1 year FREE trial of CA Anti-Virus
Kayman
http://home3.ca.com/SubscriptCenter/MSTrialRegistration.aspx?cid=573
tom
"Kayman" <kaymanDe...@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:g1h1gn$ind$1...@aioe.org...
> 1 year FREE trial of CA Anti-Virus
> http://home3.ca.com/SubscriptCenter/MSTrialRegistration.aspx?cid=573
>
years ago while using their AV, I ended up (somehow) with a lifetime free
subscription to their anti-virus program. Even at that price I won't use the
POS after it detected an infection, notified me of it and then allowed it to
infect my machine, ultimately forcing me to reformat to rid myself of the
virus.
Snapper
> 1 year FREE trial of CA Anti-Virus
> http://home3.ca.com/SubscriptCenter/MSTrialRegistration.aspx?cid=573
>
with previous incarnations. You would be much better of looking at
alternative products i.e avast
--
Snapper
VanguardLH
> 1 year FREE trial of CA Anti-Virus
> http://home3.ca.com/SubscriptCenter/MSTrialRegistration.aspx?cid=573
They keep trying to push this junk and each time they don't get many
nibbles. No one is buying their junk. After using it free for awhile,
users get rid of it. It WILL refuse to load after a awhile. You won't
be able to get it to load. CA's tech support can't figure out how to
get it to load. Their solution is to uninstall and reinstall. Yeah,
right, time to move on to something a lot better and also free.
Kayman
It's a shame, really. Only a couple of years ago or so, CA was one of
programs highly recommended by some of the resident experts here. I used to
run it and didn't have any issue then. Though their forum sux big-time
(maybe still is).
VanguardLH
CA doesn't produce software. They aren't a developer. They buy someone
else's software or rebundle it and put their name on it. Their firewall
in their EzArmor bundle is a rebranded and older version of ZoneAlarm.
I don't know from where they get their anti-virus engine but do remember
that they acquired it from somewhere else. I cannot remember ever
seeing it listed at av-comparative.com but then that site may be rating
the source AV engine rather than the rebranded version of it.
Heather
"VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:h8KdnV3sFZKBI6DV...@comcast.com...
It was originally the free Inoculate It PE.....I used it for a long
time. I got free copies for a few years of CA from Microsoft, but have
now switched to Avast. Not sure if they owned Inoculate It or bought
it. But it sure used to be a good one way back when!!
Cheers....Heather
VanguardLH
> It was originally the free Inoculate It PE
Ahhh, as soon as you said Inoculate IT then I remembered that name.
They also have their VET engine. It has been so many years since I saw
Inoculate IT or VET listed at an independent testing site that I can't
remember how many years it has been.
While CA eTrust passes the VB100 testing, that testing is very lax. A
VB100 award doesn't tell you the coverage of an AV product nor does it
tell you how many times the product was tested before it passed the
VB100 testing (VB gives the AV vendor up to 3 chances to fix their
product, which means the vendor has ample time to update their
signatures). The VB100 award only tells you if a product is super bad
and chose to remain that way. I'm only interested in the other end of
the scale for the super good ones.
At av-comparatives.org, an AV product must detect at least 80% of their
pest sample before being considered for inclusion in their report.
According to av-comparatives.org, CA has requested that their rating NOT
be published. Gee, I wonder why. By the way, CA's Inoculate IT and VET
engines are used in other rebranded AV products, like ZoneAlarm's AV,
and why you also don't see those rebranded products listed in the
independent tests.
I did manage to harvest out one single-product testing of CA Antivirus
at http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse/CA07.pdf. Enjoy
the numbers and get ready for a good laugh.
Yes, there have been folks claiming that they've never been infected
while using CA. They probably would've never been infected if they
didn't use any antivirus software, too. If don't encounter any viruses
then any or no AV product will suffice. If you encounter only those
viruses that are detectable by your AV product then you are also safe.
It's if and when you encounter viruses that your AV product doesn't
know about that gets you hurt. So having a higer coverage rate of
detection is a really good thing. CA's track record has been very
poor. When all AV products had poor coverage, sure, then CA looked
good. The rest have gotten better. CA has not.
Dave Budd
says...
>
> CA doesn't produce software. They aren't a developer. They buy someone
> else's software or rebundle it and put their name on it. Their firewall
> in their EzArmor bundle is a rebranded and older version of ZoneAlarm.
> I don't know from where they get their anti-virus engine but do remember
> that they acquired it from somewhere else. I cannot remember ever
> seeing it listed at av-comparative.com but then that site may be rating
> the source AV engine rather than the rebranded version of it.
They have 2 scanners in their package. One was the Inoculate-IT one, the
other was the Vet one. They suggest picking one for servers and one for
workstations, but via the management console you can assign either to
any machine or group of machines.
Before CA bought it, we used to use Vet here and it was pretty good back
then. I can't speak for what it's like now.
>
--
Snob? Were I a snob, I wouldn't be talking to you.
Joan Archer
I used it when it was InoculateIT which was a decent AV but it started to
go through it's incarnations getting worse each time and I only had it on my
husbands machine until the beginning of this year and thought enough is
enough took it off and installed Avast and there's been no problems at all
and it updates itself without trouble.
I use NOD32 v3
--
Joan Archer
http://www.freewebs.com/crossstitcher
http://lachsoft.com/photogallery
"Kayman" <kaymanDe...@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:g1javt$k4c$1...@aioe.org...
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
MoiMoi
arche...@nospam.com says...
> No thanks. As you say Kayman it used to be good.
Same here.
I also paid for it for 3 years or so, then one of the version changes
starting absolutely crashing my new XP box. And I mean BSOD, a tough
thing for software alone to do.
Support was a joke, they refunded me.
Been with free AVG since, fine.
MM