Programs you can't live without!

[Andromedon]

I know there was a similar thread started a while back (sometime last year) and with some searching on here I couldn't find it. So anyway...I'll start another.

What programs do you use frequently on your windows operating system? I have Windows XP Corporate edition and the programs I use are;

Hotmail Popper
Utorrent
TXMouse
Firefox w/numberous extensions
Thunderbird
Windows Media Player Classic
K-Lite mega codec pack
foobar2000
CCLeaner
Tuneup Utilities
Ace Utilities
(went back to old Nero 6 recently)
Spybot
Adaware
and winamp.

[lifehacker]

I wanted to post a topic just like recently but guess you did it first.
Here are mine:
-Kaspersky AV
-Ad-aware
-Firefox
-Alcohol120
-ZoomPlayer
-CCleaner
-NOD32's on demand scanner
-Ghost security suite (regdefend)
-WinAvi
-Pocket DivX converter
-uTorrent
-Shareaza
-SpyBot

[nukehella]

I have Windows XP Corporate edition .

So do I on an old install I don't want to reformat yet.Unfortunatelly IE7 which is one of the programs I want to run on it won't download due to the use of a VLK.IE7 is actually not terrible.I use it on another machine without a VLK just fine.
If only I could figure out how to get it to install.Yes,if only I knew how to do that.(Insert innocent looking whistling smiley here)

[origin]

-vlc
-winamp
-flashfxp
-antigium outpost firewall
-nero
-alcohol 120%
-winrar &dos rar

there is more just cant think of it lol

l8

[ccc1005]

-Kaskpersky Suite (new 6.0 Beta is awesome!)
-Azureus
-Nero
-BeyondTV
-AIM
-Winamp
-VLC
-Firefox

[lifehacker]

Kaskpersky Suite (new 6.0 Beta is awesome!)
Another kaspersky user! Kaspersky really is great. : )

[Signa]

cant live without or use on a daily basis?

'cause for cant live without would be dvd decrypter, dvd shrink and utorrent.

any one ever try "pando" its pretty good. i have a friend that is a total MST3K whore and i have been using it to get him the episodes

[kokanezub]

all p2p netowrks
winamp
nero/vso
mozilla
peergaurdian/sygate/spystopper/adaware/tor
halo for pc

[ccc1005]

Another kaspersky user! Kaspersky really is great. : )
Sure is I would highly recommend it, especially when the new version 6.0 is released (hopefully within a month or so)

The combination of File, Web, and Mail AV, as well as the Spam Blocker, Firewall and Proactive Defense (malicious programs, rootkits etc) makes it an amazingly powerful protection suite. Much better than the Norton 2003 crap I had bogging down my computer :)

[Auggie2k]

At the moment there is a few but I'll give my top five...

uTorrent
Google Talk
Winamp
Shareaza Plus
Disk Cleaner

[lifehacker]

The combination of File, Web, and Mail AV, as well as the Spam Blocker, Firewall and Proactive Defense (malicious programs, rootkits etc) makes it an amazingly powerful protection suite. Much better than the Norton 2003 crap I had bogging down my computer :)

My real time protection setup consists of Kaspersky (after testing NOD32, BitDefender, McAfee and Panda Im sticking with Kaspersky but waiting for NOD32 v3), Ghost Security Suite to protect my registry, and process Defend. However for on demand scanner I would have to pick NOD32 over Kaspersky.

[axlman]

My real time protection setup consists of Kaspersky (after testing NOD32, BitDefender, McAfee and Panda Im sticking with Kaspersky but waiting for NOD32 v3), Ghost Security Suite to protect my registry, and process Defend. However for on demand scanner I would have to pick NOD32 over Kaspersky.


Can you tell me what you didn't like about BitDefender? I'm using it now... So that's why I'm wondering

[lifehacker]

Can you tell me what you didn't like about BitDefender? I'm using it now... So that's why I'm wondering
BitDefender is a very good antivirus. Its one of the three best (NOD32, Kaspersky, BitDefender). The antivirus is good but uses a lot of memory. Its heuristics are also good but NOD32's are better. Its signatures are good but Kaspersky's are better. However what Bitdefender has to offer is still much better than most of the other AVs out there. Also the part that you have to restart your computer every time you do an update is very annoying. However BitDefender's on demand scanner is good and fast and gives little FPs (false positves) BitDefender shows much promise. In the pro version it also has to offer a registry protector and a firewall. The registry protector is good, but I wouldnt reccomend the firewall. I wont discourage you from using Bit Defender because it is an excellent choice.

