Norton/Symantec sells out

Lol, you were the one that compared NIS 2009 to Comodo in your original post. I left Comodo out because I don't know anything about it. Regardless, yes, they could/should have kept it slim from the very start (especially in the 90s when people weren't running 4Gb, dual/quad-core processors). But, you have to admit, whether you think they need work or not, they have come a LONG way from those days. To say they haven't would just be ridiculous, I'm sorry.

Edit: You know, also, I think resource usage is a poor thing to judge a program on these days. I'm very much aware there are folks out there without the latest and greatest machines, which is fine, no one NEEDS 6Gb systems with quad cores. But, for most of the available machines today, resource usage should be a non-issue, IMHO.

 

But you see,
there are still some people who use Win 98/2000/ME/XP with the minimal system requirements.
Not everyone can afford to buy a new workstation, you know.
I still have friends who use Win 2000. And as much as possible, they want to use new updated software but won't degrade their system's performance.

Most 'good' software vendors focus on slimming their products so that it can still be compatible even in older machines with older OS.
That is why most installers are being trimmed down in size to support those systems with minimal hardware specs, with small HD and RAM capacity.

 

Oh sure, I understand that completely (still chugging along on good old XP here), I just mean that for newer systems (even if it's a couple of years old), it's not too big of an issue. And really, especially with security programs, you can probably only slim down so much and still keep features. You could have a "bare-bones" program that only does the one thing, but by the time you add in other products to cover the needs that bare-bones product doesn't cover, you may be running into resource issues anyway.

 

Symantec dropped support for 2k in their 2007 product line.

 

I know.
And most Win 98/2000 users do not appreciate that, especially if they are long-time Norton users.

Anyways, I still don't see a reason why Norton needs to include a Norton toolbar w/ ASK functionality in their products, besides trying to increase their revenue even more.

 

I have to disagree also. Their 2009 products are massively improved. I'm running 360 v3 now, and it installs in something like 40 seconds. Compare that to prior version, no contest. The impact on the system overall is also much much much lighter, no contest again. It's as if I'm running Avira now or something similarly light. Features are all still there too. I think they did indeed slim things down hugely and tighten things up, and did a great job of it.

What exactly are you calling "bloated" in the 2009 products? In what way is this bloated? If it performs fantastically, as it does, then what bloat are you possibly referring to?

 

1) Symantec suggests using older/legacy versions of NAV, which are still updated.
2) If it was Google, would that be better? FF comes with a Google search box ... among with a multitude of other search engines.

 

Like I said previously..
It is perfectly understandable for Firefox or any other FREEWARE/OPEN SOURCE programs to come with toolbars. It's a major source of their revenue.

But Norton? C'mon! They have the majority of the market share in AV industry.
They have all the revenue they could ever want. So, why the need to add the toolbar?

It IS a sell-out, as clear as day.
And I, for one, will not feed the money-hungry corporates with my hard-earned cash.

 

What would be "better" would be the choice to opt-out. The Google toolbar is bundled with many apps, but it is always possible to opt-out during the install. To my knowledge they have never engaged in deceptive distribution practices, and (based on what I've read) ask.com definitely has.

 

arghhhhhhhhhhh got this update and what a mess. slows down much more than before and it checks every site no matter if i want to or not.. this sucks plain and simple. nortons is gone. and i bough up a ton of lic so i had extras. now to find something else. nis2009 WAS imo a great program. and ^^^ there is no opt out its installed if you like it or not

 

From the other "Support gone rogue" thread:

I haven't got this update yet.
Be aware, there is NO OPT OUT for the ask.com install
There is asyet no posting anywhere I can find that describes how to uninstall this pita.
There is apparently only symantec's "off" button in the Norton Toolbar settings.

I am unsure of the un/install of ask.com as search engine option or Norton's 'Safe Search" engine as option and if you use the ( heh heh ) 'safe search' as option, what if anything goes to Ask.com ??

Really, Symantec have outdone themselves
Installing all this unasked for stuff in IE and FF
( another unasked for install in FF options )
regards.

 

Of course they do - and sincere thanks to the ever-decreasing number of vendors who persist in providing good software for such machines - some even for free!

Dream on my friend.
Symantec hasn't yet got a cent of my money (and probably never will!), but no discredit where discredit isn't due.
Sure some 'bloatees' are reforming their their 'evil ways', and in this Symantec might even be seen to have led the charge, but this has nothing to do with a perceived need to satisfy the needs of "older machines" with "minimal hardware specs". Sounds to me like a wishful-thinking sentimental folk-tale.

 

Cough... email is correct. USE IT!

Got an email from a SR VP at Symantec who refuses to acknlowledge the issue and insists this feature is needed and wanted and it's OK that there is no way to uninstall it.

 

I just got hold of some info that Webroot Spysweeper will no longer add Ask.com Toolbar in their installers.
Good riddance! I hope Symantec follows by this example.

 

I'll believe that when I 'see' that.

In a certain version 6 build x no ask toolbar was present.
But in the latest version/build it is back.

I'm not buying that 'info'.

 

Doesn't Symantec also own PCTools ThreatFire?

Norton went to the rubbish bin 4 me back on Windows 98 and never once was considered by me again. A real American AV heritage that will go down in history with a legacy to look back on one day.

 

Yes, Symantec owns PCTools.

So far, there are no major issues with regards with PCTools except a few software conflicts.

 

Well it seems all the complaints people were having about Norton Safe Search being supposedly bundled with an Ask.com toolbar is being pulled back by Symantec.

Read the comment from Symantec's Senior Vice President: HERE.

I believe this will make many people happy...

 

I doubt it, nothing is stopping them from forwarding browsing habbits to yahoo, and that's why the deal is probably still active.

 

Yahoo? Ask.com you mean?

 

Good. No ask code. Well, that makes a difference, somewhat. I think that Ask wanted Symantec as an ally so their products wouldn't be classified as malware/spyware by the largest security software vendor in the world in terms of market share. McAfee, which controls a formidable market share, already classifies the ask toolbar as malicious.

 

My opinion comes to this conclusion.

First off it's a long hike to ever catch Google's audience.

On the other hand, ASK is going about it in completely the wrong way. They should fashion a noteworthy set of servers, a competitive conscientious web site and Search Engine Page, and work at building a comprehensive database first before soliciting commercial software makers to add their ASK toolbar to security programs. This is been tried before and failed miserably.

You have to learn to crawl before you can walk upright with some balance IMHO.

Am i wrong in this assumption? If so please correct me or offer your alternatives.