I've used it for a couple of years with no problems. It has a smaller
footprint in memory than Norton, for sure. Found that real handy with
some older systems. Then there's the price difference, and the fact
that you can set updates to hourly, or pull them off your local
network.
I like to set u
At 03:10 PM 08/01/2004, Douglas Cohn wrote:
I have used it on client
machines for the past 6 months and also find it
equal to Norton Corp except for one thing. It handles mail
clients
differently in that it does not scan email as they come in but instead
seems
to scan it only when you attempt to
day, August 01, 2004 2:11 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] OT: F prot as a desktop scanner
>
> I have used it on client machines for the past 6 months and also find it
> equal to Norton Corp except for one thing. It handles mail clients
> differently in tha
]
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] OT: F prot as a desktop scanner
We've used it for a couple of years. Works as well as Symantec or McAfee as
far as we can tell. Just make sure you set up updates and notifications
properly and it works like a charm.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From:
We've used it for a couple of years. Works as well as Symantec or McAfee as
far as we can tell. Just make sure you set up updates and notifications
properly and it works like a charm.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: "marc catuogno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: S