[littlebits]

I use:

For Protection-
Avast! Pro
SpySweeper
Ad-Aware
Spybot
SpywareBlaster
PeerGuardian
Windows Firewall

System Tools-
CCleaner
RegVac
7-zip

Media-
JetAudio
VLC
K-Lite Codec Pack
Real Alternative with Media Player Classic
WinAmp

P2P-
Mostly Shareaza and uTorrent

Desktop-
Webshots Desktop & Photo manager

Browsers-
Maxthon (mostly)
IE (when I have to)

Chat & Messages
IM2 Messenger
Yahoo Messenger

eMail-
Gmail
MSN hotmail
Yahoo Mail

Ok, I believe that covers everything.:icon_thum

[axlman]

BitDefender is a very good antivirus. Its one of the three best (NOD32, Kaspersky, BitDefender). The antivirus is good but uses a lot of memory. Its heuristics are also good but NOD32's are better. Its signatures are good but Kaspersky's are better. However what Bitdefender has to offer is still much better than most of the other AVs out there. Also the part that you have to restart your computer every time you do an update is very annoying. However BitDefender's on demand scanner is good and fast and gives little FPs (false positves) BitDefender shows much promise. In the pro version it also has to offer a registry protector and a firewall. The registry protector is good, but I wouldnt reccomend the firewall. I wont discourage you from using Bit Defender because it is an excellent choice.


Thanks for your Input LifeHacker! I was using NIS 2006 but not anymore because of that little thing they did with killing peoples updates, etc. :)

So, I decided to try Bitdefenders pro Version, Firewall, Antivirus, etc. So far it seems to work fine as far as I can tell. So, do you not like the firewall? What do you think would be a better firewall that is good and easy to configure? After checking out this post yesterday, I'm starting to look into that NOD32. I am a little confused about this part of your message though

(Its heuristics are also good but NOD32's are better. Its signatures are good but Kaspersky's are better.)

Are you saying that Kaspersky is better than NOD32?

Thanks again for your input!

[ccc1005]

(Its heuristics are also good but NOD32's are better. Its signatures are good but Kaspersky's are better.)

Are you saying that Kaspersky is better than NOD32?

Thanks again for your input!
NOD has the best heuristics, but Kaspersky definitely has the best signatures (they update them every 2-3 hours on average). I think the latest kaspersky has better heuristics with the Proactive Defense, but not quite to the level of NOD IMO.

For firewalls I used to use Outpost, until it started acting up showing non-local packets and crashing the computer when I would close and re-open it. I am using the Anti-Hacker incorporated with Kaspersky Internet Security. Doesn't have the most features of any firewall, but it passed all but 1 leak test when I tested it and it has good application and packet controls. Very lightweight as well compared to ZA or Outpost.

[Andromedon]

Not to interupt your guys' talk about firewalls but I have a friend that wants the option to accept phone calls when he's on dial up. I haven't found a program that works great yet.

Do any of you have any ideas?

[lifehacker]

Thanks for your Input LifeHacker! I was using NIS 2006 but not anymore because of that little thing they did with killing peoples updates, etc. :)

So, I decided to try Bitdefenders pro Version, Firewall, Antivirus, etc. So far it seems to work fine as far as I can tell. So, do you not like the firewall? What do you think would be a better firewall that is good and easy to configure? After checking out this post yesterday, I'm starting to look into that NOD32. I am a little confused about this part of your message though

(Its heuristics are also good but NOD32's are better. Its signatures are good but Kaspersky's are better.)

Are you saying that Kaspersky is better than NOD32?

Thanks again for your input!

It really depends NOD32 has better heurestics as ccc1005 already said but Kaspersky has better signatures. NOD32's on demand scanner is better than Kaspersky's but Kaspersky has more options.
NOD32 also uses less CPU and memory than Kaspersky.
What I really dont like about BitDefender Pro is that when you have all options enabled (with firewall, AV, regitry defender) it takes up a huge amount of memory and CPU. Some good firewalls include Lock n' Stop, Kaspersky Anti-hacker and Outpost. Another firewall that shows a lot ofg promise but is just not ready yet is CoreForce.

