Norton is it overrated?

[Main]

People seem to bash Norton Anitivirus alot and sometimes I can understand why when everyone say it misses viruses.

I personally feel that all AV's will miss a virus sometimes, no product will ever be full-proof.

I use Bitdefender but I've never heard of a company called softwin at all. I like the product but I feel that the interface is pretty ugly.

Anyways, NAV 2003 or Bitdender pro, which one do you think gets the edge?

Also, Since the Mcafee vs. Norton war is pretty one-sided favoring Mcafee products what do you think Norton has to do to gain back the trust of people who know more about viruses/AV's than just update and you'll be okay.

If you don't trust Norton? How or what do you think Norton should do to upgrade it's product?

[SmackDown]

All they have to do is add good unpacking engines, and they will be among the leaders again.

[Patrice]

Hi main,

actually I think NAV isn't that bad as most people say. I changed back to NAV 2003 from F-Secure a while ago and I can't complain at all. The software is very easy to use, low (!) on ressources (if I compare it to F-Secure or Kaspersky) and nevertheless provides a good protection against viruses. If you look at some threads here in this forum you will find a lot of information about NAV, not all people are against it. ;)

Best regards,

Patrice

[Madsen DK]

Some have made it a sport bashing NAV.
One of the best AVs IMO., even though i dont use it myself( yet ;D)
As Smackdown said, add a good unpacker, and it will be up there.
Regards
Ole :)
BTW read somewhere that a better unpacker was in the pipeline.
Perhaps it will be in NAV 2004.
BTW forgot to say.
Ive heard many good things about Bitdefender.

[controler]

Norton has never lost my trust and Mc affee will never gain it.

[wizard]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Madsen DK link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=0#msg61249 date=1053291093]Ive heard many good things about Bitdefender.
" }-

Especially after they supplied many pc magazines with an one year free licence for their cover cds. ;) BitDefender is a good program but IMHO it is at the moment too overrated. They do a good marketing job but if you really look into details you will find that there are still better avs on the market. :)

wizard

[Madsen DK]

Free in one year :o
Perhaps your right Wizard, Ive never really taken some time to find more out about Bitdefender.
I see , here at wilders it is ratet average.
Perhaps it marketing, cos i did hear good things about it.
Anyway i think you could do worse than Bitdefender.
Regards
Ole :)

PS. Totally agree with you Wizard. There are better AVs on the market, KAV, NAV, RAV and NOD to mention a few.

[Paul Wilders]

Ole,

-{ Quote: "I see , here at wilders it is ratet average." }-

..in comparison with other tested AVs ;).

regards.

paul

[Madsen DK]

Hi Paul.
Yes I know ;D
Regards
Ole

[Paul Wilders]

OK ;D.

regards.

paul

[Acadia]

When you're at the top of sales you are automatically wearing a Bulls Eye and people love to bash you, just look at MicroSoft. I personally believe that NAV is an excellent product but not the only one.

Acadia.

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Acadia link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=0#msg61485 date=1053358306]
...I personally believe that NAV is an excellent product but not the only one." }-

Seems a fair conclusion to me, Acadia ;)

[JimIT]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Main link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=0#msg61171 date=1053275892]
People seem to bash Norton Anitivirus alot and sometimes I can understand why when everyone say it misses viruses. " }-

It doesn't miss many! :)

-{ Quote: " quoting: Main link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=0#msg61171 date=1053275892]
Anyways, NAV 2003 or Bitdender pro, which one do you think gets the edge?" }-

Norton.

I think Norton is a great product. It takes a lot of bashing, but it's hard to dispute it's effectiveness. :)

[Uguel707]

Hello!

I'm not a virus expert, far from there, ;) but as an average customer, I am quite satisfied with it since I've been working with it for 10 months now. It doesn't take much resource consumption, had just one false positive and it works ok with my os which is xp home. I'm not saying it's the best one, they may exist many others that work great or even better. But I am satified with Norton and I think it's a good product for me.

Uguel

[Straight Shooter]

Norton...My Personal Experience...

The GOOD..
1. Excellent Support. Usually an answer from Tech Support in a couple of hours.

2. Ran very smoothly with my newer computer... Actually, it ran so smoothly I kind of missed it...LOL

3. Daily Updates.

4. A lot of help and support through the forums, especially DSL Reports

5. MUCH documentation on viruses and detailed instructions

6. Excellent Script virus protection.

7. One of the few AV's that scan both incoming and outgoing email

8. Very smooth automatic removal actions at removing or quaranteeing viruses..

The BAD...
1. It never failed to miss common viruses...Not many., and most of them were deactivated or in system restore., but over the years, I was not extremely satisfied...This was VERY confusing to me because they have an excellent Virus Bulletin record.

