best anti-virus protection

  riddley 11:17 02 Feb 2003

just wondered if anyone has any views about the bt anti-virus service, available for £3.50 a month? I currently use the free AVG anti-virus programme. Is this as good as any or is it worth investing in the bt scheme or other software?

  tran1 11:21 02 Feb 2003

AVG is perfectly adequate to protect you. And its even regarded better than paid for services. I would reccommend sticking with AVG and keeping it Up to Date.

  kevc 11:26 02 Feb 2003

i'm with tran1, i've never had any problems with this virus program...i would even say its better than Norton.

  JoeC 11:36 02 Feb 2003

to compare. click here

  Spencus 14:27 02 Feb 2003

I always believed,like many forum members that I was adequately protected by AVG,

But after reading the Virus Bulletin I think it is time for a change.

  961 14:59 02 Feb 2003

even though the virus bulletin says AVG ain't so good, have you has virus trouble during the time AVG has been on your system? Surely this is the yardstick to go by.

I've used AVG for a couple of years and had no problems. I keep it up to date and it's caught a couple of viruses coming in via e-mail attachments. I run a complete check every week or so. Remember some other (quite expensive) programmes seem to cause all sorts of bother with your system

On the basis that all this comes for free, I will stick with it until I have trouble that it doesn't deal with

  DieSse 15:50 02 Feb 2003

Most AV software catches most viruses most of the time. If they didn't their bad reputation would be well known.

All testing is only as good as the testing method used and the version of the AV software on the day the tests were run

No one persons experience of not getting a virus is anywhere near a good indication of the overall performance of AV software - as none of us individually are ever likely to see each and every virus out there.

99% performance in catching viruses is useless if you get one of the 1% that's missed. So catching viruses has to be the primary concern in my book.

Having said that - consistently good or bad performance in well run tests, is a good an indication as you are ever likely to get.

That's why I use click here It has the best record of anyone in the Virus Bulletin tests, it's probably the fastest, with the least overhead, and it autoupdates smoothly and painlessly.

  bremner 16:14 02 Feb 2003

The issue of AVG has been discussed many times and the fact the it reguarly fails to acheive acceptable levels of protection is defended by many who use it.

It is a fact howvever that it is not as dependable or reliable as other applications. It does not take a genius to work out why.

AVG = free of charge
NAV = £30 or thereabouts.

Conclusion: As usual you get what you pay for.

  Spencus 16:18 02 Feb 2003

I hear what you say,..and I have used AVG for 2 years also, in which time AVG has never detected a virus, thats not to say I have never been attacked,or have I just been lucky, as I have had to format and re-install my OS on numerous occasions due to unsolvable problems

  Scouse 16:19 02 Feb 2003

Nuff Said

  anchor 16:55 02 Feb 2003

In a recent UK PC magazine test, Norton Antivirus was chosen as best buy. McAfee was a close second.

However, any antivirus programme is only as good as its updates. It is essential to regularly keep your virus definitions updated.

Norton produce an update every working day. Norton 2002 has never let me down, even though I have had some e-mail attacks in the past.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

iMac Pro review

25 book design and illustration tips

iMac Pro review

Idées cadeaux pour geeks et tech addicts