Avast WEBforum
Other => General Topics => Topic started by: Omid Farhang on March 11, 2009, 01:08:15 PM
-
if yes, why?
I may do it on a Virtual Machine to see what they have done in latest version what is new coming in the V3.0
I'm sure it would not be better than avast! but I like to see what they do :)
-
Go ahead, try.
We're very biased against Symantec products ;)
-
Go ahead, try.
We're very biased against Symantec products ;)
I don't care about company!! I try anything to find what's best, until today I found avast! as best AV ;)
-
I don't care about company!!
Me too... I've used Symantec, I talk about my personal experience.
Anyway, using in a Virtual Machine, *any* antivirus will run slowly and the machine itself will be slow.
Will you test it into Windows 7?
-
I would not have Symantec bloat ware if they paid me.Avast is light and reliable,if you find a good product keep it. ;).
-
I don't care about company!!
Me too... I've used Symantec, I talk about my personal experience.
Anyway, using in a Virtual Machine, *any* antivirus will run slowly and the machine itself will be slow.
Will you test it into Windows 7?
I know it would be slow and it's a good point, because you can feel how much resource would it use, you can feel it better.
I would test it in Sun VirtualBox and it's not slow like Microsoft VirtualPC or VMWare...
usually first I test in Windows XP and then Vista, but, this time maybe I test it in a Windows 7 too, and not Virtual, make my System Dual Boot with windows 7 and try avast! and Norton (and maybe avira and...) in that windows :)
after done it, I would share result in my computer security software blog: http://getrideofit.spaces.live.com/
it would be my first post that I've personally tested :)
-
I would not have Symantec bloat ware if they paid me.Avast is light and reliable,if you find a good product keep it. ;).
I was a Symantec Norton user from about 6-7 years ago, I know them very well, Yes, you right, avast! is very very better than Symantec and I never would not replace my avast! with anything else.
Norton has many problems, a lot of false positive and removing them in background by default, it miss a lot of risk and...
we cannot ignore that their product performance has improved and the 2009 products are light in system performance, but, still it's not friendly and usable like avast! :)
-
if yes, why?
I may do it on a Virtual Machine to see what they have done in latest version what is new coming in the V3.0
I'm sure it would not be better than avast! but I like to see what they do :)
Not with all the bad press about PIFTS.exe belonging to Symantec that is snooping.
I might try it if they gave me a system to run it and an all expense paid trip to Barbados or Cancun for a week.
-
Go ahead, try.
We're very biased against Symantec products ;)
Agreed, Symantec's products are resource hungry junk. Both their Mac and PC software.
-
Go ahead, try.
We're very biased against Symantec products ;)
Agreed, Symantec's products are resource hungry junk. Both their Mac and PC software.
No! No! No! it's NOT! it's not junk, maybe it's not strong like avast!... also, 2009 products for windows 32bit is not resource hungry like old products... you can see I'm just talking about things that I've tested. I don't have any idea about their products for Windows 64Bit and Mac and Linux.. :)
I'm an avast! Fan!!! but I don't like to lie about other things...
-
2009 products for windows 32bit is not resource hungry like old products...
A lot of people say this. I'm not a lier, just said we're biased...
-
2009 products for windows 32bit is not resource hungry like old products...
A lot of people say this. I'm not a lier, just said we're biased...
Always I like all your responses!! ;) ::)
-
-= I can't get myself to Norton again.. There's a possibility that v.3 is 3 times heavier and will turn you over 360 degrees from your seat while waiting for your monitor to refresh.. haha..
-
I don't trust Norton any more and I wouldn't go near any Symantec product on the market and they should go broke.
-
Please try it before commenting about it (i say to the ones who talk about its resource usage). Norton AV is definitely lighter than Avast. If you don't wanna try, then look at the performance test result which was done by AV-Comparatives. Also i've found Norton 360 3.0 very light (the version 2.0 was very light too).
But i think Norton products have no web shield since they don't abort the connection when a virus is found. They react just like when a virus is found on harddisk. This situation may be not to slow the connection speed, however, the web shield of avast works greatly without slowing internet unlike the other av softwares do.
