I bought Norton Anitivirus- it was a mistake

[tyrone superfly]

I have Norton Antivirus & Norton Personal Firewall on a number of
computers in my home. Last weekend one of the computers had a disk
failure & I had to reinstall all software from scratch. Everything
worked fine until I tried to reinstall the Norton software, which I
had originally purchased and downloaded from the Symantec web site.

Here is what happened when I tried to reinstall Norton software:

- Spent 2 unsuccessful hours on the Symantec web site trying to find
out how to re-download the software & subscriptions for Norton
AntiVirus & Personal Firewall.

- Emailed Symantec Support as per the instructions on their web site
and got a canned reply that suggested I return to the Symantec web
site (where I had already spent 2 hours).

- Called Symantec Support & was told to call Symantec Subscription
Services.

- Called Symantec Subscription Services and was told that because the
software I had originally purchased was AntiVirus 2002 (only ~ a year
old!), I had to BUY A NEW COPY of the latest AntiVirus software & then
re-subscribe in a year to keep the updates active.

I told the Symantec support person that I would probably purchase the
McAfee virus checker because I've been told that their updates are
free.

I'd be interested to hear whether anyone else has had similar
experiences with Symantec.

 

[Nomen Nescio]

Something wrong. If you had a new disk failure (as in did you reformat?)
you should have been able to reinstall norton and get a new year
subscription. I have heard that you can't get norton to answer phones
(they are not toll free numbers either) or answer emails. That aside, a
clean install of norton, at least 2002, should go smoothly and give you a
full new year.

 

[Roy Coorne]

Nomen Nescio wrote:

.... That aside, a
clean install of norton, at least 2002, should go smoothly and give you a
full new year.

Well - that wouldn't work in Good Ol' Germnay, I suppose:
Symantec did not introduce the product activation for Norton AntiVirus
in Germany, in 2003.
But: If I do a clean install now - though the 2004 version is
available - of the 2003 version of NAV and run all updates, only the
on-demand scanner runs; the e-mail scanning and the on-access scanner
are deactivated.
So I have to buy NAV 2004 or look for an alternative... BitDefender of
Romania looks beautiful, too... and it's from the New Europe;-)

Roy

 

[Anonymous]

Nomen Nescio wrote:


Well - that wouldn't work in Good Ol' Germnay, I suppose:
Symantec did not introduce the product activation for Norton AntiVirus
in Germany, in 2003.
But: If I do a clean install now - though the 2004 version is
available - of the 2003 version of NAV and run all updates, only the
on-demand scanner runs; the e-mail scanning and the on-access scanner
are deactivated.
So I have to buy NAV 2004 or look for an alternative... BitDefender of
Romania looks beautiful, too... and it's from the New Europe;-)

Or, for your realtime monitor, get freeware AntiVir from Old Germany (quite
good); or get KAV from new Russia (arguably the best).

If you practice safe hex; avoid IE; and don't download a bunch of wild
stuff - AntiVir will be quite adequate.



If you practice safe hex,

 

[Blevins]

Or, for your realtime monitor, get freeware AntiVir from Old Germany (quite
good); or get KAV from new Russia (arguably the best).

If you practice safe hex; avoid IE; and don't download a bunch of wild
stuff - AntiVir will be quite adequate.

Man, I haven't seen Anti-Vir in a long time. I wasn't even sure it was
still around. One thing is for certain, if one practices "safe hex"
and doesn't do anything ignorant, almost any AV product will suffice.

 

[Mike]

Computer Associates is giving away their product right now, check it at
http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/
Mike

 

[Ladyhawk]

Hi Mike -

Computer Associates is giving away their product right now, check it at
http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/
Mike

I have not heard very much about this product, is this a reliable AV? I
might like to try the trial version, as from what I read at this sight it
seems efficient. But, it don't want something that is a resource hog or
crashes my system. Do you use this program? Just curious.

Ladyhawk

 

[Blevins]

But, it don't want something that is a resource hog or
crashes my system.

E-Trust is one of the few AV programs that isn't a resource hog. If
one uses common sense, it's plenty good enough.

 

[Ladyhawk]

Hello Blevins -

E-Trust is one of the few AV programs that isn't a resource hog. If
one uses common sense, it's plenty good enough.

Ah, good to hear. I have seen it mentioned a few times on this NG, but,
there does not seem to be as much debate of it's effectiveness as with many
of the others. Whether or not is causes system crashes will be another
story.

Thank you for your time and information, I appreciate it.

Ladyhawk

 

[Blevins]

Ah, good to hear. I have seen it mentioned a few times on this NG, but,
there does not seem to be as much debate of it's effectiveness as with many
of the others. Whether or not is causes system crashes will be another
story.

It's detection rate isn't as good as some but it's adequate. The
software hasn't caused any problems that I am aware of.

 

[Ladyhawk]

Hi Blevins -

It's detection rate isn't as good as some but it's adequate. The
software hasn't caused any problems that I am aware of.

Even the best can not perform as they should if the user does not also
remain updated and practice Safe Hex. A neighbor recently bragged that they
had just bought and downloaded a totally bullet proof AV, and they could now
just sit back and relax and let the program take care of their computer.
The next day they called in a panic that they had the Swen, and was furious
at the AV company. Turns out they were right....they had in fact just
bought and downloaded the program..... and that was it. One has to wonder
about their certificate of live birth....<sigh>

Ladyhawk

 

[Charlie]

Blevins...show us some real data to BACK UP these ridiculous "resource hog"
and "bloatware" claims you keep regurgitating!!!
But..hold off a day or two till I can stop laughing my ass off!!!!!