Oh heurestics are this. Some antiviruses are able to only defend your pc against viruses it has in its signatures meaning that new viruses that the company has not yet found out about will be able to get into your pc. Heurestics use rules and definitions on what is virus and its symptoms to be able to locate a virus before its in your signatures.
Hope this helps.

[axlman]

Not to interupt your guys' talk about firewalls but I have a friend that wants the option to accept phone calls when he's on dial up. I haven't found a program that works great yet.

Do any of you have any ideas?

I know that there were programs that came out a few years ago that would detect an incoming call if the user had call waiting and it would basically just pause your online connection without disconnecting you. I think it was called Catch a Call or something. More than likley progs like those have been fased out.

[axlman]

It really depends NOD32 has better heurestics as ccc1005 already said but Kaspersky has better signatures. NOD32's on demand scanner is better than Kaspersky's but Kaspersky has more options.
NOD32 also uses less CPU and memory than Kaspersky.
What I really dont like about BitDefender Pro is that when you have all options enabled (with firewall, AV, regitry defender) it takes up a huge amount of memory and CPU. Some good firewalls include Lock n' Stop, Kaspersky Anti-hacker and Outpost. Another firewall that shows a lot ofg promise but is just not ready yet is CoreForce.

Oh heurestics are this. Some antiviruses are able to only defend your pc against viruses it has in its signatures meaning that new viruses that the company has not yet found out about will be able to get into your pc. Heurestics use rules and definitions on what is virus and its symptoms to be able to locate a virus before its in your signatures.
Hope this helps.


Again, you have been a great help! Thanks again for your time. I have 2GB's of RAM in my system so I'm not to worried about memory usuage. I'll have to check the CPU usage.

[waqasr]

Not to interupt your guys' talk about firewalls but I have a friend that wants the option to accept phone calls when he's on dial up. I haven't found a program that works great yet.

Do any of you have any ideas?

did u try CALLWAVE?

[axlman]

I wonder if the new ZoneAlarm ISS is any good? I've used Zone Alarm before and it was very easy to use and configure.

[Krell]

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/overview.html

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2005_11.php

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2006_02.php


http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=69&mnu=69

.

[axlman]

Thanks for the Links Krell! Hopefully those will help my quest!

[Krell]

Thanks for the Links Krell! Hopefully those will help my quest!

Enjoy your quest . . . I'll have a Krispy Kreme




.

[littlebits]

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/overview.html

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2005_11.php

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2006_02.php


http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=69&mnu=69

.

Yes thanks very much for those links Krell, I've been trying to find some good reliable info on AntiVirus software.

Thanks.:drunken_s

[axlman]

Not to interupt your guys' talk about firewalls but I have a friend that wants the option to accept phone calls when he's on dial up. I haven't found a program that works great yet.

Do any of you have any ideas?


Well, I looked up CallWave. Basically if your online (Dialup) it will allow people to get through to an answering machine which will play through your speakers while online. From there, you can choose rather or not to disconnect from the Internet and call them back or not. I think that CallWave might be your only option right now. I could not find the other program that came out years ago that would pause the online connection in order to take a call. You can also Google Search for "Modem on Hold" Hope this helps!

[Andromedon]

Thanks axlman and waqasr for your replies. I found callwave and it surely looks like the only software that might do what I ask reliably.

[axlman]

No Problem. Your Welcome. Who is your friend using for a Dial Up ISP? If it's AOL, then they have software where the internet will actually be paused and the call can be answered. But like I said, with Call Wave, it is suppossed to record messages only like an answering machine. Good Luck.

[nukehella]

Not to interupt your guys' talk about firewalls but I have a friend that wants the option to accept phone calls when he's on dial up. I haven't found a program that works great yet.

Do any of you have any ideas?

Here is all you need to know.If your friend does not have a v.92 protocol modem he is basically SOL . If he does he can get the necessary software at the manufacturers website.The feature that allows call waiting is called "modem on hold " and is only available for v.92 modems,which can be found new for less than $20.I got a used one at a thrift shop for $3.

