Norton System tune-up, which is better?

Question

Hello, I am going to buy a copy of Norton System tune-up and I would like to know if anybody has an opinion on which version is the best, the 2003, 2004 or the 2005. I have read comments over at amazon.com that say that 2005 isn't as good as the 2004 version. Does anybody here have any experience with the different versions?   Thank you, Rocky Bennett

Denny Denham · Answer

therockman,

If you mean you intend to buy Norton SystemWorks your best choice is none. Windows XP's native maintenance is more than sufficient to maintain your system and there have been numerous reports of problems by XP users who have installed SystemWorks.

therockman · Answer

Obviously you are right, I meant System Works. So what you are saying is that by just maintaining my Windows XP there is no reason to have Norton System Works? I really am new to all this, but I think that I have read that before.

Thank you,

Rocky Bennett

CruiserMD · Answer

Forget NSW and get yourself TuneUp Utilities 2004. Outpaces and out performs NSW by a long shot. Besides, it comes with a window themes manipulation that is really simple and easy to use......Check it out!

sawadee · Answer

The defrag that come with Windows puts files into one piece and lines them up by size, smallest to largest. If you get Norton and use their defrag, it puts files into one piece and lines them up in the order you use them the most. The files you go to the most will be at the beginning of the file, the ones you rarely go to will be at the back. The two programs do two totally different things.

So, if you want to access your files faster, but have several files you access continually (esp if you play games) then Norton is best for you. If you don't access your files the same way each day, then either one will be good.

They do different things. Either one is OK, but don't use both. When you run one, then the other, the second defrag just un-dos what the first one did.

I have used both, but only the Windows defrag for the past few years. It works fine for me.

rickmktg · Answer

@therockman wrote:

Obviously you are right, I meant System Works. So what you are saying is that by just maintaining my Windows XP there is no reason to have Norton System Works? I really am new to all this, but I think that I have read that before.

Thank you,

Rocky Bennett

Norton SystemWorks includes Norton Antivirus, which is worth having. It also includes Norton Ghost (if you buy NSW Pro). The utilities really have little value as has been said.

However, here's where it gets interesting. If you NAV software, installed by Dell, is expiring, you have three options. 1) Pay Norton for another year, 2) Buy Norton Antivirus for the next year, or 3) Buy a product that includes NAV, like NSW, that includes an UPGRADE rebate. In the past two months I bought Norton SW Pro 2004, Norton Internet Security Pro 2004, Norton Internet Security 2004, Norton Antivirus 2005 - all FREE after rebate.

therockman · Answer

Thank you Rick, I have to look into that. I do want some of the features that are included with the Norton package, such as the anti-virus and file back-up. I just bought the Dell computer, so I am sure that I have an extension offer coming to me.

Rocky Bennett

luphy · Answer

As a whole, NSW Pro is not bad, mainly because of NAV and Ghost. And Speed Disk is fine too. The other utilities are not so useful.

NAV is definitely worth having. Ghost is good, now that they've taken DriveImage's engine (well, the whole program really).

For defragmenting, I think most people prefer Diskkeeper or O&O defrag because of their background defragmenting (not sure if latest Speed Disk has this).

For registry cleaning, Norton is not so thorough. I like Registry Mechanic myself. RegClean is free, but I haven't used it.

Windows General

Norton System tune-up, which is better?

Was this post helpful?