well nortons is gone for me so now to find something new

[zfactor]

what a mess they made with nis2009 and the whole ask thing. and the nortons safe web thing checks every site if you want it or not and add its own window pop up for each telling you it checked them.. and it for sure is slower than before imo.. this sucks

[zfactor]

hmm i see a setting now for safe web in the options. im playing with this to see if i can make this go away.

okay you can turn off the detailed results now nut the ask toolbar add in is not removable. and for sure browsing seems to have slowed down some now for some reason. nothing else has been updated or changed out.

[TrojanHunter]

Norton is a better product nowadays, but it seems symantec still uses questionable business practices.

With so many good freebies available, Payware really isn't worth it anymore for home users IMO. I'm still using Kaspersky on a couple of my PC's until the subscription runs out, but I wont be renewing.

On my laptop I have started using Drive sentry, which is a light application and has proven effectiveness. I also use sandboxie and two on-demand scanners for occasional checks. I consider this setup to be adequate and it's all free.

[Zeena]

Hi zfactor :)

Looks Like I Got Rid Of NIS 09 .. Just In Time! ;D

I've tried many Norton's in the last 3 years ( e.g. NIS 06 , NIS 07 , N360 , NIS 08 , N306 v2 , NIS 09 )
And To Be Honest!
I can't for the life of me.. Work out why so many people ever liked NIS 09 ???
I honestly thought.. It was the worst Norton out of them all :thumbd:

Although I hated NIS 09 from day one :(
I ended up sticking with it for approx 5 months.

4 Weeks Ago...
I Could Finally Take - No More >:(
And I uninstalled NIS 09

I'm Now Using - Avast Home 8)
Absolutely - Love It! :D


Happy At Last! ;D

[thathagat]

welll.............i shifted from firefox and IE to Opera and admuncher with Nis2009.......so all the aforementioned ills of nis2009 are nullified.....ummm...if not all....at least most...;)

[vijayind]

I switched to KIS 2009 for the family and I am trying out BitDefender/Outpost combo.

No complains or conspircy theories so far :)

[CookieCrumbler]

-{ Quote: "I switched to KIS 2009 for the family and I am trying out BitDefender/Outpost combo.

No complains or conspircy theories so far :)" }-

You're talking about outpost firewall with bitdefender? Sounds like a great combo imo. I really cant stand Norton, i never liked their products it seems like there crap gets worse and worse tbh. Dont know why everyone loves Norton, in the past it used to eat computer resources ALIVE. I've heard NIS 2009 is one of the fastest suites out there...lol....but why would I spend my money on a product that sucked for so many years?

[zfactor]

i for one would not go back to bitdefender. and imo the outpost firewall is way to bloated for just a firewall. 2.7 was the last great outpost after that it imo went downhill. maybe ill go back to kis2009 though it had a few issues i didnt like either they were not becoming more or less privacy issues they were simply not liking the way the program features were

[CookieCrumbler]

-{ Quote: "i for one would not go back to bitdefender. and imo the outpost firewall is way to bloated for just a firewall. 2.7 was the last great outpost after that it imo went downhill. maybe ill go back to kis2009 though it had a few issues i didnt like either they were not becoming more or less privacy issues they were simply not liking the way the program features were" }-

I think you should go with KIS 2009 tbh.

[jmonge]

what i did instead of installing those huge monsters security apps,i bought a combination of prevx edge and malwarebytes and i feel secure;) againts malware:)

[fce]

-{ Quote: "i for one would not go back to bitdefender. and imo the outpost firewall is way to bloated for just a firewall. 2.7 was the last great outpost after that it imo went downhill. maybe ill go back to kis2009 though it had a few issues i didnt like either they were not becoming more or less privacy issues they were simply not liking the way the program features were" }-

i've tried lots of security combo...either resource hog or security conflict you will get.

KIS is not bad security suite, IMO.

[CookieCrumbler]

-{ Quote: "i've tried lots of security combo...either resource hog or security conflict you will get.

