AVG7 AND NAV ON SAME PC

My friend just bought a new pc and it has the nav 2004 trial version installed on it.If this piece of junk is not running can i install and run avg7 free without trouble or do i absolutly have to remove nav which i know can be pretty tricky to say the least If you think i hate nav and love avg you are dead right
Thanks for any help

 

You can disable the resident or real time scan on NAV and then install AVG7. But you would be better off if you could remove nav.

bigc

 

As an ex-NAV 2004 user myself, I hate to say this but you may as well use it for the whole of the trial - to be quite blunt, NAV's detection rate is better than AVG.

When the trial is over and you decide not to pay anything more for it, it would be best to get rid of it. Use the uninstaller to remove the bulk of it, then the fun begins! You will need to use Explorer to find all the left-over files and a Registry cleaner to clear up some of the mess left in the Reg (RegSeeker is a good prog to use for this). Also check your Services to make sure all the NAV ones are gone (I had one left over after my uninstall!).

After all that you will still have detritus scattered about the place, but it is probably safest just to leave that.

 

Excuse Me, but doesn't Symantec offer some utility to completely uninstall NAV/NIS?

 

They certainly have a tool for NAV2003 and earlier, but the 2004 model is supposed to have a better uninstaller (!).

If you think you know of a tool for more recent versions, please let us know.

Symantec is notoriously troublesome to remove, tool or no tool.

 

What are you using now? My license for NAV04 is going to expire on tuesday and I am going to do a reformat as its that time of the year plus I want to make sure its all gone.

What would you reccomend for a seriously good AV?
Kaspersky?
NOD32?

I am basically really confused now after doing some research as I thought AV protection worked to find trojons and everything but I guess they really dont.
Is there a total package out there somewhere thats really good and isnt a pain on system resources?

 

I use Kaspersky Personal Pro 5 because I consider it the best. I also trialled the ordinary version of Kaspersky Personal 5 which is cheaper and offers a very similar level of protection.

Kaspersky is not 'light' on resources, though anyone coming from NAV2004 would not find it heavier! Nod is lighter but has a detection rate that is generally aknowledged to be a little less than KAV.

Since KAV is available as a months free trial, little can be lost by giving it a go. KAV is better at trojan detection than NAV and many other AVs, but you won't find a 'total' package as such. There is still spyware to consider!

 

I actually came from Internet security 2004 and it was a very big HOG on resources.

So NOD32 isnt all that good?

So what would you reccomend for Worm and Trojon defense since there isnt a total package?

As far as spyware goes I use FireFox and I run Spybot S&D and CWShredder once a week.

 

NOD32 is highly regarded by those who use it. However it's detection rate, on the whole, is not quite as strong as KAV. Where resources are an important issue people prefer NOD.

KAV is good at finding trojans (and Worms), so an AT would be an added bonus rather than a necessity if you use KAV. I also use Ewido resident in my tray, but I'm not going to pretend it is essential. Either A2 or Ewido could be used as a free backup scanner.

Lavasoft's AdAware is an excellent free AS scanner, though for real time protection you would have to pay. I really don't see any virtue in running CWShredder as a regular scanner - it is best reserved for when there is a problem.

 

How much of a difference in resources are we talking with AOD and KAV? I do alot of gamming and dont want something that is going to slow down my system. I have 1gig of ram if thats important.

Also are you running the free version of Ewido or the payed for one? How does it compare to A2?

I have never really had a big problem with viruses before and dont know why all of a sudden I am so paranoid about them. I have just switched to DSL and that could be the reason.

 

You have twice as much RAM as me, I would think it does make a difference but I'm not a gamer!

The free versions of A2 and Ewido do not have a Resident Guard (other than for the trial period). I don't think it is unfair to say that Ewido is at a more 'polished' stage of development than A2, but they are both improving with time. Most people would recommend Ewido over A2 at the moment, which is why I have the paid for version of Ewido and the free version of A2.

Ewido itself will take up some resources, so a gamesman may wish to take that into account. People usually use NOD in preference to KAV where they have older or less powerful machines - there will always be a compromise between utility and security.

I would rather another gamesman answered the question as to whether NOD makes an appreciable difference - I have no experience in this. I can only say that if you are used to Norton, resources should not be an issue with KAV.

 

I currently put Kaspersky trial in and so far it doesnt seem that bad other than the resources its using. I was reading some test reports and it seems like it might be the best protection out there.

I was going to use NOD32 untill I read this report to were it didnt fair to well in the detecting viruses very well.

Anti Virus Comparision

 

No. Both AVG7 and Avast are both far better at detection than NAV 2005. NAV lets every trojan, worm, web hijack, malware, and spyware install it's self on your HDD.

 

As a test I ran both Nav & AVG together - AVG outperformed. When my Nav expired I stayed with AVG but had a problem with updating so I dumped it. I installed Avast Home and am impressed & have never looked back. I have been using Avast for several months now. Test reports I have read places Avast tops. That's my 2 cents worth.

 

Do you have any supporting evidence to back up this statement?

 

I am no fan of Norton but it was right much of a slam. I'd like to see a little proof too especially when it is made by a nonmember.

 

Perhaps Peaches and Patrician would care to have a look at the link given in post #12. If that is insufficient evidence for them, I can provide several more links all giving the same results with regard to the relative merits of the leading AVs.

AVG is universally found to be a poor performer when contrasted with NAV and other leading AVs. Tittle tattle by the ill informed is no substitute for carefully prepared comparatives.

 

Never heard of those folks in link #12. I did review it and I noted it was AVG 6 not 7. Dated. I have had AVG 7 as a second opinion on demand scanner for exactly 2 days and used it once.

 

Well if you didn't like that one try this one:- http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=67&mnu=67

I'll keep on finding them until I get one that satisfies you!!!

 

I think I have decided on Kaspersky would you reccomend the Pro or the Personal version?

What is the major difference in the 2?

 

It's true that AVG is inferior to other leading AVs when it comes to non-viral stuff such as adware, spyware, joke programs, zoo malware, uncommon trojans and other non-existance malware that are technically harmless to your computer or AVG doesn't detect them by its design, you'll see that in so many amateur tests.

But when it comes to detecting most-serious-dangerous malware such as ITW viruses/worms then AVG is good as other leading AVs, you'll see this fact in some professional tests such as ICSA Labs and Virus Bulletin.

Small detection percentage doesn't mean it's provide inferior protection in the real-world scenario, maybe adversely less is more in the real-world virus protection.

 

I won't dispute that in the 'real world' against common malware you are actually likely to come across, AVG does its job:- http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?table

But that is rather different from suggesting that NAV lets stuff through while AVG does not!

The question of the difference between KAV Personal and Personal Pro has been exhausted elsewhere on this forum. Very briefly, Pro has better protection against macros in Word and other office documents, is slightly more configurable and is much more expensive! At the moment Pro does not have 'extended' data bases against some riskware, but this of limited use in general practice. Also, by default, when Pro finds a virus, it automatically deals with it, without asking; you only know about it if you look at the GUI which displays the stats. With the ordinary version it will prompt you and you have 30 seconds to act before KAV automatically deals with it. These are default settings that can be adjusted, but only Pro has the statistics presented on the GUI - it is therefore more 'set and forget' without bothering you in a surf session. Both versions have full 'Reports' sections, of course. Pro also has both 'Backup' and 'Quarantine' sections - if I remember correctly the ordinary version lacks 'Backup'.

The overall protection offered by the two versions is about the same. Unless macros are going to be a problem to you ('cos you deal with a lot of office documents).

 

No I dont deal with office documents.