Panda Panned by CNET

Well I don't use use Panda myself, for a number of reasons. But I don't think it's a bad product, in fact I think it has improved, the last 2 years. Here's some interesting reading, you guys. I'd rather "follow" Niel J. Rubenking's "advice" in finding a AV product, than "follow" Cnet's "advice".
And as always, when in doubt, try it out yourself. That's the best way always, IMHO

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2178140,00.asp

Cheers

 

The very first Titanium was absolutely awesome before they started that horrible trend with a new gui every year. It's gone downhill from that point on. Painfully slow. It froze my system for up to 2 minutes when an update was applied... No thanks.

 

In case the folks at Panda are paying attention, I couldn't agree more with Brian N regarding the gui. Also the pain involved in stopping it from loading and my inability to disable task scheduler, even though autoupdates are disabled, are amongst the main reasons I'll be ditching it. (98se)

 

I don't have much experience with Panda.

But I think, about two or three years ago, I had great difficulty removing/uninstalling Panda software.

Also, I've used several online scans, and isn't Panda the one that actually tries to send files to a Windows system folder ?

 

panda is a fine AV,

comments of it being a resource hog are just stupid

 

I totally agree. It is a very decent and respectfull av.

 

I think you should try it before posting comments.

 

i certainly have tried it

 

Wasn't there some interesting discussion some years ago as to who actually owns Panda?

 

There is no way I take any testing done by these sites seriously. Unless they have them done by a reputable testing site. they don't even post the correct information in the system requirments. I have a copy of Panda av+firewall and AS and it is definatly Vista compatable. but look at what CNET posted as system requirments. I just can't trust them at all