KIS is not bad security suite, IMO." }-

I think KIS is a great suite and is better than many out there

[zfactor]

i had kis2009 and while i liked it a lot dont get me wrong it made a lot of internet stuff drag. like you tube videos were like watching a slide show and i have a very very powerful system no reason at all it should be doing that i saw this result on more than a few computers and after simply removing it the issue was gone. among other things as well as sometimes forgetting my network settings and not allowing me to edit them? i had to actually remove it and reinstall a few times to fix the issue or i simply could not connect to the internet even with the firewall turned completly off. it still blocked the internet

[jmonge]

-{ Quote: "i've tried lots of security combo...either resource hog or security conflict you will get.

KIS is not bad security suite, IMO." }-also avira free(for viruses)and malwarebytes paid(for spywares)and set to go malware free;)

[zfactor]

-{ Quote: "I think KIS is a great suite and is better than many out there" }-

that i agree on 100% it is better than many if not most i just personally like the way i really except for a few times it could not update which was fixed had 0 other issues with nis2009 so to hear all of this just coming out at once just plain sucks

[CookieCrumbler]

-{ Quote: "i had kis2009 and while i liked it a lot dont get me wrong it made a lot of internet stuff drag. like you tube videos were like watching a slide show and i have a very very powerful system no reason at all it should be doing that i saw this result on more than a few computers and after simply removing it the issue was gone. among other things as well as sometimes forgetting my network settings and not allowing me to edit them? i had to actually remove it and reinstall a few times to fix the issue or i simply could not connect to the internet even with the firewall turned completly off. it still blocked the internet" }-

I HIGHLY recommend Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2009. The names misleading. It has the detection rates of KIS (not just viruses, but everything). It takes alot of the 'bloat' out of it, then just get yourself a seperate firewall. You can do whatever you like, but I think this would be better. Sure, it doesnt have a firewall, but it has almost everything the KIS suite has.

Clarification:
Kaspersky AV does not have:
Network Attack Blocker, Anti-Dialer, Application Filtering, Firewall, Network Monitor.

But, I'd just get a standalone firewall. I mean the AV still has all the good stuff in it, like real time files and memory scanning, real time email and IM scanning, real time web scanning, proactive defense, antiphishing. I think that's good enough. But thats just me I guess.

[TrojanHunter]

-{ Quote: " I really cant stand Norton, i never liked their products it seems like there crap gets worse and worse tbh. Dont know why everyone loves Norton, in the past it used to eat computer resources ALIVE. I've heard NIS 2009 is one of the fastest suites out there...lol....but why would I spend my money on a product that sucked for so many years?" }-

I know what you mean, because while I think their Norton 2009 software is a vast improvement over past efforts, I wouldn't use them again. I remember in the past when their software let through many infections, was very Bloated and wouldn't uninstall properly. In recent years it seems Sercurity software buyers have become wiser, so Symantec have finally put something together that doesn't suck. Having said that, I still wouldn't feel comfortable with a Norton product protecting my machine.

[CookieCrumbler]

-{ Quote: "I know what you mean, because while I think their Norton 2009 software is a vast improvement over past efforts, I wouldn't use them again. I remember in the past when their software let through many infections, was very Bloated and wouldn't uninstall properly. Over recent years it seems Sercurity software buyers have become wiser, so Symantec have finally put something together that doesn't suck. Having said that, I still wouldn't feel comfortable with a Norton product protecting my machine." }-

Wow I feel the same way. :)

[vijayind]

-{ Quote: "You're talking about outpost firewall with bitdefender? Sounds like a great combo imo. I really cant stand Norton, i never liked their products it seems like there crap gets worse and worse tbh. Dont know why everyone loves Norton, in the past it used to eat computer resources ALIVE. I've heard NIS 2009 is one of the fastest suites out there...lol....but why would I spend my money on a product that sucked for so many years?" }-
It seems to be a very good combo.
BitDefender 2009 has good detection and a behavioral scanning component called B-HAVE similar to Vipre's MX-V.
Outpost has a very good HIPS component and a highly configurable firewall.

Together they are a good couple. No fighting so far. BD takes about 22 MB and Outpost 28 MB RAM on my system. So its pretty light as well. :thumb:
The only area in comparison to NIS2009, where they seem to lag in online protection. BitDefender HTTP scan tends to slow down browsing of site with lot of AJAX, JS or VBS. Also its anti-phishing toolbar not at par with Norton SafeWeb.

