Skip to main content

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Which Antivirus? (Read 11549 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Which Antivirus?

Reply #26
F-Prot. For my Windows 2000, my Debian, my Kubuntu, my Solaris 10, my Windows 98 and my DOS boot CDs.

One thing that particularly pleases me about F-Prot is that all versions other than the Win32 one are free for home users. So, if I one day decide to become legal, I will only have to pay for the Windows version.

I also like a lot the facts that it is very fast and very un-eye-candyish (therefore, nicer on resources than those scanners that display fancy animations while scanning)

The scheduler is very good and flexible as well.

Which Antivirus?

Reply #27
do any of you have any opinions on the free malware scanner by a-squared?  a friend of mine swears by it, and it seems pretty solid and fast.  friends keep coming to me for help on their virus infested computers, and i'm trying to find some fast, effective tools to clean up their systems.  i usually install avg's free software, but the virus scan takes forever, and in my opinion, its always good to secondary scanner to use in addition.  so what do you think?  do you know of any solid, objective reviews on it?  thanks.
a windows-free, linux user since 1/31/06.

Which Antivirus?

Reply #28
Quote
do you know of any solid, objective reviews on it?  thanks.

Something similar to this?

Which Antivirus?

Reply #29
hmmm, that is interesting, and slightly dissapointing.  but i haven't had much respect for cnet since their absurd review of "popular audio codecs."
a windows-free, linux user since 1/31/06.

Which Antivirus?

Reply #30
Quote
hmmm, that is interesting, and slightly dissapointing.  but i haven't had much respect for cnet since their absurd review of "popular audio codecs."

You can also take into account the user reviews.