I've been running VIPRE Enterprise in two different environments for over two years, one with 175 nodes and one with 250 nodes.
Yes, there have been issues with false positives during that time and they've been more than an annoyance. However, since the files have been quarantined and not deleted I've been able to restore them without much of a problem. No down systems as a result in my experience. And yes, the client infection rates have definitely reduced after switching from McAfee Viruscan and MS Forefront to VIPRE. I can't give you firm stats but before switching to VIPRE we used to deal with 3-5 rouge av issues per month. That dropped on 1 or 2 after installing VIPRE and I can't recall a single incident in the past couple months. In addition to a better catch rate VIPRE has also had less drain on system performance than the previous av products. Again, not directly measurable but users don't complain about the long and slow scan times like they used to do. On my personal machine, the deep scan for Forefront used to take 5 hours or more. With VIPRE that dropped to about 3½. In my mind an occasional FP is a trade-off for the enhanced protection, lower impact on system performance, ease of management, and overall product satisfaction. Die dulci fruere! Roger Wright ___ On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Carl Houseman <c.house...@gmail.com> wrote: > For all of you staunch Vipre supporters, I'm just wondering, are you still > so staunch given the various false positives over the past year? It seems > like I remember reading here about one every quarter or so, and I can > confirm at least 3 since (from online records and messages I didn't delete) > since June 2009. And how many of you have had to deal with infections > despite having an up-to-date Vipre? > > > > Issue I'm debating is a switch from another product to Vipre, and even > though the price is very good, I'm looking at the Virusbtn RAP quadrant > (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml) with a very poor showing for > "Sunbelt". Including the false positives and cost of switching, it doesn't > add up to a good choice. At least if the protection was much better, then > the occasional false positive might be justified. Is there any 3rd party > comparison or statistic that gives Vipre a better than average result? > > > > I'm not looking for endorsements or praise for their tech support – heard > that all before. But if you've had Vipre on 10 seats or more and have kept > track of live infections after a year or longer, and effort to avoid or > recover from false positives, that would be great to know. Please include > total number of seats in any report. > > > > Carl > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
