Norton 2009 Beta

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by s4u, Jul 15, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ragnarok2012

    ragnarok2012 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Posts:
    45
    With the advent of weird voodoo/shapeshifter types of malware the only good solution is prevention/entrapment/recovery (specialty anti malware; security suites; SBIE/returnil ect.)

    For a security company like symantec these challenges make streaming solutions ASAP the next necessary step to keep viable buisness wise.
     
  2. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,286
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I agree. It opens web pages slower than Avira without the webscanner enabled, and it did not allow me to receive email because of some firewall decision it made without my permission.
     
  3. CountryGuy

    CountryGuy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    139
    One other issue - Apparently they *still* don't have context (right click) scanning working for Vista 64, with no ETA. It still doesn't work in NIS 2008.

    Maybe I'm overblowing it, but if a company can't get their product working in the context menu, why the hell should I trust it for handling my computer's security?!? I don't think there's anothe major player in the security software field (who claim to work with Vista 64) that doesn't have that working.

    I had to manually adjust the scheduled task for scheduled scans for that to work in NIS2008, do a workaround for context scanning, and still don't have LiveUpdate working correctly. Now I wonder if these issues will be around in 2009.

    NOTE: Each of these issues have been presented on their forums (or via support) and have not been resolved, so its not for lack of trying!
     
  4. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    I kind of noticed that web pages load a bit slow, but I am not 100% sure. As for the firewall, that is to be expected if you let it decided automatically.

    Another thing, it's still an early beta. Problems and bugs are to be expected.
     
  5. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,286
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I let NIS 2008 decide, and zero problems with it in terms of the firewall. But, now it is different so if I decide to reinstall the 2009 beta program, I will have to interact with it.

    I am aware (and expect) beta bugs having been involved with computers since 1967 (ya I am old).
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2008
  6. 0vermind

    0vermind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Posts:
    4
    I don't understand what your talking about.. probably cause I have a newer build then the public one released but here pages are loading just fine. Is there a certain site or anything you would like me to check because I can't find this problem you are talking about.

    I noticed that, I have just forwarded this to Tim the Beta Test Coordinator.

    ----
    As long as you guys keep on coming up with bugs, suggestions, problems, and complaints I will keep forwarding them to the team and the testing community! Also, just please be aware that this is a beta and as such I can GUARANTEE you will find bugs, problems, etc. However, keep them coming.. this is great!

    Thanks for helping making Norton a great product!!
    -Mike
     
  7. Graystoke

    Graystoke Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2003
    Posts:
    1,506
    Location:
    The San Joaquin Valley, California
    I have used Avira's security suite, and up until a few days ago, NIS 2008. I agree that Avira loaded pages slightly faster then NIS 2008, but I don't see any difference between Avira and NIS 2009. Web pages open very fast on my computer with NIS 2009. I know every PC is different, but just wanted to add my 2 cents. :)
     
  8. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    Most of the time, the decrease in browsing speed is trivial at best. You lose maybe 0.5-1 sec? Maybe 2? Unless it's something like >5 sec. I wouldn't be too worried about it.
     
  9. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,642
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    Any delay greater than 1 sec is unacceptable IMHO :D
     
  10. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    you are gonna be disapointed then XD
     
  11. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,642
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    not with my current solution ;)
     
  12. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,286
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    You have to be joking. Any delay is unacceptable.
     
  13. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    avira just cant keep out of off topic threads, can it? :rolleyes:
     
  14. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    Never tried it but based on these comments it seems to be the best thing after sliced bread. :D
     
  15. iwod

    iwod Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Posts:
    708
    Nice, what about the corporate version? When will it gets updated with new engine?
     
  16. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    With high-speed internet, 0.5-1 sec is nothing at all. At least for me. Visiting web pages is not a race, so any minimal decrease in browsing speed for better security is not a bad trade-off.
     
  17. Graystoke

    Graystoke Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2003
    Posts:
    1,506
    Location:
    The San Joaquin Valley, California


    It does seem that way, doesn't it. I remember a few years ago, it was the same with a certain Russian AV who's name starts with a "K". ;) :)
     
  18. 0vermind

    0vermind Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Posts:
    4
    Agreed. I'm on Comcast Business Class at home so anything below a second delay doesn't matter to me. But I haven't even seen the delay some of you are talking about, even in the earlier builds I didn't see it.

    I felt obligated to comment on the Avira though, I used to use it a while back before I switched to Kaspersky and I liked Avira at first but I really started to hate it after a while, it was too simple and plain and had tons of false positives (for me). That was a while back so it may have improved since then, but I just don't like Avira. IMHO, after being a malware researcher in the computer industry for quite some time now.. I have realized after extensive testing that Kaspersky is the best overall in all categories (well rounded and satisfies all). That's my two cents.
     
  19. nasdaqms

    nasdaqms Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Posts:
    38
    you said it! i wonder to know how the most proctive defense is.
     
  20. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,286
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    We will have to wait to see some test results. AV vendors make claims about how good proactive detection is, but for right now according to the latest AV-Comparatives data- the top three are (in terms of proactive detection of new samples):

    1. Sophos 74%
    2. Avira 72%
    3. Trustport 64%

    all of the others were far lower in terms of % detected.

    So Symantec has a long way to go if they want to rank up there with the best.
     
  21. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    depends what kind of proactive protection norton uses. if its a HIPS it wont show in that test. since the HIPS will only detect the malware when excuted.
     
  22. Bunkhouse Buck

    Bunkhouse Buck Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    1,286
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    A HIPS test is not an ojective test since HIPS will only detect when executed- and that is subjective by definition.
     
  23. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    then again malware is harmelss until excuted.
     
  24. PcBorg

    PcBorg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Posts:
    28
    1. Sophos 74%
    2. Avira 72%
    3. Trustport 64%

    In reality its

    1. Avira with few false positives
    2. Sophos with very many false positives
    3. Trustport with very many false positives.
     
  25. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    Reality is that this thread needs to refocus back to the intended topic which is Norton 2009 Beta and not off topic posts\comments about rankings and\or the false positive track record of other AV's
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.