Re: Thinking about buying Norton's AntiVirus

"HeyBub" <heybub@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:eXP9ToipIHA.4848@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Brian A. wrote:
"HeyBub" <heybub@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e5AGWFZpIHA.3804@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Brad wrote:
Hi,

Note: I have used NAV (Norton's AntiVirus) 2001 on a Windows 98se
computer(s) in the past.

Over a month ago, I bought a new Dell laptop with Windows XP home
edition. It came with Trend Micro PC-cillin (30 days trial)
pre-installed. I am thinking about buying NAV, assuming it allows
me to control (preferences) how it "behaves" as NAV 2001 did. I
don't want NAV always running in the background. I want to be able
to "run" NAV to check folders, etc. when I want, the same way I did
using NAV 2001.

What is your experience with the new version of NAV?

I doubt anyone on this group would recommend Norton, or, to a lesser
degree McCaffee.

There are several problems with Norton:

1. It is a resource hog, burning up to 15% of available CPU cycles.

Huh? As I currently look, not a single Symantec I have installed is
using any at all.

You didn't install it properly is my guess. Google "Norton+resource+hog" yields 226,000 hits.

Someone is going to have to contact Symantec then and let them know that the product isn't hammering the CPU after their product is installed. I'll guarantee that I installed it ptoperly and I won't be the one contacting them since I have no problems using their products and my systems run just fine with or without any of their products.

226,000 hits means nothing to me, you'll find my posts along with others who have no issues with Symantec products, those that have or had issues who voice out, and those that are followers who voice only on what they've read/heard without ever using the product. Again, no matter the program/application, the users mileage will vary due to the way their machine is setup, configured and/or kept in a clean state (both system/OS wise and machine/hardware/software gunk wise).
Symantec is not the only application developer in the world and they are most certainly not the major cause of the many OS failures.




2. It is difficult to remove. Very difficult. You have to run the
secret Symantec removal tool several times then manually scan the
registry for detritus left behind.

There's nothing secret about their removal utility, it's been around
for years, no different than any of the other applications and
Symantec isn't the only one that has registry entries that are not
removed.

It IS a secret. It's not mentioned in their documentation nor is it part of the normal uninstall process. Further, running it once is often insufficient. Further-further FINDING it on Symantec's website is non-trivial.


I'll look into that since I haven't read one of their manuals since back when. Either way manual or not, if an error did occur and I know they do, no matter the application including other than Symantec, an error code number would be generated which could be looked up for a possible solution. FWI, their removal utility has been in circulation for at least the last 5-7 years.


3. Norton interferes with many software installations - and doesn't
tell you it's bothering the install process. You end up with an
application that won't work and you don't know why. Virtually every
bit of software that tells you to "disable your virus checker"
before continuing really means "Disable Norton."

If you truly believe your last statement, you truly don't realize the
importance of shutting down running programs when installing an
application.

We write software for a living and Norton has to be disabled before our software will install properly (because we're adding things to the registry). This is not true for AVG, Avast, and several other AV programs with which we've experimented. Moreover, when Norton DOES interfere, it gives no indication that it did so. The only clue we get is when our customers can't run our product.


Then the code you write has anomalies of something on the dark side. I'm not saying any malicious code is being written, yet I'd rather have an app that tags code as a possible security risk and/or not tag it at all. If you don't see a popup message that something was blocked as being potentially dangerous, then it's truly obvious of who hadn't installed the Symantec application properly.


--


Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Windows Desktop User Experience }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://basconotw.mvps.org/

Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Normal.dot already exists
    ... Has NAV ever been installed - maybe as a free OEM trial install on the new ... Norton CE does not have the Office Plug-in option however if Norton AV was ... I don't really have NAV, ...
    (microsoft.public.word.application.errors)
  • Re: Norton Install Problem
    ... Based on all the comments about problems with Norton in these newsgroups I ... After checking on the Symantec ... > website I found that NAV 2002 is incompatible with XP. ... > bought a copy of NAV 2005 and am trying to install it, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • Re: Norton Anti Virus
    ... Cannot uninstall or reinstall NAV. ... Symantec has a utility that is supposed to remove the old ... XP requires a fresh install of NAV. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Thinking about buying Nortons AntiVirus
    ... Symantic programs. ... If that isn't being brainwashed then you must be a Norton salesman. ... I have used NAV 2001 on a Windows 98se ... not a single Symantec I have installed is ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: UNINSTALLING AND REINSTALLING NORTON ANTI-VIRUS
    ... Trying to run multiple AV apps can cause probs. ... It came with free Norton ... > Now I keep getting errors when I try to install Norton 2003 NAV or NSW. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)