[lifehacker]

I wonder if the new ZoneAlarm ISS is any good? I've used Zone Alarm before and it was very easy to use and configure.
ZoneAlarm isint very good. You can do better than that. Its heurestics are terrible and the on-demand scanner slow.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/overview.html

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seite...se_2005_11.php

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seite...se_2006_02.php


http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/...p?id=69&mnu=69
Yes Av-comperatives is a great site which I have been using for a while. I reccomend it to everyone.

[ccc1005]

You also have to watch for resource usage, some are low (NOD, Kaspersky for example), others like the latest Norton (2005 or 2006) really bog the computer down.

For example I tried Norton 2005 on my old laptop and it took over 3 minutes from login -> desktop. With the Kaspersky Beta is takes less than 1 minute. I could barely use the machine with Norton 2005 on it. Something between 2004 and 2005 changed a lot, and it was definately for the worse.

[Krell]

Also . . in as much as everyone wants to make comparisons, and qualifications, there can be desparity in how the antivirus runs on a system. One might have Real Time Monitoring enabled, another might not. This is a feature that can be turned off, and it is very difficult to compare apples to oranges.

Some apps such as Zone Alarm and McAfee are infamous for bogging down and breaking systems, but no one can speak about this 100%.

I would tend to chose the least intrusive, lightest and most configurable. I never run anitvirus full time, it never starts with windows, and any module or service would start or run only because I purposefully started it.



.

[ccc1005]

Some apps such as Zone Alarm and McAfee are infamous for bogging down and breaking systems, but no one can speak about this 100%.

I totally agree, which is why I tried out other apps to clean up the system. Even though Kaspersky starts with Windows, it does a startup scan (takes a min or so), then it sits in the background and barely uses any resources, so its barely noticeable.

[uselesscrap]

I am pleased with AVG. I was a Symantec CE advocate before using avg. I tried Avast quite some time ago and it failed me, which was probably my fault, but nonetheless, I'll stick with avg.

Just my 2 cents

[lifehacker]

I totally agree, which is why I tried out other apps to clean up the system. Even though Kaspersky starts with Windows, it does a startup scan (takes a min or so), then it sits in the background and barely uses any resources, so its barely noticeable.
Yup. Thats why Kaspersky is so great (Youre talking about v6 right, I dont remember a startup scan in v5).

I am pleased with AVG. I was a Symantec CE advocate before using avg. I tried Avast quite some time ago and it failed me, which was probably my fault, but nonetheless, I'll stick with avg.

AVG is average. Its not the worst antivirus but its also far form being the best.

[ccc1005]

Yup. Thats why Kaspersky is so great (Youre talking about v6 right, I dont remember a startup scan in v5).

Yup this is in the v6 beta, which is now in release candidate stages.

[lifehacker]

Yup this is in the v6 beta, which is now in release candidate stages.
The v6 beta is absolutely fantastic. If anyone needs the link for the dl pm me. Heurestics have been improved a lot. Less CPU usage and memory as well. A registry defender also included. However the proccess protector that is included in Kaspersky 6 sucks. Other than that its much better than v5. The OD scanner has also been improved to allow more specific scanning.

[littlebits]

The v6 beta is absolutely fantastic. If anyone needs the link for the dl pm me. Heurestics have been improved a lot. Less CPU usage and memory as well. A registry defender also included. However the proccess protector that is included in Kaspersky 6 sucks. Other than that its much better than v5. The OD scanner has also been improved to allow more specific scanning.
This new Kaspersky sounds great. I used Kaspersky in the past and really liked it, but on my system with only 128MB of RAM it just slowed down my computer a lot. I know from all the virus testing websites that Kaspersky is the best antivirus software. How much less CPU and memory does the beta use? After I add some more RAM, then I probably go back to it. Right now I'm using Avast! Pro and it runs excellent on my system and I have never got a virus with it in the 2 years that I've been using it. I like going the crack websites and Avast has always blocked all the malware and I use HostMan with MVPS Host file which really adds protection.


Thanks.

