Sponsored Links

What's Norton 360 doing?

Norton is no longer a resource hog.

They are rubbish, frankly.

Just had to sort out yet more problems caused by 2008! :mad:

That's strange, I've used Norton Internet Security 2008 & 2009 for two years, without a single glitch. NIS 2009 uses very little resources (there is a resource meter supplied in the programme). You must have had a messed up installation, or other conflict on your PC.

I've had 13 years' experience of many different antiviruses/security suites (I've tried just about all of them) and the latest Norton Internet Security software is by far the best such software available at the moment. :) Whereas, from the 2004 to the 2007 versions, it was AWFUL!:shrug:

Most similar softwares seem to suffer from failed installations from time to time, leading to such "rubbish" remarks. I found Bit-Defender to install so badly on my PC, that I got a "blue screen of death" twice, immediately after installation and had to do a complete re-format & re-install of Windows EACH time! Yet most people seem to have no such problem with it.
 
I think I'd be far more inclined to Stick with ESET than ever go near Norton/Symantec again. If something has a resource meter then the question has to be asked... Why does it need one in the first place?
 
NIS2008 is a real "dream" on my PC:cool:. It just does a efficient job virtually silently. The Identity safe & log-ins features work really well too.

Please don't knock the Norton 2008/2009 products without trying them first (not that anyone would . . . .):laugh:.

I wouldn't call it a dream but the newer ver of Norton is not bad, works well and better than the older ver of norton. I'm sure many of us had a bad experience with Norton in the past.New one is not bad fast less of a resource hog etc. I use avast free and fast and love it
 
NORTON is top security suite in PC ADVISOR REVIEW

I think I'd be far more inclined to Stick with ESET than ever go near Norton/Symantec again. If something has a resource meter then the question has to be asked... Why does it need one in the first place?

The meter is there to prove to all the "Norton is terrible & hogs resources" doubters out there, that the latest Norton DOES NOT use up a lot of resources. HOW else could they prove it?:rolleyes:

The meter is to show how good the new Norton product really is, compared to the previous versions & "knock the doubters on the head". The whole of Norton Internet Security Suite 2008 was re-written (re-coded) from scratch; it was then further improved in the 2009 version. No doubt they will find further improvements for the 2010 edition (expected about September/October).:)

Norton Internet Security has shown up in several recent tests to be the most secure product on the market (much better than ESET, which I used to use; which is not in this particular review/test). NIS 2009 was determined in the recent PC ADVISOR REVIEW to be the BEST of the 9 suites tested.:



HERE ARE THE RESULTS IN CHART FORM .


HERE IS THE FULL REVIEW .

I hope the links above are of interest.:)
 
Last edited:
Well, they could point to a meter that is not coded by them!!

I cannot comment on the current versions because I have never used them, but I WILL comment on magazine reviews.

ALL the magazines have the same weakness, the majority of their income comes from adverts; that is why the older versions of Norton were never slatted for being resource hogs when THEY were reviewed, Norton (among others), spends a LOT of money advertising their products. it is the same reason you see rave reviews for big budget games, only to find they are ***** when you try them out; if you see a ***** review it is usually for a company you have never heard of, with the big boys they always toe the line.
 
Sponsored Links
Well, they could point to a meter that is not coded by them!!

I cannot comment on the current versions because I have never used them, but I WILL comment on magazine reviews.

ALL the magazines have the same weakness, the majority of their income comes from adverts; that is why the older versions of Norton were never slatted for being resource hogs when THEY were reviewed, Norton (among others), spends a LOT of money advertising their products. it is the same reason you see rave reviews for big budget games, only to find they are ***** when you try them out; if you see a ***** review it is usually for a company you have never heard of, with the big boys they always toe the line.

In this case I tend to agree.

I'll be the first to Admit... I like ESET. Always have. I know some others do a similar or in a few cases better job but for my own reasons I stick with ESET.

However... Haven't found many that perform better.

In the case of Symantec/Norton I've never seen it beat ESET on performance level.

Remember magazines also review on how easy something is for the general public. Still doesn't mean that said something performs better than something they rate less.

Better trust the likes of virusbtn.com and av-comparatives.org.

What is really interesting is the the Microsoft offering seems to perform really well. http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report22.pdf

may well be worth a consideration if you happened to be looking.
 
I used Norton since Windows 98. I had to stop using that excellent program when Symantec shafted their loyal followers and refuse to bring out a Windows XP/X64 version.
 
I used Norton since Windows 98. I had to stop using that excellent program when Symantec shafted their loyal followers and refuse to bring out a Windows XP/X64 version.
Yes, lots of companies failed to support XP 64-bit.