I had minor issues with a possible FP in BD and Outpost was dropping some occasional DNS packets. Surprisingly BitDefender has now great support. They even offer free Chat, Email and Telephone support. Within 24 hrs, I got my clarification for BitDefender. And Agnitum Support was also effective. ( No one asked me use MBAM or stick up $99, like you-know-who )

So I may just move completely to BitDefender/Outpost when my KIS2009 license expires. :shifty:

[TrojanHunter]

-{ Quote: "I HIGHLY recommend Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2009. The names misleading. It has the detection rates of KIS (not just viruses, but everything). It takes alot of the 'bloat' out of it, then just get yourself a seperate firewall. You can do whatever you like, but I think this would be better. Sure, it doesnt have a firewall, but it has almost everything the KIS suite has.

" }-

The problem I have encounter with their Anti-virus, is that it doesn't get along to well with quite a few other firewalls. On 64Bit the choice becomes even more limited.

[nomarjr3]

I suggest you try COMODO Internet Security.
It has one of the most powerful firewall and HIPS.
AV is average, and needs further improvement. Looking forward to the next update (improved engine and BOClean integration :thumb: )
If the HIPS bothers you so much, just disable D+ and install a behavior blocker like Threatfire or Mamutu.

[thehudd]

Well, I might catch some grief for this but....I never thought I'd use Norton but having read so many glowing reports I decided to try it again. NIS was as great an improvement as I can imagine over the previous versions. Then came the recent fiasco and I removed it prior to the latest upgrade. So...

My ISP provides McAfee, which I never thought I'd use, but if you check with AV-Comparatives the latest version comes with Active Protection,aka Artemis, and showed some very nice results. Anyway, for the time being I'm going with that and I may stay there awhile, at least until Dr.Web comes up with a 64bit version.

[gery]

this the death of a great goodfather norton well praised worshiped and highly reverended .holy sh..t
the point is they made themselves a big favor by blowing a good software never liked it and never will

[silverfox99]

Junst uninstalled NIS2009 (then ran Norton Removal Tool) and installed Eset Smart Security v4 instead. Seems lighter, web browsing also seems a bit quicker, and no bloat/spyware toolbars (Ask!), so happy just now.

[CountryGuy]

No AV is perfect for everyone. NIS2009 worked great for me over the last 6 months, and I'm using N360 v3 now (given they've fixed most of the 64 bit issues) and I couldn't be happier. No performance issues, including browsing with SafeWeb turned on. I turned off the Ask.com search, so can't comment on that.

Good luck finding something you like!!

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "Junst uninstalled NIS2009 (then ran Norton Removal Tool) and installed Eset Smart Security v4 instead. Seems lighter, web browsing also seems a bit quicker, and no bloat/spyware toolbars (Ask!), so happy just now." }-
I always found Nod's web scanner to take a pretty good toll on browsing speed myself. Don't see any of that in Norton 360 v3 at all... Perhaps Eset has improved in recent times.

[JasSolo]

-{ Quote: "I always found Nod's web scanner to take a pretty good toll on browsing speed myself. Don't see any of that in Norton 360 v3 at all... Perhaps Eset has improved in recent times." }-

Sorry to say this, but they haven't.....at least not on my rig(s) :'(


Cheers

[Birdman]

After reading about the ask.com search toolbar + the pifts.exe nonsense, I couldn't trust Symantec anymore and I immediately removed NIS 2009 from my system.

I went back to Kaspersky (KIS v8.0.0.506) and I'm sure glad I did. Not only does their suite use less resources than NIS, but I noticed that my computer is faster on start-up and shutdown and my internet surfing is smother and faster as well.

Best decision I made. I would like to thank the folks @ Symantec for making this possible because had it not been for their sneaky business practices, I'd still be stuck with NIS 2009.

Also for those who have had issues with Kaspersky in the past, try their latest version. You won't be disappointed. I found a single-user license off eBay for $10. Can't beat that!

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "After reading about the ask.com search toolbar + the pifts.exe nonsense, I couldn't trust Symantec anymore and I immediately removed NIS 2009 from my system.

I went back to Kaspersky (KIS v8.0.0.506) and I'm sure glad I did. Not only does their suite use less resources than NIS, but I noticed that my computer is faster on start-up and shutdown and my internet surfing is smother and faster as well.

