The Norton 2015 New Features Sound Impressive BUT: did they ever solve their Self-Protection" problem? I had been using Kaspersky since Fido was a Pup (no pun intended), but switched to THE NEW Norton. I had already renewed my subscription and was using NIS 2014 until I observed two YouTube Reviews on NIS 2014 where in the real world dangerous URL section of the review a zeroaccess rootkit was able to totally disable NIS 2014 and allowed the subsequent injection of hundreds of malware. True, one of these reviews was by a guy who is associated in a remote way to Comodo and his objectivity was questioned by members of the tin foil hat club, but the other review was by one of the most highly respected and most watched A/V reviewers on YouTube (he is a computer-tech-virus-removal Pro in RL), I forget his name and he no longer does theses reviews. NIS 2014 was immediately removed from my system and I returned to KiS 2014 as my basic anti-malware solution. For more than half a year after the release of NIS 2014 Final there were many posts every day on the Norton KIS Forum asking how to remove zeroaccess rootkits from persons using NIS 2014. One of the mega-poster-gurus on the NIS forum had to devise a special program tailored to each user's specific system and configuration for them to download to remove zeroaccess.
You are mistaken There is an option to include "other threats that are capable of harming your PC" but it does not appear to include non-malicious PUPs. The moderators of the KIS Forum also say that for legal reasons KIS does not work against PUPs
I'm simply relating how my customers perceive their security software when it doesn't keep their systems clear of problems. I've been referring to Norton products because this is a thread about their new beta and because it is the software that I see most often on my customers' machines, but I've often said that many of the mainstream suites seem unable to deal with PUPs. I think you're right that most users don't know the difference between PUPs, viruses, trojans, etc. They can however tell when their computers are being interfered with and if their security software cannot detect and fix the problem they perceive that software as failing. I'm not saying that's accurate, but the vast majority of users have a limited understanding of PC security and they are the target audience for these products.
No, I've been using NS for some time now & there's never been high CPU usage. (Only when updating as a short peek.) Are you scanning, or trying to open malware files, etc?
Victek, I hear and understand everything you said, but on this point I don't think it's an issue of mainstream suites lacking the capability of dealing with PUPs, but rather a deliberate decision not to for legal reasons. It will be interesting to follow Malwarebytes to see if they get caught up in any lawsuits for their taking an aggressive stand against PUPs Developer A contracts with Developer B to include a pre-checked option for the download of Dev A's Program whenever a customer of Dev B download's Dev B's Program. Dev A pays Dev B to do this. By some method that does not harm the Downloader's system, Dev A is able to generate income from having his program on Dev B's customer's PC. A/V Company includes a feature that prevents the download or which automatically removes Program's such as Dev A's program. Both Dev A and Dev B lose revenue. A/V Company is sued for interference with contractual relations --- or something like that. Or WhoTF is A/V Company to have the right to decide what non malicious programs the customer has downloaded onto his PC should be allowed to remain on the customer's system, if it is non-malicious --- or something like that.
I think you have just made a very solid case why Internet suites(Symantec et all) are not enough for the demands of todays users. Other main stream solutions that offer a more complete spectrum coverage. Emsisoft (opt in PUP) Eset Nod32 (opt in PUP) Even M$ are just about to move their baseline on Adware to align closer to the ones that have moved the line in favor of the end users. http://blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc/archive/2014/04/03/adware-a-new-approach.aspx Those that dont move their baseline are getting left behind and will suffer negatively for it... Looks like to me Symantec full suite needs Malwarebytes to match spectrum coverage offered by Emsisoft, Nod32 etc etc Also back awhile it was announced NPE (Norton Power Eraser) would be improved to handle PUP removal. http://techdows.com/2014/04/norton-power-eraser-unwanted-application-scan.html Whilst this in itself will be a great help for those Symantec customers that have got their computers boned by multiple PUP installs it does nothing to prevent or protect the end user from themselves or the nefarious ways that most PUP's are pushed passed the non computer savvy end user.