However, I am running Windows 7, 64-bit & Norton Internet Security 2010 runs beautifully on it; so you can confidently return to Norton if you upgrade to Windows 7. The firewall is amazing & just runs silently in the backgound. Since the 2008 versions of its security products were re-coded, they use little in the way of resources & I particularly like the tiny "Pulse Updates" that update definitions every few minutes (no regular big update to slow the computer down).

One thing about Norton; you can buy their software MUCH cheaper by checking prices on their own download shops (via their main page) in places like Hong Kong & India! Just use an online converter to see prices in £'s. My 3-user version of NIS2010 cost only about £14 via Hong-Kong a few months ago. :laugh:
 
prolly said it before, and l will say it again... norton is bloatware, back in the day it was good but so much crap has been added that all it does is slow your system down.. tho lm not knocking its virus protection capabilities ld much rather use a less system intensive program and opt for something that does the same job while using less system resources.
 
I got an email notification on this thread...

Norton does NOT go well with Windows 7. It refuses to uninstall properly, and the only way I could do it was by going online and downloading a special norton removal tool.

I say again to everyone, do not use Norton, it's borderline virus. I'd recommend kapersky, or NOD32.
 
Sponsored Links
my personal choice is currently BitDefender.
 
I got an email notification on this thread...

Norton does NOT go well with Windows 7. It refuses to uninstall properly, and the only way I could do it was by going online and downloading a special norton removal tool.

I say again to everyone, do not use Norton, it's borderline virus. I'd recommend kapersky, or NOD32.

Well, I say the opposite!

Norton Internet Security 2010 runs beautifully on my 64-bit version of Windows 7; I have not had a single glitch during almost 5 months of using it! I have tried almost all the Internet Security Suites currently available (though not Avira) & I find that (since the 2008 version) NIS is superior to the rest in almost every way.

One caveat though, you MUST use the Norton removal tool to remove all traces of any previous Norton software BEFORE you install a new version. Norton tell you to always use this tool & it is the only "proper" way to uninstall it. That is not unique to Norton though, GData also recommend using their specific tool to uninstall previous versions of their own software. I'm GLAD that Norton internet Security needs a special tool to uninstall it; if it were too easy to uninstall, malware could potentially uninstall it to gain access to everything on your computer.

If you have bought Norton security software, you could well find that it will now install & run properly because you have used their uninstall tool first. I recommend you give it a try. Make sure that you ONLY install the 2010 versions of their software (or the most recent release of Norton 360) with Windows 7.

Good luck, whatever you decide to do! :)
 
prolly said it before, and l will say it again... norton is bloatware, back in the day it was good but so much crap has been added that all it does is slow your system down.. tho lm not knocking its virus protection capabilities ld much rather use a less system intensive program and opt for something that does the same job while using less system resources.

You are talking about OLD versions of Norton software; the 2004, 2005, 2006 & 2007 versions WERE terrible (that's why I tried so much other software for a few years). Symantec started "from scratch" as from the 2008 versions & the current Norton software is an absolute revelation compared to previously and not "bloatware" at all. In fact, their system of tiny "Pulse Updates" is brilliant & other companies need to copy it.

Please don't keep knocking something based on either heresay or outdated versions tried years ago. By all means say "Norton WAS bloatware when I tried it a few years ago, but I haven't tried recent versions"; it will make your opinions appear a lot more credible.

Another problem with knocking a product because of just ONE bad experience, is that sometimes it is not the product that is at fault; it can be caused by something on your own computer that is "tripping" the software up. Two years ago I tried to install BitDefender on my PC. I immediately got a "Blue Screen Of Death" & had to reformat my PC & reinstall Windows XP. All my backups failed to restore properly & I lost a LOT of work. However, I don't go around saying "BitDefender is absolute rubbish" because probably more than 95% of Bitdefender users have no problem with it. I was just unlucky.
 
actually l spend allot of time fixing friends computers, so have experience with pretty much all versions of norton since 2002 version and a majority of stability issues were caused by how much resources it used, granted lve not played with Windows 7 yet for more than a few mins, however under XP even the latest version has its resource issues and l have had to reinstall windows on many occasions because norton caused issues...

it was originally pretty good, norton was an amazing program but it tries to do too much now and from experience causes problems on a majority of setups.. granted it may do a good job for some ppl but quickly ends up bottlenecking things on a number of occasions, one of the most common problems lve tried troubleshooting recently is where norton thinks its own programs are viruses... didnt make sense then and nor does it now even tho after using its removal tools and scanning found nothing, just gave off way too many false positives.