2. Tech support is hard to understand because some of those folks haven't quite mastered "English as a Second Language" LOL...

3. Lousy unpackers... (I heard NAV 2004 will have much better unpackers)

4. and ... Heurustics are not reknowned. LOL...

The UGLY...

1. Even with all these faults, and they aren't too severe, I may consider NAV 2004 if I see their unpackers improve.. I presently use McAfee, and Finally I have it working good. McAfee, it seems to me, has to learn how to better configure their products to work with Micorsoft products LOL.. But, in fairness, Now, after a month long struggle, I finally have it working right!

2. Symantec is rumored to use DRM, a move I consider a bit unwise.. I understand they have a right to protect their product, but the DRM scheme backfired on Intuit... I hope Symantec studies what happenned at Intuit...

3. No matter what, Nod runs flawlessly on one of my computer. I heard they will put in better or more improved unpackers.... They may or may not think they are needed. Me? I use McAfee on one of my computers because I have seen firsthand how unpackers can help find more malware...
:o

[illukka]

hi

me thinks nortons popularity largely depens on the fact that it's OEM stuff on many computer manufacturers,like dell etc.
and the brand is a very familiar one...like coca cola of avs
actually me thinks that its real time protection (auto-protect) is really good, along with script blocking, but the scanning abilities and heuristics(bloodhound) are poor!
i mean no unpackers...and very poor trojan detection added to that( i know it is not an at).just a little upx and norton is useless!!
for the same price you can get a product which has unpackers and a good trojan detection.
now i've seen norton in action for 2 years(gave my license to my dad). during that time i was seriously trojanised, if hadn't had tauscan and after that trojan hunter i would have been hacked to extinction.

[Khaine]

Norton is good, however it is slipping behiend because of its poor umpaking, poor trojan detection, simplistic interface (its great for newbies, but for power users it isn't very helpful). Hopefully 2004 will improve upon this as for several years nothing has really been added.


It is my understanding that all future Symantec products will contain DRM.

[Patrice]

Hi Khaine,

-{ Quote: " quoting: Khaine link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61733 date=1053427222]
Norton is good, however it is slipping behiend because of its poor umpaking, poor trojan detection, simplistic interface (its great for newbies, but for power users it isn't very helpful). Hopefully 2004 will improve upon this as for several years nothing has really been added." }-

Well, I would consider myself as a poweruser and I love this simplistic interface! I hate programs which have a complicated interface. All good things are easy! ;)

By the way, I would never rely on a AV-scanner to fight trojans... That's why AT-scanners were created.

Regards,

Patrice

[Madsen DK]

Kahine.
I read that Symantec has dropped DRM.

[JimIT]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Khaine link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61733 date=1053427222]
Norton is good, however it is slipping behiend because of its poor umpaking, poor trojan detection, simplistic interface (its great for newbies, but for power users it isn't very helpful). " }-

Trojan detection isn't *that* poor, imo. It's interface is one of the best there is, as far as I'm concerned.

Less is better, if you ask me. ;)

[Madsen DK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Khaine link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61733 date=1053427222]
Norton is good, however it is slipping behiend because of its poor umpaking, poor trojan detection, simplistic interface (its great for newbies, but for power users it isn't very helpful). Hopefully 2004 will improve upon this as for several years nothing has really been added.


It is my understanding that all future Symantec products will contain DRM.
" }-

Good & uncomplicated interface doesnt automatically mean bad AV ;)
Regards
Ole

[Technodrome]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Patrice link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61758 date=1053432549]

Well, I would consider myself as a poweruser and I love this simplistic interface! I hate programs which have a complicated interface. All good things are easy! ;)

" }-

Simple interface - Less control over an AV(joe van simple))
Complicated interface - More control over an AV(power User)

But in some cases I do agree with you! ;)


Technodrome

[Patrice]

Hi Technodrome,

-{ Quote: " quoting: Technodrome link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61806 date=1053448823]
Simple interface - Less control over an AV(joe van simple))
Complicated interface - More control over an AV(power User)

But in some cases I do agree with you! ;)

Technodrome
" }-

I don't see it quite the same way as you do. ;) If a program has a simple interface, it doesn't mean at all it has less control possibilities than a complicated interface. But a very good programmer would try to implement all his tools in a simple interface with a few buttons (as Norton mostly does). Actually you can study this area at the universities. It has a lot to do with psychology (work and organizational psychology). Let's say I have some knowledge about that... ;)

Best regards,

Patrice

[Technodrome]

I'd like to be asked before an av takes any action. Norton doesn't do that. It does things automatically.

