• Welcome to Tux Reports: Where Penguins Fly. We hope you find the topics varied, interesting, and worthy of your time. Please become a member and join in the discussions.

Win7 and Norton 2010 Anti Virus

B

Bruce Hagen

Flightless Bird
"Al Smith" <invalid@address.com> wrote in message
news:Cb62n.59171$Db2.53847@edtnps83...
> Bruce Hagen wrote:
>>
>> "Emrys Davies" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:7qpm35FcctU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> Is there any history of Norton's Anti Virus product
>>> http://www.antivirusware.com/norton-antivirus/ interfering with Win7.
>>> I
>>> may decide to use that. I read the somewhat detailed thread on anti
>>> virus products on here recently and will also consider those.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Personally, I would not have anything made by Norton, (Symantec), or
>> McAfee on any machine of mine. They are both resource hogs, (Norton
>> being the worst), and don't do anything better than some free AV
>> programs. I got this machine last October and the first thing I did was
>> to remove the Norton free trial and then run the removal tool to get
>> all
>> the crap off the machine.
>>
>> Download and run the Norton Removal Tool:
>> http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039
>>
>> I am using MSE, but all of these are free and do just as good a job as
>> Norton, without being intrusive.
>>
>> AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition
>> http://free.grisoft.com/ww.download?prd=afe
>>
>> Do a custom installation and opt out of e-mail scanning.
>>
>> Avast:
>> http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html
>>
>> In the case of Avast, choose Custom Installation and under Resident
>> Protection, uncheck: Internet Mail and Outlook/Exchange.
>>
>> Microsoft Security Essentials:
>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/default.aspx
>>
>> (No e-mail scanning to worry about)
>
>
> Good advice. I also turn off automatic updates. Just one more annoyance
> that I don't need. I usually update my lists manually when I need to do
> a scan on a particular downloaded file.
>
> -Al-


Almost ditto. I'm set to notify, but not install.
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP [Mail]
Imperial Beach, CA
 
E

Emrys Davies

Flightless Bird
"Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
news:20100109164502.4433.23970.XPN@nogodhere.net...
> John Smith wrote:
>
> > On 1/8/2010 1:33 PM, Emrys Davies wrote:
> >> Is there any history of Norton's Anti Virus product
> >> http://www.antivirusware.com/norton-antivirus/ interfering with
Win7. I
> >> may decide to use that. I read the somewhat detailed thread on
anti
> >> virus products on here recently and will also consider those.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Go with AVAST!, Avira, or AVG.
> > Anything out there is better than Norton or Mcafee.
> > They suck and are expensive.
>
>
> AVG is turning into a real resourse hog . . . you might not notice it
on
> a fast system, but then again, you might. It will make an older system
> damn near unsuable.
>
> --
> Enkidu

Thanks everyone. Very enlightening.

I may get AVG Anti-Virus
Spybot Search and Destroy
Spyware Blaster
Zone Alarm

unless someone persuades me that that is overkill. I will probably have
4GB Ram Memory and 320GB Hard Drive.

Bruce said re- AVG: "Do a custom installation. Opt out of e-mail
scanning. Any particular reason for this?
 
C

Charles Tomaras

Flightless Bird
"Hugh Jeego" <id@example.com> wrote in message
news:6MGdnVX-Po35rNXWnZ2dnUVZ8g2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
> HEHEHE I love people like you. Part of my income comes from people
> recommending products that don't work well and I have to fix them. AVG
> free is much better than that. In fact in recent tests using viruses I
> have found on machines that were not known by any anti virus (until I
> report them), AVG free seems better than all except Sophos. However, if
> someone is going to download music/videos etc illegally or go to porn
> sites, you just cant buy or use anything good enough to be positive you
> are safe.
>

Well, for those of us who don't steal music or jerk off incessantly,
Microsoft Security Essentials does a fine job.
http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
For those of you who do steal music or jerk off a lot you should ask Hugh
Jeego's for his/her contact information as he/she uses a ficticious name and
email address for his/her communications. If part of his/her income comes
from fixing computers you would think that he/she would stand behind a real
id and make herself/himself a little easier to hire.




> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>
>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>
>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero problems...you
>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>>
>
 
L

Leythos

Flightless Bird
In article <Wus2n.8179$V_3.7195@newsfe09.iad>, tomaras@tomaras.com
says...
> Well, for those of us who don't steal music or jerk off incessantly,
> Microsoft Security Essentials does a fine job.
>

Why would you settle for "does a fine job" when you can get better?

