Agreed with your points, John, but <g> *in practice*, or at least in my
experience, the suites typically put more of a drag on performance than do
the individual pieces. I admit being surprised at this finding, and maybe
it's a YMMV thing, since there are so many factors in play. Or, maybe it's
my poor choice of suites. ;-)

- Dan

On 6/8/07, Jones, John (US) <John.Jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The link to Windows Secrets does in fact recommend a suite. They used
to do point products; I can't recall when they changed.

Recommendations aside, suites can potentially be more efficient than
point products. McAfee Enterprise, for instance, uses one engine for AV
+ AS so a single scan covers both. That can mean a lot less overhead
(RAM, CPU, processing time) than having product A do the AV scan then
product B scans it for spyware while product C is monitoring LAN traffic
while product D filters spam.

Of additional potential value is the trend towards blended threats where
a virus contains spyware (or some other combo). There's no reason why
this scenario couldn't occur: A standalone AV package skips a threat as
they've chosen to classify it as spyware while the AS vendor could do
the reverse; classify it as a virus and not update their
definition/detection engine. Result: The malware gets by both packages
and infects your PC. A suite shouldn't be susceptible to this scenario.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.