[lifehacker]

This new Kaspersky sounds great. I used Kaspersky in the past and really liked it, but on my system with only 128MB of RAM it just slowed down my computer a lot. I know from all the virus testing websites that Kaspersky is the best antivirus software. How much less CPU and memory does the beta use? After I add some more RAM, then I probably go back to it. Right now I'm using Avast! Pro and it runs excellent on my system and I have never got a virus with it in the 2 years that I've been using it. I like going the crack websites and Avast has always blocked all the malware and I use HostMan with MVPS Host file which really adds protection.
If your pc is really low on CPU and Memory I would reccomend F-prot or NOD32. F-prot is the lowest usage AV out there, while NOD32 combined both very low memory and CPU usage with very good protection (its argueble whether NOD32 is better or Kaspersky although the Beta of Kaspersky 6 is definantly better than NOD32 v2. Still waiting For NOD32 v3 though). Im on my Linux right now so I'll post the exact numbers of memory and CPU usage of KAV when Im on my Windows which should be in 10 min.

[lifehacker]

Ok, Im on Windows now.
At startup Kaspersky goes up to about 16,000K when its just starting up, then drops to 2,000k. Then its runs a critical area scan which makes the memory usage go up to 19,000k. Then it runs a startup objects scan which uses 23,000- 32,000K. Durning updates I get about 26,000K usage. The two startup scans together with Kaspersky loading last about a minute. When all of this is done Kaspersky drops to a 6,000K and stays that way.
Hope that helps and tell me if you need the dl link.

[Kutza]

AVG Antivirus (Was rated best antivirus in PC World)
Jetico Firewall
Nero
Daemon Tools
WinRAR
Trillian
Word
3ds Max
Adobe CS2
MP3Tag
MP3Gain
Agent Ransack
Recover My Files
Ghostsurf
Spybot
SpyBlaster
Aurionix FileUsage (A Must have if you have large dirs)
iTunes

[lifehacker]

AVG Antivirus (Was rated best antivirus in PC World)
Wow, Im really starting to get annoyed with all these reviews. There are a couple trustworthy reviews and PC World is not one of them. If you search best antivirus in google youll see Norton. Everybody nows however that Norton is a piece of worthless shit. The three best antiviruses right now are NOD32, Kaspersky and BitDefender. Here is an article explaining why there are so many incorrect reviews of antivirus software:
http://esac.kaspersky.fr/index.php?PageID=9

For good info on antivirus software check out wilderssecurity.com and
http://www.av-comparatives.org/ as well as the links posted on that website.

[ccc1005]

If you need a firewall combo as well the Internet Security version of Kaspersky gives you Popup, Phishing, Banner, and Dialer Blocking, Anti-Spam, as well as a decent firewall. The firewall engine is awesome, but the configuration and monitoring GUI isnt the best. I think this will be refined when they release the first service pack.

[Kutza]

Wow, Im really starting to get annoyed with all these reviews. There are a couple trustworthy reviews and PC World is not one of them. If you search best antivirus in google youll see Norton. Everybody nows however that Norton is a piece of worthless shit. The three best antiviruses right now are NOD32, Kaspersky and BitDefender. Here is an article explaining why there are so many incorrect reviews of antivirus software:
http://esac.kaspersky.fr/index.php?PageID=9

For good info on antivirus software check out wilderssecurity.com and
http://www.av-comparatives.org/ as well as the links posted on that website.

But what you don't factor in is this. AVG has 100% detection, and can clean a lot of crap, as well as being lighter on the system. However, if you find one you can't clean, you can use eScan which uses the Kaspersky definitions, and is MUCH lighter on the system. If that doesn't work, you use housecall (both online). And you should by now know that Kaspersky's firewall is shit (hopefully it's gotten better...). It's only slightly better than Windows SP2. I know my compys I assure you, I use stats, not just use some gayass reviews.

[ccc1005]

And you should by now know that Kaspersky's firewall is shit (hopefully it's gotten better...). It's only slightly better than Windows SP2. I know my compys I assure you, I use stats, not just use some gayass reviews.

Well it is much better than SP2, because it checks outgoing connections to begin with. I think the firewall is an excellent program in the current v6, maybe there were problems before but it works very well now.

