From my experience all windows anti-virus programs are a facade. They are just a sham and in reality do very little without having a firewall running as well. Now, to me that makes no sense where some security software isn't really secure unless you have it running with a counterpart.
I used to run norton pro (latest year version and update my virus definitions weekly). Virii could still get through from time to time. Sometimes it was good and caught a few things, but sometimes it was too late and didn't tell you 'til you were already infected. It's even more annoying how a file can be quarantined and you can't do a damn thing to it (it's my fucken computer, don't tell me what I can or can't do to my files!!).
I've tried loads of them actually; I've used symantecs, some panda one (free) and several other free ones as well.
To me windows virus protectors just offer a sense of false security to people little realizing they don't actually help or prevent all that much.
Actually, when I got the worst virus I had and needed to format, the virus was smarter than the protection and wouldn't let me so much as go to any anti-virus web sites. Now that is clever... it's a shame that none of the anti-virus software is that clevel. I guess they only learn as the virus writers keep 'em on their feet because in my humble opinion a virus writer is far more intelligent and logical than any anti-virus programmer.
Right now I don't have any virus protection as I am on Linux. There's very little need or point to have virus protection on Linux, because most people using it have a somewhat better understanding of their computer to begin with and won't go and do anything plain stupid. On top of that, nearly every single program you install on Linux is from source code in which you compiled it yourself; no one is going to write a virus or include a virus in a program where everyone who obtains it can look at the source code. That and the fact that nearly all Linux software is free and the stuff that isn't source is in RPM format distributed by the companies that release the Linux build you run. It seems like there's almost no chance unless you just really are an idiot in which case you shouldn't run Linux anyhow.
Another awesome safety feature of Fedora Core 4, which I run, is that if you ever double click on a file to open it and the system realizes it's content-type is different than the extension it has (say it's really a windows executable program but it's extension is .scr for a windows screen saver).. Well, once you double click it a warning will come up telling you that the mime-type of thefile does not match the extension it is telling you and that it can pose a security threat if opened. Now this is fucking logic at it's best.. pure clever thinking and I'm surprised windows hasn't ripped it off by now.
If I was still using windows today, I guess I'd still use a similar program to one I did use since maybe 50% of the time they could help... Aside from that I'd just cross my fingers and hope for the best, but deep down know im screwed anyhow since.. well.. come on, it's Windows. lol These companies who program the anti-virus software are businesses, plain and simple. It doesn't make much of a strong point in wasting your programmers time and effort in doing something that doesn't NEED to be done, so of course these companies will only do what's necessary as it is necessary because doing anything else from a financial standpoint is a waste of resources. This is why Linux is more secure; it's not about money... it's about computers.
That's my two cents at least.
"Hey man, what is it to you - how do I infringe on what you do? Well, I beg your pardon if you're offended by my garden, but I just can't grow Prozac in my yard." - Ben Scales
[ creating worlds ]
www.sikosoft.com