4 ms·
I mean McAfee in lieu of a less expensive perfume, like Avast. I'm assuming Avast is less expensive.... Avast is better, though. (And is it just me or is HN fr
by RevRal 16y ago
I mean McAfee in lieu of a less expensive perfume, like Avast. I'm assuming Avast is less expensive.... Avast is better, though.
(And is it just me or is HN freaking out right now?)
- maukdaddy 16y agoThe only problem with Avast is enterprise management. Products like Symantec and McAfee suck, but at least provide options for managing 100k+ deployments.
- sokoloff 16y agoHave a look at Sophos (http://www.sophos.com/ http://www.sophos.com/). It was the only one I found in my testing to not destroy Windows filesystem performance when real-time scanning was enabled and to have no discernable impact when real-time scanning was disabled. (Symantec, McAfee, AVG and Avast all hurt disk performance quite a bit, EVEN when disabled, merely by being installed. F-secure was the only other I found to not harm disk performance when installed but inactive.) Sophos also has a decent enterprise management console. No connection, other than as a customer.