[lifehacker]

But what you don't factor in is this. AVG has 100% detection, and can clean a lot of crap, as well as being lighter on the system. However, if you find one you can't clean, you can use eScan which uses the Kaspersky definitions, and is MUCH lighter on the system. If that doesn't work, you use housecall (both online). And you should by now know that Kaspersky's firewall is shit (hopefully it's gotten better...). It's only slightly better than Windows SP2. I know my compys I assure you, I use stats, not just use some gayass reviews.
The meaning of 100% detection can have different menings. Do you mean it has a 100% detection in its OD scanner? AVG' is reccomended for users who stay away from porn, warez, and crack sites. For those users AVG is perfect. Its also very light on th esystem although I would reccomend F-prot if you need a very light AV because its better than AVG. AVG is a light and basic anti-virus but it WILL NOT block 100% of all viruses. Its heurestics are pretty bad and the on-demand scanner slow. However for a user who stays away from the sites listed above AVG is great. There have also been compatibility issues with AVG and other products.

Kaspersky's firewall isint the best, thats true, but its not shit either. It does what a firewall is supposed to do. Other firewalls such as Outpost and Lock n' stop are better but there really is a smaller difference between different firewalls and differnet AVs.

[Krell]

The meaning of 100% detection can have different menings. Do you mean it has a 100% detection in its OD scanner? AVG' is reccomended for users who stay away from porn, warez, and crack sites. . . .

Kaspersky's firewall isint the best, thats true, but its not shit either. It does what a firewall is supposed to do. Other firewalls such as Outpost and Lock n' stop are better but there really is a smaller difference between different firewalls and differnet AVs.

Dude use the quote button and back out what you dont want to keep continuity and show the name.

I've never seen any stats that substantiate 100% detection. I used to *cough* pillage a LOT of sites . . and on some, i found very large zip files of virii.

I used them to benchmark a number of antivirus softwares, and even thos the virii was a bit dated, NOT ONE of them detected everything. Plus, the ability to detect is only as good as the hueristics.

I use Trend Micro online, I dont even HAVE one installed currently. The only real benifit I see is the ability to right click a file on demand, but I have a website for that too, that uses ALL the major antivirus engines at once.



.

[lifehacker]

Dude use the quote button and back out what you dont want to keep continuity and show the name.

Sorry. I'll keep that in mind Krell.

I've bever seen any stats that substantiate 100% detection. I used to *cough* pillage a LOT of sites . . and on some, i found very large zip files of virii.
Very true. There is no perfect AV that detects everything.

[ccc1005]

I've bever seen any stats that substantiate 100% detection. I used to *cough* pillage a LOT of sites . . and on some, i found very large zip files of virii..

Totally, agree thats why its important to incorporate the resource usage, definition update intervals, and other things into the decision, not just the detection rate. Common sense itself can be a very powerful anti-virus as well :icon_thum

[lifehacker]

Here is a nice little review I found:
http://avtest.mycity.co.yu/modules/news/article.php?storyid=17
Its conclusions are that the best three AVs are f-prot, KAV and BD. NOD32 seems to drop old virus signatures which I find strange.

[chris305_interpol]

-K-Lite
-Limewire PR0
-Opera
-iTunes (iPod)
-Windows Media Player 10
-Trillian
-Registry Mechanic
-Spyware Doctor
-Spy Sweeper
-RegCleaner
-Tren Micro Anti-Spyware (Very EFFECTIVE)

[lifehacker]

Tren Micro Anti-Spyware (Very EFFECTIVE)
Trend Micro anti-spyware gives you tons of FPs (false positives meaning it says things are spyware when they really are not) and is also very heavy on the system, it uses too many resources.

[chris305_interpol]

Trend Micro anti-spyware gives you tons of FPs (false positives meaning it says things are spyware when they really are not) and is also very heavy on the system, it uses too many resources.

0MG N00! W0NdER! i WAS LikE HU? WHEN iT SAid LiMEWiRE WAS SPYWARE,i DiDNT BELiVE iT,THANKS!
BTW,iM N0T YELLiN L0L,THiS iS H0W i WRiTE (;

[Potato]

You're annoying.

[Krell]

You're annoying.

He's a retard . . they must put somthing in the water in San Diego

seems widespread there


.

[littlebits]

Here is a nice little review I found:
http://avtest.mycity.co.yu/modules/news/article.php?storyid=17
Its conclusions are that the best three AVs are f-prot, KAV and BD. NOD32 seems to drop old virus signatures which I find strange.
Don't know just how good this info is about antivirus software but here it is
http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com/
Rates- #1. BitDefender Standard, #2. Kaspersky Personal, #3. F-Secure Anti-Virus

For spyware- http://anti-spyware-review.toptenreviews.com/
Rates- #1. Webroot SpySweeper, #2. Aluria Anti-Spyware, #3. Sunbelt CounterSpy
Doesn't even mention Spybot, which is strange.