But thats just me! ;)



Technodrome

[Patrice]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Technodrome link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61820 date=1053450552]
I'd like to be asked before an av takes any action. Norton doesn't do that. It does things automatically.

But thats just me! ;)



Technodrome
" }-

O.K., got your point. Nevertheless I never wanted to say with the above mentioned statement that Norton is perfect! Far from that, but let's say it's going into the right direction. After all which software is perfect? ::)

Regards,

Patrice

[Madsen DK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Technodrome link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61820 date=1053450552]
I'd like to be asked before an av takes any action. Norton doesn't do that. It does things automatically.

But thats just me! ;)



Technodrome
" }-
Tech!
I dont use NAV, but i think ive seen, that you can check a box, so NAV ask the user first, before any action is taken.
Regards
Ole

[Technodrome]

http://www.dslreports.com/r0/download/47813~cbab8c3cd3d780d2be725ac2be804622/nortonalertaccess.jpg



Technodrome

[Technodrome]

There’ve been some discussions about this over at dslr. . ;)



Technodrome

[Madsen DK]

Okay Tech.
Now i get it ;D ;D ;D
sorry :-[
Regards
Ole 8)

[Technodrome]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Patrice link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61821 date=1053450932]
Far from that, but let's say it's going into the right direction." }-
Its the easiest AV and yet very effective.

-{ Quote: "After all which software is perfect? ::)" }-
I don't think there is one...



Technodrome

[Tinribs]

I used Norton alone for over a year and never had a problem with it, it caught many a Magistr infected email in its time and was relatively easy on my pc's resources. I still recommend it to those who want a trouble free and 'forgettable' av ,.
To be honest its probably the most trouble free av I've ever used (honest) :)

[Technodrome]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Madsen DK link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61855 date=1053454751]
sorry :-[
" }-
Don't worry about it! ;)



Technodrome

[Straight Shooter]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Madsen DK link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61770 date=1053439188]
Kahine.
I read that Symantec has dropped DRM.
" }-

Do you remember where you read that? If you could provide a link I would REALLY appreciate that...

Thanks

[Madsen DK]

Hi Straight Shooter.
Perhaps i misunderstood something in a post on DSL.
Something on Intuit dropping DRM.
It was the Turbo tax issue, and somehow i related it to Symantec- doh ::)
I guess your right.
No words from Symantec yet.
Regards
Ole

[Straight Shooter]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Madsen DK link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=30#msg61917 date=1053461086]
Hi Straight Shooter.
Perhaps i misunderstood something in a post on DSL.
Something on Intuit dropping DRM.
It was the Turbo tax issue, and somehow i related it to Symantec- doh ::)
I guess your right.
No words from Symantec yet.
Regards
Ole
" }-

No problem...That's what I thought...

I'm one of those who spoke VERY LOUDLY ON THAT ISSUE at DSLR, ..if you remember ...

[Paul Wilders]

Shooter,

as for DRM: this article (http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,3998,a=39843,00.asp) might be of interest ;).

regards,

paul

[Tinribs]

Quote from link : Symantec began offering DRM-enabled, downloadable versions of the English-language Symantec Norton Antivirus software to consumers in January, although customers were not able to choose between the DRM-enabled software and non-DRM versions, according to Del Smith, senior product manager for Norton Antivirus. Smith called the pilot a "test".


:o Do I read right that its already in place and has been for months?? :-\

[Paul Wilders]

Kev,

-{ Quote: "Do I read right that its already in place and has been for months??" }-

Well, it says what is says, doesn't it? ;). In case you are a customer, you might drop them an email...

regards.

paul

[Straight Shooter]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Forum Admin link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=30#msg61946 date=1053466098]
Shooter,

as for DRM: this article (http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,3998,a=39843,00.asp) might be of interest ;).

regards,

paul
" }-

Are you kidding me? ;D LOL!
Paul, I read that article about a month ago, and it began a crazy series of posts at DSL Reports.... I run 4 personal computers at home, (Me, and I use one other, my father uses a 3rd only as a hobby, to do his home business in, as he is semi retired...)... I got upset at the time with the DRM issue, and I switched to McAfee Internet Security 5.0... for 3 reasons...
1. No DRM
2. McAfee IS 5.0 was a completely free upgrade...from NIS 2003, installed on one of my systems...
3. McAfee has very good unpackers...

