I hate Norton Antivirus.

[moeburn]

A typical checkup with Norton Antivirus:

"4 viruses have been detected"

*clicks 'Repair Files'*

"Repair failed. Would you like to quarantine?"

*clicks 'Quarantine files'*

"Quarantine failed. Would you like to delete?"

*clicks 'Delete files'*

"Delete failed. Would you like to ignore?"

*goes off in search of files. First two are deleted by selecting them and pressing the 'delete' key on my keyboard. Second two don't exist.*

Is there something better than this? Please don't tell me to use AVG, I've tried it and I don't like its instability.

[mlerner]

It's about time someone realizes Norton Anti-virus sucks..

[+virtorio MVC]

I have been recently stuck using Norton AntiVirus 2003 again (for money related reasons). Its terrible. Nod32 and Kaspersky and sooo much better.

[JustGeorge]

Surely Symantec knows the sub-par performance of NAV, why don't they pretty up the GUI and use the SAV engine in NAV?

[giga Veteran]

Another vote for NOD32. And for the people who are saying norton corp: did you guys actually pay that much for it? I dont think I can justify spending that much on antivirus.

[sfalcon]

What's the latest version of Symantec's AV, and can an end user buy it?

[mgleason007]

Surely Symantec knows the sub-par performance of NAV, why don't they pretty up the GUI and use the SAV engine in NAV?

It's not just the sucky-ass engine; the piece of crap takes over your recycle bin and uses waaaaay too many system resources.

[TGD]

Norton uses enough system resources that the average PC will not have a problem with it. You people go on about it like it takes up ALL of your RAM. We're looking at about 40mb, tops.

And the recycle bin thing can be disabled. People honestly give Symantec too much ****. Of COURSE they're going to try and improve the GUI, they target their software at normal users. Making it simple to use is important. But the program still does it's job as well as any other, and I think it's the best when it actually comes to dealing with an infected PC.

[AppleDave Veteran]

go into safe mode load up NAV and do a scan that should fix it.

[mgleason007]

Norton uses enough system resources that the average PC will not have a problem with it. You people go on about it like it takes up ALL of your RAM. We're looking at about 40mb, tops.

And the recycle bin thing can be disabled. People honestly give Symantec too much ****. Of COURSE they're going to try and improve the GUI, they target their software at normal users. Making it simple to use is important. But the program still does it's job as well as any other, and I think it's the best when it actually comes to dealing with an infected PC.

Considering NOD uses half of that, and has a better detection rate, it's too much. People go on like it's no big deal if you have 5 apps running in the background that take up 40MB's. I don't want all of that **** going on when I'm trying to play Battlefield Vietnam or UT2004 or DOOM 3 or whatever. With NOD I can actually keep my antivirus running while playing a game. And BTW what's your definition of an "average" PC? Considering the amount of PC's I've worked on over the past couple years, and knowing that most of those are still in use as primary systems, I would consider mine slightly above average (nowhere near a top-of-the-line obviously).

How do you disable the stupid recycle bin thing? I've looked high and low. You shouldn't even have to deal with it... it should be something you can turn ON, not off.

[JustGeorge]

Norton uses enough system resources that the average PC will not have a problem with it. You people go on about it like it takes up ALL of your RAM. We're looking at about 40mb, tops.

And the recycle bin thing can be disabled. People honestly give Symantec too much ****. Of COURSE they're going to try and improve the GUI, they target their software at normal users. Making it simple to use is important. But the program still does it's job as well as any other, and I think it's the best when it actually comes to dealing with an infected PC.

Thats still 40 meg Ram I could be using for other things. NAV dealing with viruses as well as the next AV product is highly questionable. One member of this forum said awhile back "Lots of AV products are good at detecting viruses, but its what it does with the virus after detection thats separates a good AV product from a bad one" Norton products have a long standing reputation for screwing up more than they fix. Anything from poor virus removal, intrusive behavior, resource hogging or leaving a damn mess in the registry from P*ss poor un-installations. SAV is so much better although its not perfect. I brought a computer home from work that I was sure had a virus. Ran a virus sweep with the already installed SAV 8.1 corp. It found nothing. I disabled SAV and loaded AVG Free Edition and ran another sweep. AVG Free found 3 viruses that SAV didn't detect. At some point, Norton AV must've been good and made a household name for itself. I evidently came in at the end of the joy ride because It doesn't impress me one bit.

[boogerjones]

LOL you just made my day, Symantec and Norton are the same company :whistle:  :laugh:

Yes, they're the same company, but he was talking about the respective antivirus products. :o Symantec Antivirus and Norton Antivirus are two very different products. And yes, SAV is much better than NAV, though much too expensive for the regular consumer to buy.

[PureEdit]

A typical checkup with Norton Antivirus:

"4 viruses have been detected"

*clicks 'Repair Files'*

"Repair failed. Would you like to quarantine?"

*clicks 'Quarantine files'*

"Quarantine failed. Would you like to delete?"