 

[Ladyhawk]

Hi Charlie -

Blevins...show us some real data to BACK UP these ridiculous "resource hog"
and "bloatware" claims you keep regurgitating!!!
But..hold off a day or two till I can stop laughing my ass off!!!!!

Would you happen to have information on any AV's that are not, in your
opinion, resourece hogs, and yet, have a good detection rating? I would be
very interested in learning more about such programs.

Ladyhawk

 

[Roy Coorne]

Ladyhawk wrote:
....

Would you happen to have information on any AV's that are not, in your
opinion, resourece hogs, and yet, have a good detection rating? I would be
very interested in learning more about such programs.
...

What about BitDefender? There's a Free Edition for Win, for Linux, for
DOS...:

http://www.bitdefender.com/bd/site/downloads.php?menu_id=21

(Detection rate of v.6.5 better than NAV according to c't 9/2003 pp.
128-137 - in German)

HTH - Roy

 

[Bart Bailey]

Would you happen to have information on any AV's that are not, in your
opinion, resourece hogs, and yet, have a good detection rating? I would be
very interested in learning more about such programs.

I like the DOS version of F-Prot,
low resource usage, good detection,

Ladyhawk

Do I know you?

 

[Blevins]

Would you happen to have information on any AV's that are not, in your
opinion, resourece hogs, and yet, have a good detection rating? I would be
very interested in learning more about such programs.

Nod32 seems to leave the smallest footprint and has very good
detection.

 

[Charlie]

Hi Ladyhawk,
No I have never seen any data that would support AV scanner system
performance parameters such as cpu load, ram usage, etc.
Also I have never seen any real modern-day definitions as to exactly what
"resource hog" or "bloatware" really mean. For example if my AV scanner
uses 3% of my cpu cycles is it a "resource hog" or just exactly where is the
threshold for being a "resource hog" and that is my point exactly. Blevins
and others throw these terms out to unsuspecting, naive, yet earnest folks
seeking guidance about AV products. Who knows how many this joker has
mislead through his runaway ego-trip as an AV "expert".

I typically refer AV questions to the ICSA test results which does quantify
many real world AV performance specs such as detection and cleaning but
AFAIK does not report on nebulous terms like "bloatware" and / or "resource
hog"

1.
http://www.icsalabs.com/html/communities/antivirus/certifiedproducts.shtml

-ps in the "old days" of PC home use in Win 3.1 thru WinMe there was a way
to measure resource usage and therefore the term "resource hog" was
evidently coined. Nowadays WinXP (built on the NT kernel) have no resources
like that and so the term is really archaic.

 

[Ladyhawk]

Hi Roy -

Ladyhawk wrote:
...


What about BitDefender? There's a Free Edition for Win, for Linux, for
DOS...:

http://www.bitdefender.com/bd/site/downloads.php?menu_id=21

(Detection rate of v.6.5 better than NAV according to c't 9/2003 pp.
128-137 - in German)

I have visited the site you have provide, however, I did not find a
reference as to whether or not it is compatible with WinME, which is the OS
I have.

Thank you very much for this information. I really appreciate it.

Ladyhawk

 

[Ladyhawk]

Hello Charlie -

Hi Ladyhawk,
No I have never seen any data that would support AV scanner system
performance parameters such as cpu load, ram usage, etc.
Also I have never seen any real modern-day definitions as to exactly what
"resource hog" or "bloatware" really mean. For example if my AV scanner
uses 3% of my cpu cycles is it a "resource hog" or just exactly where is the
threshold for being a "resource hog" and that is my point exactly. Blevins
and others throw these terms out to unsuspecting, naive, yet earnest folks
seeking guidance about AV products. Who knows how many this joker has
mislead through his runaway ego-trip as an AV "expert".

I typically refer AV questions to the ICSA test results which does quantify
many real world AV performance specs such as detection and cleaning but
AFAIK does not report on nebulous terms like "bloatware" and / or "resource
hog"

1.
http://www.icsalabs.com/html/communities/antivirus/certifiedproducts.shtml

-ps in the "old days" of PC home use in Win 3.1 thru WinMe there was a way
to measure resource usage and therefore the term "resource hog" was
evidently coined. Nowadays WinXP (built on the NT kernel) have no resources
like that and so the term is really archaic.

Thank you, for your time to provide this additional information. It is very
much appreciated.

Ladyhawk

 

[Roy Coorne]

I have visited the site you have provide, however, I did not find a
reference as to whether or not it is compatible with WinME, which is the OS
I have.

Thank you very much for this information. I really appreciate it.

Well... meanwhile I contacted Dr Google with respect to BitDefender
and received links to several most critical and disappointed postings...
....and the Free Version has no on-access scanning.

At present, I run a test version of Panda Titanium 2004: Looks
beautiful but has product activation which I hate as I play around
with several computers testing this & that...;-)
As Norton AntiVirus hat no product activation in Good Ol' Germany -
not yet;-)! - may be I buy a copy of NAV 2004 Update.

Roy