Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 96861	2009-01-26 19:53:00	Wainuitech - Nortons Wins	pctek (84)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
742210	2009-01-26 23:20:00	Obviously then Norton excels in test environments, and would be the perfect solution if thats the intended use for your computer. Buy a real world product for the real world, and leave the "experts" to their tests. Sending 1000 virus signatures to a freshly installed nortons and expecting to get real world results is retarded and pointless.	Metla (12)
742211	2009-01-27 00:09:00	Just had a person call this morning - I was told they have the latest Norton360 - the person said it pops up with a message saying the PC has trojans - the person did scans but Norton couldn't remove them - He rang symantec on their help line ---- The advice from Symantec -either remove them manually OR Run system Restore back a week ---:lol: Heres comes that tui again :banana -- YEAH RIGHT - the bugs will go for the ride. Man I love Nortons:wub it gives us techs jobs $$$$	wainuitech (129)
742212	2009-01-27 00:54:00	There is nothing unusual about having to remove infections manually as you know very well wainuitech. This forum is full of hijackthis posts from people who have had all sorts of various infections even though they had various types security and antivirus installed. How about posting about some of the infected computers you get running Avast or other programs you like instead of just the ones with Norton	Safari (3993)
742213	2009-01-27 01:09:00	Fair enough comment Safari - Where mentioned about removing infections manually - yeah easy for a tech, but REMEMBER its the average home user we are talking about - if they enter the reg and start deleting keys and soon they wont have a bootable PC, or they have no idea what they are doing and make things worse, the average home user - they depend on a software package that promises every thing and doesn't do it some of the time. Working on an average of 5-6 PC's a week Total Computers last year that had infections AVG - looking up records 21 Avast - 1 Kaspersky - 0 Nod32 - 0 The remainder were either Nortons or McAfee - with the majority being Nortons - which also had the highest number of infections. Its been proven time and time again by many techs - Nortons simply doesnt protect from infections like the so called test results say it does. Customers laptop at the moment - got Norton 360 - screwed the system to the point it has to be reinstalled. That person who called me this morning - he made a simple comment - "I have Norton 360 - it obviously didn't work - All I want is someone to fix it and put in some better software and teach me how to use it as required". Edit: the PC's I had in with Nod and Kaspersky both had hardware problems - infection wise they were clean.	wainuitech (129)
742214	2009-01-27 01:10:00	. . . How about posting about some of the infected computers you get running Avast or other programs you like instead of just the ones with Norton Perhaps it hardly ever happens? (I have Kasperspsky for the rare times I run Windoze . ) Norton's only good point is possibly that it makes trojans, viruses etc . look like good neighbours in comparison to it's own PC sludging abilities .	R2x1 (4628)
742215	2009-01-27 01:13:00	Nortons also has a huge footprint on system resources. It slows everything down like it was running in golden syrup. NOD32 has the smallest drag on resources I've ever seen - hell, I'm a gamer and I am fussy about that, so I notice.	Deane F (8204)
742216	2009-01-27 01:26:00	Fair enough comment Safari - Working on an average of 5-6 PC's a week Total Computers last year that had infections AVG - looking up records 21 Avast - 1 Kaspersky - 0 Nod32 - 0 The remainder were either Nortons or McAfee - with the majority being Nortons - which also had the highest number of infections. Its been proven time and time again by many techs - Nortons simply doesnt protect from infections like the so called test results say it does. Customers laptop at the moment - got Norton 360 - screwed the system to the point it has to be reinstalled. That is just screwing the stats. Of course you get more with Norton because more computers have that installed then anything else so isn't it to be expected to get those results. Very few people have Avast or Kaspersky so how likely are you to get one of those in the shop. It is like saying that Windows must be unreliable because nearly every person who calls is running that. Compared with the total number in use the percentage with problems is probably very low. I still think you have an unhealthy bias against norton that is unsubstantiated. Not that I really care as I use a mac and don't use or need Norton but many people do and never have any problems.	Safari (3993)
742217	2009-01-27 01:33:00	Very few people have Avast or Kaspersky so how likely are you to get one of those in the shop. It is like saying that Windows must be unreliable because nearly every person who calls is running that. I still think you have an unhealthy bias against norton that is unsubstantiated. I get plenty of PCs with things like AVG and Avast. Not just Norton PCs. And Windows is unreliable. :lol: We base our opinions on what we see - I test all new apps by trying them out on an infected PC, if the detection rate isn't at least 75% then its rubbish. Like Wainuitechs results - he'd already run antispyware - he was scanning for viruses with NOD, and it was finding them. Nortons had been sitting there like a deaf and blind halfwit.	pctek (84)
742218	2009-01-27 02:25:00	That is just screwing the stats . Of course you get more with Norton because more computers have that installed then anything else so isn't it to be expected to get those results . Very few people have Avast or Kaspersky so how likely are you to get one of those in the shop . It is like saying that Windows must be unreliable because nearly every person who calls is running that . Compared with the total number in use the percentage with problems is probably very low . I still think you have an unhealthy bias against norton that is unsubstantiated . Not that I really care as I use a mac and don't use or need Norton but many people do and never have any problems . Hmm you think - get a life - If you have 100 PC's and they all have Nortons - and the majority are infected then why is that ?? simple the softwares not doing what it claims . OKAY answer this - WHY is it then if PC's have Nortons installed and it fails - lets through infections like its not even there - why are they getting infected if its as good as the lab tests say ??? I still think you have an unhealthy bias against norton that is unsubstantiated I'd be VERY surprised if there are many tech places that have not had the same / similar results - or is every one in the repair business and others here on the forum that say the same thing just making it up - I dont think so . I used to use Norton myself ages ago - it did a scan one Friday night saying it was clean when finished I turned off the PC - following morning Norton went belly up , I uninstalled it, then put in NOD32 - Instantly found 6 active infections and I hadn't even done a scan yet . When ever a New version comes out I download it, install an image of an infected drive and scan - I know how many infections it has - every time Norton or McAfee miss infections other antivirus software detects . Out of all the PC's I saw through the workshop that have Nortons, last year I had only one that didn't have any infections - it was a 4 week old Dell .	wainuitech (129)
742219	2009-01-27 02:39:00	Strongly disagree Safari. You need to wake up to to facts. Not lab tests. I'd say 10% of the PCs that come in here use Avast, and if they have Nortons or AVG Free off it comes and on goes either NOD32 or Avast. Frequently hear people commenting on how much better their PC runs, random problems have gone away and internet is quicker after the removal of nortons. AVG is kinda heading the same way, but not nearly as bad. Nortons simply doens't pick up infections that it should be picking up - we see this time and time again. It's designed to do one thing - and it doesn't do it properly. It should be dumped because of this.	wratterus (105)
1 2 3 4