Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Fuzzfas, Dec 23, 2009.
Enjoy! And i hope you 're all taking notes!
And here you have an answer
That's a typical PR mumbo jumbo, when we all know free antiviruses like avast! 5 are seriously chewing off their userbase. And they sure are scared as hell. And it's good that way.
i have always paid for my protection. there's no need to anymore IMHO and i wont again. last time my paid for antivirus caught anything was over 3 years ago. and the only program i have had major grief with since upgrading to 64 bit win 7 was from my paid for anti virus. thats out of nearly 300 games. i wont be paying again, end of the day whole systems backed up to external every week and it's behind a router. im using mse now with windows firewall. no problems slowdown, disconnects on line lag.
The only time my pc has ever got infected was with nis installed...
Yep and reminds of Symantec's reaction to MSE. They are worried alright and they should be!
Avast 5 has all cards in place to become very dangerous indeed. There's nothing wrong really in Avast 4 either.
The sad thing is the average user will read this and be brainwashed. Wonder how much longer Symantec can go without releasing a free version of Norton?
Yes and that's why they wrote this article. If you think about it, it's pretty scary for someone who doesn't know about security, antiviruses, etc. And fear is good motive to drive people where you want them to be.
With new,improved versions of the likes of Avira and Avast,plus promising newcomers such as MSE and Panda Cloud,it's inevitable that Symantec will be increasingly twitchy.It must cause panic in the boardroom that one day soon they might actually have to provide a free version of Norton
The irony is that if and when this happens all this 'free is rubbish' scaremongering may well come back to haunt them.
Wow, that article by Symantec is very wrong and a very extreme narrow-minded view. Looks like they're trying to brainwash the less knowledged users and throwing FUD to the users of free AVs
Norton is good product hands down.
This article is created to attract average computer users from USA. This way of marketing unfortunately works here
In Europe its different story.
Most of my friends here are using AVG, Norton and Ad-Aware. They never heard of MBAM, SAS or HIPS.
2-3 years ago I sold a new PC with NOD32 preinstalled and customer was not familiar with it and installed AVG. I did not know for this until he got a virus and asked for help At that time NOD32 2.7 was really good.
On the other side many of my European friends are using Avira, Hosts, MBAM, SAS and often I see Threatfire etc.
I reckon most people start their computing using security software that is peddled in the local shops, aka the likes of Symantec, Mcafee, Sophos ... and over time get savvy to the protection found in freeware.
A lot of these scare guides probably work - on newbs. It naturally doesn't make sense that payed protection could be worse performing/or as good - as the free offerings. I think people assume that because they're paying for it, then it must be the best. Oh how bitter they shall be.
*gets out my crystal ball* MSE, will shut down a lot of AV vendors. The writing is on the way.
*Article kindly brought to you by the symantec $$$ suckers*
looks like a door to door salesman
mse is free stick that up ya norton
well,i have mentioned my comments in "Free Vs Paid AV" thread,but let me assure you free antivruses cannot be trusted........essentially because they are not good at prevention...
i recently got infected with win32.polipos and had an "excellent" free AV installed and updated,the result..........had to format my HDD and re-install windows again.......
A paid security suite is in my view,absolutely necessary for safe PC.........there is a reason why even companies providing free AV's also offer their paid products......
BUT many free FWs and AVs are better than symantecs
About Prevx . I guess so
We will get 24x7 support for our problems in wildersecurity
moral of this
If you paint a girl green, is she an alien?
Even more, Avast, Avira and AVG, all have their own dedicated fora, where they give support to the free users too.
PrevX and Panda are reachable here.
avast! forums work pretty much 24/7 because most of regular techy users are from all over the world, covering nearly all timezones and providing sufficient help to solve most of the issues without any need for official staff interventions.
Unless there are core problems where only programmers can help.
But even ALWIL staff is usually very active (except these days since they are really busy with avast! 5).
So, saying tech support is handicapped in any way just because we're dealing with free program is kinda ridiculous. Especially because for them, every bug report or false positive report for free version also solves the problem for all the payable customers. So it works in both ways. We get free program and payable users get large userbase covering them. And from ALWIL's word, this model works pretty well for them.
All hail to RejZoR! Rest assured he's also a dedicated avast! user for a long time.
The same could also happen while using a paid-for AV.
(PS, I also use a paid-for AV)
xaxa symantec always be symantec no coments for this company.....
Mind letting us know what that "excellent" free AV was?
in whose opinion was this an excellent AV,and if it failed you and you want to slash on its rep then y not mention a name for this mysterious awesome failure. At least Symantec's BS got thru to someone. but I would have sworn that article was aimed at children, I got a mad-on reading it.
Personally, I think the entire “free versus paid” debate is misguided—unless you’re in a position where you can’t, unfortunately, afford to purchase a paid product.
All good anti-malware solutions are very modestly priced for individual users. In my opinion, the top consideration should the extent to which the solution provides quality protection against malware, since that is the product's raison d'etre.
"Detection But No Cure – Many free products appear to work great, until you need them. These “solutions” will let you know if you are currently infected, and then push you to pay for the “real” software to remove the threat."
This actually made me laugh out loud given the stories about Symantec support techs using MBAM to clean out users' infected systems.
Actually, consider this quote from the Dennis Technology Lab report that was funded and distributed by Symantec:
It seems to me that Symantec can’t be accused of failing to be “fair & balanced” -- right?
Separate names with a comma.