There is no option for archive files to be scanned by real time protection. I think this is also because of not to slow the pc performance. The settings aren't customizable enough. There should be more options for those who want to manage the program well.
And i must say that Norton Insight feature has a very important role on the lightness.
-
The only Norton I liked was the 1970s Norton Commander Motorcycle.650.cc. ;).
-
-= I can't get myself to Norton again.. There's a possibility that v.3 is 3 times heavier and will turn you over 360 degrees from your seat while waiting for your monitor to refresh.. haha..
it's not heavier :)
I don't trust Norton any more and I wouldn't go near any Symantec product on the market and they should go broke.
Their AV is not good like avast!, but they are not ;)
Please try it before commenting about it (i say to the ones who talk about its resource usage). Norton AV is definitely lighter than Avast. If you don't wanna try, then look at the performance test result which was done by AV-Comparatives. Also i've found Norton 360 3.0 very light (the version 2.0 was very light too).
But i think Norton products have no web shield since they don't abort the connection when a virus is found. They react just like when a virus is found on harddisk. This situation may be not to slow the connection speed, however, the web shield of avast works greatly without slowing internet unlike the other av softwares do.
There is no option for archive files to be scanned by real time protection. I think this is also because of not to slow the pc performance. The settings aren't customizable enough. There should be more options for those who want to manage the program well.
And i must say that Norton Insight feature has a very important role on the lightness.
Thanks for your NICE and TRUE response, I like it and I say AGREED! ;)
The only Norton I liked was the 1970s Norton Commander Motorcycle.650.cc. ;).
I'm just 20 year old and it's about 7-8 years that use computer :D
-
Hi :)
Over the last 3 years - I've Tried...
On Windows XP
NIS 06 .. Worked Fine - Light - Rubbish Protection!
N360 .. Never Worked - Couldn't Get It To Work - Eventually.. Killed My XP :'(
On Windows Vista
NIS 07 .. Stopped Updating after 3 Weeks - Light - Never Felt Protected! ( Thank god it was only a 60 day trial - That came on my new Vista computer )
N360 - Again! .. Worked Fine - Light - Felt Protected! :)
N360 v2 .. Never Worked - Felt Heavy - Rubbish Protection!
NIS 08 .. Worked Fine - Felt Heavy - Never Felt Protected! ( Thank god it was only a 60 day trial - That came on my new Vista Laptop )
NIS 09 .. Bugs, FP's, Problems & Lies! - Felt Heavy - Never Felt Protected! ..... Complete pain in the Bum .. & .. Felt like Spyware >:(
And that was all before the Ask and PIFTS thing ::)
mevcit Said..
And i must say that Norton Insight feature has a very important role on the lightness.
In My Opinion!
Norton Insight - Was...
1/ At Best - Half Truth .. & .. At Worst - Complete Lie!
2/ Only affects Scan Speeds if computer is left on 24 hours a day.
3/ Took at minimum of 30 minutes a day for Norton Insight Scan and Norton Insight Submission to run.
4/ A Load of Rubbish ... & ... Complete Nonsense!
5/ Felt Like - Spyware!
And as for... Norton Idle Time / Background Tasks .......... Don't get me started! ::)
I'm Stickin With Avast 8)
To the Avast people
Please, please Please..
Never make Avast even the tiniest bit like NIS 09
Coz .. NIS 09 .. Is - :P
Avast .... Is The .... Winner! :D
Avast is the Winner .. Avast is the Winner ... Na na na Na .. Na na na Na! Avast is the Winner .. Avast is the Winner ... Na na na Na .. Na na na Na! Avast is the Winner .. Avast is the Winner ... Na na na Na .. Na na na Na! Avast is the Winner .. Avast is the Winner ... Na na na Na .. Na na na Na!
