** Martyn Drake martyn@drake.org.uk [2005-10-31 17:09]:
This is true and also some-what annoying. Windows users *have* to install McAfee anti-virus 8 before they can connect to the network. A friend of mine had to uninstall McAfee 10 - seems silly but I suppose it's a good thing in a way. I have McAfee on my Windows 2000 installation, I haven't noticed that it slows down. The only thing I would put it down to, would be scanning all the files on the disc for virii which would slow the machine down but you can't really stop it doing that.
I wouldn't put McAfee on any computer. It's NOD32 for me all the way. It's light-weight, has passed more Virus Bulletin tests than any other scanner and is reasonably priced - particularly when it comes to multiple licenses. Do UEA really insist on McAfee? Incredible!
Back a few years McAfee was my preferred AV application. One of several reasons for this was being able to update the signature files from an FTP server or file share automatically which was great for supporting a network of installations. At the time Norton needed an expensive server application to do the same thing. In fact when IBM sold its AV technology to Symantec and the company I worked for (an ex IBM location) had to move across to Norton I had the opportunity to migrate with them for free (I had been using IBM AV for free until then). I decided to purchase a couple of copies of McAfee instead - which I guess shows the high regard I have for Norton (literally wouldn't us it if it was free). I can roughly date this by saying that the McFee package is for Windows 3.1, 95 and NT and OS/2 :) We had a nightmare of a time getting Norton working on the machines around site, and a significant proportion ended up with either IBM AV with out dated signature files on or no AV at all simply due to the fact that Norton killed the machines. Norton tech support have never been helpful either in my experience.
I've not used McAfee recently as when I did my last round of evaluations I could only install it from an ActiveX control from their website. Since my test machine was not network connected they ruled themselves out of the running at the first hurdle (and failed to respond to my emails). I'll have to take a look at NOD32. I've no experience of it, but I've seen it advertised a bit - although the ads haven't really given me the confidence in the product that would make me want to take a further look for some reason.
I ended up with F-Secure which is doing me nicely at the moment, and I've just installed the latest version which has a nice integrated suite of AV, firewall and anti-spyware. That had the good taste to insist I removed the MS Antispyware product, which I was more than happy to do since I was seriously fed up with it wanting to remove VNC because it was spyware/malware!
Mind you, back in those days I didn't have a laptop and only used the Linux boxes in SYS and the DEC Alphas in the CPC centre (they were *superb* - I liked using them even though I wasn't really supposed to).
I had my very own CPC centre when I was doing my degree. I doubt it was much like yours though. It consisted of an Amstrad CPC6128 and a CPC464, both with twin floppy disks. The 464 had Protext on ROM cartridge and the 6128 had a ROMBO ROM box with Protext (WP), Prodata (database), Promerge (mailmerge), Prospell (spell check), Maxam (assembler) and BCPL (predecessor to C) on the installed ROMs. Still, it did me well and saved the hassle of booking computer time and having to stop at midnight (or whenever they closed). I could work around the clock (oh whoopie!).
Those were the days..
** end quote [Martyn Drake]