Is Norton worth the upgrade?

[Gaz]

"Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote in

Spot on. IMO paying money for a bloated, finnicky, resource-hogging
package like NAV or McAfee that has no *significant* benefits seems
like a bad deal.

BTW: I had to chuckle at Norton's logic. On a few occasions when
trying to uninstall NAV from a PC, the uninstall failed. Norton's
fix is to download a utility to uninstall it, which worked. So WTF
doesn't Norton include the uninstall utlility that works in the
package instead of the one that doesn't?

Some oem versions, preinstalled, do not have an add/remove feature,
amazingly, there is no uninstall ability.

Gaz

 

[Gaz]

Except its shite and the root of many problems.

I do enjoy the money it makes me, though.

Gaz

 

[* * Chas]

| ken wrote:
| > Hi,
| >
| > I am currently running Norton Internet Security 2002. I am having
terrible
| > troubles with the Live update downloads. But Is it worth me
upgrading to the
| > new version? your views gratefully received.
|
<snip>
| "How it's still the most popular AV software I'll never understand."

Dell and a number of other PC makers have been shipping systems with
either Norton or McAfee. Most users just buy into what ever came with
their new PC. An IT associate told me yesterday that Dell has switched
to shipping Trend Micro instead of NAV???
|
| I'd recommend NOD32 antivirus and ZoneAlarm (free) for a firewall.
Both
| will protect you better and work more efficiently than any Symantect
| product.

I've been very satisfied with NOD32. I got cured of my last case of NAV
about 9 months ago. I recovered 400MB of disk space when I uninstalled
NAV 2002. The later versions of NAV with all of their bloatware have to
be taking up more room. I also run F-Prot as a backup for on demand
scans.

I run the older free version 2.15 of Kerio for a firewall. It's not as
easy to set up as ZoneAlarm but it uses less resources.

Chas.

 

[* * Chas]

| Thanks for your many replies. I think now, after what you say, I will
stay
| with NIS 2002 and try the free versions that you recommend.
|
| Ken
|

If you want to run NAV, 2002 is probably the best choice. The scan
engine has been continually updated to the latest versions and it has a
little less bloatware than the later releases. You used to be able to
purchase an update renewal without having to install a software upgrade.

I'd advise against updating LiveReg as it just adds more bloatware to
verify that you have a legal copy of NAV. Norton/Symantec seems to have
invested more effort on this issue than it has on PC performance.

There are a lot of better choices in protection available. I've tried or
used over 20 different AV products during the past 10 years plus I've
used every version on NAV from 2.0 (1995) to 2003. NAV and NIS are
monstrous resource hogs and NIS is far too complicated to configure
compared with other popular firewalls.

I'm using NOD32, F-Prot and Kerio 2.15 plus SpyBot S&D and AdAware for
spyware and A-Squared for anti-trojan software.

ALL of the hosed PCs I've run across over the past several years were
"PROTECTED" with either NAV or McAfee. Most of them had been updated
regularly. Admittedly, they were owned by unsophisticated users but both
of those programs are aimed at just those kinds of folks.

One other consideration, all in one PC protection such as NIS is
vulnerable to the types of malware that disables their protective
capabilities. If a virus takes out NAV then you might not have NIS
protection either!

Chas.

 

[Shadow]

No

No. Norton is quite simply shite. Back in the 90's, Norton had good
products but then went downhill.

Agree. And use avast free. I believe it's lighter that AVG,
with plenty of daily updates.

My suggestion?

Spybot Search and Destroy - FREEWARE
Sygate Personal Firewall or Zonelabs ZoneAlarme Personal - FREEWARE

Norton bought Sygate ????? Saw this somewhere .....
Better download a copy quick, or just use good ole kerio 2.1.5
like I do .
Blah ........