-
@Hally: Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it :)
all of the programs you noticed has one problem!! (all before 2009), they have one process ( I don't remember exactly, maybe svchost.exe or something like that ) that get CPU busy on 100% when computer is working (and sometimes when it's idle). it's not just my problem, since I am a member of Norton Forum too, I've seen many user have same problem too :)
I like Norton 2009 too, but it has a lot of false positive and also don't offer good protection like avast!, I love avast! because "avast! is the Winner" ;)
-
But i think Norton products have no web shield since they don't abort the connection when a virus is found. They react just like when a virus is found on harddisk.
Hi, I can't speak of norton 360, but nav 2009 blocks the eicar test file every bit as fast as avast web shield does. :)
-
I've tried, over about 6 years: Norton AV (trial) worked OK.
Avira (Then called Antivir)
AVG,
and for about 2+ years Avast.
The second best of these was, i thought, Avira.
I have no need nor urge to try anything else apart from Avast. It's never caused me a significant problem.
I occasionally help friends who have Norton 360 installed. Don't like it. Very hard to "get in to", to adjust settings, locate logs, view blocked items etc. I think it's designed for those users who want to be very "Hands-off" and let the program have pretty much complete control over the security of the PC.
That said, next time I am with these friends, I will (if possible) use the Norton updater to see if they can update to the latest 360 version, free of charge, the version they have is a bit of a pig. Stopped SP3 from installing correctly, for one thing. That was fun to sort out!
-
I don't trust Norton any more and I wouldn't go near any Symantec product on the market and they should go broke.
Oh the pain.
I am helping a friend who has the High Speed from the local cable company and they insist on Norton Total Protection.
It is a rather old 1.5GHZ Celeron with only 386MB RAM and it takes about 10 minutes to boot up.
I went through it removing a bunch of malware with Malwarebytes MBAM and a bunch of other auto starting applications that I know she never uses because all she really likes to do is to play Pogo games.
I cleaned it up with CCleaner then did a defrag which took about 3/4 hour and now it works much better.
Now the browser opens quickly and closes quickly were before it could take up to 5 minutes to open or close.
-
Hi, I can't speak of norton 360, but nav 2009 blocks the eicar test file every bit as fast as avast web shield does. :)
Yes, you right
@Tarq57: Norton is a "silent" product and is good for normal users who don't want to done any action and decide for malware and don't do any special works. avast! is good for everyone!! ;)
@YoKenny: yes, AV is not everything for computer performance! there are other kind of tune-up and you have done them :)
-
@Tarq57: Norton is a "silent" product and is good for normal users who don't want to done any action and decide for malware and don't do any special works. avast! is good for everyone!! ;)
@YoKenny: yes, AV is not everything for computer performance! there are other kind of tune-up and you have done them :)
So is AOL. ;D
Ve have vays to make you confess!
-
So is AOL. ;D
Ve have vays to make you confess!
YoKenny!!!!!!!!!!
-
But i think Norton products have no web shield since they don't abort the connection when a virus is found. They react just like when a virus is found on harddisk.
Hi, I can't speak of norton 360, but nav 2009 blocks the eicar test file every bit as fast as avast web shield does. :)
Hi.
If you turn off the web shield of Avast, the standard shield also will detect it as fast as the other softwares do. For instance, the detection speed of Avira Free is so fast, but this doesn't mean that it has a web protection feature. I said "They react just like when a virus is found on harddisk."
Why i think web shield is so important is that it can prevent the malwares which the av may not detect. If the connection is aborted immediately when the first virus is found, then it will prevent the probable threats too. If a website contains a malicious code, then it might also have a few more. And i can't expect from my security software to detect all of them. That's the point. ;)
Hally, take no offense but i'm not fanatic of any antivirus programs unlike you're. I saw your previous comments too. Anyway...
I don't know much about Norton Insight feature, however there is a reality that Norton AV is lighter, according to my experiences and the performance test i mentioned in my previous message. As a result everyone has the right to believe in whatever s/he wants to. :)
-
Hi.
If you turn off the web shield of Avast, the standard shield also will detect it as fast as the other softwares do. For instance, the detection speed of Avira Free is so fast, but this doesn't mean that it has a web protection feature. I said "They react just like when a virus is found on harddisk."
