[Tech] Anti-Virus recommendation
- Thread starter Cynic-Al
- Start date
waterproofbob
Junior Administrator
An anti-virus is nothing like a flu vaccination, an anti-virus is like being on constant pump of every anti-biotic and flu medication possible constantly. In the end it doesn't help and you'll find that it is a pain in the arse and you wish you could stop.
Also it's not like driving a car with no insurance. It's like (if you are sensible i.e using all methods mentioned by Wol Haven earlier) getting a car and strapping armour plating to it and also having AA and fully comp insurance. The car will become slower and less responsive on the slight chance that one someone starts firing RPGs at you.
decky101
In Cryo Sleep
Anti viruses don't help? That's possibly one of the most incorrect statements that has ever come from your mouth bob, I mean, if the were useless and didn't help, why would they exist in any shape or form? And the analogy for the driving a car with armour plating is slightly flawed, it would be more accurate if say, you were driving through iraq with a banner saying "I'm a suicide bomber" on the side of the car, then the analogy is a bit more realistic, as if you're driving through London, what are the chances someone's going to shoot you with an RPG? Pretty damn low. What's the chance you're going to get a virus whilst simply browsing the internet? It can be pretty damn high. On a side note, it seems everyone just bypassed my analogy, which I believed to be a fairly accurate one.
Also, this argument is almost ready for the Soap box *looks expectantly at Ronin*
.
Also, this argument is almost ready for the Soap box *looks expectantly at Ronin*
.
waterproofbob
Junior Administrator
Anti viruses don't help? That's possibly one of the most incorrect statements that has ever come from your mouth bob, I mean, if the were useless and didn't help, why would they exist in any shape or form? And the analogy for the driving a car with armour plating is slightly flawed, it would be more accurate if say, you were driving through iraq with a banner saying "I'm a suicide bomber" on the side of the car, then the analogy is a bit more realistic, as if you're driving through London, what are the chances someone's going to shoot you with an RPG? Pretty damn low. What's the chance you're going to get a virus whilst simply browsing the internet? It can be pretty damn high.
Also, this argument is almost ready for the Soap box *looks expectantly at Ronin*
I didn't say they didn't help, if I got one it would be for me like getting armour plating on my car. The fact I'm not going to have RPGs fired at me is entirely my point. The reason they exist is because people don't protect themselves and because it is another way for companies to earn money for doing very little more than inconveniencing me. It is not that easy to get Viruses from the internet just from browsing, the pure fact that I spend my entire life on the internet sans a anti-virus sort of supports that one. In fact I'm a little biased against anti-virus programs as I spend a lot of time at work having to bypass the stupid things to do data transfers for customers, their oh so irrelevant anti-virus programs block what should be a quick network setup and I spend an hour breaking the damn thing as I'm not allowed to just remove it.
OK and your bulletproof vest analogy much like the car one is not accurate. It isn't like that at all if correct firewalls etc are in place. It is much like the SWAT guy having a bulletproof vest and life insurance and then you deciding that isn't enough for you and strapping cricket pads over the vest and strapping sheets of steel to that. Sure it will protect you from both beefy botham's bowling and pretty much anything anyone feels they want to throw at you. Still pointless and unnecessary. I get this is overkill and as I've already had a "reductio ad absurdum" argument along these lines, it is all largely pointless.
If you like them and it makes you feel more comfortable then marvellous. Personally I'm not a fan and I love ridiculous computer related analogies, I spend most of my time at work coming up with them to explain bits of computers so the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned.
You can argue both ways.
For the sake of the thread as I've not said anything helpful to the OP regarding which to choose. I've had nothing but issues from Norton and McAffee and AVG has given me the same issues elD suffers from. I used Sophos for a long time and decided in the end that it really wasn't worth it and have been happy ever since. Sophos did very well tbh. It does get itself well buried in but it never bothered me particularly.
KillCrazy
Active Member
I can't believe there is such a heated debate over this, and I had no idea so many of you felt so strongly against using anti-virus software.
I have rarely ever managed to get a virus on any of the PCs I've owned, and when I did it was mostly down to a stupid mistake. However, I still want the security and peace of mind of having anti-virus software installed. I have no issues with my software either, so it's all good.
Can't we just respect each others decisions rather than argue? After all it is just personal preference, when was that disallowed?
I have rarely ever managed to get a virus on any of the PCs I've owned, and when I did it was mostly down to a stupid mistake. However, I still want the security and peace of mind of having anti-virus software installed. I have no issues with my software either, so it's all good.
Can't we just respect each others decisions rather than argue? After all it is just personal preference, when was that disallowed?
decky101
In Cryo Sleep
Nah, it was an interesting argument to be honest, was getting quite into it . Yes, it's all down to personal preference, you can do whatever you like, but I'll end with this: I like the peace of mind of having it there, ready to catch anything when I make a mistake, Avast does the job very very well for me, never had any problems whatsoever and I can safely say I've never had any problems with it.
. Yes, it's all down to personal preference, you can do whatever you like, but I'll end with this: I like the peace of mind of having it there, ready to catch anything when I make a mistake, Avast does the job very very well for me, never had any problems whatsoever and I can safely say I've never had any problems with it.
waterproofbob
Junior Administrator
Nah, it was an interesting argument to be honest, was getting quite into it
I agree totally down to personal preference. This wasn't an argument, more of a light hearted discussion.
If you want that feeling of comfort then find one that works for you. I'm sure somewhere there is a person who wears their pants on their head and dribbles a lot that swears by Norton.
[THN]Buffalo_Hunter
In Cryo Sleep
I like to think I know what I'm doing, but not having AV is like walking a tightrope without a safety net. Normally, you hope you don't need it, but if something goes wrong you'll be glad it was there.
Viruses can be nasty, especially those that don't make themselves evident but just sit in the background, gathering information and occasionally firing it off to whoever wants it. They can also prevent AV systems from working, so once it's there, you have to do a complete reformat/reinstall to clear it off properly.
I currently use Zonealarm ISS, which has both AV and firewall, and it's load on my system is negligable - I've benchmarked with and without it and there's no difference in performance.
Reading through AV reviews, it seems that it's Joe Public's PC that seems to suffer problems - reviewers, using "clean" machines, appear to have very few (hence why Norton 360 gets great reviews but is actually c*** in the real world).
So, I vote yes
Viruses can be nasty, especially those that don't make themselves evident but just sit in the background, gathering information and occasionally firing it off to whoever wants it. They can also prevent AV systems from working, so once it's there, you have to do a complete reformat/reinstall to clear it off properly.
I currently use Zonealarm ISS, which has both AV and firewall, and it's load on my system is negligable - I've benchmarked with and without it and there's no difference in performance.
Reading through AV reviews, it seems that it's Joe Public's PC that seems to suffer problems - reviewers, using "clean" machines, appear to have very few (hence why Norton 360 gets great reviews but is actually c*** in the real world).
So, I vote yes