Looking for an older version of Kaspersky

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by infini, Jan 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. infini

    infini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2002
    Posts:
    110
    I am looking for avp but i don't know exactly which version it is. I went to avp.ch and i found 4 different versions. Kaspersky 4.5, 4 , 3.5 and 3.0.132. How does avp perform with the latest version of kaspersky?
     
  2. Chuck57

    Chuck57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Posts:
    1,422
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    I'm running Kaspersky v4.5 and the only complaint I have is it uses a LOT of resources. I have a 1.3G processor and 512 RAM and when it's doing a scan, I can't do much of anything on the PC. I set my scan to run at night, so no problem. Other than that, I'm very happy with it.

    The new version 5 beta is lighter on resources I understand but, according to what I've read here, it still has a few bugs to iron out, as is common with most beta programs.
     
  3. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Older than present official version, (v 4.5) or older than present unofficial beta version (v. 5)?.

    AVP 3.5 is the choice of Kaspersky users for older computers and detection is comparable to v.4.5. Therefore, this is the one that is generally downloaded from the Swiss Kaspersky site; http://www.avp.ch/E/downloadv2.stm

    AVP 3.5 has been discussed recently; http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=18503

    KAV 4.5 is the present official version and with some tweaking of the default monitor settings, it again can run quite smoothly on most newer boxes. http://forums.useice.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=1;t=152;st=0

    Key-files for the registered versions are interchangeable and it is worth trialing first to see which one you prefer and which one sits most happily with your other software.
     
  4. Chuck57

    Chuck57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Posts:
    1,422
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    Hey Blackcat, are you saying that my license for 4.5 will work with 3.5? If I could free up some resources and save a little space on my drive, I'd think about dropping back, or would that be a stupid thing to do?
     
  5. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Hi Chuck57

    I have 'dropped back' to AVP 3.5 on one of my older computers here and I am using the key-file I was sent for KAV 4.5. So you can use your present key-file.

    AVP is very lean, has a negligible imprint and it uses the same virus definitions as its big brother.

    However, I am surprised that you are finding KAV 4.5 resource hungry on your computer. Have you tried all the tweaks and are you using the latest version?

    http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,4977354~root=security,1~mode=flat

    If you have not used AVP 3.5 before, it may come as a shock as this is a real bare bones scanner compared to KAV 4.5. The interface is really simple, but effective and again most people run it without the control centre.

    If you are thinking of dropping back, don't forget to use the KAV registry cleaner after removing V4.5 before installing AVP 3.5. http://kasperskylab.co.uk/files/utils/
     
  6. Chuck57

    Chuck57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Posts:
    1,422
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    I downloaded 3.5 but couldn't get the auto update to work. I have it saved in a folder with other antivirus and firewall .exe files and might try it again later.

    I haven't done any adjusting of 4.5, other than selecting all files for realtime and weekly scans. Since I have it set to scan after I'm done working, the resource doesn't concern me that much. I only mentioned it because it was such a surprise when I first used it, considering the amount of RAM I have and my processor power.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.