EggXpert

Hey eggxperts, can u give me an advice of which program is the best for my pc?

macafi or Norton?? And why?

Thank you!

Mcafee or Norton?

of course,Kaspersky 

It is really a matter of personal preference. If you do want to know  which is best for your PC, just Google it. there are tons of reviews and decide which features are best for you. I used all three of them, Can't make any difference. All of them protected my PC very well. it depend to a great extent on what you use your PC for.

I agree with intelguy about personal preference and how you use your PC. In the past I've used Norton and it hogged systems resources to the hilt. That really soured me on it and it was a nightmare to remove it completly. At one time there were several free softwares to assist removeing it.
McaFee I've read nothing really good about it but never used it so unable to have an opinion on it.

 I use AVG 8.xxx, (the paid version for 3 machines), which includes an excellent Firewall & Spam Filter. It's very tweekable and user friendly IMO.
You can also get a Single machine license. Also, the Free version is the most downloaded software at Cnet if that means anything.

Just read up on all of them to help when makeing a decision.       

Neither. 

Avast

AVG

fewer problems, ease of use.

---

Tallon41:

Neither. 

Avast

AVG

fewer problems, ease of use.

Agreed.    

Avast always seems to be a good setup for any new or old system that I have put it on. AVG runs rather well itself, but I tend to have problems with the program corrupting itself over time with updates to where I end up having to reinstall it every few months on each computer. Some computers never have the problem and some do.

Like it's already been said though, it's all about how you use computers. Some people want a full security out of a single application so they go with an internet security package, but if you want something that won't get in the way, basic anti-virus and firewall can do some good.

Er...hard to say. I agree with intelguy, that's just a matter of personal preference.

Even if the worst rating one, it still has its own fans...so just choose one you like and get familiar with it. BTW, my working computer has Mcafee installed, that's decided by my company...

---

whitelotus:

Hey eggxperts, can u give me an advice of which program is the best for my pc?

macafi or Norton?? And why?

Thank you!

If it is an older maybe a little bit slower than todays computers then I would suggest AVG Free to be used in conjunction with Windows Defender and windows Firewall thus lowering the amount of system resources being used to protect you and your data. 

If it is a newer and more powerful computer with at least 2 Gigs of ram I would suggest something like Norton AntiVirus with AntiSpyware (System builder Edition) A lot of folks complain about Norton and McAfee which are great programs if you have a powerful enough computer to run them.  I have gone back to the Norton product I mentioned with my Vista Ultimate system and it works tremendously!!!  I am currently Beta testing the newest McAfee on my Windows 7 beta system and it also works great! 

Sorry to be so long winded and if you post your computer specs we may be of more help to you. 

To the mods I hope I did not break any rules with my links and if so please remove them. 

4hams:

If it is an older maybe a little bit slower than todays computers then I would suggest AVG Free to be used in conjunction with Windows Defender and windows Firewall thus lowering the amount of system resources being used to protect you and your data.

I just dealt with another system yesterday that when Norton was killed by a virus and subsequently "uninstalled," rendered the OS un-bootable.  too many fingers in too many pies.  KISS.

Tallon41

---

Tallon41:

4hams:

If it is an older maybe a little bit slower than todays computers then I would suggest AVG Free to be used in conjunction with Windows Defender and windows Firewall thus lowering the amount of system resources being used to protect you and your data.

well the problem with that, is that you SHOULD NOT install the 8.0 version (or higher,) of AVG on an older system.  The 7.5 version is still being updated with virus definitions so use it instead, the performance impact of 8.0 on older systems is QUITE noticeable.

I just dealt with another system yesterday that when Norton was killed by a virus and subsequently "uninstalled," rendered the OS un-bootable.  too many fingers in too many pies.  KISS.

Tallon41

I too, have to fix too many Norton/SEP waxed boxes. Avira, Avast, and NOD32 have always done well for me. MAcaffee? Whos that?

Kaspersky seems to be pretty good to, strong engine, but it does seem to pose compatibility issues more so than any other.

Penewah!

Neither. I'd have to recommend ESET smart security. I've been trying it out for the past two weeks and I have to say I love it. The latest version (4) is simple on the outside but pretty damn deep - if you want it to be - if you ask me. I also have it running alongside Spybot S&D (and no, they aren't interfering with each other).

In general, I don't recommend, Norton, Avira, Panda, AVG (8), or McAffee. I do recommend Smart Security, NOD32, Kaspersky, AVG (7.5), or Avast!