Best decision I made. I would like to thank the folks @ Symantec for making this possible because had it not been for their sneaky business practices, I'd still be stuck with NIS 2009.

Also for those who have had issues with Kaspersky in the past, try their latest version. You won't be disappointed. I found a single-user license off eBay for $10. Can't beat that!" }-

I understand why you wanted to dump NIS 2009, but it's hard to believe that KIS is even lighter on system resources. NIS 2009 has the lowest impact of any suite I've used - even lighter then just using KAV 2009. The last time I tried KAV 2009 (version 8.X) it made my system crawl, but I don't remember what build it was. Do you use any other security apps that could be a factor?

[steve1955]

-{ Quote: "I understand why you wanted to dump NIS 2009, but it's hard to believe that KIS is even lighter on system resources. NIS 2009 has the lowest impact of any suite I've used - even lighter then just using KAV 2009. The last time I tried KAV 2009 (version 8.X) it made my system crawl, but I don't remember what build it was. Do you use any other security apps that could be a factor?" }-
If Kis made your system crawl then you probably had a conflict or remnants of some other AV on your system 8.0.0.506 is very light on resources,you have to realise that if you install any app and have problems it may not be down to the "just installed" app but sowmething already installed(or not completely uninstalled)interacting with it,so depending on your view point it could be the newly installed or the one already installed which is at fault,but its always easier to lay the blame at something newly installed rather than do a little investigating

[zfactor]

-{ Quote: "I understand why you wanted to dump NIS 2009, but it's hard to believe that KIS is even lighter on system resources. NIS 2009 has the lowest impact of any suite I've used - even lighter then just using KAV 2009. The last time I tried KAV 2009 (version 8.X) it made my system crawl, but I don't remember what build it was. Do you use any other security apps that could be a factor?" }-

have to say i agree nis2009 was lighter than ANY other suite or almost even stand alone av including eset and kis or kav

[Baldrick]

-{ Quote: "have to say i agree nis2009 was lighter than ANY other suite or almost even stand alone av including eset and kis or kav" }-
KIS is not a standalone AV but a full security suite equivalent to NIS2009.

FYI...according to reviews whilst NIS2009 is apparently the 'lightest' full suite KIS 2009 is very, very close behnd in terms of drag on the system when installed.

My humble suggestion is to try KIS 2009...I think that you will be surprised. ;)

[zfactor]

i used to use kis .506 before i went to nis2009 imo nis2009 is far faster on my system than kis2009 .506 was

[Birdman]

-{ Quote: "I understand why you wanted to dump NIS 2009, but it's hard to believe that KIS is even lighter on system resources. NIS 2009 has the lowest impact of any suite I've used - even lighter then just using KAV 2009. The last time I tried KAV 2009 (version 8.X) it made my system crawl, but I don't remember what build it was. Do you use any other security apps that could be a factor?" }-

Other than KIS, the only other apps that I have on start-up is WinPatrol and Ad-Muncher.

On system start-up with NIS 2009 previously installed, the memory usage was around 220M. With KIS, it's around 186M.

Also in terms of internet speed (page rendering), I also noticed that it was smoother with KIS installed as opposed to NIS.

[Baldrick]

-{ Quote: "On system start-up with NIS 2009 previously installed, the memory usage was around 220M. With KIS, it's around 186M.

Also in terms of internet speed (page rendering), I also noticed that it was smoother with KIS installed as opposed to NIS." }-
KIS 2009 on start up is way lower than that on my system...probably why I like it so much compareed to NIS which was heavier on my system...suppose it is down to ones rig to a certain extent. ;D

[zfactor]

holy wow how was nis2009 that high on startup mine is no where near that..?? also my system starts up faster with nis2009 over kis.

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "Other than KIS, the only other apps that I have on start-up is WinPatrol and Ad-Muncher.

On system start-up with NIS 2009 previously installed, the memory usage was around 220M. With KIS, it's around 186M.

Also in terms of internet speed (page rendering), I also noticed that it was smoother with KIS installed as opposed to NIS." }-
I have the exact opposite experience, KIS slows down browsing much more, and my system was more sluggish with it also, as compared to Norton 360 v3 which is extremely light and quick in all regards.

