Re: Worst AV Experiences by spam?
spam?
Thu May 27 09:20:23 CDT 2004
eTrust has treated my four most demanding customers very well. 99% of any
virus problems I've seen in the last three years on these systems have been
100% related to user issues not software issues.
P.S. If not for Ghost - I wouldn't touch ANY of the Symantec solutions. Too
invasive, too problematic.
db
"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:unULLtzQEHA.3016@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> This was NIS too. The computer would boot normally, but within anywhere
> from 30 seconds to 3 minutes, it would stop responding. I think numlock
and
> capslock would work and the mouse would move (can't remember for sure),
but
> no menus would come up, programs wouldn't run, etc. After quite a few
hours
> of fixing what turned out to be an unrelated problem, I started disabling
> 3rd party services one at a time, and sure enough it was Norton.
>
> I wouldn't argue with you about CA, except to say that they are much
better
> now than they were a couple of years ago or before. I buy etrust AV
> licenses for under $25 each - in addition to running it on all the
computers
> in the office, I install it for anyone who accesses the LAN over VPN, just
> so that I know they have AV software running and updating itself
regularly.
>
>
> "SuperGumby [SBS MVP]" <not@your.nellie> wrote in message
> news:%23QAwK5qQEHA.1620@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > which version Dave? I have a client at the moment whose performance
seems
> > to
> > be being heavily impacted by NIS 2004 (well, NAV actually, I've had to
> > disable the IS side of things).
> >
> > In the past my dislike of NAV (since it became Symantec NAV, previous to
> > that it was fine) has been slight, Jan whom I work with hates it with a
> > vengence.
> >
> > I got so fed up with Innoculan from both a performance and a support
angle
> > that I simply no longer consider CA products. One of their Sydney
offices
> > is
> > a 'stone's throw' from my home, I've been tempted.
> >
> > --
> > I'd rather be happy than right anyway.
> > Slartibartfast.
> > "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in
> > message
> > news:%23FBcwbqQEHA.2644@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >> I'd never use a Norton product after some bad experiences in the early
> > days
> >> of win95. However, my Dad uses it successfully, and he clicks every
> > pop-up
> >> and runs every file he gets in the e-mail. The fact that his computer
> > still
> >> runs is a testament to either Norton AV or some exceptionally good luck
> >> (probably both).
> >>
> >> That said, I recently spent about 10 hours troubleshooting a user's XP
> > Home
> >> laptop for a problem that turned out to be Norton. (Computer froze
solid
> >> about 1-3 minutes after boot, except in safe mode). Unfortunately for
> >> me,
> >> he had some minor Windows errors that misdirected me from the real
> > problem,
> >> which disappeared upon uninstalling Norton.
> >>
> >>
> >> "Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" <steve.foster@picamar.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:xn0dipd1wmqag000@msnews.microsoft.com...
> >> > Given that there's no consensus on "the best" AV solution for SBS, I
> >> > wonder if there's any chance of one on "the worst"... :)
> >> >
> >> > Personally, I find Norton to be the pits (heck, it won't let you
> >> > install/uninstall it from safe mode, for goodness' sake), closely
> >> > followed by McAffee.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
> >> > ---------------------------------------
> >> > MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>