A lot of decent opinions in here..

If it's between the two, you have to go McAfee.  They remain a profitable company, and the largest AV vendor globally I believe.  They have the only true single-engine solution, and their corporate products (ePO) blow everything else away.  If you can score a corporate/enterprise edition, you'll be sitting pretty without all the retail bloat.

Retail Symantec security stuff is basically PC poison if you ask me.. :P

Some of the suggestions for the other smaller players in the game are decent. 

I would disagree with the statement that McAfee corporate products blow everyone else away... I've worked with several clients that use them, and evaluated them on quite a few occasions. I don't know anyone who would recommend them over anyone else for ANY of their products.

Between the two options the OP presented, I would pick Norton over the McAfee now that they've filtered the tech from SEP into their consumer products. Otherwise, I'm fond of Avast and AVG. For U3 scanners, I would recommend McAfee, however. NOD32 I don't use for ethical reasons due to ESET's business practices.

I don't play favorites with companies unlike some people think...

Micron:

NOD32 I don't use for ethical reasons due to ESET's business practices.

Come again?

All of the vendors have made mistakes at one time or another, accidently removing legitimate files on users' systems. However, ESET has been known to intentionally target other companies' softwares that do not align with their business practices.

One example that would strike home for many home users is the PeerGuardian incident. In 2008, P2P monitoring activity was detected on ESET's network, and Bluetack added them to their IP blocklist. While simultaneously sending a legal threat to Bluetack, they chose to classify those apps that used Bluetack's list as malware so they would be removed from the users' systems. Their issue was the Bluetack, not PeerGuardian and others. Doing what they did overstepped ethical and legal boundaries, especially since they were pending litigation against Bluetack. Yes, they later changed their minds, backed down and removed those apps from their detection signatures, but the line was already crossed.

So if you don't mind having a software whose company's management will designate any given software a threat based on whether they agree/disagree with them AND whether they're even directly or indirectly related to the "reason"... that's your call.

Micron:

All of the vendors have made mistakes at one time or another, accidently removing legitimate files on users' systems. However, ESET has been known to intentionally target other companies' softwares that do not align with their business practices.

One example that would strike home for many home users is the PeerGuardian incident. In 2008, P2P monitoring activity was detected on ESET's network, and Bluetack added them to their IP blocklist. While simultaneously sending a legal threat to Bluetack, they chose to classify those apps that used Bluetack's list as malware so they would be removed from the users' systems. Their issue was the Bluetack, not PeerGuardian and others. Doing what they did overstepped ethical and legal boundaries, especially since they were pending litigation against Bluetack. Yes, they later changed their minds, backed down and removed those apps from their detection signatures, but the line was already crossed.

So if you don't mind having a software whose company's management will designate any given software a threat based on whether they agree/disagree with them AND whether they're even directly or indirectly related to the "reason"... that's your call.

Oh. Just nitpicking, that isn't exactly an ethical problem. Now, say, if ESET employees spammed Bluetack with harassing emails, that would be an ethical problem.

Micron:

I would disagree with the statement that McAfee corporate products blow everyone else away... I've worked with several clients that use them, and evaluated them on quite a few occasions. I don't know anyone who would recommend them over anyone else for ANY of their products.

Between the two options the OP presented, I would pick Norton over the McAfee now that they've filtered the tech from SEP into their consumer products. Otherwise, I'm fond of Avast and AVG. For U3 scanners, I would recommend McAfee, however. NOD32 I don't use for ethical reasons due to ESET's business practices.

I don't play favorites with companies unlike some people think...

Well, opinions aside, what I meant was from a market share perspective.  McAfee is the powerhouse in the corporate world.  That's just raw data. 

Based on what data? What's the comedic saying about the reliability of statistics, sampling, etc?

In your experience, it points to McAfee. In mine, Symantec. But that's not the object of the thread... If the OP wants to hear it, I'm sure we could both rattle on and still ultimately arrive at a stalemate. We could probably both run up and down the pros and cons of each product, point and counterpoint. In the corporate world at least, it's up to the consultant or IT staff to properly evaluate the software that best fits their users' needs and environment.

Besides, with the diversity of today's converged networks... a "one-size-fits-all" solution simply doesn't exist.

Micron:

Based on what data? What's the comedic saying about the reliability of statistics, sampling, etc?

