norton internet security 2004

i am debating upgrading to norton internet security 2004
i have nav 2003 and internet security 2002 works fine
and firewall passes "shields Up" and all the new features in 2004 i have with other programs that work well
is it worth while upgrading ?
thanks
Rusty

 

Yes...

I use NIS 2004.. The unpackers in the av were strengthened, which means that NAV can now scans inside compressed files...

The Anti -Spam program that comes with it is the absolute BEST anti spam program I've seen yet...

Yes, now you need to activate NAV... (Product Activation., ie., DRM)...

Even though I am generally against DRM, NAV's activation scheme is really a lightweight.. No problems, no headaches...

I'm very happy with it...

 

While the features look/seem good, this program absolutely killed my Win2k system. I had to apply for a refund (which they promptly gave) less than 4 days after buying it. Maybe someday they will actually patch it /shrug

First off, the unpacker might sound like a good idea.. but it heavily impacts system performance, especially when you sit down for a "power-session" (heavy usage for the shortest time possible). Not to mention it's not entirely necessary, because, well, the files are packed

Then I had serious issues while defragmenting my drive or erasing freespace. The program came up with an error "Please uninstall/reinstall this product" and promptly disabled itself, leaving my system wide open. Then of course, there was the activation issue associated with the number of times I had to uninstall/reinstall

 

For NAV2004
Advantage:
- new an unpacking feature
Disadvantage:
- the new unpacking engine is not really good
- you are only allowed to install NAV2004 5 times during the licence runtime

I personally never would recommend NAV as there are far better products on the market. Ever tried NOD32? But if you are happy with Symantec products you will be happy with NAV2004 as well but not really that much "better" protected as with NAV2003.

wizard

 

My personal feelings...

Not only is the whole idea of "product activation" (PA) repulsive to me as a concept, it has caused me considerable inconvenience in the past. As far as how well Symantec's new PA scheme works, this article tells me all I need to know.

Norton defenders will say that this isn't a real problem, since only a small relative proportion of customers were affected (surely, right?), but that's probably not much consolation to those customers. And that's the same lame defense that Microsoft PA defenders used when I was disallowed from using my copy of Word 2002, for no apparent reason, and spent a ridiculous amount of time and effort (not to mention call phone time) getting it straightened out, because the PA system "was down".

As far as unpackers go, I am not impressed. I admit that I'd rather use an AV utility that gave me the option to scan inside archives than one that couldn't, but in reality, it's slow, and not particularly necessary.

 

I think it's a crying shame when A MODERATOR takes sides and says, "don't buy product x, buy product y.."
And your recommendation isn't exactly the greatest one out there, too..

But, that's MY opinion, and I'm not a moderator..LOL.

Proof, Please?

 

Surprisingly,

this is the first time since I am in this forum that a person criticises that I give my personal recomanendation on software. It's definitly no secret here that I don't like Symantec antivirus products. It's widely known that I am a big supporter of KAV same as you do for the Symantec stuff. So therefore I understand why you don't like my postings.

But the facts remain there are better products than NAV. Take NOD32 for example for speed, ITW detection and resource friendlyness or KAV for a first class unpacking engine.

Anyhow coming back to your question: NAV 2004 offers compared to NAV 2003 only some minor improvements in the unpacking engine but it's still needed to run an additional antitrojan program. Test results can be found in one of the latest tests at Rokop-Security and also in some threats in this forums a few month ago. Also extremely negative on NAV 2004 is the product activation that takes the user's free choice on how often he wants to install the product during a year.

wizard

 

Straight Shooter, let me get this straight. Are you saying that in order for a moderator's opinion NOT to be biased here at Wilders, that their recommended AV (and by implication, AT) cannot include NOD32 and TDS-3? Or that moderators shouldn't be making recommendations at all?

Norton and McAfee have been (edit) buying great product reviews anywhere and everywhere (magazines, papers, security publications) with their quid pro quo approach-- advertising dollars dictating product opinion. And yet, I don't see people go after this far more obvious symbiotic relationship with the same zeal/fervour/fanaticism that people seem to reserve for one product (NOD32) and one forum (Wilders). If you criticise the latter without even mentioning the former, you are not being morally or philosophically consistent

Wizard, I'm sorry I have to say this, but I do believe you hijacked the thread. The poster asked whether it would be worthwhile upgrading from NIS03 to 04, not for an alternate product recommendation. The recommendation of NOD32 was irrelevant in the context of the request, and it would easily give further credence to the perception that Wilders is biased towards towards NOD32, and even more importantly, against anything Norton. No offence meant, you understand?

For the record, I am a registered KAV Personal Pro user, and let's keep the discussion on track.

edited for one word which may be deemed "unsavory" - Detox

 

If I remember correctly (a big "if") NIS2002 might pass the File Sharing part of Gibson’s ShieldsUp but it fails his Common Ports scan, specifically for port 0 (again, if I am remembering this correctly). It also failed the same port 0 with the PCFlank test. Norton was aware of this and said that they were going to fix the port 0 "hole" in the 2004 version. I stopped using NIS when Norton "announced" that they were stopping all tech support for NIS2002, the version that I was using. (Norton could take a lesson on tech support from Kevin at BoClean.)

Take care,
Acadia

 

- Rusty, your first post here! Welcome to Wilders!

- If everything is working fine just the way it is, you should be repeating over and over to your self, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it..."
- After an hour or so of that, you will have the answer to your original question. If not, come on back and we'll help you out some more.

 

I recommended NOD32 years before Eset decided to have support forums overhere and even before I joined this fourm. Besides NOD32/KAV/AVK or DrWeb were just a few programs that are on my recomendation list - especially for those people who still beleave the best av programs gets delivered in a yellow box.

And the argument of being biased towards NOD32 is just not valid. I recommended it before and I will do in the future because everybody who at least understands a little bit of av programs knows that NOD32 is without a doubt one of the most innovative av products today with a top notch reputation. To recommend it has just nothing to wether Eset has a support forum here or not.

But anyhow coming back to the threat. If you just take the time to read my posting again you will find out that I answered regarding the topic. The side note regarding NOD32 was just a small hint not to see the world just only with yellow glasses.

wizard