Norton Anti-Virus

[Leythos]

Then why doesn't it happen to me? I use AVG on my personal machine
and never see that warning. Neither do any of my clients who also run
AVG, and I have never encountered it on any of the relatively few
machines that I see which have a fully functioning Norton install.

However it seems that malfunctioning and Norton are synonyms.

it doesn't happen on any of the Norton / Symantec AV system that we use,
control, maintain, have looked at. Shortly after Sp2 came out, every AV
vendor came out with an update in order to resolve that issue - if the
user is running an obsolete version it may not be patched for SP2.

 

[Lil' Dave]

As XP evolved, I believe it was after service pack 2, AV software has to be
able to tell XP that it is present (installed). At least this is the case
with NAV. I know this because after setting up countless computers,
installing the Win XP updates and the NAV updates there is a point XP stops
complaining the computer might be vulnerable or not protected, or what ever
the hell it says, eventually after nearing the end of the update process for
NAV, NAV downloads something that allows it to tell XP it's there, and then
XP stops nagging you about it.

Your comment "malfunctioning and Norton are synonyms" I believe are
incorrect. May be it's because you have had a bad experience with NAV in the
past and I understand this but I have been using Norton Internet Security
for many years now and find it top notch. I also like AVG, nice program. I
have had glitches with just about anything out there. It all depends on
what's installed on the computer, how well the computer is setup, (hardware
drivers etc.) and just plain bad or good luck.

Corrie

NAV 2004 all up to date. SP2 w/all subsequent security updates. Security
Center says PC may not protected until NAV loads. Disappears when the NAV
icon shows in system tray at boot. A simple solution would be to force NAV
to load first...

When people have a AV installed that the security center does not recognize,
most people disable that portion of security center to avoid the prompt.

Don't let Ron's attitude about Norton (Symantec actually) products bother
you. I'm used to it, read his rantings, and smile.

 

[Ron Martell]

it doesn't happen on any of the Norton / Symantec AV system that we use,
control, maintain, have looked at. Shortly after Sp2 came out, every AV
vendor came out with an update in order to resolve that issue - if the
user is running an obsolete version it may not be patched for SP2.

Any user with an antivirus that predates SP2 has more serious problems
than just the warning messages from the Securiry Center.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm

 

[Ron Martell]

As XP evolved, I believe it was after service pack 2, AV software has to be
able to tell XP that it is present (installed). At least this is the case
with NAV. I know this because after setting up countless computers,
installing the Win XP updates and the NAV updates there is a point XP stops
complaining the computer might be vulnerable or not protected, or what ever
the hell it says, eventually after nearing the end of the update process for
NAV, NAV downloads something that allows it to tell XP it's there, and then
XP stops nagging you about it.

Your comment "malfunctioning and Norton are synonyms" I believe are
incorrect. May be it's because you have had a bad experience with NAV in the
past and I understand this but I have been using Norton Internet Security
for many years now and find it top notch. I also like AVG, nice program. I
have had glitches with just about anything out there. It all depends on
what's installed on the computer, how well the computer is setup, (hardware
drivers etc.) and just plain bad or good luck.

Corrie

My opinions about Norton/Symantec products are based on years of
experience with customer's systems that have been crashed, smashed,
and/or trashed by malfunctioning products from that company.

I see at least two or three systems per month where the only way to
restore normal stable operations (other than a reformat and reinstall
which I consider as the absolute last resort) is to:

1. Uninstall all Norton/Symantec products using the supplied
uninstallers and/or Add/Remove programs.
2. Do the uninstall again, this time with the supplementary
uninstallers provided by Symantec, such as RNAV2003. (side point -
doesn't the mere existence of these supplementary uninstallers provide
some pretty strong evidence of shoddy programming practices at
Symantec? Why can't they design their products to uninstall properly?
Other companies can and do.)
3. Do a manual cleanup, including searching for all folders with
Symantec/Norton in their names and deleting them and their contents;
plus a registry scan for and removal of all remaining Norton/Symantec
references.
4. Install replacement products for the removed Norton/Symantec items
where needed or requested.