It's amazing how you can not trust Symantec anymore, and yet go on to trust KIS when they completely destroyed many people's file systems, mine included (needing a reformat) in past years with their file system tags and chkdsk issues. I find that pretty amusing.... ;)

But if it makes you happy, the by all means, use it.

[zfactor]

just did a shutdown restart nis2009 is using 18mb upon restart so not sure where you get 220mb from def something wrong there i can post a screenshot if you want

first image is the second the system started second pick is nis2009 at idle it uses less the 2mb idle usually

2 procc to ccsvchst.exe and csrss.exe

[EASTER]

To be perfectly honest and as obvective as possible given Norton's duplicate O/S as i called it in the past. If they could or would just trim down the massive congestion of all it's working parts to a more tolerable level then perhaps they wouldn't draw so much negative press from the customer's view.

We already know it draws a good share of a top billing from the commerical publications review of it. At least most of them that are well funded to talk this Behemoth up.

[Baldrick]

-{ Quote: "It's amazing how you can not trust Symantec anymore, and yet go on to trust KIS when they completely destroyed many people's file systems, mine included (needing a reformat) in past years with their file system tags and chkdsk issues. I find that pretty amusing.... ;)

But if it makes you happy, the by all means, use it." }-
Never destroyed my file system, never had an issue with CHKDSK nor did it put a foot wrong on my rig from KIS 6 through to 2009. Some of this did affect a small number of people...relatively...but then again NIS trashed some peoples systems and slowed other to a crawl...as has done McAfee and others in the past.

It is all down to what works for one on one's own rig. ;)

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "
It is all down to what works for one on one's own rig. ;)" }-
Yep, this is true, and that's the bottom line really... :thumb:

[Birdman]

-{ Quote: "holy wow how was nis2009 that high on startup mine is no where near that..?? also my system starts up faster with nis2009 over kis." }-

That's the usage of ALL the processes running on my machine (19 total), not just NIS or KIS by itself.

[zfactor]

why are you comparing it that way? kis for me would idle aroun 8-13 or so and would be around 30-40 at startup and up to 60-80 during scans nis2009 hits around 35-40max for me, at least i have not seen it go higher. imo browsing as SO much slower and sites like you tube was like watching a slide show with kis2009 nortons is nice and smooth

[Birdman]

-{ Quote: "It's amazing how you can not trust Symantec anymore, and yet go on to trust KIS when they completely destroyed many people's file systems, mine included (needing a reformat) in past years with their file system tags and chkdsk issues. I find that pretty amusing.... ;) " }-

Kaspersky no longer incorporates system tags or has any issues with chkdsk. While both has their faults, Symantec continues to use BS practices while Kaspersky seems to have moved forward in a positive direction.

In terms of history and track record, nobody has a worse reputation than the folks at Symantec/Norton. Just when you thought they have finally cleaned up their act with their 2009 software line, they prove to be the same greedy scum as they've always been.

What I find amusing is how anybody can defend them. To each their own I guess.

[zfactor]

trust me im NOT happy but i have a paid lic and im looking for something else in the meantime. i will be switching im just not to what yet..

[Birdman]

-{ Quote: "why are you comparing it that way? kis for me would idle aroun 8-13 or so and would be around 30-40 at startup and up to 60-80 during scans nis2009 hits around 35-40max for me, at least i have not seen it go higher. imo browsing as SO much slower and sites like you tube was like watching a slide show with kis2009 nortons is nice and smooth" }-

It must be machine/hardware related then because my experience is the exact opposite as it relates to sites like youtube.

t's been a couple of days since I dumped NIS for KIS and even my girlfriend has noticed the better internet speed performance (and I didn't even mention anything to her about switching security suites).

[Birdman]

-{ Quote: "trust me im NOT happy but i have a paid lic and im looking for something else in the meantime. i will be switching im just not to what yet.." }-

I paid 11 bucks for my Norton license and I've used it for 4 months now. Also I kept a snapshot image of my system w/ NIS 2009 on an external drive just in case something goes wrong with Kaspersky and I change my mind. However considering the recent moves by Norton, that seems highly unlikely.

