Norton AntiVirus 2008 Review


Recommended Posts

Well, after reading mixed opinions of Norton AntiVirus 2008, I decided to take the plunge and give it a go to form my own opinion. Below is my impression after using it for 2 hours; I will update this post after using it for 1 and 2 weeks.

First Impressions

Installation

The installer came in at about 57MB, which I felt wasn't too bad, but could be better. The installer was very straight-forward and user-friendly, and the only thing I saw that I didn't really like was the fact that the 15 day trial offered to install Yahoo! Toolbar. I spotted this with the help of another review and unticked it.

The installer had a very clever feature which scanned the computer before installing the application. It is up to the end-user whether this occurs, however. Installation was quite quick, but it felt like the computer was lagging slightly whilst the setup program was running. I didn't find this an issue as the installation wasn't too long.

Straight after installation, I was asked whether to continue with the 15 day trial or enter a product key. After proceeding with the 15 day trial, I was prompted to create a Norton Account, which I felt to be unnecessary due to the fact that I was simply using the trial version. I proceeded with it anyway, and created a Norton Account. One thing I noticed that was really awesome was the fact that a sidebar gadget is installed for Vista users, telling you the current state of protection for your computer.

Scanning

The program started very quickly, consuming only 3MB of RAM when idle. When trying out the Quick Scan functionality, the memory usage spiked to about 60MB total, which I feel is very high. Upon completion of the scan, memory usage went back down to about 6MB.

When the application was idle, I barely noticed it running; in fact, whilst it was running a quick scan, the memory usage didn't really cripple computer performance substantally.

Previously, I had been using Avira AntiVir, and Norton AntiVirus seems to be a bit more suspicious of cookies and the like, detecting tracking cookies that AntiVir hadn't. These cookies, however, were those from advertising such as IntelliTXT on the Neowin home page.

The scanner was quite fast, sporting a background scan feature that is designed to reduce resource consumption. It seems to do this job very well.

Interface

The user interface is fantastic, and doesn't sport a custom window border when in Vista (I'm not sure about other operating environments), instead opting for glass. The drawing of images did, at times, feel a bit laggy, but this may have been due to the fact that it was the first time it was running and accessing particular portions of the program.

It is very easy to observe at a glance how secure the computer is, and what Norton AntiVirus is protecting. This, I feel, is something that the average computer user will definately appreciate.

The Network Map feature is very useful for an at-a-glance view of all computers on the current network. It doesn't really get into any in-depth information, but is useful for general information such as IP addresses and even allows you to configure remote access to select Norton products on the aforementioned computers.

Finally, the user interface ties in with Vista quite well, with the quick links at the side of the window, helping with continuity within the OS.

Verdict

Although the memory usage is quite high when scanning, I feel that Norton AntiVirus 2008 is a much needed improvement to this product line. It is much more responsive and very user-friendly, and one will barely notice it is there when idle. I would definately buy this and plan to do so.

One Week Later (Well, just under two weeks ;))

Well, I am quite surprised at the performance of Norton AntiVirus 2008. I have barely noticed that it has been there over the time I have been using it, and the scans have been very good and unobtrusive.

As previously mentioned, it seems to be very sensitive with its scanning (which may not necessarily be a bad thing), picking up tracking cookies and the like in scans. It appears to have scheduled a scan at a set time (as most antivirus applications if not all do) and lets me know very clearly what is wrong, providing me with total control over what to do with the problem (such as fix, ignore, quarantine, etc). I've heard quite a few gripes about previous versions of Norton AntiVirus not actually fixing a problem when prompted by the user. I have to say that this appears to have been fixed and, in my books, Norton AntiVirus has redeemed itself. I would most certainly recommend this to others when looking for an antivirus solution.

Two Weeks Later

Norton AntiVirus has been running very well and I haven't had any slow downs at all. If anyone is saying anything negative about Norton AntiVirus, I highly recommend that they try this new version; it is very likely to change their opinion for the better.

