Norton 2005

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I'm planning to upgrade to norton AV 2005, are there any problems with 2005
that i should know about? previously ran 2003 and found it really good.
 
There are many reviews on NAV 2005.Just go through them.Google is your
friend.

regards,
ssg MS-MVP
 
My mother told me once many years ago that if I couldn't say anything nice
about something, I should say nothing at all. So I'm saying nothing.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
removethis said:
I'm planning to upgrade to norton AV 2005, are there any problems with
2005 that i should know about? previously ran 2003 and found it really
good.
Click to expand...

I personally haven't liked NAV since their 2003 version. If you have a
very fast processor and lots of RAM, I suppose NAV 2005 won't bog your
computer down, but it has a very large impact on the system.

Malke
 
pierce454 said:
I'm planning to upgrade to norton AV 2005, are there any problems with
2005
that i should know about? previously ran 2003 and found it really good.
Click to expand...

Ditch norton, its a computer resource hog and its also expensive.
Get AVG FREE, its free, light on the computer and effective!
 
Make sure that you fully uninstall NSW or NAV 2003 or any prior Norton
product before installing the 2005 product. One of my biggest criticisms of
Norton products are that you have to manually uninstall them too high a
percentage of the time, and even that isn't successful all the time.
Norton/Symnantec has not been able to make a clean uninstall with any
reasonable degree of success. Also there is a high incidence of XP SP2
incompatibility with all Norton Products and neither MSFT nor Norton has
paid much attention to this fact. MSFT the small software company in
Redmond Washington, though has purchased AV and Spyware companies and they
will be offered for your purchase at websites and stores near you soon.
Hopefully MSFT Antivirus will be compatible with the MSFT Windows OS's XP
SP2 and Longhorn/Blackcomb. There is time for this to happen.

Problems I have seen with SP2 and Norton AV 2003-2005 or Norton SW 2003-2005
are:

Sometimes it won't run a scan--not that important if you are sure autoupdate
has protected you from all viruses, worms, and blended threats. Sometimes
Autoupdater won't work, but it's not that critical considering you can get
those updates directly from the site and you don't have to rely on it for
the key critical update, which is updating definitions. For definition
updates, go here manually each and every day and drag the shortcut
somewhere. You'll be glad you did:

Intelligent Updater Service
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/download/pages/US-N95.html
Click on the first file name and run it every day. Don't worry about the
MD5 hashes and other links on that site.

What's the difference between intelligent updater and Live Update? Well
despite the Mickey Mouse semantics Symantec deploys on the page actually
quite a lot. Once a week definitons vs. once daily definitions when
enterprises with big buck accounts may get updated more than once a day.
Well gee.....I'd sure go for once a day and you should.

Difference between Intelligent Updater and Live Update --once a day vs. once
a week

http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPOR...2002021908382713?OpenDocument&src=sec_web_nam

hth,

Chad Harris
____________________________________________



I'm planning to upgrade to norton AV 2005, are there any problems with 2005
that i should know about? previously ran 2003 and found it really good.
 
I'm planning to upgrade to norton AV 2005, are there any problems with 2005
that i should know about? previously ran 2003 and found it really good.
Click to expand...

Symantec software in general has not been, IMO, up to par in the last
several years. I would avoid anything from Symantec. I too used NAV
2003 on several systems until my subscription ran out. I now use the
free version of AVG 7.X and am pleased with it.

www.grisoft.com
 
Kelly said:
Not yours? :o)
Click to expand...
No, I use F-Prot on the Windows boxen. On this system (which is getting
rather long in the tooth) I don't use av at all because - well, you
know why. ;-)

Malke
 
Unfortunately, I know of two people in my family alone who have gotten
viruses on their machines even with AVG running on their machines. Stick
with Norton.

As far as Norton 2005, I couldn't say because I don't have that version.
I've got Norton 2002 which works fine on Windows XP, and Norton 9.0.0.338
(Corporate version) because my employer requires it in order for me to VPN
into their network.

That sounds like a winner to me.

|
| | > I'm planning to upgrade to norton AV 2005, are there any problems with
| > 2005
| > that i should know about? previously ran 2003 and found it really good.
|
| Ditch norton, its a computer resource hog and its also expensive.
| Get AVG FREE, its free, light on the computer and effective!
|
|
 
I can also attest to what Charles has stated. I maintain a modest network
of 23 computers, and I recently had to install AVG as a stopgap measure when
the licenses I ordered from Symantec did not arrive on time (due to the
holidays).
Every machine that AVG was installed on became infected, while those that
still had current Norton AV stayed clean. I will never use AVG again.

Bobby
 
In
Charles C. Drew said:
Unfortunately, I know of two people in my family alone who have
gotten
viruses on their machines even with AVG running on their
machines.
Stick with Norton.
Click to expand...


It's important to realize that no anti-virus program can be
perfect. New virus definitions are added only after the new virus
is already out there, infecting people. AV programs can
substantially reduce the risk of getting infected, but never
eliminate it entirely, no matter how diligent you are at keeping
your virus definitions up to date.