In your experience, it points to McAfee. In mine, Symantec. But that's not the object of the thread... If the OP wants to hear it, I'm sure we could both rattle on and still ultimately arrive at a stalemate. We could probably both run up and down the pros and cons of each product, point and counterpoint. In the corporate world at least, it's up to the consultant or IT staff to properly evaluate the software that best fits their users' needs and environment.

Besides, with the diversity of today's converged networks... a "one-size-fits-all" solution simply doesn't exist.

Again, I'm not interested in getting into a conversation with you about the pros and cons of each product.  My contribution to the topic was in regards to market share for each product and how the big players are performing in "today's world".  In the national industry arena, McAfee tops the other products.  In retail, Symantec leads McAfee by a larger, albeit narrowing margin.  In the global industry arena, McAfee's margin widens.  I attribute this primarily to EPO.

This is based on "industry data", but if that isn't specific enough, data provided to me by McAfee and Symantec directly through vendor contacts.  I don't mean to name-drop, but you asked.  These are folks I work with regularly.  I have no reason to post on topics I know nothing about.  If you would like, I can get with a McAfee contact and see if he can provide recent market share numbers at the close of 1Q.  I do have financials readily available, but that is beyond the scope of this and doubt if it would be of much interest.

At this point, I feel this sub-topic has gone beyond the scope of the original thread and would appreciate if you wanted follow-up information if you would PM me instead.  thx

Agreed. The OP has no use or desires to learn of IT versions of the software and this has gone This user is a home user and any corperate software information you may feel relivant ... is in fact not relivant.

Whitelotus:  I recomend Norton for you ... its more user freindly right now. Also Antivirus is only the tip of the iceberg for security. you also should get a maleware scanner like SuperAntiSpyware or something, and remember that safe surfing is the only way to prevent hacking, viruses, trojens, maleware (thats right put on a condom and stay away from those diseased looking sites)

---

whitelotus:

Hey eggxperts, can u give me an advice of which program is the best for my pc?

macafi or Norton?? And why?

Thank you!

I agree that this thread did get a little off topic but the original question is also vague! 

Both McAfee and Norton have many versions for the home user and we really need to know the full scope of protection the user is looking for?  Are they only looking for Anti-Virus software or are they looking for total system and network protection? 

Tallon41:

4hams:

If it is an older maybe a little bit slower than todays computers then I would suggest AVG Free to be used in conjunction with Windows Defender and windows Firewall thus lowering the amount of system resources being used to protect you and your data.

well the problem with that, is that you SHOULD NOT install the 8.0 version (or higher,) of AVG on an older system.  The 7.5 version is still being updated with virus definitions so use it instead, the performance impact of 8.0 on older systems is QUITE noticeable.

I just dealt with another system yesterday that when Norton was killed by a virus and subsequently "uninstalled," rendered the OS un-bootable.  too many fingers in too many pies.  KISS.

Tallon41

Hi Tallon41,

I have a question I believe is relevant to this thread. What is considered an 'older system' ? I couldn't find it defined in this thread. I am using Vista Home Premium SP1 in one machine with AVG Free ver. 8.0.238 and it runs just fine. On the other machine I have Windows XP Media Center 2005 SP3 with the same AVG Free version. It has been running funky since the install of AVG 8.0.238. Is my XP machine considered to be an 'older system'? If so, would I be better off with ver. 7.5 on the AVG Free in the XP Machine?

Thanks,

Jakeman97

---

ASUS M3A78-T AM2+/AM2 AMD 790GX HDMI AMD Phenom 9950 2.6GHz Socket AM2+125W Quad-Core Ultra X3 1000-Watt PSU G.SKILL 4GB DDR2 800

Jakeman97:

I have a question I believe is relevant to this thread. What is considered an 'older system' ?

PC's that were built during say the last year before the release of Vista would be out as well.

I would say Single-core Systems with 512RAM would be it. 

Jakeman97:

 If so, would I be better off with ver. 7.5 on the AVG Free in the XP Machine?

less than 10days ago, my 7.5 systems began receiving notices of AVGs intent to stop providing virus updates for that version.

So I have to say....switch to Avast.  I do not recommend 8.0 AVG.

Tallon41

---

Hi Tallon,

Thanks for the reply and the info. I'll be looking at AVAST for the XP machine.

Jakeman97

---

ASUS M3A78-T AM2+/AM2 AMD 790GX HDMI AMD Phenom 9950 2.6GHz Socket AM2+125W Quad-Core Ultra X3 1000-Watt PSU G.SKILL 4GB DDR2 800