Guest The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Re: Anti-Virus Software Leythos wrote: > In article <#5jNcKI2HHA.4004@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Gary S. Terhune" > <none> says... >> Exactly. You give a hearty recommendation to Norton based upon the corporate >> edition which has no relationship to the consumer version -- and don't >> bother to mention that delineation in a group that is primarily accessed by >> the consumer market. Not the first time you've provided what I consider to >> be deliberately misleading and incomplete answers and that bugs me. > > I agree, the Norton line became crap several years ago. The corporate > versions, not the 3.x versions, but the 10.x versions are still reliable > and very efficient and good at detecting about everything. > > Symantec lowered their min purchase qty down to 5 units, making Symantec > Antivirus Corporate Edition for Workstations and Servers a viable cost > for many home users also. > 10.x is too bloated though, and slows down the system. -- Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group: http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html "Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with legality." - Linus Torvalds
Guest Leythos Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Re: Anti-Virus Software In article <f9ctid$qht$2@aioe.org>, none@none.not says... > Leythos wrote: > > In article <#5jNcKI2HHA.4004@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Gary S. Terhune" > > <none> says... > >> Exactly. You give a hearty recommendation to Norton based upon the corporate > >> edition which has no relationship to the consumer version -- and don't > >> bother to mention that delineation in a group that is primarily accessed by > >> the consumer market. Not the first time you've provided what I consider to > >> be deliberately misleading and incomplete answers and that bugs me. > > > > I agree, the Norton line became crap several years ago. The corporate > > versions, not the 3.x versions, but the 10.x versions are still reliable > > and very efficient and good at detecting about everything. > > > > Symantec lowered their min purchase qty down to 5 units, making Symantec > > Antivirus Corporate Edition for Workstations and Servers a viable cost > > for many home users also. > > > > 10.x is too bloated though, and slows down the system. Maybe 10.2, but 9 though 10.1.5 are great. I've not seen any issues with 10.2 on workstations or servers, but the 10.2 reporting module for servers does slow them down. -- Leythos - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist" spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
Guest The poster formerly known as Nina DiBoy Posted August 8, 2007 Posted August 8, 2007 Re: Anti-Virus Software Leythos wrote: > In article <f9ctid$qht$2@aioe.org>, none@none.not says... >> Leythos wrote: >>> In article <#5jNcKI2HHA.4004@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Gary S. Terhune" >>> <none> says... >>>> Exactly. You give a hearty recommendation to Norton based upon the corporate >>>> edition which has no relationship to the consumer version -- and don't >>>> bother to mention that delineation in a group that is primarily accessed by >>>> the consumer market. Not the first time you've provided what I consider to >>>> be deliberately misleading and incomplete answers and that bugs me. >>> I agree, the Norton line became crap several years ago. The corporate >>> versions, not the 3.x versions, but the 10.x versions are still reliable >>> and very efficient and good at detecting about everything. >>> >>> Symantec lowered their min purchase qty down to 5 units, making Symantec >>> Antivirus Corporate Edition for Workstations and Servers a viable cost >>> for many home users also. >>> >> 10.x is too bloated though, and slows down the system. > > Maybe 10.2, but 9 though 10.1.5 are great. I've not seen any issues with > 10.2 on workstations or servers, but the 10.2 reporting module for > servers does slow them down. > We used 7 and 8. Anything past 9 did just as good a job as the earlier versions as far as protecting machines from nasties, but we felt it slowed down machines too much. It seems to work for you though, to each their own. We use Kaspersky 6 now. -- Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group: http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html "Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with legality." - Linus Torvalds
Recommended Posts