It seems that alot of Digg posters do not know what they are talking about. I have helped friends remove viruses that both Norton and Symantec failed to detect using a combination of AVG/Avast!/ ClamWin. MaximumPC and other magazines have reviewed both free and pay virus software, and at last check, the free virus scan software won hands down. No virus software was perfect, but it was clear that the free solutions were better than pay software. The reason why everyone is upset about the rootkit situation is that it messes with your system internally, without your knowledge or permission. There is no good reason to install a rootkit. It is too dangerous. How are you supposed to know what rootkits are good and which are bad? And even if you do, how do you know it can't be taken advantage of?
"I don't bash Norton because ~I can't afford it~ I most certainly can... but why would I waste my money on _crap_? The ~lame free anti-virus~ software I got picks up viruses 10 times faster than Norton.."Wow, I'm surprised you're able to benchmark how fast each software package can detect viruses. You get that many??
"Some of you use AVG.. HAHAHAHA Oh that's a good one.. run a scan with a real anti-virus sometime, you'll be surprised."LMAO!!! You are so full of s**t it's surprised you can talk...I work with the removal and repair of virus and spy/mal/greyware EVERY DAY... and Norton is C-R-A-P... Back in the day, they were THE AV company, now it's 100% bloat...Ok, there is a good reason for their rootkit, but it's still a POS software package. I have installed AVG on 90% of the computers I have repaired, and they have not been re-infected since. Matter of fact, when the 0-day WMV exploit hit, 4 clients of mine that insisted on using NAV got massively infected and required a COMPLETE reformat, whereas 10 other clients who were running AVG had the viri caught when the site dropped them and they weren't affected at all.Now, do I need to go into the giant piece of crap that they call Norton Internet Security or that ultra-bloat Utilities? Here's an idea, go to your local tech college, take their 0 level computer class and get yourself a clue.SB
Oh - and for the record... Rootkits are not all evil, this was installed as a preventative measure and to help facilitate the protection of the system. However, considering Symantec's shared library exploit, someone I'm sure could have taken advantage of the "rootkit" if motivated.SB
It is, and the problem is that "rootkit" has become such a buzzword that all kinds of clueless wonders are out there spouting it off without knowing what they're talking about.
I've never liked Symantec software and have always felt it was too intrusive. I uninstalled that Norton s**t and there are still reminants all over my PC just like with AOL crap. ugh. what a piece of s**t program.
f**k everyone and his grandma is installing rootkits now."MOOOM, CAN I GET A ROOTKIT? ALL THE COOL KIDS ARE DOING IT!"As for any symantec programs, i suspected they were doing something fishy loong ago. It took up just too much system resources not to be doing something bad. I got rid of it after a month.
Norton is crap.Symantec AV Corp is pretty good.Norton AV and/or Systemworks hoses half the systems its installed on when removed, from my personal experience anyway.
I use Symantec AntiVirus (NOT Norton AntiVirus, Symantec AntiVirus) because I can download it for free from my college (IUPUI). If someone could please convince me to go back to McAfee or another alternative, I'd be more than happy to listen (I don't know anything about how good/bad the product is). :-)
Norton is extremely lame you prat Riddick020 your second name ought to be culous cos you think. My brother in law works for future publishing (PC Answers, PC Format and PC Plus etc) these magazines are the main advertising agents for Symantec products and as a results they must always find Symantecs products very good or they jeopardize one of there main sources of income. AVG is without doubt one of the best AV programs as I have been using it for 6 years now, installing it on every PC I sell (2-3 per week) and every PC I format and reload (6-10 per week) I can honestly say that many aspects of Norton Internet Security make it very very lame, constant pop ups just give the user false sense of security. ICSA Labs are independent assessors and find Norton 2006 to score only 92% detection where AVG get 100% and many more see <a class="user" href="http://www.grisoft.com/doc/CertAndAwards">http://www.grisoft.com/doc/CertAndAwards</a> Now THIS IS THE WORST PART, NEC Group (Packard Smell etc) have been happy to take up the Symatec reseller rebate scheme whereby the vendor installs a trial of symantec (3,6 or 12 months), without the uninstall and then when the user is FORCED to renew, the vendor receives 50% of the subscription fee. Norton received maybe 10,000 times the revenue that AVG does and yet they fail to make a stable honest effective product. I wrote a norton uninstaller program back in 96 or 97 and submitted it to PC Format and they put it on there coverdisc, since then norton started to make (a very unstable 50-50 chance of working) uninstaller themselves google symnrt and you'll see. Peter Norton is one corrupt rich man at the expense on the innocent public, to this day is still offering any vendor 50% return on all resubscriptions. Still think it's good Mr Ridiculous???