BitDefender on the other hand has been pretty good for me, tho l admittedly did have issues with its proxy service scanning and browsing and tho the fix took a while to be released in general lm impressed, especially with the level of daily updates, lve never seen so many virus signatures released for one program so quickly.

still as a final point all programs have their bugs, and yes one should give them their dues when it works but when you build a program to do too much it affects system stability and often causes long boot and shutdown times which can be quite bothersome, lm more for simplistic programs that dont try to do too much that actually do the job their designed to do without crashing too much.
 
I don't know if it's just me but looking at the posts it seems pretty much clear that the general consensus from posters is that (almost) nobody likes Norton.

I am one of them. Have hated Norton for years and I admit it was back in the day when it was indeed the bloatiest of bloatware and as protective as a sieve. I will echo timeless in the fact that I've also had the pleasure of having to reinstall windows for people on many occasions as Norton just didn't do the job it was meant to do and the resource/stability issues.

Now as for the new version I really can't comment on Windows 7 as I've not yet had the pleasure of anyone having problems with this OS in general (or anything running on it). However 3 weeks ago I had a wipe and reinstall with a system full of spyware/malware/worms (i.e. all the lovely varieties you can get). It had NIS 2009 installed and kept up to date. The thing wouldn't stay in windows for more than a minute before restarting or BSOD or freezing. It was running Vista and the user used it for net access and word processing. So nothing out of the ordinary. After a reinstall all is fine and the machine runs fine. I left it with a 30 day trial of Eset Smart Security (as it happens to be my security suite of choice and it's never let me down)

Same person has just purchased a license for Eset and not Norton. This person WAS a Norton faithful, had used it for years and had believed in it. No more. The comment I got was that the computer had never run as fast.

Now I know a lot of that is to do with it being installed properly with none of the crap that comes bundled from the manufacturer. It's still running Vista coz they didn't have the money to go Win 7. Still pretty much sure Norton hasn't got much better.

So from my point of view I still wouldn't touch Norton with a barge-pole. If nothing else I simply don't want to give them any money for something which I know I can get better elsewhere.

If you look at the real test of any antivirus... i.e. pre-emptive scanning for stuff that it doesn't already know then it is evident Norton are still lacking.

If you look at the data from av-comparatives.org then you see that in the last Pro-Active test Norton could only manage 36%. Avira, G Data, Kaspersky, ESET all managed over 60%

So if you are happy with Norton then I'm happy for you. However there are good and valid reasons why others don't. There are a few other AV solutions out there which I detest (McAfee being one of them) but never so much as any I've seen more anti-Norton than anything else and who feel strongly enough to openly say so.
 
While I was using Norton's I found issues with my pc and had to reformat regularly just to keep some speed.

I changed to Eset smart security and just reformatted not as I needed to but to move to windows 7 the last OS was Vista no reformat for 2 years no slowing down of computer and still no viruses got onto the system. I recommend Eset to everyone.
 
I'm on Eset smart security (NOD) 64Bit too, the latest code is a lot better than its older v3 series and that was rock solid for me too. I will never return to the days of Norton hell, IMO that is still one bloated piece of nagware.
 
I understand that; "Once bitten, twice shy" as the saying goes. I doubt that I would ever give BitDefender a second chance either; since it "trashed" my PC on installation.

However, there's no denying that myself & both my stepdaughters are using Norton Internet Security 2010 on 3PCs, without any problems at all. I have used Eset's, GData's, AVG's, Kaspersky's, Sunbelts's & Webroot's security software (to name a few) in recent years & have returned back to Norton Internet Security because it is the one programme I am happy with & have confidence in. My second choice would be GData Internet Security.

Until Norton rears up & bites me on the nose, I'll be sticking with it! :laugh:
 
Top
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £24.00
132Mbps
Gift: None
Shell Energy UK ISP Logo
Shell Energy £26.99
109Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £27.99
145Mbps
Gift: None
Zen Internet UK ISP Logo
Zen Internet £28.00 - 35.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £15.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
YouFibre UK ISP Logo
YouFibre £19.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
BeFibre UK ISP Logo
BeFibre £21.00
150Mbps
Gift: £25 Love2Shop Card
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Sponsored Links
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (5468)
  2. BT (3505)
  3. Politics (2523)
  4. Openreach (2290)
  5. Business (2251)
  6. Building Digital UK (2233)
  7. FTTC (2041)
  8. Mobile Broadband (1961)
  9. Statistics (1778)
  10. 4G (1654)
  11. Virgin Media (1608)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1451)
  13. Fibre Optic (1392)
  14. Wireless Internet (1386)
  15. FTTH (1381)
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules