#1 ·
Which one actually holds up better when things get real—which one is more secure? I’m curious to hear what you all have been running lately... thanks for the assist.
Started by Edward Hernandez332 · · 👁 5 views · 24 replies
Edward Hernandez332 said:Which one is actually better and more secure? I'd love to hear about your experiences. Thanks for the help...
Justin Brown5 said:Why wouldn't you just go with ZoneAlarm? It handles both the firewall and the antivirus in one package. And please, don't give me that excuse about not having a firewall installed already.
Daniel Long97 said:ZoneAlarm is garbage and slows everything down, especially if you're on a modem. Toss Norton on top of that and you've just created a total mess. You're much better off sticking with McAfee and Cisco or Symantec!
David Wood27 said:I used to rely on McAfee for a long time, but after a few security gaps, I switched over to McAfee ( 👍 ), which I honestly believe is the top antivirus on the market right now!!
You can't go wrong with either choice! Just don't forget to run your updates regularly!
Justin Brown5 said:Why bother with Norton when ZoneAlarm has its own antivirus built in?
Justin Brown5 said:With ZoneAlarm Suite, Malwarebytes, and S&D running, I don't think anyone could break into my rig if they tried. 😉
ruggedhawk2 said:McAfee just can't compete with McAfee—McAfee is twice as secure...
Back when I was running McAfee, the thing couldn't even pass 50% of the tests. 🙄
Justin Brown5 said:I don't think anyone can break into my setup. 😉
David Wood27 said:Take a look at this Test
Joseph Davis5 said:Ever heard of Virus Builten? Here are the awards
for 2005.