Norton/Symantec = worried ?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by CloneRanger, Sep 8, 2010.

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

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    Judging by the amount of very recent, but Limited :D sponsored tests by them, i would say it seems that way.

    They must be hoping these tests will get publicised to "try" and influence the public, who don't realise the limitations of them, and therefore innocently unfairly make comparisons with other vendors.

    Who are they so worried about ? :D
     
  2. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    What are you on about? Quit the booze already.
     
  3. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,080

    I think that is not a problem just of Norton, probably all the AV paid products are not having very good times due to the amount of free AV's, and other free security products.
    Anyway most of the benefits of companies like norton, panda, karpersky, mcafee... comes their corporate line of producs, big deals with the governments, companies...
     
  4. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,561
    Norton earned a bad name years ago with bad products. The past few years, they now have an excellent product, and maybe they feel they need help getting the word out.
     
  5. begemot64

    begemot64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Posts:
    71
    Exactly - when they improve a product so much, who can blame them for marketing it. Surely this is an obvious point the OP understands?
     
  6. Rampastein

    Rampastein Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Posts:
    290
    I don't know about others, but as far as I know, at least Kaspersky's sales have been just growing over time. Norton has always been very large, most preinstalled computers sold here come with a trial of Norton (although most people I know switch that Norton trial immediately to Avast or Avira). I don't think Symantec has anything to worry about, especially since Norton is only one of their product lines.
     
  7. Pleonasm

    Pleonasm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    1,201
    The fact that Symantec demonstrates industry leadership and funds anti-malware comparative research conducted by independent organizations somehow implies that the company is worried about the future success of their products?

    To me, the exact opposite conclusion seems to be more reasonable. Symantec is highly confident in the capabilities of their product and in its ability to retain existing customers and acquire new ones. For this reason, the company is making publically available a set of comparative research findings for individuals to review.
     
  8. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,080
    And how do you explain that in the test of Dennis Technology Labs Norton has socored 100% 40/40... you can take 10 0day malware files and easily see how Norton do not score 100%. In the same way that norton gave the scripts to test the performance to passmark...

    Which kind of testing group accept the testing scripts of one of the products being tested?
     
  9. Pleonasm

    Pleonasm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Posts:
    1,201
    Are you suggesting that Symantec influenced the selection of malware chosen by Dennis Technology Labs for use within its test?

    Are you suggesting that objective performance measures (e.g., boot time, memory usage) -- consistently assessed across all tested products -- are influenced by who wrote the test script?
     
  10. pabrate

    pabrate Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Posts:
    685
    Well, sponsored results or not, in every video review I watched Norton stopped everything.
    So, really doesn't matter ..
     
  11. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,080
    1) No, and you?

    2) Why objective performance measures (e.g., boot time, memory usage) need special scripts made by Norton? Why the testing company need those scripts for those simple tests?
     
  12. TomiRed

    TomiRed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Posts:
    19
    I don't see these tests as too important, and the 100% is laughable, because before, when Nortons weren't soo good in blocking the scripts that serve malware, I could find something undetected merely by going to Google Trends, picking the most likely candidate and go to search page, say, No 26 where SEO results would start appearing on their march to the first page.

    The reasons I use Norton are:
    1) I got used to it
    2) you don't notice it's there most of the time
    3) it can be had for 25 bucks on Amazon, and upgrade is free
    4) no major malfunctions in years
    5) they are constantly getting beter, not worse
    6) no FP in my case
    7) Identity Safe :D
    :cool: Safe Web

    I myself would make a switch to MSE in no time, but I have some not-so-sophisticated people in my family who need the browser to be protected and something to be deleted without asking the person in front of the screen too many questions.
     
  13. tipo

    tipo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Posts:
    408
    Location:
    romania
    ....or the cracks, keygens, patches etc invading the internet :cool:
     
  14. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,080
    Some of the AV companies allow this "patches" to work, vlk was talking about this in a thread. If you see with Norton 2010 every single crack release was not able to work during more than 1 week.

    VLK said that they know who are using cracks, and it is in the had of the AV vendor do something or not.
     
  15. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    *Sniffs the air* I smell thread closure, lol. Anyway, are you expecting them NOT to do tests? To me it just looks like they are active, not worried. Maybe they are trying to move people away from the disaster that was Snoop Dogg too :D
     
  16. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    I hate to derail this thread, but only for a moment. You're wrong, at least with Norton 2010. I know a few people still using it, and it is still running and updating fine. The only cracks that truly ever work are keygens and, in Nortons case, the trial resets. Serial numbers are useless and are dead in the first two installs. Unless VLK is talking about these serials, I have serious doubts Avast "knows" who is using cracks. Though, you'd have to be an idiot to crack a paid software when the free version is damn near a carbon copy, as is the case with Avast's antivirus.
     
  17. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Well, that's something i'll NEVER understand. But i guess ppl are indeed that dumb...
     
  18. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Eh, I used to use cracked AVs. But heck, when you've got free ones available like MSE and Avast that are fantastic, why in the world bother?
     
  19. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,080
    You didnt understand anything.
     
  20. begemot64

    begemot64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Posts:
    71
    Beg to differ, I can take 10 zero day malware samples and easily see how NIS2011 blocked them all. And then I can take another 10. And another 10. Right up to the point were I have 124 fresh zero say samples, all released between the 5th and the 8th, and still nothing gets through (bear in mind I'm not suggesting that NIS is inpenetrable). What's your point?

    Can I ask you a question, have you used the final version of NIS2011, ever? Or did you just make up your statement without using it? Because getting NIS not to score 100%, whilst not impossible, is definitely hard. Do you have some non-anecdotal evidence? Maybe some samples that bypass it?

    I can share my 124 samples with you if you like, and you can retest them, if you doubt my words. Coming to criticise on anecdotal evidence is quite easy. Let's see you back up your words with facts.

    Even more amusing is the title of this topic. Why would one of the biggest companies in a billion-dollar industry, who have just released a hugely improved product, be worried? CloneRanger (and any others who share this opinion), have you had a look at their recent revenues and profits? I think someone here is confusing marketing strategy with worries.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2010
  21. clocks

    clocks Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,561

    Yep. I have tested Norton 2011 on 5-6 different times, probably close to 100 0 day threats, and it blocked them all. So I can easily see it going 40/40. I am not saying the software is absolutely impassable, but it is damn good.
     
  22. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Well then you spell it out for me if I can't read. You stated all Norton 2010 cracks didn't work over a week, I told you that I saw from experience that it was wrong. I'm not sure how I could have screwed that one up. You stated VLK knew who were using cracks, I said I doubted that unless it was duplicate serial numbers showing up. That was my opinion, so where did I screw up there?
     
  23. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,635
    Location:
    UK
    I don't think the average Joe will actually read these results, even less discover them through fora like this. It's only the likes of us and the industry as a whole who *may* take some interest.

    For me personally, the sponsored reports won't/don't persuade me to buy Symantec products. However confident Symantec may be in their products, seeing too many sponsored results in one day is slightly overkill in my eyes although I can appreciate the timing with the release of their newest line for 2011. That'll be marketing for you.
     
  24. begemot64

    begemot64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Posts:
    71
    Definitely. These kinds of reports should be taken with caution, in a wider context of other, more independent reports.
     
  25. lordraiden

    lordraiden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Posts:
    3,080
    I said that the companies know which users are using a cracked version.

    Of course you know more than a developer of a AV company.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.