On Monday 31 October 2005 20:35, Margaret Wilson wrote:
> I won't requote prices since Peter has done an excellent job of that
> already. :-) Unlike many antivirus products (especially Symantec) which
> have turned into what I call "bloatware" using up a ton of RAM, NOD32 has a
> small footprint and is very configurable. It also updates daily, sometimes
> more than once. I second Peter's wish that MSU would negotiate reduced
> rates with Eset.
>
> Regards,
>
> Margaret
[snip]
I'm not concerned with "bloatware" (love that term) per se, as something
that works is FAR more important to me than something with a smal
memory footprint.
As with John Valenti, I've found Symantec to be OK. I can't think of the
last time a user got a virus, so the combination of MSU's email spam/
virus filter and Symantec seems to be working well. ...But how do I
prove that? I'm not at all against jumping to a different platform but
judging how well they work isn't simple. Spyware detectors are easier
to judge I think, owing to the sheer volume of dreck out there. So far
I think Spysweeper is one of the winners.
This topic, spyware & virus protection might make for a very lively
interesting NAG meeting.
--STeve Andre'
Political Science
|