Norton Account.

Thanks superssjdan...an expert and Guru's feedback!

Cheers,
Herve

 

Prevx was and still is compatible with other AV's as it was designed to also! So they try as hard as they can to be compatiable with other AV's with WSA in the same way!

TH

 

One of the most important things to remember is that "Compatible with other AVs" means WSA tries very hard to stay out of the way. Like a submissive cat that hides in the shadows and is there to catch all the mice the aggressive cat misses.

Compatibility does not work in all directions though. It's entirely possible for the "aggressive cat" to intentionally go hunting for the submissive cat and get into a fight, or to freak out and die when i finds a cat hair on its food bowl that doesn't belong to it. Just because WSA works very hard to play nice doesn't mean everybody else can't work hard, or secretly, to intentionally screw up. Then they can just blame it on the "Don't run two at a time!".

From a business standpoint, not allowing them to be running two at a time, even when one is submissive and tries to be compatible, makes complete sense. If the average person has SomeAV and WSA, and twice the other AV misses something WSA catches, that average person will be very likely to drop SomeAV and just keep WSA. The rules of AV say that this is going to happen at one time or another, so companies don't normally want to take that chance. So it's perfectly reasonable to expect that other AV vendors will constantly try to make changes that will cause compatibility issues.

Consider this, "IE9 Crashes when I try to use Norton Toolbar to access stuff when I have WSA installed." Why do people go and say "It's WSA's fault! Joe has to fix it!"? It seems to me that -NORTON- is not only the ones with the Toolbar crashing IE, but also completely unwilling to fix it despite the fact that WSA is a highly compatible system.

Norton should get used to people wanting to run WSA alongside it, and fix their junk. Otherwise, like thousands of people are doing, more will end up seeing Norton as breaking for no good reason and making excuses about it, so they will go with WSA alone or WSA and something that DOESN'T break. After all.... If WSA is going out of its way to stay out of the way and Norton is still picking a fight and dying over imagined offenses, that doesn't reflect well on Norton. Is their stuff so flaky that an intentionally polite thing still gives it problems after a Norton change?

 

Personally i actually prefer WSA to be used by itself.I love to test things and tinker,i am that way by nature.I will try combos just to say i tried them..that way i am not lying when i say a particular combo worked in my environment.I have 1 million percent trust in WSA-C and as such am using it along with MBAM and windows firewall.I've removed Norton now that i've let it run for a bit.Does run fairly smoothly along with WSA.Had it's moments...nothing ever froze..just a tad sluggish from time to time.Joe and his team have done one heck of a job on WSA and i am fully confident in it's ability to keep one safe in a non layered format running on it's own.I am very much looking forward to continued improvement on an already fantastic product.Joe and his team have really worked harder than most people realize in designing this program from scratch.There is nothing quite like it in the market today.I would like to take this moment to thank Joe and his team for all their hard work.They've made me a believer.

 

Thank you!