Norton Anti-Virus or AVG?

Message

leoblob · #1 Post by **leoblob** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:15 am

I'm re-doing a computer (wipe hard drive, etc.), and I have a spare LEGAL copy of Norton Anti-Virus 2005 (I got a 3-user pack, only 2 used so far). Any thoughts on whether I should go with AVG or Norton Anti-Virus? Norton sure hogs resources, but it has a good reputation. I've only recently heard about AVG, but the limited research I've done so far, says it's pretty good, too.

(Target computer is a PIII 1200/256/133 with 512MB RAM running WIN98SE)

#2 Post by **daeojkim** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:20 am

I have been using AVG for almost a year now and I really like it.
It seems to run much lighter than Norton, which is a memory hog.

Leon · #3 Post by **Leon** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:41 am

IMHO, I would use your "paid" copy of NU, then make a decision at the point in time that it will cost you money to renew (the landscape will change by then). I run Norton 2005, and in spite of it's reputation, find it uses very little CPU (I just checked now, and it was using less than 1%). In addition, the 2005 version includes worm protection, which is quite effective (has caught them in "real time" on my system).

P.S. I DO think that AVG is very good and effective.

YMMV

#4 Post by **carbon_unit** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:13 pm

I still find that AVG picks up a few things that Norton 2005 misses and AVG is easier on the resources. Systems feel faster after removing Norton and installing AVG. Of course I am talking about Nortons consumer version, Corporate is a different story.(Better)

s0larian · #5 Post by **s0larian** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:38 pm

Norton AV is pretty lame with the virus definition update frequency and the reaction time for new discovered issues. And sometimes it can slow down the system really heavy (i.e. boot time), but for some reasons not on every system. I had it once running smooth on my T40, on a different machine with exactly the same specs it was slow as hell. Another thing is that it is almost impossible to uninstall Norton products completely without digging into the registry. All together I cannot recommend Norton AV, there are many better ones. If you want to use your computer with a regular User account instead of Administrator (which is the best weapon against viruses, spyware and so on) then I know just of 2 AV's working without restrictions and issues with a User account: F-Secure and Bitdefender Pro.

krosenstein · #6 Post by **krosenstein** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:47 pm

I second carbon_unit's statement about the corporate edition of NAV, called Symantec AV. I picked up a copy of v.9 on e-bay for about $70. Very easy to install, not a lot of crapola like the consumer edition, and updates seem to appear at least once a week. The system overhead appears to be on par with NOD32, which I had used previously. As to its effectiveness, I can't really say, since to date I haven't been infected regardless of the AV program I've used.

dvorak · #7 Post by **dvorak** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:34 pm

I switched to NOD32 before my NAV subscription ran out (the one preloaded). As far as I have used it in the last weeks, I recommend it.
According to reviews and Virusbulletin, NOD's updating and scanning even topped Symantecs AV (SAV as in the Corporate Ed.).
Booting time was definitely shorter, although I'm still having a weird 30 second wait when shutting down which I at first thought was caused by Norton. That was my main reason for uninstalling earlier, but alas, I'm still waiting half a minute after Windows logs off and displays a light blue screen.

leoblob · #8 Post by **leoblob** » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:03 pm

Thanks! Good info. I only paid $19.95 (after rebate) for my 3-user version, so I'm not too concerned about using all 3. I am concerned about the fact (stated above) that Norton Anti-Virus is virtually impossible to un-install, so if I were to switch to some other anti-virus program down the road, I'd have to leave it installed.

Leon · #9 Post by **Leon** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:37 am

In the interest of being totally accurate:

NAV 2005 does not exhibit the "difficult to uninstall" characteristics of previous versions. In addition, Symantec provides a total removal tool should you ever experience a failed or partial removal of their product.

I am not encouraging anyone to use their product, but want to emphasize my positive experience (with the 2005 version) of low CPU impact and effectiveness. I use my T42 with high load/demand applications running many hours a day/seven days a week, so I am extremely sensitive to performance.

I think that much of the negative press is a result of problems with earlier versions.

I have also never had a virus or worm while using their product even though my machine is connected to the Internet 24x7.

Internet Security is my full time business, and while I have no allegiance (or particular like) for Symantec, their product has never failed me.

nikemen · #10 Post by **nikemen** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:51 am

regardless, NAV is a memory hog, and I have had numerous problems on my TP's, there were issues with it picking up AC as a threat, or security weakness.

I pretty much do an uninstall on all systems I put together, AVG is nice, and the new interface works well for less tech users.

krosenstein · #11 Post by **krosenstein** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:05 pm

nikeman wrote:regardless, NAV is a memory hog

Define "memory hog." My experience showed that SAV and NOD32 both occupy about 14mb of memory.

nikemen · #12 Post by **nikemen** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:14 pm

I would put the combined total for all NAV services, update connector, and NAV mail and resident shield at 48MB

that is a lot, especially all the boot load services stuff, and the update connector.

dvorak · #13 Post by **dvorak** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:19 pm

nikemen wrote:I would put the combined total for all NAV services, update connector, and NAV mail and resident shield at 48MB

that is a lot, especially all the boot load services stuff, and the update connector.

At least on my machine, the boot time was quite noticeably shorter when NAV was not installed/running.

Regarding updates, it seems to me that NOD32 offers more up-to-date definitions. Symantec is like Microsoft, providing updates once a month/week, and not when they were developed.

leoblob · #14 Post by **leoblob** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:19 pm

Leon wrote:NAV 2005 does not exhibit the "difficult to uninstall" characteristics of previous versions. In addition, Symantec provides a total removal tool should you ever experience a failed or partial removal of their product.

This is good to know, since my experience is only with the older versions

Norton Anti-Virus or AVG?

Norton Anti-Virus or AVG?

Symantec AV (corporate)

regardless,

much more than that

Re: much more than that

Who is online