not about linux, but . . . (virus protection for business)

[LBmtb]

My boss is considering these two
http://enterprisesecurity.symantec.c...?ProductID=155
or
http://www.mcafeesecurity.com/us/pro...managed_vs.htm

McAfee seems to be cheaper. Is norton's 1 year of 'gold maintenance' basically virus definitions and technical support? Virus definition updates only last for a year without having to pay more to norton?

Which seems easier to implement and use? Anybody have experience with either? Ease of use for the employees is important too because some of them are very computer illiterate.

We need protection for 25 computers btw.

Thanks!!

[puntmuts]

The quality of virus scanning software varies from time to time. There seems to be a lot of problems using any symantec product regarding virus scanning.
But I think this is not a question that belongs on this forum.

[budman7]

Go with Linux, then you won't have to worry so much about virus protection.
If you go with SUSE the learning curve is not huge and it is an easy to understand distro.
Check out http://www.novell.com/linux/suse/index.html

But as for the 2 av's you mentioned, it is a matter of preference. Some people will swear by Symantec, other people think it is crap. Same is true for Mcafee.

[LBmtb]

I wish I could move them all to linux but some are REALLY bad with even windows.
If we ever get a file or email server I'll be sure to use Red Hat and samba though.

I'm leaning towards Norton. Been reading good things about their corporate edition (but bad about their home).

[retired1af]

The Enterprise products from Symantec are actually quite good and run better than the personal stuff they sell to the end user.

As far as which is better, I've always relied on Symantec in a business environment. A little story....

Many moons ago, we were using McAfee in a 10,000 user environment. DieHard2 managed to get by it through the mail system and we spent the next 2 and a half months eradicating it off the network. The response from McAfee was dismal, to say the least, and we ended up going with Symantec after that. Never had an issue from that point on.

For support issues in a business environment, I would trust Symantec over McAfee.

[sdousley]

Go with Linux, then you won't have to worry so much about virus protection.

For the server itself.... no, but for the workstations (if they're stil windows) u will.... especially if the server is a fileserver.

This is due to the fact that, although linux isn't affected by windows virii, it can be a carrier for infected files.

[budman7]

I have not investigated the Enterprise editions yet. But they would come with some sort of virus protection, wouldn't they?

[retired1af]

The problem with recommending "Linux" is the IT Staff rarely has the final say in what's used in a business environment. There are a lot of hurdles and hoops to negotiate in any new system, and if management isn't for it, you aren't going to get it done.

In this case, the individual needs a solution to an existing infrastructure. Recommending a change to that isn't feasible.

[LBmtb]

The problem with recommending "Linux" is the IT Staff rarely has the final say in what's used in a business environment. There are a lot of hurdles and hoops to negotiate in any new system, and if management isn't for it, you aren't going to get it done.

In this case, the individual needs a solution to an existing infrastructure. Recommending a change to that isn't feasible.

Exactly.

I'm going to recommend Norton and I'll let you guys know how it goes. I know this has little to do with Linux but thanks for the help anyways.