On an older system, and there are a vast number of computers built in
2000 and 2001 that are still being used, just the removal and cleanup
as above will result in a very substantial improvement in overall
perfromance as most other antivirus and security products have a much
lower impact on computer performance than their Norton/Symantec
equivalents.

And please don't get me started on the myriad of problems that ensue
when a recent Norton product is installed on a computer running
Windows Millennium Edition.
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

On boot upI get a windows warning that Norton has not loaded and I am at
risk. a little further on during boot up, Norton loads and it is always
loaded before the internet connection is made, hopefully there is no problem,
it never used to do this.
I have uninstalled and reinstalled twice which puts the matter right for a
short time only for it to return, any one had experience of this?
Regards

Are you seeing a warning about Norton Antivirus from the Windows
Security Center? If so, that's probably because the Security Center
starts running before Norton does, and Norton hasn't had a chance to
report its status to the Security Center. I've seen that behavior on
many XP computers, and it's OK.

Some versions of NAV let you turn off alerts from the Windows Security
Center to avoid that behavior.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

 

[Ron Martell]

Your comment "malfunctioning and Norton are synonyms" I believe are
incorrect. May be it's because you have had a bad experience with NAV in the
past and I understand this but I have been using Norton Internet Security
for many years now and find it top notch. I also like AVG, nice program. I
have had glitches with just about anything out there. It all depends on
what's installed on the computer, how well the computer is setup, (hardware
drivers etc.) and just plain bad or good luck.

Corrie

For an example of why I dislike Norton/Symantec products please see
the topic "System Optimizer" from
(e-mail address removed)-spam.invalid dated 12 October.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm

 

[Leythos]

For an example of why I dislike Norton/Symantec products please see
the topic "System Optimizer" from
(e-mail address removed)-spam.invalid dated 12 October.

There is no question that Norton Suites are bad news, but their stand-
alone Antivirus products are cleaner and better at keeping people safe
than any other save 1 application.

I think the biggest problem is that Norton/Symantec bundle NAV with
their suite programs and those bundles are total crapware.

I just had a client hire a young lady, she came in with her own laptop
and asked if she could use it on the network - I told her I would have
to check it first.... The system had McAfee AV just installed a week
ago, it was their multi-security product, and what's sad is that nothing
had been updated - she thought it was updated, thought it was updating,
etc... As it turns out that pretty bar-graph display confused more
people than it helps... Once she "registered" online it would update,
but NAV doesn't have that issue and it will nag you until you do an
update and you don't have to register.

 

[kurttrail]

There is no question that Norton Suites are bad news, but their stand-
alone Antivirus products are cleaner and better at keeping people safe
than any other save 1 application.

I think the biggest problem is that Norton/Symantec bundle NAV with
their suite programs and those bundles are total crapware.

I just had a client hire a young lady, she came in with her own laptop
and asked if she could use it on the network - I told her I would have
to check it first.... The system had McAfee AV just installed a week
ago, it was their multi-security product, and what's sad is that
nothing had been updated - she thought it was updated, thought it was
updating, etc... As it turns out that pretty bar-graph display
confused more people than it helps... Once she "registered" online it
would update, but NAV doesn't have that issue and it will nag you
until you do an update and you don't have to register.

NAV sucks. You have even said that you have found systems with viruses
on them that ran NAV.

Nortons sucks, and you do too.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Ed]

but their stand-
alone Antivirus products are cleaner and better at keeping people safe
than any other save 1 application.

I use NAV2005 on my latest and fastest desktop but on the laptops and
slower desktop, I still use the older NAV2003. Reason.... when
compared to 2003, 2005 does seem to render a degradation in
performance on "slower" machines. Especially on my 1.7GHz laptops....
there was an evident cost to performance when running 2005 in
comparison to 2003.

However, I must agree with you about NAV's ability to keep a system
relatively safe when configured properly and kept up-to-date. I also
use AVG on a few test systems and have no problems with it either but
NAV has never let me down as far as protection goes.

