After installing and uninstalling Panda anti virus + firewall 2008 + 2 patches that Panda provided with their (free upgrade) from Panda anti virus + firewall 2007, 3 times; I finally got it to work. What you must do is install Panda--restart, and then install the first of the 'hotfix's' then restart, but do not install the second hotfix as they suggest, because neither Panda or internet will work on Vista. On XP OS's the 2 hotfix's work fine.

There, I just saved you many wasted hours.

I just use AVG, saves allot more time! ;)

I just use AVG, saves allot more time! ;)

I already have a 3 computer licence agreement with Panda paid up to 2010, so it was worth it; Panda is excellent.

I only pay 50.00 a year, that way I can discontinue it if I don't need it any longer or if a better anti-virus program comes along.

I only pay 50.00 a year, that way I can discontinue it if I don't need it any longer or if a better anti-virus program comes along.

i've never seen AVG listed as a top performer in any testing i've ever seen...

i pay $28 a year for a program the outperforms every AV on the market...

Link... (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,130869/article.html)

Link... (http://www.software-antivirus.com/program/avg-antivirus-review.html)

Link... (http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com/)

since when is AVG waiting to be outperformed?...

i've never seen AVG listed as a top performer in any testing i've ever seen...

i pay $28 a year for a program the outperforms every AV on the market...

Link... (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,130869/article.html)

Now that's funny looking at that list.

While Kaspersky comes top, it comes with a Higher level of 'False Positives' than AVG. Which means if people report a 'high detection' rate, they might be reporting 'False positives'.

I know they could of done the tests properly and utilised machines loaded with the same viruses for testing but I really don't think that any such lists are relevant because at the end of the day they are produced by companies that sell anti-viral software on their store shelves.

For me AVG (Free) works great, I just apply common sense in regards to what files I open and have Spywareblaster installed and haven't had an infection in years. (Even when I prat around decrypting what viruses people get sent to them)

For me AVG (Free) works great, I just apply common sense in regards to what files I open and have Spywareblaster installed and haven't had an infection in years. (Even when I prat around decrypting what viruses people get sent to them)
I find common sense is the best preventative measure. I don't use any antivirus software -- not that I would necessarily recommend it to anyone, I know the risk I am taking -- but I am careful enough to not get myself infected. Every once in a while I will run some online anti-spyware scans and clean up the little bits, but there usually isn't much.

Now that's funny looking at that list.

While Kaspersky comes top, it comes with a Higher level of 'False Positives' than AVG. Which means if people report a 'high detection' rate, they might be reporting 'False positives'.

I know they could of done the tests properly and utilised machines loaded with the same viruses for testing but I really don't think that any such lists are relevant because at the end of the day they are produced by companies that sell anti-viral software on their store shelves.

For me AVG (Free) works great, I just apply common sense in regards to what files I open and have Spywareblaster installed and haven't had an infection in years. (Even when I prat around decrypting what viruses people get sent to them)

i don't use Kaspersky... the program i use outperforms in all flavours of testing...

i just grabbed those three reviews real quick for a frame of reference on AVG... i didn't notice any of those sight having brick and mortar retail software businesses... maybe i missed it?... i don't think so...

if AVG works, you want it free, and you are mindful of browsing and download practices that's one thing...

saying "i'm waiting for something to come along and outperform AVG" is on the other end of the spectrum...

you kind of took my point out of context a bit... i wasn't lauding Kaspersky... or any of the others... i was placing perspective on AVG as a poor performer, it always has been in comparison to others in every test i've ever seen... if you want to believe every single test was 'rigged', or biased, it's a free country i guess...

the testing i put the most faith in is done by probably the most respected site on the web for this... av comparatives... here is their last test... Link... (http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2007_11.php)
i'm sure someone that wanted to could easily come up with a way to paint that non e-commerce site as somehow biased or 'rigged'... i don't... this sight is highly respected for it's findings in the industry...

yes i use Avira Personal Edition Premium... notice the huge difference in the number of virus records... avira is a smaller lesser known german company... it is editor's choice from major US magazines in testing... easily the best performer of all the software i know of, in any test that includes it... it's $28 a year, a bargain... and the scanning engine runs so fast and clean in the background in comparison to the major resource hogs that are most AV programs...

i have not had one false positive out of the software in a few years of use... it is the only program i have used that detected a trojan embedded in a JPG on my system... something most programs only wish they could do... i sent the file off and it was confirmed...

Dr Mabuse,
Don't get me wrong I wasn't posting to undermine your integrity but merely pointed out reasons while some do better than others.

In essence though the simple common sense solutions like not opening files that your not expecting in emails, not downloading copied programs without understanding the danger of installing such files (or cracks), and pretty much not going to websites that are obscure. (Google along with other search engines has done a good job of identifying potential threads from their Cache's being Virus scanned)