What about the person that mistypes a url and gets hit by a rogue site
while using that "does a file job" product and it fails to protect them?

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
 
E

Emrys Davies

Flightless Bird
"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>
> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>
> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
problems...you
> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.

What is your experience with this product please?
 
E

Enkidu

Flightless Bird
Emrys Davies wrote:

>
> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>
>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>
>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
> problems...you
>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>
> What is your experience with this product please?

I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at the
the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?

Independence and competion can be good.
--
Enkidu
 
C

Charles Tomaras

Flightless Bird
"Emrys Davies" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:7qv6h9Fvn9U1@mid.individual.net...

>>
>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
> problems...you
>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>
> What is your experience with this product please?

Well, in years gone past I've used many of the popular antivirus products
including those from Norton, MacAfee, AVG, Panda, and Esset. A few years
back I switched to Windows One Care and noticed how well it ran, how little
overhead it had on my moderately powered computers and how easy it was for
my inexperienced relatives to operate on their computers. With the advent of
Windows 7 and Security Essentials being a free product I continued upon that
route using it first in beta and now as a released product. Zero problems
for myself and for my family members who are using it. I've also not read
anything derogatory about it on independent sites which rate AV products.
Sure, there are some products which have higher ratings in some areas but
Security Essentials has worked admirably for myself and for the other people
I know who use it. No virus' or malware and very simple installation and
operation.

It's certainly a valid choice for one to make and a no brainer for those who
like to keep it simple. The generally "all things MS are bad" notions that
are kept alive on these newsgroups should be cast aside and products judged
on their own merits. Security Essentials works.
http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
 
E

Emrys Davies

Flightless Bird
"Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
news:20100110235640.7336.43473.XPN@nogodhere.net...
> Emrys Davies wrote:
>
> >
> > "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
> > news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
> >>
> >> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
> >> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> >>
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
> >>
> >> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
> > problems...you
> >> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
> >
> > What is your experience with this product please?
>
> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at
the
> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>
> Independence and competion can be good.
> --
> Enkidu

So what are you advocating?
 
C

Charles Tomaras

Flightless Bird
"Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
news:20100110235640.7336.43473.XPN@nogodhere.net...
> Emrys Davies wrote:
>
>>
>> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
>> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>>
>>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>>
>>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
>> problems...you
>>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>>
>> What is your experience with this product please?
>
> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at the
> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>
> Independence and competion can be good.
> --
> Enkidu

Well there will always be the monoculture argument and it's certainly worthy
of consideration. At this point there is plenty of culture in the AV
community and my experiences with Security Essentials are positive enough
that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to people. It runs really well with
Microsoft's OS's, keeps updated without intervention and is dumb simple to
use. No matter what your computing political views, in my opinion, Microsoft
got this product right.
 
E

Emrys Davies

Flightless Bird
"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
news:k0u2n.31946$Gf3.17834@newsfe22.iad...
>
> "Emrys Davies" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:7qv6h9Fvn9U1@mid.individual.net...
>
> >>
> >> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
> > problems...you
> >> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
> >
> > What is your experience with this product please?
>
> Well, in years gone past I've used many of the popular antivirus
products
> including those from Norton, MacAfee, AVG, Panda, and Esset. A few
years
> back I switched to Windows One Care and noticed how well it ran, how
little
> overhead it had on my moderately powered computers and how easy it was
for
> my inexperienced relatives to operate on their computers. With the
advent of
> Windows 7 and Security Essentials being a free product I continued
upon that
> route using it first in beta and now as a released product. Zero
problems
> for myself and for my family members who are using it. I've also not
read
> anything derogatory about it on independent sites which rate AV
products.
> Sure, there are some products which have higher ratings in some areas
but
> Security Essentials has worked admirably for myself and for the other
people
> I know who use it. No virus' or malware and very simple installation
and
> operation.
>
> It's certainly a valid choice for one to make and a no brainer for
those who
> like to keep it simple. The generally "all things MS are bad" notions
that
> are kept alive on these newsgroups should be cast aside and products
judged
> on their own merits. Security Essentials works.
> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

I am very interested in what you are saying because you have the
experience, which is important. Just one point: Do you run any other
security programmes in conjunction with it or does it deal with
everything? Thanks a lot.
 