Thanks.:icon_thum

[lifehacker]

Don't know just how good this info is about antivirus software but here it is
http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com/
Rates- #1. BitDefender Standard, #2. Kaspersky Personal, #3. F-Secure Anti-Virus
Some of the information there is pretty much correct.
I would rearrange the top 4 to this but they have ease of use and ease of installation in consideration which I dont count.
1.Kaspersky
2.NOD32
3.BitDefender
4.F-prot
Although like I said before its argueble whether Kaspersky is better than NOd32 or NOD32 better than Kaspersky.

For spyware- http://anti-spyware-review.toptenreviews.com/
Rates- #1. Webroot SpySweeper, #2. Aluria Anti-Spyware, #3. Sunbelt CounterSpy
Doesn't even mention Spybot, which is strange.

Thanks.
That info however dosent seem to be correct. Most reviews on websites like that only review the feature set of programs not the amount of false-positives and amount of correctly spyware found on scan. They also dont say anything about signatures.

[Krell]

Just an interjection, I'm tired of antivirus posts in this theead, let's move on already . . .


Name dem Utilities!


.

[nukehella]

Overdisk-----Try it!!!!
OK -this one is Beta and so not for little girls.It is without a doubt the best disk usage/pie chart type utility(yes I have used Sequoia,which is not a pie chart display but some realy cool Frogger looking display) I have ever used.Don't let the fact that it Beta throw you-this thing rocks!!
http://users.forthnet.gr/pat/efotinis/programs/overdisk.html

It basically let's you drill down throw your hard drive a layer at a time and displays the location,name and size of all your files in an easy to understand interface.If you like knowing excatly what is going on with your HD you have to check this out.

[Krell]

Overdisk-----Try it!!!!

So you like it better than Tree Size Pro?

btw . . . treesize has a smaller applet called "tree" that does not need to be installed, I push it to servers to see what the profile sizes or folders are etc, then delete it afterwards


.

[nukehella]

Haven't tried it yet,but I will.

[mfgbypooter]

Funny I use Tree Size Pro a lot.

I'm not checking this thread to see if this has been mentioned before but I use CKRename from time to time to batch rename files.

LINK (http://www.musicsucks.com/CKSoft/CKRename/)

*

[janett999]

McAfee Virus Scan 10
Mcafee Firewall 7
AVG 7.1
Xoftspy http://www.paretologic.com/
Spy Emergency 2005 --- Playing with http://www.spy-emergency.com/
Trend Micro Anti Spyware 3.11
Adaware
Spybot
SpywareBlaster
The Cleaner 4.1 Pro
Winzip Pro 10
Winrar
CCleaner
SuperCleaner 2.9 ---Playing with http://www.southbaypc.com/


ARES :)



I love to play with different programs

[nukehella]

So you like it better than Tree Size Pro?

.
I finally got around to trying this,I like it so far.I found that as cool as Overdisk is for some things, it is kind of distracting when working with a lot of files using a filemanager like Totalcommander or Filemonkey.Treesize is similar in appearance to a filemanager so when you use the 2 together it is harmonius.

[smith100]

i see that no 1 use mirc

[swamphox]

since yall are talking about firewalls....

I'm just looking for a firewall that allows me to control whats going out

I basically just dont want a program phoning home for any reason via the net unless it has my permission to do so

any advice would be greatly appreciated

[-0-BACKLASH-0-]

RegCleaner
AIM 5.9 & MSN Messenger 7.5
Newsin Pro & Quickpar
Winamp
Diskeeper 10
Adaware SE Pro
Spybot S&D
Firefox
WinRAR & Winzip 10 pro
magical jellybean keyfinder
Nero 6 Ultra Edition
NIS 2005 - I know a lot of ppl hate norton, but I don't have any problem with the software and the ad/popup blocking is the best I've used.

[Mels_Smileys45]

"General Hospital" Is a nice program.

