I am not slapping a label on anyone. My definition of a basher may be
different than yours. In essence it is someone who berates a product only
going by what is read and not experienced for themselves which I have
noticed all around the web (Vista has pretty much shared the same fate). I
have not seen anything in this thread relating to the modern versions of
NAV/NIS but only the older versions. I have admitted that the '03-'06
versions were pretty much crap but I cannot say the same thing after what I
have experienced in the last year. Some people, such as yourself, may have
problems running Symantec products (as with any software) but at home and at
work has been trouble free here.
To simplify it even further an old saying comes to mind "Don't knock it
until you try it".
"Dave T." wrote in message
news:F5nzj.7742$Mh2.655@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> midway wrote:
>> Take a look at AV Comparatives.org or AV-Test.org to discover the "most".
>> Also Norton has not failed a VB100 certification since 1999. The only
>> other AV solution to do so is Eset I believe. And speaking of Eset,
>> NAV/NIS uses less RAM than NOD32. I guess this would be bloat on a
>> Pentium I 32 MB RAM, lol.
>>
>> Though you may not describe yourself as a basher your tone certainly
>> reflects one. As I said, I used to be one after a terrible experience
>> with NIS '04 years ago. But I read so many good reviews about NIS '07 on
>> a security forum I decided to put my prejudice aside and try it out.
>>
>> But getting back OT, I am curious to know what the OP picked up and how.
>> Symantec Threat Explorer has a big list of these rogue security apps
>> listed on it's page with definition updates to counter them.
>>
>> "SG" wrote in message
>> news:ObAoV6ifIHA.5996@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Again I'm not nor ever have been a "Norton" basher, it's Symantec
>>> products I dislike.
>>>
>>> From your site you provided......
>>>>>> Norton Internet Security 2008 remains our Editors' Choice for
>>>>>> security suites. Its virus/spyware scan scored very well on tests,
>>>>>> and it cleans up more thoroughly than most.>
>>> Than most? who are they talking about?
>>>
>>> Now I'll let you in on a little secret, I work on many machines in my
>>> shop everyday and the first thing I tell my customers is if they have
>>> Symantec products on their systems it will be the first thing to come
>>> off or they can take them elsewhere. So far and it really doesn't matter
>>> to me at all is no one has refused. I'll put Avast or AVG up against any
>>> of them any day. Also the day AVG or Avast starts bloating their
>>> Antivirus into a suite like MacAfee or Symantec I'll find something
>>> else.
>>>
>>> The last word is yours as I'm moving on. Don't want to extend this
>>> thread as these discussions seem to go on forever.
>>>
>>> --
>>> All the best,
>>> SG
>>>
>>> ALEX NICHOL
>>> (1935-2005)
>>> http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm
>>> You will never be forgotten my friend
>>>
>>> "news.microsoft.com" wrote in message
>>> news:%23QLXPnifIHA.4144@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Granted that the '03-'06 versions were less than stellar but the '07-up
>>>> versions have been completely revamped. RAM usage is around 7.5MB on
>>>> my machine which can hardly be called a resource hog. These polls you
>>>> speak of are from mainly people who experienced Norton during it's
>>>> '03-'06 "bloat" era and hasn't even tried the latest versions.
>>>>
>>>> Though it took them a while (too long in my opinion) Symantec quite
>>>> frankly acknowleged the "bloatness" of its past products and is now
>>>> working on improving its performance as stated in their blog entry:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.symantec.com/norton/blog/detail...id=tom_powledge
>>>>
>>>> So Symantec has SymNRT (Norton Removal Tool). So does Kaspersky,
>>>> OneCare, Trend Micro, McAfee and maybe others I don't know about have
>>>> similar removal tools. I don't see an issue here.
>>>>
>>>> Since you posted a review I will post this one:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,2180639,00.asp
>>>>
>>>> What gets me when I communicate with the bashers, I ask them if they
>>>> even tried the latest versions and usually I get silence in return. It
>>>> is like they are afraid to try it and maybe start liking it thus not
>>>> able to bash it anymore. It must make their lives complete or
>>>> something.
