In the previous question (this is a "related question") the statement was made "Thats why I prefer AVG/Avast , as I wouldnt use a Norton app to save my life......"
Hopefully it will never come down to a true life or death decision, but this does illustrate the anxiety with which we view our various pieces of security software. How do we really know which one is best? Do we trust reviewers we have never met and who might have hidden conflicts of interest or other biases? Do we trust the market? (Norton Antivirus is clearly the market leader, can all those people be wrong?) Do we trust the PC manufacturers, who clearly have an interest in seeing the fewest problems with their systems?
Long ago McAfee let me down hard. I still miss some of the irreplaceable photos that were on my not-backed-up PC when McAfee crashed it. Since then I have always used Norton, first NAV, then NIS when threats went beyond infected emails. I am the one-man IT department for my business, but I'm also everything from co-president to maintenance/janitorial staff. I do not have time to really focus on the IT, so I simplify as much as possible. So every PC runs the same OS, the same office suite, the same security suite. It's all I can do. So my entire small company runs NIS. I have thought about changing many times - usually when in the middle of solving a problem - but I've never had the time to follow through.
Or the knowledge. Now this PIFTS.exe fiasco has me considering the alternatives once again and I am wondering what to do. To be honest, a lot of the debate sounds like "Ford trucks are the best!" "No!! Chevy trucks are the best!" "I wouldn't touch either with a ten foot pole, Datsun (or whatever they are now) rules!" Religion, in other words. And I'm just not a very religious person.
There are tens of thousands of viruses, trojans, worms, ticks, lice, and who knows what other insidious threats out there. How does every upstart AV or security software company cover us for all those threats? We know that Symantec and McAfee have big labs full of experts twiddling away on their keyboards, sniffing out every new threat before it gains a good foothold in the real world. Or so we think, and they surely enjoy our belief in them. Is that true?
So how do the little companies find out about these threats? Do they each have a subscription to NIS and run LiveUpdate every day to see what new threat is out there? If so, maybe they do a better job of protecting us from those same threats, or maybe they are just always a few days behind the curve?
Sorry, this is getting longer than the simple question which was "how do I select a security suite?" But is there a good methodology besides just selecting your particular ism and following it?
Thanks,
--Brian
