 |
 |
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