Norton AV vs AVG .... which is better ??

Question

I had an AVG trial ver 7.1
I had it for arround 6months. It will expire on 15 Jan 2007.
Requiring me to upgrade to AVG 7.5 that cost $$

So I uninstalled the AVG and purchased NAV 2006. Thought that it s the most popular "most trusted"
It run well, but my system seem to start slower...???
1.5-2 min slower (I am runing on AMD Athlon 1.5 Ghz, 512 mb memory)

Then I ran the full system scan for the 1st time, it ran about 40-60% slower.. compared to my older AVG.
Other thing NAV CAN"T resume scanning after it is stopped

I had NAV 2005 before, it ran out of lisence in 06 so I tried the AVG 7.1 free.
The NAV 2005 seem to perform the at same level with 2006 (only new user interface, that r more friendly, techy and fancy) ??? Are there any improvement really from 05 to 06 ?

Now I wish to return the product, but I had activated it already...
So is it really AVG is better than Norton now..
I need the detailed comparison work..
Or what is the best AV so far..
do u have links

++
What about the virus reference ????

Answer 1

Hi there,

Instead of all these "Mine is better than yours" answers that go on around here, I'll instead answer with the facts.

Quite simply - Yes, Norton IS much better than AVG.

Looking at current protection ratings, AVG scores a lowly 90% protection against all known viruses. This means they are letting through one in every ten viruses - pretty shocking.

Norton on the other hand is protecting against something like 98.3% of all known viruses - a much better score.

However as people have mentioned, Norton is know for being a very heavy program which can tend to slow down certain machines. If it is affecting your machine in the negative way you allude to, then I would consider swapping - BUT NOT to AVG..

If you would be interested in other Security products that are better than Norton or AVG, you should try either Prevx1, Kaspersky or F-Secure who all score over a 99% protection rating. Out of these three my recommendation would be Prevx1, as this is the quickest at protecting against new outbreaks of malware.

Answer 2

2

Answer 3

I have been using the free avg for quite awhile and have never been infected with that in mind I also keep a myrid of anti spyware on my system which has been more problematic than any viruses that have come my way. As to which is better I cant speak much of norton Since the update release that screwed up alot of systems a couple of years ago. I stayed`away and have been happy with avg.
to get it go to cnet.com and search it

Answer 4

I see the AVG fanboys and cheerleaders are out in full force again here on Yahoo Answers!

AVG by Grisoft is definately NOT "The Best". Unfortunately one of the things it is NOT the best at, is doing what is is supposed to do, detecting viruses!

In test,
http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=82&mnu=82
after test,
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
after test,
http://antivirus.about.com/od/antivirussoftwarereviews/gr/avgfree.htm
after test ,
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=891307&postcount=1,
after test,
http://www.pcworld.com/article/124475-1/article.html ,
etc. etc. etc, ad nauseam.

AVG has proven itself to be a mediocre performer at best. Absolutely crappy at worst. Missing almost 20%, when trying to detect known malware, in some tests. Not to mention almost non-existent heuristic detection and infrequent "once-a day" updates.

AVG = Average, at best!

There are much better free alternatives, such as Avast, Active Virus Shield, and Avria Anti-Vir.

I like best the AOL Active Virus Shield. Don't let the name AOL fool you. Active Virus Shield is made by Kaspersky which is one of top-rated anti-virus vendors in the world.

In recent tests, the most popular free anti-virus, AVG, was only able to detect about 82% of a very large sample of viruses. On the other hand, Active Virus Shield was able to detect better than 99% in the same test.
http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=82&mnu=82

Active Virus Shield has excellent virus detection rates and is extremely light on using your computer resources. (6mb)

And it updates 15 to 20 times a day with new virus definitions, 7 days a week.

Free to anyone, AOL member or not from:
http://www.activevirusshield.com/antivirus/freeav/index.adp?

Answer 5

Norton is a very good product and is worth the money, but yes it is a memory hog. I believe it is better than avg, suppose to detect more. There is a free version of AVG go to www.download.com and you can get it from there. I know you already bought your Norton but maybe you can sell it to someone else and let them worry about it. I use AVG.

Answer 6

The most popular isn't necessarily the best. Norton spends alot of $ advertising, therefore there price is so much.
I will second the above mentioned of Norton being a resource hog, they also create there own viruses to keep them in business.

I find this one very good and ALOT cheaper.
http://home3.ca.com/Microsoft/Default.aspx?lang=en-US

Answer 7

The best antivirus is not Norton nor AVG, try Avira Free Edition here : http://www.free-av.com

Answer 8

Honestly speaking norton is the worst antivirus ever , i know of many keyloggers and trojans that can bypass norton 2006 , i personally say either try

www.avast.com

or www.kasperskylabs.com

these are the best antiviruses out there right now

Answer 9

avg has a free adition, just use that and save your $. Norton is known for being a huge resorce hog.

Answer 10

AVG is better than Norton. Norton is expensive, annoying, a resource hog and it doesn't protect you just when you need it.

SUPERAntiSpyware rocks too.