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "Kaspersky no longer incorporates system tags or has any issues with chkdsk. While both has their faults, Symantec continues to use BS practices while Kaspersky seems to have moved forward in a positive direction.

In terms of history and track record, nobody has a worse reputation than the folks at Symantec/Norton. Just when you thought they have finally cleaned up their act with their 2009 software line, they prove to be the same greedy scum as they've always been.

What I find amusing is how anybody can defend them. To each their own I guess." }-
You are of course entitled to you views on all this. After the "BS" that Kaspersky pulled with the file system, I will NEVER use their products again, they went way far across the line with all that. Trust is gone. To my way of thinking, screwing with the OS's file system is a far greater sin than installing a search box without asking.

Symantec is big, and no doubt a target. I think they have managed to produce a fine product in the 2009 line and in Norton 360 v3. And that's why I use it, and will defend it. I care nothing about a silly Ask search box, and I think those who make a stink about it have nothing better to do than bash Symantec, just as there are those who blindly bash MS because they dominate the market. You'd be better off and have a more valid complaint if you were complaining about their tech support. As for them being "greedy scum", everyone is in business to make a buck my friend, don't fool yourself.

IMO, Symantec knows what they are doing, they are worthy of everyone's trust, and they have an excellent current product line, and there are many many people who will agree.

But as we all know, to each his own. Use what works for you.... ;)

[Victek123]

-{ Quote: "
Symantec is big, and no doubt a target. I think they have managed to produce a fine product in the 2009 line and in Norton 360 v3. And that's why I use it, and will defend it. I care nothing about a silly Ask search box, and I think those who make a stink about it have nothing better to do than bash Symantec, just as there are those who blindly bash MS because they dominate the market. You'd be better off and have a more valid complaint if you were complaining about their tech support. As for them being "greedy scum", everyone is in business to make a buck my friend, don't fool yourself.

IMO, Symantec knows what they are doing, they are worthy of everyone's trust, and they have an excellent current product line, and there are many many people who will agree.
" }-

For me at the moment the problem with Symantec is not the ask.com search box, which I agree can just be ignored. It's the behavior of the company they have outsourced tech support to. Did you read the article on Pcmag.com by Neil Rubenking about his recent experience with Symantec's chat support? If not I suggest reading it and also the many comments from users that confirm the behavior is not an isolated problem. It is possible to "make a buck" without manipulating and scamming users. Keep in mind that when you call a company for product support they have already "made their buck" when you purchased the software.

[zfactor]

that is one part i agree with i am kinda shocked as well at their tech support. i mean they came out this year lock stock and barrel with a near imo perfect solution that simply stunned everyone that this could come from nortons and now they are just killing themselves.

i dont like the ask thing at all but i agree i can turn it off (well not really i can hide it) but their abuse of mbam and trying to force people (freind of mine called and tried this with him he was told he should pay for premium support if he really wanted help and yes they actually said that to him then he called me to ask what to do) into paying for support that originally was said to be free with the new product is absurd and horrible

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "For me at the moment the problem with Symantec is not the ask.com search box, which I agree can just be ignored. It's the behavior of the company they have outsourced tech support to. Did you read the article on Pcmag.com by Neil Rubenking about his recent experience with Symantec's chat support? If not I suggest reading it and also the many comments from users that confirm the behavior is not an isolated problem. It is possible to "make a buck" without manipulating and scamming users. Keep in mind that when you call a company for product support they have already "made their buck" when you purchased the software." }-
I have not yet read the article, but I will do so. Thanks... In general, it's hard to believe a large and profitable organization would act with bad intent. I'd be more likely to believe they simply made some bad decisions and mistakes and will correct them. But who knows... I never use tech support myself, so the issue doesn't really touch me personally, however, I don't approve of misleading, scamming or manipulating customers either, if that is indeed what occurred.

[CountryGuy]

Just from the outside looking in, it looks to me like they outsourced their support completely with very little to zero oversight. That's what happens when you do that.

I love their 2009 products, but to be completely honest, without their community forums I'd be loathe to install their software on my machine.

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "Just from the outside looking in, it looks to me like they outsourced their support completely with very little to zero oversight. That's what happens when you do that.
" }-
Yep, I would give them the benefit of the doubt on intent, and conclude that they just made some mistakes, which hopefull will, or have been, corrected.

