| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 95301 | 2008-12-01 18:01:00 | Free Norton 360? | mabix (10146) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 724719 | 2008-12-05 02:44:00 | Update to the test - you gotta Love this (www.imagef1.net.nz) - :lol::lol::D It HAS got service pack 2 installed - Norton thinks it hasn't. BTW this PC did have Norton 2006 installed. |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 724720 | 2008-12-05 02:47:00 | :lol: Windows 1, Nortons, 0. |
wratterus (105) | ||
| 724721 | 2008-12-05 03:09:00 | :lol: Kind of defeats the purpose if the infections block the Antivirus software from installing, just tried it in safe mode - still no joy - the infections have locked the C: drive solid, can not open it, they have also disabled the DVD writer from running any programs, the DVD drive works fine as I used an Acronis CD to clone the drive --- installed Nod32 Via the same USB drive as norton was on - it went NUTS instantly ding ding ding ding:lol: Maaaay be you need to install a better AV then put in Norton :rolleyes: Not even going to try with the Norton - that test alone was a good enough to confirm that its still useless as t1ts on a bull :p |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 724722 | 2008-12-05 05:01:00 | Why does norton get such excellent reviews in mags and online articles? ??? Are magazines "unbiased"? |
Blam (54) | ||
| 724723 | 2008-12-05 05:48:00 | Why does norton get such excellent reviews in mags and online articles? ??? Are magazines "unbiased"? I don't think they see machines like wainuitech has ^ :) |
jwil1 (65) | ||
| 724724 | 2008-12-05 06:32:00 | Why does norton get such excellent reviews in mags and online articles? ??? Are magazines "unbiased"? I would never say that it is because Symantec are such big advertising spenders. What I think may differ. |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 724725 | 2008-12-05 07:18:00 | Mabix - back in post 18 you asked of me - Hey Wainuitech If you get a chance, you should try NIS 2009~ I downloaded the trial and it was absolutley amazing. Installed in about half a minute, and a quick scan took about four minutes on my laptop. - Yes it loads faster, not quite a system hog - BUT what follows you may not really want to know - sorry mate but pictures dont lie.------ Just to prove the point that Nortons is rubbish, no matter how much faster it loads - the old saying " a pictures worth a thousand words" Well heres 4 K Following on from that screen shot earlier when I Tried to install NIS 2009 and the infections stopped Nortons from even loading - Here is what I did- Got a Unused HDD - dumped a Workshop Image of XP in the drive, loaded NIS 2009, which would install fine. updated the program Via Live update. Turned off the PC, got the drive that is infected - attached as a slave - the original drive I have found has two partitions. The infected drive is showing as D and E (www.imagef1.net.nz) - then using using NIS 2009 did a full system scan - The results (www.imagef1.net.nz) - Now Norton even with the drive as a slave, could not access the infections they blocked the program.:groan: NOW - I copied the drive twice, one scan run just before and another earlier on today - the exact same install/infections on the drive - once Nod32 Settled down (www.imagef1.net.nz) from stopping the infections in memory - I then set it scanning - this is a install, no updates been done as I'm not putting this drive on my network. So far Only part way through (www.imagef1.net.nz) - I have removed the persons name, but the rest tells all. So for any one who is using NIS 2009, or any Norton product - I hate to say it but they very well may be under a false sense of security - pictures of REAL every day tests Prove beyond a doubt the "lab" tests mean diddly squat. |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 724726 | 2008-12-05 07:45:00 | hate to add insult to injury - Norton said the drive was clean. Nod32 - Not updated - look beside the Arrow (www.imagef1.net.nz) Number of infections :groan: |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 724727 | 2008-12-05 07:56:00 | *bookmarks thread for future Nortons bashing* :D | jwil1 (65) | ||
| 724728 | 2008-12-05 08:40:00 | Sorry but there is something wrong here. I am not disputing the results that wainuitech posted but they don't line up with the numerous tests carried out by experts around the world. I am not prepared to accept the results from one person that contradict numerous others carried out by experts in their field. Check this site http://www.av-comparatives.org/ Look into the Comparatives section and scroll down to find out additional tests and reports. Have a look at the Online results for the following. On-demand comparative August 2008 Online results / Report Retrospective/ProActive Test November 2008 Online results These people are not idiots, they give NIS good marks, if a product did not work they would say so. So what is going on here. |
Safari (3993) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||