It's worth noting that purveyors of adware are making it increasingly more difficult to "opt out" and there are cases where people are saying that there simply isn't an option to "opt out", or the choice has been ignored during the install. I haven't experienced the latter yet, but I have installed software where I could not find the opt out link because it was intentionally made almost invisible. The only answer is for consumer action groups to take the adware companies to court and have their practices declared illegal.
Is this whole new "Norton Security" thing supposed to replace Norton AntiVirus and Norton Internet Security altogether? Meaning Norton 2015 equals Norton Security from 2015 and onwards, replacing Norton AntiVirus and Norton Internet Security? I noticed there is a "Norton Security with Backup" which I suppose will replace Norton 360? And considering they have BETA for both Windows and Mac at the same time, will these two versions finally be of equal feature set? The previous edition of Norton Internet Security for Mac was a absolute joke compared to it's Windows sibling. Or is Norton Security a new thing Symantec will offer in addition to their usual line-up? What happens with Norton AntiVirus? Has it come to an end, meaning Symantec will no longer offer any solutions for those who do not want the built-in firewall solution of Norton? I hate name shifting.. I makes things so ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ confusing..
http://community.norton.com/t5/Nort...t-Norton-2015/m-p/1156036/highlight/true#M437 Also; http://community.norton.com/t5/Nort...e-discontinued/m-p/1151262/highlight/true#M23
I do not think you will be able to use your current subscription with Norton Security. http://community.norton.com/t5/Prod...-PC-Mac-NIS-PC-Mac-N360-Standard/ba-p/1168925.
There has been a huge discussion (well, since yesterday ) going on about it: I'd really be disappointed if Symantec drops the upgrade option! I mean even the package (!) of the 2014 version says "ALWAYS UP TO DATE - automatically updates to the latest version" And besides it's not "Norton Security 1.0", but 22.0. But the situation does not seem to be clear so far.
Ok so I installed this Beta and got the 7 day trial. I then created a new account and entered the key I got in e-mail. I now have a whopping 14days. Is that what the rest of you are seeing? Thanks
You'll be able to renew for another 14 days when your current trial expires. After that you will need to sign up for a new key and another 14 day trial, which can again then be renewed a further 14 days, and so on. I hope that helps.
I have this day posted the following on the Norton Blog announcing the new product. I have yet to see the discussion on the Norton Forums mentioned above: "Having just purchased a new license for NIS 2014 on 8/15/14, I am somewhat horrified and disappointed by this announcement, accompanied by a statement by Norton that can be interpreted as Norton's making a break with it's long-standing tradition/promise/reliance inducing practice of upgrading existing licenses owner's to the latest methods of malware protection.. In many ways I can understand this change. This new edition is clearly a much more comprehensive and feature - rich version than NIS 2014 and will most likely be a more expensive product and rightly so.. However, If the new version offers any new or more refined or more effective protection methods or layers of protection that will not be made fully available to current NIS 2014 license owners, then I would consider Norton's new and totally unexpected policy to be unfair and an unethical business practice. NIS license owners have purchased their licenses with the fully justified expectation of being provided with the best and most current malware protection that Norton has developed. For the sake of Norton's Reputation among the security conscious consumer alone, I hope that current NIS license owner's expectations and justified reliance on past Norton business practices respecting receiving the latest and best Norton malware protection will be met. Sincerely stated, [I hope I am not violating any of Wilder's TOS by posting this here. I wrote it and and ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ if they claim to own my statement.] "
I would not be too surprised if they did this. I don't think they started giving upgrades of your key to the current version until about 2007. I used Norton exclusively from 1996 to 2004 and you always had to purchase the new version if you wanted to upgrade. It would be tremendously stupid for them to go the other way at this point, but again I would not be totally shocked. It would definitely cost them some users. I myself have a NIS 2014 license I have not yet activated.
Very stupid way of conducting a Beta. I reenlisted, uninstalled the Beta, Got e-mail for new code and reinstalled the newest Beta and low and behold, I still have two days left. What the hell kind of Beta is this?
Hi controler, I'm sorry your having issues with the beta. I've found you need to wait for the current subscription to expire, then uninstall / reinstall and use the new Product Key. I suggest if you have any more problems you post them here - http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-Security-Norton-Security/bd-p/norton2015PB - so that Symantec can see and help if required. Thanks.