C

Charles Tomaras

Flightless Bird
"Emrys Davies" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:7qv941FdifU1@mid.individual.net...
>> It's certainly a valid choice for one to make and a no brainer for
> those who
>> like to keep it simple. The generally "all things MS are bad" notions
> that
>> are kept alive on these newsgroups should be cast aside and products
> judged
>> on their own merits. Security Essentials works.
>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>
> I am very interested in what you are saying because you have the
> experience, which is important. Just one point: Do you run any other
> security programmes in conjunction with it or does it deal with
> everything? Thanks a lot.

It's the only thing I run on the three computers that are under my direct
supervision. I long ago gave up on all the little antispyware apps scouring
for cookies every other little this or that and I've not had any issues.
I've got better things to do with my time than to be constantly updating
this and that and running little apps that suck the resources from either my
computer or myself. I can also tell you that it uninstalls easily and
completely if you decide you do not like it or wish to remove it from your
system temporarily for whatever reasons. I removed it from a Vista machine
prior to a very successful in-place upgrade to Win 7 just to be sure there
was no interference in the upgrade. Don't know if I needed to do that but it
was simple enough to accomplish.
 
E

Emrys Davies

Flightless Bird
"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
news:5iu2n.31948$Gf3.17565@newsfe22.iad...
>
> "Emrys Davies" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:7qv941FdifU1@mid.individual.net...
> >> It's certainly a valid choice for one to make and a no brainer for
> > those who
> >> like to keep it simple. The generally "all things MS are bad"
notions
> > that
> >> are kept alive on these newsgroups should be cast aside and
products
> > judged
> >> on their own merits. Security Essentials works.
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
> >
> > I am very interested in what you are saying because you have the
> > experience, which is important. Just one point: Do you run any
other
> > security programmes in conjunction with it or does it deal with
> > everything? Thanks a lot.
>
> It's the only thing I run on the three computers that are under my
direct
> supervision. I long ago gave up on all the little antispyware apps
scouring
> for cookies every other little this or that and I've not had any
issues.
> I've got better things to do with my time than to be constantly
updating
> this and that and running little apps that suck the resources from
either my
> computer or myself. I can also tell you that it uninstalls easily and
> completely if you decide you do not like it or wish to remove it from
your
> system temporarily for whatever reasons. I removed it from a Vista
machine
> prior to a very successful in-place upgrade to Win 7 just to be sure
there
> was no interference in the upgrade. Don't know if I needed to do that
but it
> was simple enough to accomplish.

Very well put and you have certainly got me thinking that I will give it
a go because what you say makes real sense and I know that you are
sincerely trying to be helful because you have found something which
works for you, your family and friends. I much appreciate you time and
help.
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
Enkidu wrote:
> Emrys Davies wrote:
>
>> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
>> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>>
>>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
>> problems...you
>>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>> What is your experience with this product please?
>
> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at the
> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>
> Independence and competion can be good.

What a ridiculous statement!
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
Charles Tomaras wrote:
> "Emrys Davies" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:7qv941FdifU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> It's certainly a valid choice for one to make and a no brainer for
>> those who
>>> like to keep it simple. The generally "all things MS are bad" notions
>> that
>>> are kept alive on these newsgroups should be cast aside and products
>> judged
>>> on their own merits. Security Essentials works.
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>> I am very interested in what you are saying because you have the
>> experience, which is important. Just one point: Do you run any other
>> security programmes in conjunction with it or does it deal with
>> everything? Thanks a lot.
>
> It's the only thing I run on the three computers that are under my direct
> supervision. I long ago gave up on all the little antispyware apps scouring
> for cookies every other little this or that and I've not had any issues.
> I've got better things to do with my time than to be constantly updating
> this and that and running little apps that suck the resources from either my
> computer or myself. I can also tell you that it uninstalls easily and
> completely if you decide you do not like it or wish to remove it from your
> system temporarily for whatever reasons. I removed it from a Vista machine
> prior to a very successful in-place upgrade to Win 7 just to be sure there
> was no interference in the upgrade. Don't know if I needed to do that but it
> was simple enough to accomplish.
>
>
I agree 100% with what you've said and I've done the same thing.
 