In closing, I would say that I personally believe that NAV2003 was
their last and best contribution to the antivirus utility world. As
with most other programs, utilities and application turned out today,
they all have gone to hell compared to back when they had "Real"
programmers coding and not pin headed brainless administrators and
bean counters calling the shots. Example for one: EYE CANDY! They
are all hung up on EYE CANDY! Make it look good and to hell with what
it does and how it does it. EYE CANDY SELLS! They would rather
devote their energies to Eye Candy than code as simple a thing as a
proper uninstall routine that can get their application off one's
computer. BTW, NAV2003, to my knowledge, does uninstall without
problems. I don't think the same can be said for later versions.

Regards,
Ed

 

[kurttrail]

I use NAV2005 on my latest and fastest desktop but on the laptops and
slower desktop, I still use the older NAV2003. Reason.... when
compared to 2003, 2005 does seem to render a degradation in
performance on "slower" machines. Especially on my 1.7GHz laptops....
there was an evident cost to performance when running 2005 in
comparison to 2003.

However, I must agree with you about NAV's ability to keep a system
relatively safe when configured properly and kept up-to-date. I also
use AVG on a few test systems and have no problems with it either but
NAV has never let me down as far as protection goes.

In closing, I would say that I personally believe that NAV2003 was
their last and best contribution to the antivirus utility world. As
with most other programs, utilities and application turned out today,
they all have gone to hell compared to back when they had "Real"
programmers coding and not pin headed brainless administrators and
bean counters calling the shots. Example for one: EYE CANDY! They
are all hung up on EYE CANDY! Make it look good and to hell with what
it does and how it does it. EYE CANDY SELLS! They would rather
devote their energies to Eye Candy than code as simple a thing as a
proper uninstall routine that can get their application off one's
computer. BTW, NAV2003, to my knowledge, does uninstall without
problems. I don't think the same can be said for later versions.

Regards,
Ed

That's why there is a special uninstall utility for uninstalling it?!
Get real! NAV sucks.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Ed]

That's why there is a special uninstall utility for uninstalling it?!
Get real! NAV sucks.

There is a "special" uninstall utility for 2003 but I have never
really needed it Kurt. 2004 and later, yes, there is a problem but
2003 has always uninstalled just fine for me. I have also read that
the 2003 uninstall utility was more for NAV installed under the 2003
SystemWorks and/or 2003 NIS Suit umbrella rather than as NAV2003 stand
alone installation.

You must remember, I am a NAV2003 advocate, not a NAV any version
advocate. That is why I have gotten "Real".

Regards,
Ed

 

[Leythos]

Get real! NAV sucks.

What AV product do you suggest that the masses use on their computers?
Please list something you actually have experience with that provides
the same level of protection that you would want on your own computer.

 

[kurttrail]

There is a "special" uninstall utility for 2003 but I have never
really needed it Kurt. 2004 and later, yes, there is a problem but
2003 has always uninstalled just fine for me. I have also read that
the 2003 uninstall utility was more for NAV installed under the 2003
SystemWorks and/or 2003 NIS Suit umbrella rather than as NAV2003 stand
alone installation.

You must remember, I am a NAV2003 advocate, not a NAV any version
advocate. That is why I have gotten "Real".

LOL! Just because YOU haven't needed it doesn't mean shit. If you knew
what you were talking about, you would know that even NAV2003's regular
uninstall leaves too much crap behind.

NAV sucks, PERIOD.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

What AV product do you suggest that the masses use on their computers?

That is not the topic of this thread, LameGirl. The topic is "Norton
Anti-Virus."

Please list something you actually have experience with that provides
the same level of protection that you would want on your own computer.

Who are you? My teacher? Blow me.

NAV sucks. And more & more & more people are learning that the hard
way.

It's almost getting to the point that we will need to rename this group
to:
microsoft.public.windowsxp.symantec_problems

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Leythos]

That is not the topic of this thread, LameGirl. The topic is "Norton
Anti-Virus."

It's such a simple thing - most of your posts are complaints without any
form of help - as an example, the above.

You state that a product Sucks, you state that asking what product you
would recommend to the masses is off-topic, you then speq more BS about
the product and the group.....

