Norton is the best Antivirus-Do you think about this?

Hi,

I've heard and seen what people say " Norton is the best Antivirus " so many times from many people. The reason is that Norton is the most trust AV in the world, Norton looks trustworthly, Symantec is the big name compaby, Norton has the best detection rate, Norton is widely used, Norton is used in every big corporate, Norton is everywhere, you will see Norton in every security forums, you will see Norton in every virus news, and if you talk about AV with your friends the first name they will recognize is Norton. This is the reasons to prove Norton is the best AV in the world.

Do you guys agree with that? I don't agree. I don't understand why almost people that I know think this way. They want to see only Norton name on their computer and think they're safe and don't even try try other AV.

My friend has an old-slow computer with expired Norton 2002 and he gets infected again and again because he cannot use Live update he must update manually and always too late. I suggest him to try avast! home edition with automatic update if he doesn't want to buy one. But he tells me that he trust Norton only Norton is the best AV and other AV is stupid. I'm sorry I can't help him because lastnight he gets infected by Beagle.AF.

Personally, I think there's no best AV. You should use the one that suits your needs.

[Dazed_and_Confused]

Originally Posted by TAP

Personally, I think there's no best AV. You should use the one that suits your needs.

Agreed. So what's your question again?

[bigc73542]

Norton is a good antivirus but there are a few other very good ones out there also. It just depends what your requirments are as to which av might suit your computer best. Some have good file scanning others have good unpackers and so on. But I agree with you that there is no one "best" antivirus.

[flyrfan111]

I have to agree with D & C, I don't see a question in your post. It seems to be a statement to me.

[bellgamin]

I have a fairly old & slow computer, but it does everything I need it to do. I have lots of programs, games, etc. plus I maintain my several websites. I can run all those excellent programs OR I can run NAV. Why? Because, if I run NAV, it uses my whole bloody CPU & half a HD for its oversized butt. That's why.

[bigc73542]

I agree norton is a large program

I'll say that there is a best anti-virus... Kaspersky. KAV usually beats the daylights out of any other AV. Very few are even close.

Norton is good but if you can't update it, it's useless. An updated Avast! is better than an old Norton.

[RejZoR]

Well,i recommend avast! and AntiVir over Norton. Norton's time has pased. Unless they'll show something radically new in NAV2005.

[nadirah]

I think symantec released a beta version of NAV 2005. Wonder what's new in it. I find NAV 2004 a terrible system resource hog already.

[Rita]

Originally Posted by TAP

Hi,

I've heard and seen what people say " Norton is the best Antivirus " so many times from many people. The reason is that Norton is the most trust AV in the world, Norton looks trustworthly, Symantec is the big name compaby, Norton has the best detection rate, Norton is widely used, Norton is used in every big corporate, Norton is everywhere, you will see Norton in every security forums, you will see Norton in every virus news, and if you talk about AV with your friends the first name they will recognize is Norton. This is the reasons to prove Norton is the best AV in the world.

Do you guys agree with that? I don't agree. I don't understand why almost people that I know think this way. They want to see only Norton name on their computer and think they're safe and don't even try try other AV.

My friend has an old-slow computer with expired Norton 2002 and he gets infected again and again because he cannot use Live update he must update manually and always too late. I suggest him to try avast! home edition with automatic update if he doesn't want to buy one. But he tells me that he trust Norton only Norton is the best AV and other AV is stupid. I'm sorry I can't help him because lastnight he gets infected by Beagle.AF.

Personally, I think there's no best AV. You should use the one that suits your needs.

Hi there
i agree with you--there all good if you keep them updated.i have norton on one computer and a free antivir on one and i like them both
Rita

[Rita]

Originally Posted by bigc73542

I agree norton is a large program

Hi Bigc
yes it is for sure-i had one program with 3 or 4 programs on it like norton ghost etc and i installed it and it crashed my computer and i had to take it to the shop where they only installed the virus part of the disk--my computer didnt have enough ram to run them all--but i have been satisfied with it since then and it updates itself every day --does good--i guess anyway lol
Rita

[Chuck57]

I used Norton av for 3 months. It came with a 3 month trial when I got this pc a year ago. When the trial was gone, so was Norton. Over the years, I've used many antivirus programs and in the past couple of years have found myself always returning to Kaspersky.

I now use Kaspersky 4.5 and, since I've finally got it set the way I like it, will stay with Kaspersky for as long as the 4.5 version is supported.

Norton is probably a good antivirus. I never had any virus problems during the few months it was on this machine, so can't comment on its effectiveness. I have a fairly powerful machine and 512RAM and still it noticeably slowed my computer down.

For me, it is Kaspersky all the way.