E

Enkidu

Flightless Bird
Emrys Davies wrote:

>
> "Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
> news:20100110235640.7336.43473.XPN@nogodhere.net...
>> Emrys Davies wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
>> > news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>> >>
>> >> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>> >> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> >>
>> >> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>> >>
>> >> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
>> > problems...you
>> >> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>> >
>> > What is your experience with this product please?
>>
>> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
>> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
>> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
>> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
>> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at
> the
>> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>>
>> Independence and competion can be good.
>> --
>> Enkidu
>
> So what are you advocating?

Using an AV *not* from Microsoft if you run Windows, not
from Apple if you run OSX.

--
Enkidu
 
E

Enkidu

Flightless Bird
Frank wrote:

> Enkidu wrote:
>> Emrys Davies wrote:
>>
>>> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
>>> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>>>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>>>
>>>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
>>> problems...you
>>>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>>> What is your experience with this product please?
>>
>> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
>> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
>> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
>> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
>> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at the
>> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>>
>> Independence and competion can be good.
>
> What a ridiculous statement!

Advise is free . . . if you think it's not worth the price, don't take
it.
Oops!

--
Enkidu
 
E

Enkidu

Flightless Bird
Charles Tomaras wrote:

>
> "Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
> news:20100110235640.7336.43473.XPN@nogodhere.net...
>> Emrys Davies wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
>>> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>>>
>>>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>>>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>>>
>>>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
>>> problems...you
>>>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>>>
>>> What is your experience with this product please?
>>
>> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
>> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
>> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
>> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
>> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at the
>> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>>
>> Independence and competion can be good.
>> --
>> Enkidu
>
> Well there will always be the monoculture argument and it's certainly worthy
> of consideration. At this point there is plenty of culture in the AV
> community and my experiences with Security Essentials are positive enough
> that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to people. It runs really well with
> Microsoft's OS's, keeps updated without intervention and is dumb simple to
> use. No matter what your computing political views, in my opinion, Microsoft
> got this product right.

Getting it right is one thing . . . keeping it right for years is quite
another. Of course, that's true of any software from any source.

--
Enkidu
 
F

Frank

Flightless Bird
Enkidu wrote:
> Emrys Davies wrote:
>
>> "Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
>> news:20100110235640.7336.43473.XPN@nogodhere.net...
>>> Emrys Davies wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:IQU1n.17089$Wl3.2420@newsfe11.iad...
>>>>> "John Smith" <someone@somewhere.com.INVALID> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hi954m$i59$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
>>>>>
>>>>> Free, works well, low resource overhead...pretty much zero
>>>> problems...you
>>>>> won't know it's there and you won't have to mess with it.
>>>> What is your experience with this product please?
>>> I gotta wonder if you want your AV software from the same people who
>>> wrote your OS, no matter what OS you use. If MS (or Apple) left a big
>>> security hole, would you rather it be blocked by someone looking over
>>> his shoulder at the public relations problems such a hole would cause,
>>> or would you rather it be filled by someone who is looking ahead at
>> the
>>> the public relations coup of being the first to block that hole?
>>>
>>> Independence and competion can be good.
>>> --
>>> Enkidu
>> So what are you advocating?
>
> Using an AV *not* from Microsoft if you run Windows, not
> from Apple if you run OSX.
>
Ridiculous advice.
 
C

Charles Tomaras

Flightless Bird
"Enkidu" <enkidu@nogodhere.net> wrote in message
news:20100111011912.7336.80938.XPN@nogodhere.net...
> Charles Tomaras wrote:
>> Well there will always be the monoculture argument and it's certainly
>> worthy
>> of consideration. At this point there is plenty of culture in the AV
>> community and my experiences with Security Essentials are positive enough
>> that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to people. It runs really well
>> with
>> Microsoft's OS's, keeps updated without intervention and is dumb simple
>> to
>> use. No matter what your computing political views, in my opinion,
>> Microsoft
>> got this product right.
>
> Getting it right is one thing . . . keeping it right for years is quite
> another. Of course, that's true of any software from any source.
>
> --
> Enkidu

I'm confident that Microsoft has both the resources and the internal mandate
to get this right for the long term because now more than ever it is in
their best interest. I hedge my confidence with a solid and consistent
backup routine. So, I've got a low overhead dumb simple free AV solution
that is supported by good backup and archiving practices. I feel secure.
 
E

Enkidu

Flightless Bird
Charles Tomaras wrote:

> I hedge my confidence with a solid and consistent
> backup routine.

Were it so with everyone! You may not be able to prevent every
problem, but preventing disasters with backups is easy.
--
Enkidu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top