Antivirus

[Deadly_Nightshade]

My subscription for Norton Antivirus (yes, I know that might not have been the best choice) just ran out and I was wondering what people thought was the best antivirus for a gaming PC that, at the moment, is also used for everything else. I am currently trying the thirty-day free trail from NOD32, and it seems to be working well, although I have yet to try on-line multiplayer or any serious gaming.

[Pidesco]

AVG. Mostly because it's free.

[Hurlshort]

Norton is currently the highest rated in PC World.

[Enoch]

I had been using AVG without any problems until recently. But I had 2 separate incidents where an update picked up false positives in an important game file (first was the CivIV:BTS installer, and second was the NWN2 launcher). The issues were addressed in later updates, but the experience was infuriating enough that I switched to Avast. When I have to spend my gaming time figuring out why my machine won't launch a game, I get angry.

 

Anyhow, I don't think that I have seriously tested either program, though, because I don't do a whole lot with my computer that exposes me to a high virus risk. So a low-resource-load free program is best for my needs. If I were doing lots of P2P downloading or something, I'd invest in some serious protection.

[Tigranes]

I use AVG. It does give false alarms every now and then, but what antivirus is perfect? I think it's very good unless you in the past have gotten a lot of viruses or had a lot of trouble with simple ones.

 

I despise Norton and McAfee. They annoy you more than the viruses, they take up too much room, and when you want to uninstall them they want to make *that* as annoying and clumsy as possible. I've had more frustration caused by them than most actual viruses.

[taks]

if i had to choose i'd say either norton or mcafee, though i fully acknowledge what tigranes mentions. personally, i find norton to be an extreme resource hog, though it is configurable to the point at which it is not a bother - it simply works well. mcafee is less so annoying, and likewise configurable to the point at which is not as annoying, and it's cheaper to boot. i do own a copy of mcafee, btw, though it is not currently installed at home (brand new build and no recent DLs so there's no hurry on that front). i'm running something here, but i'm too lazy to figure out what.

 

taks

[Fionavar]

avast fwiiw

[samm]

Fionavar ausatIdnu

I use AVG. It does give false alarms every now and then, but what antivirus is perfect? I think it's very good unless you in the past have gotten a lot of viruses or had a lot of trouble with simple ones.

 

I despise Norton and McAfee. They annoy you more than the viruses, they take up too much room, and when you want to uninstall them they want to make *that* as annoying and clumsy as possible. I've had more frustration caused by them than most actual viruses.

Had to re-install windows when my copy of norton had run out of free updates, because even if I uninstalled it, I couldn't install another virus scanner and get it to work properly, not to mention the troubles with the firewall (it was norton internet security)... I hope that doesn't happen to you, Deadly_Nightshade!

I'm using AVG free, too, which never caused problems for me, but for NWN2 it did apparently

We have McAffee at work and it sucks. Everytime I start the PC, it updates using up all bandwidth for downloading an update for about three minutes, then scans the pc wich then is reacting very slowly when accessing the local harddrive.

Edited January 16, 2008 by samm

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Had to re-install windows when my copy of norton had run out of free updates, because even if I uninstalled it, I couldn't install another virus scanner and get it to work properly, not to mention the troubles with the firewall (it was norton internet security)... I hope that doesn't happen to you, Deadly_Nightshade!

 

So far it seems that I got it completely uninstalled, and the trail NOD32 seems to be working fine (i.e. nothing shutting down because of the old antivirus).

[mkreku]

I use NOD32 at home. It's cheap and it won some security tests in Swedish computer magazines (and around the world).

 

I tried Kaspersky a few years back, but that program grew and grew and now it basically just takes over your computer and, if you're lucky, it sometimes lets you play with it.

[Kaftan Barlast]

I use Avast since its free and unintrusive. Norton is probably the worst security software available, in many ways it acts like a virus since it infects a computer, screws up the network settings permanently, and draw heavily on system resources. The only way to make a computer with Norton installed work properly again is to format the system drive.

[Gorgon]

Free versions vastly outperform subscriptions when it comes to footprint, they might need manual updates and have certain features disabled, but it's usually worth the tradeoff. You are better off not paying for anti virus, unless you are of the particularly paranoid persuation.