(Sorry for the late update)

Smctainsh

post-78416-1201003791_thumb.png

post-78416-1201003807.png

Edited by smctainsh
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/612754-norton-antivirus-2008-review/
Share on other sites

Norton AntiVirus 2008 is a great product. All the previous issues are fixed.

It doesn't 'hog' your system or anything (Yes, the previous products DID, but this has now been fixed).

Though I still maintain NIS is a terrible product.

I completely distrusted anything with the Norton brand on it until I downloaded the trial and tried it - as you can see from the review, it has changed my view considerably.

Smctainsh

Maybe ill try it out when my Kaspersky internet security licence expire next year :) i only got it for 20$ :p

What was wrong with the Norton 2003 interface. They should have just kept that. Now they just try to make it so simple to find stuff they buried the information. Probably one of those interfaces that is easy for idiots but confusing to the experts. I don't know if it has changed but in the latest version of Norton, but it use to take a little looking to find out how much time was left on the subscription. Where as the earlier versions had it right there on the front of the application right next to when the latest definitions where installed.

What was wrong with the Norton 2003 interface. They should have just kept that. Now they just try to make it so simple to find stuff they buried the information. Probably one of those interfaces that is easy for idiots but confusing to the experts. I don't know if it has changed but in the latest version of Norton, but it use to take a little looking to find out how much time was left on the subscription. Where as the earlier versions had it right there on the front of the application right next to when the latest definitions where installed.

The time remaining in your subscription is in a very logical location; you just click on the 'Norton AntiVirus' tab in the main window, and presto, it tells you how long you have left in your subscription in bold.

Smctainsh

I have to be blunt, it sucks. I just went to an account that had this on 10 of the 60 workstations they have at this location. 5 of these 10 computers were heavily infested on average of 18 to 50 viruses. It was fully up to date and **** poor.

When Symantec first launched their applications they were "incredible". Sadly enough they obtained a high reputation and didn't live up to it causing many users, including myself, grabbing for alternatives. I ended up using AVG Free. A free anti-virus program which did not only deliver but it was free as well.

Nonetheless, good review but some screenshots would be nice.

I have to be blunt, it sucks. I just went to an account that had this on 10 of the 60 workstations they have at this location. 5 of these 10 computers were heavily infested on average of 18 to 50 viruses. It was fully up to date and **** poor.

I don't care what virus program you have, if "you" or the customer are stupid enough, you can get a computer infected with any AV program on there if it is a Windows OS..

Sorry, but NOD32 all the way. I dont think i'd ever go back to Norton, nor do I recommend it to any of my customers anymore.

It just doesn't stack up. :/

To each their own. :D I used to think that Norton products weren't very good at all, and then I tried Norton AntiVirus 2008; it's fantastic. :)

I've updated the original review with my opinions after one week of use and included some screenshots as requested.

Smctainsh

All I want from an anti-virus package is something which runs quietly, does it's job and keeps itself updated without much intervention. As well as that, I want something that isn't going to affect the PC's performace. Unfortunately for Norton, it doesn't tick all of those boxes. Plus, the GUI is over the top.

(N)

umm

ok lets get something str8

NORTON SUX

having Norton is like not haveing antivirus at all

if you want a go0d one

get NOD32

I get the feeling you didn't even bother to read my review, and simply saw "Norton AntiVirus" in the title and jumped to conclusions. I highly recommend that you try this latest release; saying that it is like "not having antivirus at all" is completely incorrect (at least for this version anyway).

Smctainsh

I have used many systems with the new Norton AntiVirus, and although its a slight improvment - I found it did slow down to typical "Norton Speeds" over a period of 3/4 weeks. The computer was barely usable. After the good old Norton Remover tool uninstalled it, NOD32 went on and there were no performance problems.

I used to use Norton myself until about 2002, where it became horrible and I started searching for alternatives.

Can you test them by downloading some infected files and see if Norton picks it up.

And how can I obtain this trial?

I'll have a go at seeing how well it does at picking up infected files when I get some free time. You can get the trial from Symantec's website.

Smctainsh

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      71
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!