What are you afraid of?

Since you don't like NAV, what product would you recommend to the
masses, one that you trust enough to use on your own machine to protect
you at the level that you would feel comfortable?

 

[Alias]

It's such a simple thing - most of your posts are complaints without any
form of help - as an example, the above.

You state that a product Sucks, you state that asking what product you
would recommend to the masses is off-topic, you then speq more BS about
the product and the group.....

What are you afraid of?

Since you don't like NAV, what product would you recommend to the
masses, one that you trust enough to use on your own machine to protect
you at the level that you would feel comfortable?

TrendMicro (my choice), Kaspersky, NOD32, AVG, Avast!, Panda. Almost
anything but NAV or McAfee.

Which anti virus occupies the newsgroups the most with problems? NAV,
followed by McAfee. Writing. Wall.

Alias

 

[Leythos]

Which anti virus occupies the newsgroups the most with problems? NAV,
followed by McAfee. Writing. Wall.

If that was a clear indicator then Linux and Windows should also not be
used.

Many people fail to use just Norton AV products and/or to keep the
updated to the current version of the product. Many people keep using
the same engine with updated virus def's while changing their OS or
applying major service packs to the OS without regard to the OLD version
of any AV they are using.

Many people also install the crap called NIS and then don't understand
the difference between NIS and NAV.

While I completely agree with NIS being a terrible product, I've not
seen where NAV 2005 presents any issues to the majority of users that I
know that run it on Windows XP, XP SP1, or XP SP2.

I also agree with you about McAfee AV only because their programs
requires the user to "register" on their website in order to permit
virus definition updates to be pulled - something that I've seen people
not understand an every installation of McAfee in the last two years. I
would never suggest one of those multi-product tools from McAfee or
Norton.

 

[R. McCarty]

If you closely examine the time frame when all these Norton issues
started to appear, you'll notice it tracks almost exactly with their
(Symantec's) introduction of Product Activation. Most all of the
Update/Renew/Subscription problems started to mount up when
PA was added. Prior to that time, Uninstalls (NAV-2002...) did
not result in boot issues and all the other Quirks & Anomalies in
these newer product lines. I wouldn't say that PA accounts for all
the issues but it must be a major factor.

 

[Leythos]

If you closely examine the time frame when all these Norton issues
started to appear, you'll notice it tracks almost exactly with their
(Symantec's) introduction of Product Activation. Most all of the
Update/Renew/Subscription problems started to mount up when
PA was added. Prior to that time, Uninstalls (NAV-2002...) did
not result in boot issues and all the other Quirks & Anomalies in
these newer product lines. I wouldn't say that PA accounts for all
the issues but it must be a major factor.

That could be, but I seem to recall that once NIS was offered it cause
about a 80000000% increase in problem postings with people not
identifying that they were running NIS and just calling it Norton, and
there were also those that posted complaining about NAV, but they really
had NIS.

 

[Alias]

If that was a clear indicator then Linux and Windows should also not be
used.

Um, do you know what "logic" means? The fact that people do NOT post nearly
as many problems regarding the other AVs ... get it now?

Many people fail to use just Norton AV products and/or to keep the
updated to the current version of the product. Many people keep using
the same engine with updated virus def's while changing their OS or
applying major service packs to the OS without regard to the OLD version
of any AV they are using.

Many people also install the crap called NIS and then don't understand
the difference between NIS and NAV.

While I completely agree with NIS being a terrible product, I've not
seen where NAV 2005 presents any issues to the majority of users that I
know that run it on Windows XP, XP SP1, or XP SP2.

I also agree with you about McAfee AV only because their programs
requires the user to "register" on their website in order to permit
virus definition updates to be pulled - something that I've seen people
not understand an every installation of McAfee in the last two years. I
would never suggest one of those multi-product tools from McAfee or
Norton.

I use SystemSuite 5.0 with Trend Micro for AV and Sygate for a firewall. I
use their registry fixer and a number of other tools that come with it and,
since 2001, I haven't had one problem with it and it has saved my computer's
ass a number of times.

Alias