-
January 4th, 2012, 10:27 AM
#1
Is Norton Internet Security reliable?
I just bought a new laptop and this specific software is already installed (trial version). I'm wondering if it's really reliable so I would know if I would pay for the full version or not. Nice answers will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
-
January 4th, 2012, 10:35 AM
#2
Registered User
My personal opinion are that Norton and McAfee are both trash. My personal choice would be NOD32 by www.eset.com second runner up would be Kaspersky from either a local store or www.kaspersky.com I also try to avoid the "Internet Security Suites" and other grand named products and just go for anti-virus. I find the automated firewalls to be less than effective and better at blocking things you need/want access to and not suited to blocking what you don't want to get through.
Listen to everyone elses advice as well before making a choice.
One Script to rule them all.
One Script to find them.
One Script to bring them all,
and clean up after itself.
-
January 4th, 2012, 10:37 AM
#3
Thanks Niclo. I'm looking at the link you had given.
-
January 4th, 2012, 11:18 AM
#4
Registered User
I agree that the all encompassing suites arent worth the money you pay. Strictly on a waste of good resources idea. Just plain ole antivirus works very well.
Although unlike Niclo I have used Norton Anti Virus very successfully for the last few years without issue on a lot of customer machines
-
January 4th, 2012, 11:21 AM
#5
Thanks Ferrit. Have you tried the paid version of Norton Internet Security? Do you think it's worth it?
-
January 4th, 2012, 11:54 AM
#6
Registered User
Originally Posted by Ferrit
I agree that the all encompassing suites arent worth the money you pay. Strictly on a waste of good resources idea. Just plain ole antivirus works very well.
Although unlike Niclo I have used Norton Anti Virus very successfully for the last few years without issue on a lot of customer machines
I absolutely will not recommend either Norton Internet Security or Norton 360. Even though they have scored fairly good on reviews. I really don't see any need for that big of a piece of software.
Norton Anti Virus uses around 12/15 megs of ram on a regular basis and it updates a lot without being in your face all the time.
I don't think any of the others can claim much more then that.
I just dont see the need for all that firewall /protection stuff. In all likely hood your behind a router that already has a built in hardware firewall so really your just doubling up for nothing.
-
January 5th, 2012, 08:16 AM
#7
Registered User
For the last 2 years I have used Microsoft Essentials on my personal PC's, clients and doctor offices with no problems. Before there was a variety of Norton and Mcafee on the PC's which caused a lot of problems. This is just my 2 cents worth.
It's not the computers that keep having problems, it's the users!!
-
January 8th, 2012, 01:50 AM
#8
Registered User
Originally Posted by Zonie
For the last 2 years I have used Microsoft Essentials on my personal PC's, clients and doctor offices with no problems. Before there was a variety of Norton and Mcafee on the PC's which caused a lot of problems. This is just my 2 cents worth.
Exactly. MSE works great, small footprint, customer proof.
Sergeant WOTPP
-
January 10th, 2012, 01:19 PM
#9
Registered User
Originally Posted by terihilton27
Thanks Ferrit. Have you tried the paid version of Norton Internet Security? Do you think it's worth it?
The problem I have seen with this particular software suite is the security piece. It is not configurable to begin with. When was the last time your firewall had no exceptions? We routinely get calls that someone out in the wide world can't access one of our database subscriptions. Since they are paid subscriptions, our users have free access. These subscriptions are acessed in one of 2 ways: Either we authenticate on our end and pass off the request to the webiste, or they will authenticate based on the link they came from. The first method NIS will see as a "referring URL." Which is absolutely forbidden by NIS. But it is what it is. That is the authentication method and we have to tell our customers to turn off their security to get to the website.
Another problem I see with these big company AV suites is their lack of identifying threats in a timely manner. We use McAfee Enterprise at work and we are regularly loading trial Malware Bytes to find stuff McAfee has allowed through. Only when MB finds the threat does McAfee "claim" to have found something.
Oh yeah, then there was that update that killed several thousand machines world-wide because McAfee pushed out a dat update that hosed your machine! Lucky me, I called in sick that day.
I like Avast! I particularly like the boot scan.
When you’re left out of the club, you know it, when you’re in the club, you don’t see what the problem is.
