Norton Internet Security 2009

I tried Norton 2009. It's really very light... Probably the lightest AV that I know...

But detection is still poor and I didn't notice changes about it.

Sorry. It's not the Symantec's time yet...

 

How can you say detection is poor? It has done real well on some of the tests. Have you actually tested the detection?

 

LOL...........detection poor. Did you see the latest AV Comparatives yet? Norton 2009 is out on top with Avira and ahead of NOD32,KAV and Avast. Also ahead of many others. Maybe you need to retract that statement and do some home work. Norton blew away F- Secure thats in your sig.

 

lets settle this, I own both and they are very much equal now. A few likes and dislikes for both for me, but both are really good. They both protect very well and are both light. I prefer KIS right now because of its antispam integration, but that is it. You have to trial both and make your own call before buying.

 

listen, im not bashing here as ive always like norton, since i can remember...

but no way, even with the new version, does norton have a 99% detection rate.

to me, its just another dodgy result.

nice to see norton improve alot with the new version however

 

Hey trjam I tried KAV 09 and it slowed my system down as well as web browsing. Also KAV 07 and 08 also slowed browsing down. Thats the only down fall I found but KIS is a very good program. My system flys with NIS 2009 though. I was going to add TF into the mix.

 

Take it up with AV Comparatives then. I guess they are liars from what you say. Sorry not arguing but why when tests come out does everybody think they are false and fudged.

 

I don't believe AV-Comparatives, or any test for that matter, reflects real world use. It does appear Symantec is improving though.

 

If you want real world test then check out this guys videos. NAV 08 did great.

http://remove-malware.com/

 

last year in august, av-comparatives did another test of on demand & Norton08 did 98.6 I think & was like 2nd, this years test did just a tiny bit better. Last year no one liked it after those test results, reports of missed trojans , etc...this year it's lighter & has pulse updates & it's the 'better than sliced bread' AV & of course it's 09 version , my question is why would a .04% increase from a year ago & new buzz words really make a better product?...I can't say... all I am saying is in Norton if is so good now why was it so bad last year? or is this all just a lot of hype for the 09 version?...I would also say that I too believe in what I refer to as 'real world results'...I don't expect to run into all the malware av-comparatives throws at these av's in one sitting & I expect it to stop perhaps one I 'may' run into. IMHO any of the quality products sold will more than likely save the day for you...sorry I'll get off my soapbox...

 

everyone is allowed their fifteen minutes on the soap box

 

Can someone tell me the processes? I can't find any remotely close to the memory usuage of any other av I've used other than nod32 2.

 

Never thought that I'd be saying this, but props to the boys (and girls) from Cupertino. I gave NIS 2009 a trial run, and was more than impressed with the features and litheness of the program. Not to mention of course the stellar numbers from AV-Comparatives. Really good protection. If I hadn't recently re-upped my AntiVir Premium sub, this would be a real consideration. Who am I kidding, it still might!

 

It wasn't 'bad' last year. Simply put, they're paying attention to what users don't want finally. The difference in the overall litheness of NIS 2009 as compared to the 2008 version is absolutely noticeable to say the least. The features that I would use are there. While I'm far from a Symantec fan boy, I have to call this one as I see it. I see it as NIS 2009 has game.

 

this is for you

 

Why ? because your chosen av can't get "these" kind of results ?

 

Yes, I'm aware of Matt's testing, and have watched each of his reviews for quite some time. NAV certainly did well.

 

That fun Brazilian guy uses F-Secure, which really is doing poorer than in previous tests (all sorts, for the matter )

 

Ok well my 15 days is almost up so I bought NIS 2009 for $70. That way there I can install it on my Mothers pc and my Aunt's pc. Early Xmas presents.

 

Just go through this link

http://shop.symantecstore.com/store...hemeID.106300/productID.107115800/pgm.5748300

You can buy at $ 50/- for three PC easily. I bought for my brother too.

 

LOL.........too late now.

 

Not sure if this 'wrong' but where I work we have 12 PCs which require a security product. Currently we're using F-Secure Client Security which is supplied and maintained by an external IT company. I fully realise and have heard my colleagues cursing that there PCs become bogged down and I know this is FS doing this. If I bought 4 licenses for NIS2009 (ie. 4x3 user 1 year = 12 PCs) is that an acceptable thing to do for a company or do you suggest the Endpoint Protection route (we have a central server which is home to F-Secure's Manager). I've got NIS2009 on my home PC and my work laptop (and just used the remaining license on my boss' laptop as he was complaining yesterday that ever since F-Secure was installed it just crawls).

Just wanted to see if I would be in breach of Symantec's terms if I was to use NIS2009 on work pcs as I realise it's a home product and is for personal use.

My only hurdle would be the IT company we have used for the last 8 years who maintain our system and are resellers for F-Secure - I guess they wouldn't be too happy if we switched.

 

Actually F-secure did well in the latest Av-test.org. As a matter of fact it did better than Norton 2009. Please refer to:

http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02

However, since Norton did well in the latest AV Comparatives test I would say right now it is a draw between Norton and F-secure.

 

I have one trivial question. Is it possible change unused Norton 360 2.0 for NIS 2009 key? I got Norton 360 2.0 bundled with external hdd.

 

Exactly. No way... The Pope, Clinton, Gates or God can say Norton detects more than 95% of te samples...

I will not believe... because I get a lot of samples every day and Norton doesn't detect more than 80% (being optimistic).

If you (all people) trust in the tests, use it and be happy. I will not.