Norton 2004 on xp

[petermeachem]

I was just going to buy this for a customer but have been reading customer reviews on

http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/software/utilities/0,39024213,39116718,00.htm

Is it that bad? If so what should I buy the guy? It's got to a) work, b) do everything automatically and c) not get in the way (by popping up 'useful' message boxes if it finds something).

I use 2003 on a win98 box and it's just fine, so Iwas surprised by these reviews. Don't suggest avg, I'm not very enamoured with it.

http://www.accuflight.com

http://www.lettersdirect.co.uk

http://www.ourhouseinportugal.co.uk/

 

[CableInstaller]

Well, there are alot of half truths in those reports..

i have it installed on a couple of my machines and i will give you my honest opinion..

-It works well providing you disable the excess bloat like recycle bin protecting, and those bloodhound scans, also disabling a couple of the services in the msc snap in.
-The activation in 2004 is a tedious measure that will need to be redone if you change hard drives or partition the hard drive(which was surprise to me)
-I have to disable it to burn a cd, although cd burning still will work, the caching of files has excessive lag and things go faster with the scanner disabled.
-6 running processes visible(after i set options and disabled hal of it)also 7 found services under "services.msc"
-Yes it's a disaster to reinstall, what symantec product isn't?
-You will notice the drag of resources when it is running, I have production machines I would not install this on due to the huge demand of resources.

-For a user that is not computer savvy, and uses the Internet for email, web browsing, or sharing files..this Nortons will suit them well, it updates itself, and can make decisions for the user like deleting files automatically, although they will get a popup box stating an action has been taken, but no input from them is required other than closing the dialog.

-For users that are into high end gaming, cd/dvd burning, video rendering... if they know how to disable the scanner while doing these tasks, it is still ok, although even while disabled those running processes are still present.

It will keep you protected, and if resources are not an issue this is one good scanner.
Would I install it again?? probably not, the nortons corporate edition looked a little more resource friendly... and I would have to agree with your AVG non-preference.

 

[rockerfellerz]

I like f-protect myself. It's small, works well, updates itself, and isn't a resource hog. I have used norton's and find the F-prot is much more problem free. It is also less expensive and there are no "activation" issues.

If you're going through Hell...keep going... (Winston Churchill)
RocKeRFelLerZ

 

[Kutter]

I am with the people from ZDNet, I have installed Norton many, many times for customers. Nearly ALL ring me back to complain about its instalation, how slow it makes their machine, and how its locked up CD burning, Photoshop (seems to be a favourite lockup) and all manner of other 'issues'

This product is without a doubt completely useless!

Saying all this, I use it at home... Why? Because I know how to deal with it and any anti virus software is better than none. Norton also update VERY quickly (this much I'll give them) If your not an IT literate person DONT use it...

Hope this helps

Kutter.

 

[royalmail]

Does anyone have any links on how to tune Norton to improve performance? I run Norton Internet Security 2003 on XP Home, 2 GHz Celeron, and 256MB RAM and the machine runs like a dog. It probably takes almost 5 minutes to get from power on to a useable XP GUI...

 

[BadBigBen]

@royalmail --- first I would suggest that you up the RAM, as 256mb is pretty damn low for XP... second, I would suggest that you update to 2004 as 2003 has been known to cause on some XP system, problems...

I use seperate Progs to do what Norton IS 2003/4 does, my PC hasn't been hit nor ever had a Virus/Trojan/Worm on it in over a year...

--- I use ZoneAlarm 5.1, AntiVir 6.27, as an Anonymizer I use JAP 2.004, TeaTimer out of SpyBot 1.3 --- all this on XP Pro SP2...



Ben

If it works don't fix it! If it doesn't use a sledgehammer...

 

[royalmail]

Thanks.

Yeah, I have been intending to up the memory to either 512 or 768, but am also toying with the idea of a replacement PC...

Heard any good things about NIS 2005? I would probably consider that over NIS 2004.

I will check out those programs you mention. What does TeaTimer do?

 

[royalmail]

Ignore the TeaTimer question - I just did some research on it.

 

[BadBigBen]

@royalmail

I know about it, but haven't heard nothing bad or good about it...

about upping the RAM, well I would ignore it, if you are planning too upgrade the PC as mostlikely the older RAM will not be transferrable to the newer one...



Ben

If it works don't fix it! If it doesn't use a sledgehammer...