From: "Rich Gauszka" 


"Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
news:dccdr11ni9eapkck6c7s9q00pdsnne9sk8{at}4ax.com...
> On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 18:20:58 +0200, "Antti Kurenniemi"
>  wrote:
>
>>"Frank Haber"  wrote in message
>>news:43b69e06$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> Y'know, I've never tried F-Secure.  I'm shopping, too.  Sophos is OK,
>>> AVG
>>> is OK, but not stellar at detection.  Kaspersky is a PITA at times, and
>>> I
>>> haven't even looked at a centrally-administered version of that.  NOD32
>>> is
>>> fine, it seems, say a couple of friends, but one of its components
>>> conflicts with common task/searchbar addons (Google DTS, toolbar; Yahoo
>>> toolbar (from memory)).  You can run without the offending component.
>>>
>>> We have a Finn here.  Perhaps he can tell us what Finns think of
>>> F-secure,
>>> and the story behind the split between Frisk, Iceland and F-Secure?
>>
>>I don't like it much (F-Secure that is), it's really bloated and too
>>"clever" for it's own good. Also, all of the
virus-infected computers I've
>>seen in the past couple of years have been running either Symantec or
>>F-Secure stuff. I would not use it myself.
>
>
> grrrr...  so what you're saying is that there's no good solution here?
>
> Maybe I should just go back to running no AV software.  I've never had a
> virus infection.  At the moment I have the avast free version, and
> that's been OK.  But they still have nothing for this WMF fiasco....
>
> What about trend? (oh, never mind about trend, I just visited their
> website and they rate the WMF vuln as not critical....)
>
> /m

I gave up on Trend in April when my processor went to 100 % utilization
after an ill tested patch from Trend

My chief hope for anti-virus software now is that it does me no harm.
Currently I'm using the Computer Associates  anti-virus freebie that SBC
provides. So far it's done me no harm unlike Trend, Symantec, AVG and
McAfee.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5