I almost dumped McAfee after a 3 week struggle to get it to work right, but in fairness to McAfee, they did provide me with an updated version of their product and now it runs flawlessly.. So Now I am a very happy McAfee camper..
I also use NOD32 in my other computer, and I run AVK Pro in my father's... Admittedly, AVK Pro makes the whole computer run slowly.. when it comes time to renew, I'll probably switch to EScan or KAV or FSecure.. But that's 10 months away...LOL...I also run GAV exclusively (with the RTM) on an older laptop that constantly breaks down.. and honestly, it runs very well there...

So in finality on this, I am a STRONG Opponent of DRM..It hurt Intuit's sales, and just because of that, I hope Symantec reconsiders their actions and changes their viewpoint on DRM... I understand that Symantec wants to protect their product, but as I said before, my needs and concerns take precedence.. Besides, yes, I have to admit that a screwball like Lisa Chen having 600,000 copies of illegal NAV's isn't going to help the AV industry, but Symantec should remember that she's in jail., and the people who bought the "Stealware" may eventually become paying customers... If someone out there wants free AV software, they can use AVG or Avast...

I don't find the value of free AV software appealing anyway.. I want to support my AV companies of choice.. That way they provide timely def's, and better software... (I hope)

[Straight Shooter]

Aside from the last post I made, I have a question.. Why hasn't Norton AV ever been reviewed by Wilders? I mean, it's evidently used by a good number of people at Wilders..it's been around forever, and in spite of my personal reason why I stopped using it, it is recognized as a top notch AV.. I mean, you folks review RAV, but not Norton??? Even McAfee gets a review...

Just wondering...
;D

[Madsen DK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Straight Shooter link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=30#msg61934 date=1053463378]
-{ Quote: " quoting: Madsen DK link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=30#msg61917 date=1053461086]
Hi Straight Shooter.
Perhaps i misunderstood something in a post on DSL.
Something on Intuit dropping DRM.
It was the Turbo tax issue, and somehow i related it to Symantec- doh ::)
I guess your right.
No words from Symantec yet.
Regards
Ole
" }-

No problem...That's what I thought...

I'm one of those who spoke VERY LOUDLY ON THAT ISSUE at DSLR, ..if you remember ...

" }-

I do ;D
Regards
Ole

[Paul Wilders]

Shooter,

-{ Quote: "Why hasn't Norton AV ever been reviewed by Wilders?" }-

On our "to do list" ;).

regards.

paul

[msingle]

I'm a NAV user of many years and honestly didn't even know about any of the other AV programs like NOD and the other less well known ones until I got a little interested in security issues for some projects. Since then I've tested several others but it's still running as my resident.

Here's my take.

Pros:

Easy to use for the average user.
New definitions every day.
Great results in all the AV tests.
Great support site with tons of information.

Cons:

All the features aren't available to Win2K or XP users like me (emergency repair disk and other things).
On my slow PC which I'm having to use right now I literally can't do much of anything while it's scanning which is frustrating.

The slowing down of my PC drives me crazy sometimes but I trust it and would recommend it to others depending on their needs.

So I don't think it is overrated but I do think it is attacked, sometimes unjustly, by competitors and their followers.

My two cents.

[Khaine]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Madsen DK link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61787 date=1053444252]
-{ Quote: " quoting: Khaine link=board=24;threadid=9344;start=15#msg61733 date=1053427222]
Norton is good, however it is slipping behiend because of its poor unpaking, poor trojan detection, simplistic interface (its great for newbies, but for power users it isn't very helpful). Hopefully 2004 will improve upon this as for several years nothing has really been added.


It is my understanding that all future Symantec products will contain DRM.
" }-

Good & uncomplicated interface doesnt automatically mean bad AV ;)
Regards
Ole
" }-

When I said it had a simplistic interface, I wasn't implying that it was a bad AV (I actually use it) I just meant that for people who like to control what each app does on their pc (like me) the interface does not allow it. I think that it would be nice if it was more granular, it allowed the user to control waht it does better. However the GUI is great for people who don't know alot about computers, or those who want a no fuss AV.

I agree that you should not rely on an AV to protect against trojans, however that doesn't mean that noorton should not try and improve its trojan detecting abilities. Frankly if they used added more archive support and better unpacking ability I would be happy