Symantec vs Mcafee

Status
Not open for further replies.

cdkiller

Baseband Member
Messages
92
Has anybody tried the new 2006 versions of Norton anti virus or Mcafee anti virus? i am trying to decide which is the better buy for my pc. i know from experience that mcafee uses less resources than norton but i used mcafee virus scan 8.0 and it refused to stop showing the annoying splash screen at logon. i thus continued to use norton 2005 anti virus.


any experiences to share?
 
i always go for Mcafee because it doesnt slow your computer down like most other anti-virus programs
 
Regardless you want the best protection there is by both definition and real time. I'm not sure on Mcafee's definitions but Symantec's real time is unrivaled.
 
Tyler1989 does have a good point. i have been using norton 2005 pro for the past year and it has blocked alot of threats. i also know about symantec antivirus but i never really considered it since its built for servers/networks and costs about 10 times norton :)
but has anybody ever tried symantec antivirus ona standalone desktop? whats the performance like? does it keep asking for network resources or can it work by itself?
 
oh yea i used avast on my xp pro x64 edition because there was none other that could work on the x64 edition. but where i have the choice i rather stick with a reputable name instead of avast. i never even knew about avast until i googled in search of an x64 compatible antivirus. ok so i have 2 standalone desktops but i am only concerned for the 32bit one at the moment.
 
yea my school uses symantec too cuz its for a network and it does work good. this makes me wonder about something else. i am wondering if i can use symantec on xp x64 edition, because i know that the x64 edition is different from xp 64-bit.
 
Tyler : then again i have a slew of system hangs with microsoft outlook 2003 and i think xp pro runs too slow, i see that u are running vista. how is it? U reckon i should just upgrade to vista?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom