Norton AntiVirus 2004 - To bin or not to bin?

[edgy_reggie]

I have a brand new and boxed copy of "The world's most trusted antivirus solution", which I have been reluctant to install on my PC, since reading fierce criticism and horror stories from users in the Online section of The Guardian.
Although I haven't read all the threads, I notice some of the contributors here have also had problems with Norton. My question is, would a free antivirus (AVG), be a better option, or is NAV 2004 safe? I have a pretty basic set-up; IBM Aptiva, Win98, Zone Alarm, Pop-Up Stopper, Spybot S&D, Outlook Express, 160 MB RAM.
Any guidance/opinions will be appreciated.

[login]

Are you asking if AVG is better than NAV? Not by a long shot IMO. Most free anti-viruses are good basic protection but the saying 'you get what you pay for' is definitely applicable here. NAV is a good solid anti-virus. Certain people may feel other anti-viruses are better but that's their opinion. I'm would go with NAV over any free anti-virus.

[Trans]

-{ Quote: "I have a brand new and boxed copy of "The world's most trusted antivirus solution", which I have been reluctant to install on my PC, since reading fierce criticism and horror stories from users in the Online section of The Guardian.
" }-
If I were you I would be reluctant to install it too...;D
In reality you can hear same stories for many other AVs and not only Norton.

I have tried (many times) KAV,NOD,F-PROT,Avast,AVG,eTrust,DrWeb and I didn't have a single problem installing,uninstalling or updating them.
A simple gold rule :
You must have no trace of another AV in your system when you install and configure a new one.

Just some AVs (and Norton is one of them) can slow you down even after tweaking them for best performance.
:)

[dog]

-{ Quote: "I have a brand new and boxed copy of "The world's most trusted antivirus solution", which I have been reluctant to install on my PC, since reading fierce criticism and horror stories from users in the Online section of The Guardian.
" }-

Hi Reggie, :)

I agree that there seems to be alot of posts regarding troubles with Norton. But people are usually more willing to complain rather than compliment. Know what I mean. All software has problems etc., I doubt any are perfect. But as a user of Norton AV '02, '03, '04, I haven't had any major problems, and it's safe guarded my system effectively, I'm pleased with it. The only problem I had was somehow apart of the program got corrupted, I simply uninstalled and reinstalled, updated and have never had a problem other than that.

I'm sure everyone will agree that you're better off with Nortan rather than a free AV, regardless of their opinion of Symantec.

HTH, :)

dog - *puppy*

[Blackcat]

NAV would generally be a much better option as a primary scanner than any free AV, but not on your machine.

It takes up a lot of resources and if you manage a good install the running Norton AV monitor will drag your machine to its knees.

But you can still use NAV. Use it as a backup scanner, by choosing a custom install and deselecting the NAV Monitor. Then you can use another lightweight (free) AV as your main scanner.

My only recent experience of NAV was as part of the NIS 2004 suite which came as a 6 month trial on my daughter's new laptop. She had difficulty with Live Update and the Monitor would not load properly at times, so I uninstalled and replaced it with another program.

Everyone has a horror story about what a particular AV did to their computer but whether Norton will run well on yours, only you can find out.

But I would recommend using it only as a backup scanner and I would recommend trying to monitor its install. Then, if you do have problems then you can try and uninstall ALL of its entries as Norton does seem to bury deep into the system.

Try checking the install with Total Uninstall- a free program at http://www.geocities.com/ggmartau

Symantec also have various tools on their main site for the removal of their products.

http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/nav.nsf/docid/2003090415405206?OpenDocument&ExpandSection=1&Src=#_Section1

Suitable AV programs for your older computer include either free ones ( AVG or AntiVir) or commercial software ( Dr Web, F-Prot for Windows, KAV 5 or NOD).

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=28952

Those of us with low spec machines need to choose our main AV with care.

Good Luck.

[BlueZannetti]

Even though I had installed NAV2004 but ultimately removed it from my PC's due to some stability issues, I would still recommend that you go with NAV, at least until you demonstrate there are problems with it on your system.

It is a decent product. There are more horror stories about it simply because there are a lot more copies of it floating around - it's called market share.

It can be a bit of a resource hog, but whether you see this really depends on the entire set of processes that you generally run on the machine. My only concern with respect to resources is that you also run ZoneAlarm - the latest version of ZA is also a bit of drain on a PC and - as Blackcat notes - you may drag your system to its knees - but I'd verify this by direct testing rather than idle speculation (my own included).

Blue

[edgy_reggie]

Hmmmm....thanks for the imput, guys, but I'm still no clearer. As I said, I am using a very old (1998) PC, Pentium r processor (MMX?), with dial-up internet access. I've used Zone Alarm, Spybot S&D and Pop-up Stopper for a while, regularly delete temp files and cookies, and use the Trend Micro Housecall online virus scan once a week or so.
Perhaps I've been lucky so far, but until a dose of CoolWebSearch, which your excellent spyware fighter, Nick from Virginia, helped me clear, there have been few problems that I have not been able to deal with.
The last thing I want is to slow down my PC further, and as a relative newbie, Blackcat's warning, that NAV may "Drag (my) system to its knees", fills me with dread!!!
Anyone out there with a similarly low spec set up, who enjoys problem-free NAV usage?

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "

Everyone has a horror story about what a particular AV did to their computer but whether Norton will run well on yours, only you can find out.
" }-


Since you have a new, shiny NAV ready to use, I would give it a go. Everyone's system is unique and if you have a fairly 'clean' system, NAV 2004 as a primary scanner may be okay on YOUR system. If you do proceed take note of some of the recommendations on installing the program that I gave in my previous post.

While acknowledging that all systems are unique, I would not state that my original comments were 'idle speculation' as I have seen current versions of NAV slow down much higher spec computers than yours.

I did not mean to put you off in my initial post, but better safe than sorry.

Report back with your findings if you decide to go ahead.

[Arin]

if you are running a 199MHz Pentium system with 160MB RAM with Windows 98 memory management i'd suggest that you forget about NAV2004 and think about something like F-Prot. this way you'll get better protection minus the memory hogging. oh by the way F-Prot is not free. but you can use a free AV like AntiVir PE which is better than AVG and use the DOS version of F-Prot which is free. so in this way you'll have AntiVir PE as on-access and on-demand scanner and F-Prot as on-demand scanner. its a pretty good defense. if your surfing habit is good then i don't see any problem with it.