Anyone use AVG anti-virus

[JohnBoucher]

Any experience with AVG? The teams computers need updated subscriptions to NAV. Is AVG an acceptable substitute?
Thanks

[pi_guy578]

I use AVG on all of my home computers and it is great. THe only limitations in the free edition are limited scheduling capabilities and somthing else I can't remember (because I don't use it). Any way it is kept up to date through free online updates. It has kept everything clean so far for me.

Jake

[Ian Curtis]

AVG works pretty well. I'd give a 7 or 8 out of 10.

[Bharat Nain]

I have used AVG a lot, its good but if you could go for Norton or McAfee you'd be much safer.

[petek]

I have used AVG a lot, its good but if you could go for Norton or McAfee you'd be much safer.

How so? I haven't checked in a while, but when I started using AVG, the reviews said it was as effective as Norton or McAfee.

[Bharat Nain]

How so? I haven't checked in a while, but when I started using AVG, the reviews said it was as effective as Norton or McAfee.
Eventually when the virus definitions reach, they are almost identical. But I have noticed that Norton and McAfee usually come up with the virus definitions before AVG. The one thing good about AVG though is it does not use as many system resources as other anti-virus programs, therefore it's good for slower computers. I'd still stay with norton or mcafee, but thats just a preference.

[Drew Hopman]

When i worked at Circuit City we found that AVG works a heck of a lot better than anything else. The best part is that it was free. I would highly recommend.

Drew Hopman

[Greg Marra]

I have used AVG a lot, its good but if you could go for Norton or McAfee you'd feel much safer.

fixed.

In my experience, AVG holds its place up there with the big guns.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Avast! (http://www.avast.com)

I don't use AVG, but I've had much good luck with Avast!, and it's just as free. It also scans generic POP3/SMTP traffic so it works with more than just MS mail packages....

[Greg Marra]

Avast! (http://www.avast.com)

I don't use AVG, but I've had much good luck with Avast!, and it's just as free. It also scans generic POP3/SMTP traffic so it works with more than just MS mail packages....

AVG hooks into Thunderbird just fine.

Actually, too just fine. It takes quite a while to scan the thousand or so spam messages I get every month to my ISP's e-mail address. The worst part is none of them are even addressed to me, just something really close to me.

[Mike Betts]

Eventually when the virus definitions reach, they are almost identical. But I have noticed that Norton and McAfee usually come up with the virus definitions before AVG. The one thing good about AVG though is it does not use as many system resources as other anti-virus programs, therefore it's good for slower computers. I'd still stay with norton or mcafee, but thats just a preference.
Actually, my experience is just the opposite. I had a friend's computer which was protected by NAV (updated to the latest definitions). When I scanned with AVG it found 3 infections not detected by NAV.

IMHO, Norton spends too much energy making sure that they take your money and not enough in protection... But that's just my opinion...

I have used AVG along with AdAware and SpyBot (all freeware versions) for the last 6 months or so and am very happy with the results.

I also keep current with all the Windows updates (I've been SP2 for over 3 months) and don't know where all the hysteria about SP2 comes from.

I also use Firefox as my primary browser, Crest Total as my toothpaste and I don't walk under ladders... :rolleyes:

[Joe Matt]

I have used AVG along with AdAware and SpyBot (all freeware versions) for the last 6 months or so and am very happy with the results.
Holy poo, same here! I'd recommend AVG too!