>>>>
>>>> And to let you in on a secret I too was once a Norton basher.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SG" wrote in message
>>>> news:OuvauMffIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>> I am not a Norton basher, I am against Symantec products. When Peter
>>>>> Norton owned the products many years ago it did what was advertized.
>>>>> When Symantec bought him out it has went down hill ever sense. You are
>>>>> among the few that hasn't had any trouble and you are one of the lucky
>>>>> ones. It's not so much the software doesn't do it's job, but it is a
>>>>> Resource Hog hands down and they have done nothing to improve it.
>>>>> Furthermore, it's gotten worse with their added Suite. Their uninstall
>>>>> does not even clean up their own mess and they have now an extra file
>>>>> one must run to get rid of it which BTW still leaves some remnants. If
>>>>> it works for you great, but as with anything the majority rules and if
>>>>> you search these groups and the Net you will see it is not worth a
>>>>> grain of salt to put their Junkware on any system. Do a Google for
>>>>> "why people hate Norton Internet Security" and you will see many
>>>>> reasons. Also try "why people like Norton Internet Security". The only
>>>>> thing I still use and still works in all versions of windows from 3.0
>>>>> to Vista is NortonSS, other than that they couldn't pay me to take it.
>>>>> If fact I've thrown away many FREE copies that have been sent to me
>>>>> over the years when I order hardware and software for my customers.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://review.zdnet.com/internet-security-...6-32588378.html
>>>>>
>>>>> You may also try Google and type "antivirus polls"
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.6starreview.com/Antivirus-Softw...CFQEfFQodRxEevw
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.gripe2ed.com/scoop/story/2005/8/1/0559/03379
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> All the best,
>>>>> SG
>>>>>
>>>>> ALEX NICHOL
>>>>> (1935-2005)
>>>>> http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm
>>>>> You will never be forgotten my friend
>>>>>
>>>>> "midway" wrote in message
>>>>> news:E0B95724-110E-43E6-B983-90A1914CDB73@microsoft.com...
>>>>>> Nothing but old fashioned prejudice. If I believed half the things
>>>>>> that were said about Vista I wouldn't never had gotten it. Same goes
>>>>>> for the platitudes from the Norton bashers. But I am able to make up
>>>>>> *my* own mind on both and couldn't be happier (never had ANY kind of
>>>>>> infection with the Vista UAC/NIS combo in over a year). I do run SAS
>>>>>> and PrevxCSI at times but never find nothing more than a few cookies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I ignore the "cut and paste" replies in this group. It is like
>>>>>> listening to a record that is stuck, lol.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "frizzie" wrote in message
>>>>>> news:frizzie.35m660@no-mx.forums.net...
>>>>>>> What's wrong with Norton's Internet Security program?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> frizzie
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> I'm not sure I can understand your argument. If I have had bad experience,
> and bad service for many years, I should give them just one more chance or
> else I risk being labeled a basher by someone like you! The only fact that
> means a damn thing is that people (read I) have had a lot of problems with
> NIS and have decided to go to something that does not have these problems
> and still gets the job done. Period. I used Norton from 1993 till 2007 and
> experienced MANY problems. The final straw for me was when I discovered
> that my system restore wouldn't work unless I made configuration changes
> in NIS's internal security settings, and then of course you have to
> remember to change the settings back when you were done restoring.
> Someone else in this thread said "If it works for you". Fine. It doesn't
> work for me, and obviously a lot of others. The fact that anyone who has a
> divergent viewpoint is automatically awarded a schoolyard label by you
> leads me to be suspect about whether or not your opinion is worth
> considering.
>
> --
> Dave T.
>
> "Many people die at twenty-five and aren't buried
> until they are seventy-five".
> Benjamin Franklin