Norton is a bloated PIG. Slows down hard drive transfer speed. Inferior scanning speed. Plus the Liveupdate program can go bad, so you may not get new AV definition update. If this person does not want to use Avast, then he could alway remove NAV2002 including liveupdate and livereg and reload the software again.

The reason why NAV is widely known is because it comes prebundled with the Dells and HPs. Once NAV is installed, you might as well keep it, because it is very difficult to remove this c_rap. Novice users would rather fork over the subscription $ because they don't know how to completely remove NAV. Plus, they aren't aware of the many excellent free alternatives...like Avast Home. NAV is 90% marketing. BTW, I've seen many McAfee products in use at large companies.

[coppertrail]

Does anyone use CA's eTrust EZ Antivirus? It's a great product, and less intrusive than Norton. Sigs are updated almost daily, and the update process is invisible to the user. You download a trial copy here.

[Eldar]

I've used NIS2004 before, but didn't like the resources it took, as well as the non-existant support & price. After that I tried Avast, but due to my spam blocker I really had nightmares setting this up. I dumped Avast and for now I use Bitdefender SE. I'm glad to have found an antivirus, where you don't have to fiddle a lot. Sigs are updated instantly.
My advice is dump Norton, it takes over your system.
There are antivirus who do the job better & cheaper & quicker.

[lynchknot]

Norton is the best Antivirus-Do you think about this?

No, I don't think of this. Although I have used SAV corporate and think it's a decent AV.

I have used many of the well known AV's (NAV, Panda, SAV, Etrust, AVG, NOD32, ExtendiaAVK, KAV5.0, KAV 4.5 - I have settled on KAV 4.5 until they improve 5.0 - for my PC's configuration (it behaves well with other apps I use)

[SmartyX]

Originally Posted by f123

The reason why NAV is widely known is because it comes prebundled with the Dells and HPs. Once NAV is installed, you might as well keep it, because it is very difficult to remove this c_rap. Novice users would rather fork over the subscription $ because they don't know how to completely remove NAV. Plus, they aren't aware of the many excellent free alternatives...like Avast Home. NAV is 90% marketing. BTW, I've seen many McAfee products in use at large companies.

f123, I agree with you.
Avast! Home edition is a great program, and easy to use and (un)install. I recommend it to many novice computer users.
For me personally: I am very happy with McAfee, also because I have a free license, like every member of the best ISP in the Netherlands: XS4ALL.
I used NAV for nearly two years, and it gave me many conficts with other software. Haven't had any of such problems with McAfee yet.

McAfee 8 has too much advertising for my taste. The program uses active X to update the AV definition file. Version 8 does not permit a lot of personal tweakings. I guess that's probably OK for 90% of PC users. Also notice 3 to 4 McAfee startup items. However, the program it not a huge resource hog. And it does not significantly reduce the throughput speed of the hard drive. It's a solid product but I would prefer version 7.

But you still cannot beat FREE Avast Home. Avast does not negatively impact the speed of my HD. And new AV definition file is lightning fast...50K or less most of the time. Perfect for dial up users. If you practice good PC housekeeping, then the chance of a virus infection by any of these AVs is very slim.

F.

[SmartyX]

Originally Posted by f123

McAfee 8 has too much advertising for my taste...........It's a solid product but I would prefer version 7.

Lucky me > I have version 7.
They probably don't want XS4ALL members to have their latest version for free.

[xflat]

Norton has one of the best marketing departments in the history of man. I do beleive the same guy who sells cow poop in a plastic bag and calls it Organic Fertalizer is the same genius who markets Norton cuz there is no difference of what is inside the package between the two. Norton and McAfee for that matter...both cut deals with retail ooutlets/PC manufacturers etc. so they have acheived name recognition....doesn't mean their product is worth a spit. I use AntiVir and have been virus free for a long long time

[bigc73542]

Norton and mcafee may be good advertisers but they do make a good antivirus product either one is better than any free one. just go to VB and check their detection historys out. VB

[xflat]

Originally Posted by bigc73542

Norton and mcafee may be good advertisers but they do make a good antivirus product either one is better than any free one. just go to VB and check their detection historys out. VB

Having been in the IT business for over 30 years I have learned not to put significant weight with these "ratings" and pass/fail labs. Quite often they are loaded with pre-released virus scripts to be utilized during the "test"...I also noticed in your link AntiVir and AVG both received the same rating as McAfee and Norton....

[bigc73542]

mcafee 15 passes 17 fails
norton24 passes 6 fails
avg 5 passes 20 fails
antivir 2 passes 8 fails.

That is quite a difference in performance. and I also have been around computers awhile. Had my own shop for ten years until I retired.

[Pigman]

Norton is a good AV in the virus detection department - newer versions have scored constant 100%s in all categories on VB tests. On the other hand, it's bloatware...

[bigc73542]

There is no doubt that norton and to a lesser degree mcafee are bloatware.