[AaLF]

-{ Quote: "what a mess they made with nis2009 and the whole ask thing. and the nortons safe web thing checks every site if you want it or not and add its own window pop up for each telling you it checked them.. and it for sure is slower than before imo.. this sucks" }-

Do yourself a favor & give ESET Security a shot. Like to hear your opinion after 30 day trial.

I'm impressed.8)

[zfactor]

-{ Quote: "Do yourself a favor & give ESET Security a shot. Like to hear your opinion after 30 day trial.

I'm impressed.8)" }-

i own a lic to ess3 and tried ess4 it is now gone from all my systems till they fix the issue of connecting to the internet sorry. i do think it was no better or worse than nis2009 as far as speed though. i would say they are about equal actually i think nis2009 is even a bit faster browsing

[EASTER]

No real surprise from my results.

My own wireless ISP to my complete astonishment one night when the wireless tower malfunctioned killing paid internet services for an entire night, finally fessed up that they were being as night support outsourced by my ISP till the A.M. and were in a totally dofferent country then the states.

It wasn't untill the next morning i got a call from the local office explaining that their pagers are supposed to alert them to any problem as this so they can reboot the tower and resume service. In the end that didn't work either, they eventually had to climb the tower and replace a critical malfunctioning componant.

The night before, the outsourcer had me trying everything in the book on my machine to receive a signal that just wasn't there to begin with.

So why is it the outsourcing bit with everyone? That has to cost extra in itself doesn't it? Seems would be more cost saving to do it themselves.

EASTER

[nomarjr3]

OT @ EASTER

I just noticed that you are using both Deep Freeze and Returnil?

Case in point, both have EXACTLY the same function.

[EASTER]

-{ Quote: "OT @ EASTER

I just noticed that you are using both Deep Freeze and Returnil?

Case in point, both have EXACTLY the same function." }-

Wrong!

I don't run them both at all but are on separate units. Would be somewhat redundant and even conflicking likely.

My sig is situated with the products i do use but on different systems as to keep the m'ware's lurkers guessing which Razor Wire is in place at any one time, which they have no idea. 8)

[vijayind]

-{ Quote: "No real surprise from my results.

My own wireless ISP to my complete astonishment one night when the wireless tower malfunctioned killing paid internet services for an entire night, finally fessed up that they were being as night support outsourced by my ISP till the A.M. and were in a totally dofferent country then the states.

It wasn't untill the next morning i got a call from the local office explaining that their pagers are supposed to alert them to any problem as this so they can reboot the tower and resume service. In the end that didn't work either, they eventually had to climb the tower and replace a critical malfunctioning componant.

The night before, the outsourcer had me trying everything in the book on my machine to receive a signal that just wasn't there to begin with.

So why is it the outsourcing bit with everyone? That has to cost extra in itself doesn't it? Seems would be more cost saving to do it themselves.

EASTER" }-

Easter,
The problem here is not necessarily with the outsourcer. I am sure he/she is a qualified professional. But most often limitations occur because the outsourcing parent company has bad business practices. Most Outsourcing firms, don't provide the same levels of tools and info to outsourced employees. They have far too many restrictions in place, not allowing outsourced tech to do even mundane tasks easily. The main reason for this being money !! They don't want to integrate and invest in a particular location or outsourcing company. They just want to save money (by making compromises) and if someone else comes along who can do the same work for 50 cents less, they will jump boat without any integration issues.

In your case the ISP had access to tower status and network health. But the outsourced technician had nothing and was practically shooting in the dark. Had the ISP given them access to network data, they would have noticed the outage and done some remote troubleshooting. Hence the ISP could have gone back to normal in less time.

But alas, for that to happen ISP has to trust Outsourcing firm >>> Outsourcing firm will only put in quality people and assets for the job, if they have a long-term assured contract.
Its a Catch-22 situation, where customer is the first person to get burnt. And the next victim is probably the tech support guy who gets his moral shattered so frequently while the real problem is the management red tape remains un-addressed and un-understood.

[TechOutsider]

After using N360, NAV, and NIS for a considerable amount of time, NOD32 AV v4 RC1 and Kaspersky IS 09 impressed me. Detection was more or less the same.