So regardless of what AV program you're talking about, there is
always somebody who has gotten viruses even with it running on
their machine. Your statement above is not a good reason to get
rid of AVG and run Norton instead.
 
What you are saying is true, but I don't know. The odds do seem higher with
AVG than Norton.

If one is free and the other can better afford to stay current at all times
because it gets paid, who do you think will have the most current and
complete list of virus signatures? If one is used as a stop-gap because
something is better than nothing and the other is use in corporation after
corporation, which would you say is more reliable?

So far, I've never had an infection on a PC with Norton and a current virus
signature list. I have with AVG. True, I've not used AVG very long nor do
I have hundreds of PC to manage; but I've used Norton since about 1996 and
the only time I've seen a machine infected with this software is when the
virus list has been allowed to grow old.

At the corporation I work which has over 48,000 employees and contractors
working for it, the only viruses that ever get in are those that haven't
been detected yet, and manage to pass through firewalls, intrusion
detection, email filters, etc. These are only the most virulent viruses.

I can't speak for every other virus scanner software and there are many, but
can say I trust Norton far more than I do AVG.

| In | Charles C. Drew <[email protected]> typed:
|
| > Unfortunately, I know of two people in my family alone who have
| > gotten
| > viruses on their machines even with AVG running on their
| > machines.
| > Stick with Norton.
|
|
| It's important to realize that no anti-virus program can be
| perfect. New virus definitions are added only after the new virus
| is already out there, infecting people. AV programs can
| substantially reduce the risk of getting infected, but never
| eliminate it entirely, no matter how diligent you are at keeping
| your virus definitions up to date.
|
| So regardless of what AV program you're talking about, there is
| always somebody who has gotten viruses even with it running on
| their machine. Your statement above is not a good reason to get
| rid of AVG and run Norton instead.
|
| --
| Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| Please reply to the newsgroup
|
|
 
AVG do get paid. They give it free to home users so those users specify AVG for their company's AV solution. When Inoculate did that it worked. I specified it and spent $2000 of the companies money. Unfortunately Inoculate's free version was far better than their paid for version.
 
Hum...interesting.

"David Candy" <.> wrote in message
AVG do get paid. They give it free to home users so those users specify AVG
for their company's AV solution. When Inoculate did that it worked. I
specified it and spent $2000 of the companies money. Unfortunately
Inoculate's free version was far better than their paid for version.
 
In
Charles C. Drew said:
What you are saying is true, but I don't know. The odds do
seem
higher with AVG than Norton.

If one is free and the other can better afford to stay current
at all
times because it gets paid, who do you think will have the most
current and complete list of virus signatures? If one is used
as a
stop-gap because something is better than nothing and the other
is
use in corporation after corporation, which would you say is
more
reliable?
Click to expand...


AVG is free for home use, but not for corporate use. Many
corporations use it.

I'm not trying to tell you that AVG is better, worse, or the same
as Norton. I happen to use Norton myself, and despite the
opinions of many other MVPs (and other) who I greatly respect, I
continue to use it because it's always worked well for me.

So far, I've never had an infection on a PC with Norton and a
current
virus signature list.
Click to expand...


Nor have I.

I have with AVG.
Click to expand...


I've never used AVG, and can't comment on it.

True, I've not used AVG very
long nor do I have hundreds of PC to manage; but I've used
Norton
since about 1996 and the only time I've seen a machine infected
with
this software is when the virus list has been allowed to grow
old.
Click to expand...


The experience of a single user, whether you or me, or even both
of us taken together hardly counts. Statistics are meaningful
only when you look at large numbers of users.

At the corporation I work which has over 48,000 employees and
contractors working for it, the only viruses that ever get in
are
those that haven't been detected yet, and manage to pass
through
firewalls, intrusion detection, email filters, etc. These are
only
the most virulent viruses.

I can't speak for every other virus scanner software and there
are
many, but can say I trust Norton far more than I do AVG.
Click to expand...


Your choice, of course. There are many other AVG users who
disagree with you. In my opinion (admittedly hearsay--but from
those whose opinions I trust), AVG does at least as good a job as
Norton). If Symantec were to go out of business tomorrow, and I
had to find another anti-virus product, AVG is one of those I
would definitely consider.

Again, however, I wasn't trying to tell you that AVG was better.
Despite my using and liking Norton, I was merely commenting that
your statement "I know of two people in my family alone who have
gotten viruses on their machines even with AVG running on their
machines" is not a good reason for the conclusion "Stick with
Norton." Statistics based on two examples are meaningless.
 
Norton's bad press is by people who machines were screwed by norton's products (not necessarily AV), not it's virus catching behaviour.

I only look up viruses at Norton's site as they seem to know the most about viruses. It's just their programs are crap programs - designed by a marketing team.

Q I have a old game and my computer is too fast to play it?
A Install a Norton product.

A long time ago I used NU Dos V 6.0 (they restarted their versions at 10 - 6 was the last where exe were standalone and didn't require overlays [like dll but for dos]) and McAfee (whatever version). Making programs do more to increase the feature count (of useless features) and looking prety were NU's priorities.
 
Back
Top