psrosenJan 12, 2006
It seems that alot of Digg posters do not know what they are talking about. I have helped friends remove viruses that both Norton and Symantec failed to detect using a combination of AVG/Avast!/ ClamWin. MaximumPC and other magazines have reviewed both free and pay virus software, and at last check, the free virus scan software won hands down. No virus software was perfect, but it was clear that the free solutions were better than pay software. The reason why everyone is upset about the rootkit situation is that it messes with your system internally, without your knowledge or permission. There is no good reason to install a rootkit. It is too dangerous. How are you supposed to know what rootkits are good and which are bad? And even if you do, how do you know it can't be taken advantage of?
mrkiteJan 12, 2006
"I don't bash Norton because ~I can't afford it~ I most certainly can... but why would I waste my money on _crap_? The ~lame free anti-virus~ software I got picks up viruses 10 times faster than Norton.."Wow, I'm surprised you're able to benchmark how fast each software package can detect viruses. You get that many??
silentbobscJan 12, 2006
"Some of you use AVG.. HAHAHAHA Oh that's a good one.. run a scan with a real anti-virus sometime, you'll be surprised."LMAO!!! You are so full of s**t it's surprised you can talk...I work with the removal and repair of virus and spy/mal/greyware EVERY DAY... and Norton is C-R-A-P... Back in the day, they were THE AV company, now it's 100% bloat...Ok, there is a good reason for their rootkit, but it's still a POS software package. I have installed AVG on 90% of the computers I have repaired, and they have not been re-infected since. Matter of fact, when the 0-day WMV exploit hit, 4 clients of mine that insisted on using NAV got massively infected and required a COMPLETE reformat, whereas 10 other clients who were running AVG had the viri caught when the site dropped them and they weren't affected at all.Now, do I need to go into the giant piece of crap that they call Norton Internet Security or that ultra-bloat Utilities? Here's an idea, go to your local tech college, take their 0 level computer class and get yourself a clue.SB
silentbobscJan 12, 2006
Oh - and for the record... Rootkits are not all evil, this was installed as a preventative measure and to help facilitate the protection of the system. However, considering Symantec's shared library exploit, someone I'm sure could have taken advantage of the "rootkit" if motivated.SB
silentbobscJan 12, 2006
It is, and the problem is that "rootkit" has become such a buzzword that all kinds of clueless wonders are out there spouting it off without knowing what they're talking about.
sellJan 12, 2006
I've never liked Symantec software and have always felt it was too intrusive. I uninstalled that Norton s**t and there are still reminants all over my PC just like with AOL crap. ugh. what a piece of s**t program.
muzical84Jan 12, 2006
And I still don't care. The Norton Protected Recycling Bin has been around for years. So what?No digg.
Closed AccountJan 13, 2006
f**k everyone and his grandma is installing rootkits now."MOOOM, CAN I GET A ROOTKIT? ALL THE COOL KIDS ARE DOING IT!"As for any symantec programs, i suspected they were doing something fishy loong ago. It took up just too much system resources not to be doing something bad. I got rid of it after a month.
Closed AccountJan 15, 2006
Norton is crap.Symantec AV Corp is pretty good.Norton AV and/or Systemworks hoses half the systems its installed on when removed, from my personal experience anyway.
masamunecyrusJul 18, 2006
I use Symantec AntiVirus (NOT Norton AntiVirus, Symantec AntiVirus) because I can download it for free from my college (IUPUI). If someone could please convince me to go back to McAfee or another alternative, I'd be more than happy to listen (I don't know anything about how good/bad the product is). :-)
dialup2001Oct 28, 2006
Norton is extremely lame you prat Riddick020 your second name ought to be culous cos you think. My brother in law works for future publishing (PC Answers, PC Format and PC Plus etc) these magazines are the main advertising agents for Symantec products and as a results they must always find Symantecs products very good or they jeopardize one of there main sources of income. AVG is without doubt one of the best AV programs as I have been using it for 6 years now, installing it on every PC I sell (2-3 per week) and every PC I format and reload (6-10 per week) I can honestly say that many aspects of Norton Internet Security make it very very lame, constant pop ups just give the user false sense of security. ICSA Labs are independent assessors and find Norton 2006 to score only 92% detection where AVG get 100% and many more see <a class="user" href="http://www.grisoft.com/doc/CertAndAwards">http://www.grisoft.com/doc/CertAndAwards</a> Now THIS IS THE WORST PART, NEC Group (Packard Smell etc) have been happy to take up the Symatec reseller rebate scheme whereby the vendor installs a trial of symantec (3,6 or 12 months), without the uninstall and then when the user is FORCED to renew, the vendor receives 50% of the subscription fee. Norton received maybe 10,000 times the revenue that AVG does and yet they fail to make a stable honest effective product. I wrote a norton uninstaller program back in 96 or 97 and submitted it to PC Format and they put it on there coverdisc, since then norton started to make (a very unstable 50-50 chance of working) uninstaller themselves google symnrt and you'll see. Peter Norton is one corrupt rich man at the expense on the innocent public, to this day is still offering any vendor 50% return on all resubscriptions. Still think it's good Mr Ridiculous???