[infoseeker]

note: some of the links are dead
Originally Posted by Krell
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/overview.html
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seite...se_2005_11.php
http://www.av-comparatives.org/seite...se_2006_02.php
http://www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/...p?id=69&mnu=69

so if you like to see the site, go in the home page
http://www.av-comparatives.org/index.html?http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/overview.html

NOTE: dont ever, ever use two (2) AV in your PC, stick to one and use online scan like Bitdefender,PANDA

BITDEFENDER- i read so meany reviews, forums and others, they said its really very nice
one thing i noticed and i dont like is, its very much capacity eater in HD memory and RAM memory

>>>>>>>>>>mine<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
AVG
Ad-aware
S-S&D
Windows Defender beta
Zonealarm Pro w/ AS
CCLEANER
Window Washer
ASO "all in one tools"
RegistryFix
Limewire
Azureus
OPERA 9
WMP11
VLC
Cyberlink
Power Defragmenter GUI.exe with Contig.exe (the fastest defrager)
Norton Speed-Disk

:icon_salu infoseeker :icon_salu

[GATORIAN]

Av-Comparatives.org is pretty useless in my opinion and not only:

The Anti-Virus Software Market Is A Big Bubble

That's very difficult, especially today. The users are scared. They are constantly threatened with viruses, other dangers, and innumerable Trojan worms trying hard to steal their data. This atmosphere is created by some anti-virus vendors in the first place. It's like the situation with the birds' flu: some say a pandemia is inevitable, and we all will die. Horrific, isn't it? Some people give way to panic but others stay cool, hoping it isn't as bad as that, after all. Keeping the users scared and persuading them that only your product can protect him against any trouble is a very clever idea. A person will buy your anti-virus software, although he may never catch a virus at all and never know how efficiently your product works. Quite often, we have had to clean up thousands of viruses after an alternative anti-virus tool's operation.

There are scores of “anti-virus quality” ratings today, like “This product detects 99.95 percent of known viruses”. What do you think of those?

That's pure marketing. In the first place, the very figure of 99.95 percent seems questionable. All those tests are held like this. Say, you have a large collection of viruses of which each must be detected. If at least one virus is left undetected, the entire software product cannot be called anti-virus. In case of unknown viruses, it is totally unclear how to calculate the percentage of detected viruses. Besides, methods of testing may vary. For example, you may download what you call a “virus dump” from the Internet and try to clean it up with an anti-virus. The resulting efficiency factor would hardly be higher than 90 to 92 percent. But what kind of a virus collection would that be? It would be one containing huge numbers of broken files, binary viruses, etc. These being unworkable viruses, why waste time trying to detect them at all? My position in that respect is pretty rigid: I never deal with trash or add it to my databases. Meanwhile, many anti-virus vendors have won considerable publicity working with this particular kind of collections. I do not mean to say that's bad; that's just one way of doing business. But the question is how relevant all those ratings are. I deliberately exclude all that rubbish as irrelevant; but then it turns out that Dr. Web fails to detect everything. Is it good or bad, you may ask. Well, judge for yourselves.

While selecting your anti-virus system, don't look at any of those ratings because they are based on “laboratory” testing. They take a collection of “dead” viruses and test a variety of anti-virus tools on them. Each tool “sees” a virus, reports: “Danger: virus detected!” and goes on with the scanning process. In real life, it is different. You work on your PC, enter a website and - there you are! - you are already infected, with some process suddenly grabbing 70 percent of your machine's capacity. With anti-virus software installed, you feel okay. Otherwise you rush to buy it. And it doesn't matter which - probably, one offered by some of the “leaders”. But there are just a few anti-virus tools in the world that can be installed on your infected PC. The rest won't allow the setup function to be enabled because of the resident virus, and you will have to reinstall the operation system from scratch. Everything becomes clear at once. But none of the “leaders” has ever done this kind of testing, although Boeing once pointed to the problem. They don't want to do it - it's too big a headache.

FULL STORY (http://company.drweb.com/press/igor+daniloff+cnews+interview+may+2006/)

[lifehacker]

GATORIAN, so you trust what they say on that website but not what they say on another. Why do you trust the Dr. Web website more than av-comparatives. Its definantly true that most website give totally false results (thats why you see Norton on first place in a bunch of places) but av-comparatives is one of the not many reliable websites testing AV software.

[JJ72]

PeerGuardian2
Acronis True Image
UTorrent
Windows Washer
AIM