 

I like AVG, it only throws a popup in my face when it wants to reboot after an update.

[SteveThaiBinh]

I only have experience of Norton and McAfee, and of those two I found all sorts of problems gaming with Norton that (mostly) disappeared when I switched to McAfee. I guess other (free) ones might be better, but as McAfee works fine at the moment and is free for me, I'm sticking with it.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

...screws up the network settings permanently...

 

Really, what sort of things does it do -I have not seen anything so far-?

[Kaftan Barlast]

...screws up the network settings permanently...

 

Really, what sort of things does it do -I have not seen anything so far-?

 

 

It wreaks havoc with the file/sharing printer stuff in all verisons of WinXP. 90% of the times when someone at the University complains about not being able to access stuff on the network its because they're running Norton. The tech-support guys hate it.

[mkreku]

We're running Norton at the place where I work. On over 100 computers none have any problems because of the antivirus. And we've just un-installed and re-installed a new version of Norton.

 

The main problem with Norton is that it's resource heavy and inefficient (takes a looong time to scan a hard drive). It's not buggier than most other antivirus programs out there.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

It wreaks havoc with the file/sharing printer stuff in all verisons of WinXP. 90% of the times when someone at the University complains about not being able to access stuff on the network its because they're running Norton.

Would that apply to a wireless network?

Edited January 17, 2008 by Deadly_Nightshade

[Tigranes]

Wireless networks are dodgy on the best of computers. Now, if you're not having problems, don't worry. But if you are having problems, just remember that you might want to consider Norton as one of the many possible causes.

 

You know, it's disturbing how Norton is similar to Vista in terms of the damage to your computer...

[LadyCrimson]

To quote my husband - "Basically just about everything that the average joe pc user can go buy is crap."

 

He likes/uses McAfee Professional - or Enterprise, or something. I've never had any problems getting around/through it in terms of internet stuff, or anything else, on our network or the gaming pc he set up for us. No popups, no 'can't do that/can't connect' for game related things, etc. Which is good, since I wouldn't know the first thing about how to alter settings or anything of that nature.

 

But as indicated by his quote, he acknowleges that the McAfee that home users typically can purchase is terrible.

Edited January 17, 2008 by LadyCrimson

[Fionavar]

It wreaks havoc with the file/sharing printer stuff in all verisons of WinXP. 90% of the times when someone at the University complains about not being able to access stuff on the network its because they're running Norton.

Would that apply to a wireless network?

 

Absolutely! That is why in most of the offices I am involved with that have Norton it get pulled right away. Too many Ghost's in the machine with Norton, imo!

[Deadly_Nightshade]

So, how correct I correct that (short of a reformat)?

[Azure79]

I also have bad experiences with Norton. Never tried McAfee.

 

Norton was a hindrance to uninstall, slowed down my computer and took up too much room.

 

I use a program called V3, developed by Ahnlabs. Its pretty unobtrusive with regular updates for the latest malignant computer intruders. Found it works best for me.

[taks]

norton is really a hog only because it defaults to real-time virus checking. i.e. every time you touch a file it, to read, write or execute it, norton checks it for virii. if you're playing a game, this is going to result in very poor performance since it is constantly loading and unloading any of a number of different files. simply turning off the real-time checking removes most of the issues with norton's virus software. we had to do this at my previous company, but since we didn't have permission to turn it off, we had to "trick" it by telling it to only check certain file types, and we gave those types file extensions that did not otherwise exist (like "check all files named *.OMG").

 

the file sharing problems pointed out by kaftan are probably due to norton's network security, which by default locks out access to the local domain as i recall (while allowing web access). i typically have had to go in and manually adjust everything, including the windows firewall (which is an XP addition as i recall), in order to do any printing or file sharing when norton is installed. i had this problem with my laptop, which is running vista, as well. my guess is that the install automatically disables things, including the windows firewall, which i don't think is right (at least the current settings should be left alone). don't hold me to any of this, however, since i have not used norton in a while. my laptop's copy is all but disabled at the moment.

 

the benefit of norton is that it is extremely comprehensive, particularly if you have a professional version, but the drawback is that it is very difficult to configure (at least, labor intensive) if you want maximum protection but minimum performance degradation. you have to tinker with it to get things right...

 

taks