-
March 13th, 2012, 02:39 AM
#10
Let it exprire. And then go with AVG. It is the best anti virus i have ever come across. Automatic daily updates with only kb files. Easily you can find its serial key till 2018 version. Overall a perfect combination to keep your PC secure.
-
March 13th, 2012, 10:12 AM
#11
Registered User
Originally Posted by techbug157
Let it exprire. And then go with AVG. It is the best anti virus i have ever come across. Automatic daily updates with only kb files. Easily you can find its serial key till 2018 version. Overall a perfect combination to keep your PC secure.
If you're going to go the free route the real advantage would be with Microsofts Security Essentials. Microsoft pretty much knows the ins and outs of their own product and if you're going to go with a free solution might as well take theirs. Not to mention it's simple, effective and does the job more reliably than all other free solutions.
AVG has some issues that I don't agree with. One being that it seems to miss some of the more common bugs but catches the ones Norton always misses. The other issue I have is people think you can have more than one antivirus on a PC which is a big big big NO. 90% of the time when I fix a norton/avg problem is because both are on the same machine and it now boots slower than the time it takes to cook a turkey. That problem also is evident when norton has been uninstalled but did not remove all of its original functions with the uninstall and avg was installed afterwards. With that problem set aside I've never felt secure with the results or even the time it takes to scan with AVG.
By the way AVG has a free edition, no need for a key. If you're touting the idea of stealing please take that kind of advice elsewhere. In addition you didn't advise removing Norton when it expires which leads back to the biggest issue I have to contend with on machines that are slow and have BOTH on them. Finally, all AV update daily as it's an unofficial standard. If you want to get gritty about it ESET updates 3-6 times a day in some instances and the updates are just as miniscule.
Last edited by Niclo Iste; March 13th, 2012 at 10:16 AM.
One Script to rule them all.
One Script to find them.
One Script to bring them all,
and clean up after itself.
-
March 13th, 2012, 10:35 AM
#12
Registered User
Originally Posted by techbug157
Let it exprire. And then go with AVG. It is the best anti virus i have ever come across. Automatic daily updates with only kb files. Easily you can find its serial key till 2018 version. Overall a perfect combination to keep your PC secure.
That is theft and this post will be reported and should not be answered.
No antivirus will help you with the problems associated with stolen keys.
By the way AVG is crap, try uninstalling it on 10 machines.
The answer will become clear
Last edited by Ferrit; March 13th, 2012 at 10:39 AM.
-
March 13th, 2012, 04:48 PM
#13
Driver Terrier
I never did understand the need to steal antivirus when there so many good free products. Oh well. Leaving the thread as is, otherwise I have to delete everything posted today.
Never, ever approach a computer saying or even thinking "I will just do this quickly."
-
March 13th, 2012, 08:05 PM
#14
Registered User
Some people just feel the need to "borrow" everything
-
March 13th, 2012, 09:28 PM
#15
Registered User
Certainly true, just as there are people who will lie to you when the truth is better just to stay in practice.
Anyway, since we're more or less officially sanctioned, I've got to say that Norton 2011 and 2012 are really underachievers. Truth in naming should require that they both be renamed Norton Cookie Removal Tool. You can use MBAM scan a system with Norton installed, and their is virtually zero chance that Norton will detect a single infected file during the process. Except for cookies.
Monday, I ran MBAM on an obviously infected system running NAV 2012 and the only "threat" it detected was the MBAM installation file. In the meantime, MBAM detected seventy-something threats.
Now, somebody may pop up and say, "Well, Av Comparatives says that Norton is like, 99.5% effective in realtime testing."
All I can say is "Good luck replicating THAT performance in the real world!"
Similar Threads
-
By daveislost in forum Sound Card Drivers
Replies: 34
Last Post: June 3rd, 2010, 09:56 AM
-
By Eccentric in forum Spyware & Antivirus - Security
Replies: 1
Last Post: June 8th, 2007, 06:51 AM
-
Replies: 12
Last Post: June 26th, 2006, 04:23 PM
-
By ClickHere2Surf.com in forum Tech-To-Tech
Replies: 20
Last Post: October 17th, 2004, 02:19 AM
-
By Skippy in forum Spyware & Antivirus - Security
Replies: 1
Last Post: April 13th, 2004, 10:54 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks