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

    • Oh, I did. And it's even worse than I was hoping! Besides a lot of techno-babble jargon (yes I understand 100% of it but it's still all just techno-babble) there's 2 key points that make me super-weary about even considering testing this out. -- By default, after installation, a relay is automatically set up, so you do not need to care about that. * Non-chatmail apps use email servers as a long-term message archive while chatmail clients use email servers for ephemeral instant message relay. * Supporting the full variety of classic email setups would require considerable development and maintenance efforts, and complicate making chatmail-based messaging more resilient, reliable and fast. -- Basically, the end-user device is the 'server' (relay) so there is NO ARCHIVING whatsoever because every message is necessarily ephemeral. Great for techno-paranoia (and for illicit activities preferring no tracks to cover) but terrible for everybody else. It's also ironically contradictory to engineering principles of redundancies besides the transport layers due to the explicit absence of any persistent storage. Instead of 'classic email address' retaining multi-GB messaging archives on its server, now every device must retain 100% of those storage demands. (Email messages were originally meant to be short correspondences, not the multi-MB attachments boondoggle that now exists with unlimited spam engines flooding every potential recipient.) Any device swap or reset (or loss) makes the entire message history go bye-bye forever... lest there's an off-device auto-archival "relay" mechanism that's really a separate server that holds onto all transported messages (an email server) that utilizes 'chatmail email address' identities (like an email server) and its own persistent storage archive (like an email server). But... this solution is hoping to exist alongside real-world email address identities (based on the email server relay pathway) but simply render messages in chat thread format in an ephemeral manner (with contents being encrypted, and messages auto-expiring) ... In the end, it's a chat app/experience for the Web3/P2P-at-all-costs zealots. (I have accts on all sorts of federated web3 services so I understand the technical and non-technical alike.) For any practical users, however, it's just another service to download/install, register, cross-share id cards/qr codes, but know that there's no history/archive whatsoever (by design) so no account/message recovery whatsoever... update the device, install a bummed update patch, or dare upgrade your device... all history, poof, gone. Ya gotta start everything over again like they're a brand new person.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      502
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!