*clicks 'Delete files'*

"Delete failed. Would you like to ignore?"

*goes off in search of files. First two are deleted by selecting them and pressing the 'delete' key on my keyboard. Second two don't exist.*

Is there something better than this? Please don't tell me to use AVG, I've tried it and I don't like its instability.

Yep, it sucks.

I was fixing a infection for a client and had better luck deleting the files manually.

[prz]

Surely Symantec knows the sub-par performance of NAV, why don't they pretty up the GUI and use the SAV engine in NAV?

Answer:

1) They use complete diffrent source does; why would they change it if they're the number 1 antivirus software (I am NOT implying I think it's good, I hate Symantecs' software)

2) NAVs' interace is all in ActiveX (which is horribly vulnerable) which explains a lot of resource usage

Also, The reason Symantec is so popular is because they made a good antivirus for DOS back in the day, and ever since people has bought from them. Simple as that.

[cork1958]

Me too! Removed 3 copies I had in favor of Kaspersky within the last 2 months.

[WigglesTheFish]

i was using mcaffee 7.0 corporate on my laptop but got rid of it because the university i got it through so severly limited what i could change about it that it was more a virus and a real virus would have been... anyways the laptop came with nav 2004 and i slapped it on, it's okay except for the fact it is chewing up 55-75MBs of memory, this laptop only has 512 total so i am definately hunting a new one i just want it to be really good if i going to pay for it...

[Deryck]

But Symantec Antivirus (makers of Norton products) is for business and what you actually pay for is for many licenses instead of 1. Norton is more for the home user. with a more "user-friendly" interface.

How does everyone else on this forum get Symantec Antivirus?

[lawtai]

i get the corp version through my school since it distributes the corp version to all its students.

[Hurmoth]

I have SAV through the company I work for, but I uninstalled it and put F-Prot on it!

[Chester-]

i used almost every antivirus (yes, norton sucks) but i love Panda antivirus, a must try. i had no problems since i swiched to panda, i had norton before and a did a scan with panda after i removed it, and guess what 4 viruses...

Panda Webpage (i use Platinum Internet Security btw it removes spyware, daliups, also has a spam filter and a firewall but i dont use them)

:rolleyes:

[Hurmoth]

i used almost every antivirus (yes, norton sucks) but i love Panda antivirus, a must try. i had no problems since i swiched to panda, i had norton before and a did a scan with panda after i removed it, and guess what 4 viruses...

Panda Webpage (i use  Platinum Internet Security btw it removes spyware, daliups, also has a spam filter and a firewall but i dont use them)

:rolleyes:

I have never used Panda, but it does have a nice GUI!

[EDIT] Also, welcome to Neowin Chester!

Edited August 12, 2004 by Hurmoth

[moeburn]

I have to say, Symantec AV has the best interface I have ever seen; clean and simple.

No, Symantec and Norton are not the same "product", although they are the same company.

Either way, I just did a test. And I must say I was severely disappointed in SAV. I created their test-virus file, and it detected it. I compressed it with UPX, and it did NOT detect it. Is there any AV that can detect compressed executables?

[Patrick_]

We're looking at about 40mb, tops.

LOL, tops? Isn't that like, extremely high for something thats supposed to be running in the background? That's extremely high amount of RAM. That's the difference between a nice game of UT2K4 or one that is not because your AV is taking up all your RAM...

Avast is just as good, if not better, and never goes over 13MB for me. (And that's with P2P shield, IM shield, Mail and Outlook shield enabled)

[+Steve B Subscriber²]

A typical checkup with Norton Antivirus:

"4 viruses have been detected"

*clicks 'Repair Files'*

"Repair failed. Would you like to quarantine?"

*clicks 'Quarantine files'*

"Quarantine failed. Would you like to delete?"

*clicks 'Delete files'*

"Delete failed. Would you like to ignore?"

*goes off in search of files. First two are deleted by selecting them and pressing the 'delete' key on my keyboard. Second two don't exist.*

Is there something better than this? Please don't tell me to use AVG, I've tried it and I don't like its instability.

The best thing to do is run AV when in safe mode. Give that a try.

[moeburn]

LOL, tops? Isn't that like, extremely high for something thats supposed to be running in the background? That's extremely high amount of RAM. That's the difference between a nice game of UT2K4 or one that is not because your AV is taking up all your RAM...

Avast is just as good, if not better, and never goes over 13MB for me. (And that's with P2P shield, IM shield, Mail and Outlook shield enabled)

This is why we have memory management on XP.

Besides, auto protect is silly and irritating. A simple nightly scheduled scan is good enough for me.

[Mister Lamar]

I used McAffee on Windows ME, back in 2000. Switched to Norton 2000, and was hooked on the ease of using it. The Live Update feature was a hassle, now I know how to turn it off, its good. I tried Panda, didn't like it. Also tried to use the new version of McAffee, but im in Love with Nortorn and its firewall.