Why i think web shield is so important is that it can prevent the malwares which the av may not detect. If the connection is aborted immediately when the first virus is found, then it will prevent the probable threats too. If a website contains a malicious code, then it might also have a few more. And i can't expect from my security software to detect all of them. That's the point. ;)
Hally, take no offense but i'm not fanatic of any antivirus programs unlike you're. I saw your previous comments too. Anyway...
I don't know much about Norton Insight feature, however there is a reality that Norton AV is lighter, according to my experiences and the performance test i mentioned in my previous message. As a result everyone has the right to believe in whatever s/he wants to. :)
Agreed! the "abort connection" is a good feature as what you said.
but, about Avira, no! I don't like it, it slow down web-browsing very bad! it don't allow the web progress to work smooth, you need to wait for every load until 100% to see what's happening...
-
Agreed! the "abort connection" is a good feature as what you said.
but, about Avira, no! I don't like it, it slow down web-browsing very bad! it don't allow the web progress to work smooth, you need to wait for every load until 100% to see what's happening...
I use Avira Premium on my XP Pro system and I do not notice any slowdown on Web sites even malicious sites.
-
I use Avira Premium on my XP Pro system and I do not notice any slowdown on Web sites even malicious sites.
But, for me it did, I need to wait for website to load 100% and then show for me, the progress of files that I was loading were 0% and after a while 100%... the progress was still 0% until that download complete and then 100% and not showing 1% 2% 3% and....
Forgive me about my bad English, I don't know how to say that in English :(
-
Omid, I see in your profile Win Vista HP SP1, IE 8 RC1, Avast 4.8 Pro, Outpost Firewall Pro 2009(+8000 IP Blocked - HIPS Advanced) so this is what I see.
I choose to not run a software firewall as I have an effective hardware firewall and monitor what applications are running on my system very carefully and use CurrPorts to monitor Internet traffic:
http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/cports.html
I thought you were discussing Avira being slow?
I do not use IE8 so I do not know how it renders Web pages.
-
But, for me it did, I need to wait for website to load 100% and then show for me, the progress of files that I was loading were 0% and after a while 100%... the progress was still 0% until that download complete and then 100% and not showing 1% 2% 3% and....
Forgive me about my bad English, I don't know how to say that in English :(
Yes, you're right Omid. And my English isn't that good too, so i can understand you well. ;D
The web shield of Avast and the one of Avira work totally different. Avira web guard doesn't let internet flow continuously through the concerned applications. We can see the same situation for G DATA.
Avast web shield has a different working method, i dunno how to tell in both Turkish and English. ;D But internet traffic and download operations flow smoothly with Avast web shield. And it can abort the connections of malicious ones successfully. These two features are what i love about Avast. :)
YoKenny, maybe your internet connection speed is a bit higher, so you may not feel the slowness. But i suggest you to pay attention the download speeds while downloading something. In fact, the total time of download operations doesn't differ so much, however, the case Omid stated is true. My connection speed is 100 Mbps and i can see the web guard effect obviously (not while surfing, but downloading sth; and it is effective on surfing if the connection speed is slow). And IE8 has nothing to do with this case, and also i must say that IE8 is really fast, works fine. Each tab works as an independent process just like in Chrome. This is so important since it prevents the browser from crashing with its all tabs.
-
-= I just lost my trust in it.. I kept trying it, norton 2005, '06, '08, '09, but still heavy.. It seems that only state of the art computers shall be able to function well with norton..
-
@mevcit: Thanks for great reply!
@chronoboi001: yes, it WAS! ;)
-
-= I guess Norton has a great potential as an antivirus only if it was less heavier.. Based on what I experienced in Norton '08, there are some background processes in Norton that hogs up the memory, and worse, I didn't really need those processes.. Moreover, updates took very much time due to its numerous services which I do not actually need like Trusted Applications List.. The interface is really exceptional but it also add up to the hogging.. Maybe a more compact & tabbed interface will help it..