Symantec's tips on Free Antivirus

They do make a good point about having to use a collection of free tools to secure a computer. I mean take Microsoft security essentials it's great software, but some would believe that's enough protection. Sure, you can combine various free tools and have very secure Setup, but there's more to go wrong in my experience and the average user just isn't going to do that.

I personally pay for Kaspersky Internet security because it has got some great features for it's relatively reasonable cost from shopping around. I could use free tools, but I just prefer a security suite and I can afford it.

Ofcourse, this being from Symantec it's not going to start promoting freeware, is it.

 

So if you want an all-in-one solution: buy one. Great lesson to be learned here. Ah!, another one: if you don't want to spend time on security: don't. I'll throw one in myself: if you don't want to swim: drown.

 

many suites are getting to be as good if not better in some cases as stand alones. im people that say thats suites are crap or not worth it look at the more recent firewall tests for kaspersky which also has excellent av. even norton when set to advanced mode is a pretty good option and again as proven all year has a great av. comodo has a great firewall and their av is getting better and is pretty decent now. not as good as some of the top ones but still a good choice for the average user. i use nis2010 and the firewall in advanced mode and it really is very good.

 

I was only talking about the article mentioned in the above post. You brought Dennis labs into the equation - nothing we were talking about in this thread.
Also Dennis the test was not written by Symantec. Lets not go there and discuss that again, the discussion has been had many times and just seems to go round in circles.
Stick with to the thread in hand.

 

Lol...just another mention for such infamous dennis "test"

and counting..

 

Come on guys get real:-do you expect Symantec,or any company SELLING an av/anti malware product,to actually give either a balanced view on freebies or sing their praises?They are 1st and foremost a business and as such have to raise the profile of their products AND place doubts in the minds of potential clients about competing products,free or paid for ones!

 

Why we guys always try to take suggestions on negative way? I guess Norton is just trying attract novice users. We should take it in a positive manner, rather negative. This what i feel.

 

I agree -- but, clearly a report that is affiliated with Symantec makes positive statements about freeware, and that’s worthy to note. Also, consider: Symantec says here, “Of course, not all freeware, shareware, or trialware is bad."

I expect Symantec, like any other business, to act in their own best interests. I also expect Symantec, like many other businesses, to act in an ethical and truthful manner. Their article “Freeware—The Good, The Bad, And the Dangerous” is clearly aligned with their own best interests, yet I personally don’t see any content in the article that is unethical or untruthful -- do you?

Symantec has no obligation to "sing the praises" of any of their competitors, but they do have an obligation to adopt positions on issues that are truthful and justifiable.

 

one of the another stunt from dennis the menace


no need to worry missy we can use xp to run in virtualbox.....

or use sandboxie/geswall no need to cure

we got mbam to find self replicating kids what even you left...

and at last we all got options like free OS like linux and bsd which are more secure that you miss megan fox...


last there is no 100% antimalware/virus solution but with different combinations and sensibly using browsing in a virtual mode and going to safe sites you can make it 99.9% safe