Perfect Score?

[John]

Found this article while browsing the web today:
http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=153760&WT.svl=news1_2

Norton 2008 got a perfect score?? Gee, that's a big surprise. I wonder if
the review is biased.

 

[philo]

Found this article while browsing the web today:
http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=153760&WT.svl=news1_2

Norton 2008 got a perfect score?? Gee, that's a big surprise. I wonder if
the review is biased.

Maybe norton finally has a product with so much overhead
the machine cannot even get on line...
then the chances of getting a virus are pretty small <G>

 

[John]

Maybe norton finally has a product with so much overhead
the machine cannot even get on line...
then the chances of getting a virus are pretty small <G>

or maybe the CPU is always busy processing a ton of Norton processes, it
doesn't even have time to handle rootkit processes trying to kick in. Hey,
that is it!

 

[Bill in Co.]

For the most part, the only good Norton products were those dating back in
the DOS days (NDD, SD, DS, etc). Frankly, I'm surprised he isn't
embarrassed by all that has happened since Symantec took it over (and still
with his name attached).

 

[Nonny]

For the most part, the only good Norton products were those dating back in
the DOS days (NDD, SD, DS, etc). Frankly, I'm surprised he isn't
embarrassed by all that has happened since Symantec took it over (and still
with his name attached).

How do you know that he isn't?

My guess is that he made so much money over the years that he
couldn't care less about that.

And I agree... the products were GREAT and HAD to be had when he
owned the company.

 

[Mark]

AFAIK Norton has always had good protection, it's the integration with the
OS, resource hogging, and tech support that's been the problem. I used it
for a few years and never had a problem with malware. With that said, it is
generally crap software that I would never again install on a machine that I
own.

Mark

 

[Bill in Co.]

How do you know that he isn't?

My guess is that he made so much money over the years that he
couldn't care less about that.

I wouldn't want my name on a product tarnished like that. I'd force them
to remove it - if there was any possibility - or maybe even pay them with a
lump fee, to be done with it. I'm sure he's rich enough to have some
options.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I wouldn't want my name on a product tarnished like that. I'd force them
to remove it - if there was any possibility - or maybe even pay them with a
lump fee, to be done with it. I'm sure he's rich enough to have some
options.

Yes, he's very rich. But regardless of how rich he his, he sold his
name to Symantec. I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand the law, I'm
sure that he has no any legal options to prevent them from using the
name they bought and paid him for on their products.