Basic Question regarding Norton Internet Security

Both of you make very good points.  I think I will buy Norton's product today.  I would much rather be in control.

---

@kima1263 wrote:

Can someone tell me why I would need a program like  Norton Internet Security for my computer if my DSL provider (SBC (formerally Ameritech) yahoo) already provides virus/firewall protection???  I already have the free version of Zone Alarm and spy sweeper running on my Dell Dimension 8200. Do I really need any more protection?

---

ZoneAlarm provides a firewall, so NIS isn't needed for that.

You don't have antivirus software, and you are trusting SBC to catch everything?  Bad, bad idea.  Get antivirus software right now.

Ok, I will check it out before I buy Norton.  If anyone else wants to chime in with their experience feel free!

PC-Cillin Securtiy software has been rated higher than Nortons and if you wish you can test it for three months free as I am doing now and very well pleased.  A number of updates every couple of days, that Nortons does not do.

Dim 4400 ( 2002 )
2.6 Ghz
Bios A06
768 MB DDR 2100
Windows XP Home
SP-2
1703 FP LCD monitor
PC-Cillin Security.....Much better than Nortons

Kima:

Norton is widely regarded as the biggest resource hog among anti-virus programs. PCcillin is well regarded and highly rated. There are also a few free A/V programs.

AVG: http://free.grisoft.com/freeweb.php/doc/2/

Avast: http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html

eTrust has a 30-day trial program, http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/Collateral.asp?CID=39914

You may also want to ask your ISP. Many are starting to provide either free or low-cost anti-virus software. AOL gives McAfee away for free, for example.

msgale,

I can't speak for Osprey; but from my experience, Norton does take up more space on the hard drive, and does cause the boot-up and shut-down processes to take slightly longer (the review I linked even mentions the longer start-up/shut-down times).  NIS also uses slightly more RAM when running than other security programs due to the number of security features they've bundled together.  If these items are what Osprey bases it on, then I have to agree.

Some users also report CPU usage being high, and openning and closing some windows and/or programs taking longer.  I've never seen any of this on any of the machines I've had NIS on, so I've always suspected those complaints are actually caused by some other problem.  They may get magnified by Norton, but NIS isn't the root cause (IMHO).

I am using NAV 2003, mainly because it came OEM, but I'm happy with it. With the updates Symantec provided it works well with Security center and ZA free. My startup/shut down is not slowed by NAV, but somewhat by ZA and some startups that use .NET framework (ATI catalyst control center and Diskeeper (they need ZA to have started to allow them to start). Still under a minute startup or total shut down. 

The only slow down was with office apps (Word), but that was cured by turnung off the Office plug in.

Reply to Jason98036, Thank you for the reply.  I have unitentionally cause a bit of confusion.  In my quest for proof I have mixed NAV with NIS, I was only refering to NAV, since that is what I have, and I have never used NIS.  The reason for the challange is that many people say Norton is a "resource hog", but are unable to support it with facts.  I one of my many responses to the "resource hog" issue.  I used my PCs as the test beds.  I actually run Symantec Enterprise AV - Version , since one of my PCs runs Windows 2003 Enterprise server and NAV will not run on it.  In any event when my PC are idle, with Auto-Protect set on I use between one and two percent of the available CPU cycles.  The memory foorprint is between 30 and 50 megabytes.  Those numbers are in the noise for current PCs.  The only time NAV usage becomes noticeable is about 4:00 AM when I do a nightly full scan, but I am asleep so I don't care.

>>>>PC-Cillin Securtiy software has been rated higher than Nortons and if you wish you can test it for three months free as I am doing now and very well pleased. A number of updates every couple of days, that Nortons does not do.<<<<

Actually that is not true. If you go here, you can get updates for Norton every day, it auto updates and I make it a habit of checking their sight and downloading the files and installing them as well. It keeps me more updated. Also I am using NAV pro 2003, from what I heard, the later versions slowed down your system. I bought a duo pack from ebay and it's been the best thing I did.

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/download/pages/US-N95.html

---

@computergeekette wrote:
>>>>PC-Cillin security software has been rated higher than Nortons and if you wish you can test it for three months free as I am doing now and very well pleased. A number of updates every couple of days, that Nortons does not do.<<<<

Actually that is not true. If you go here, you can get updates for Norton every day, it auto updates and I make it a habit of checking their sight and downloading the files and installing them as well. It keeps me more updated. Also I am using NAV pro 2003, from what I heard, the later versions slowed down your system. I bought a duo pack from ebay and it's been the best thing I did.

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/download/pages/US-N95.html

---

 

 

I don't have to check PC-Cillins site (ever) for updates.  Almost everyday it just downloads additional updates for me.  Nortons took a few days to update, or I would have to go to the updated site and manually download them.  And the last reading of a computer mag stated that PC-Cillin is better than Nortons and is not a resourse hog like nortons.  Too many problems have been reported with symantec software and those like me are staying away from nortons and going, either to AVG or PC-Cillin for peace of mind

Dim 4400 ( 2002 )
2.6 Ghz
Bios A06
768 MB DDR 2100
Windows XP Home
SP-2
1703 FP LCD monitor
PC-Cillin Security.....Much better than Nortons

Message Edited by SR45 on 02-19-2005 08:05 AM

---

@SR45 wrote:

And the last reading of a computer mag stated that PC-Cillin is better than Nortons and is not a resourse hog like nortons. 

---

I'll grant you that Norton is a resource hog, but the detection is basically the same as PC-cillin's, and both PC-cillin and Norton are superior to AVG, at least according to one review (granted, using the 2004 versions):

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,115939,pg,5,00.asp

The main items that gave PC-cillin a "Best Buy" rating, even though it had marginally lower detection, were that it's scan engine is faster than Norton, it doesn't slow boot-up / shut-down like Norton, PC-cillin had the best ease of use of any they reviewed, and PC-cillin had zero false positives (vs. Norton having 2 and AVG having 16).

The above is from PC World, which should have a better grip on the technology than the more generic consumer sites.  But, in September '04, Consumer Reports rated seven anti-virus programs.  They ranked PC-cillin number one, but gave both it and Norton their best buy rating (note: AVG wasn't on their test, but they ranked McAfee #5, below Kaspersky and Panda).

After eight years of dealing with the aggravation of Symantec, I will still vote for Norton as the Best Service of its type.

In 1998, Dell had provided a download of a Free AntiVirus that really seemed to work better than NAV but subsequent attempts to purchase support and updates from(don't even recall the name, but it was located in  Israel)  went un-answered.

My 2003 Sony VAIO had been delivered with a 'trial' version of PC-Cillin which was enough to make me purchase Norton SystemWorks2003.

My Dell Dimension was delivered last year with McAfee AntiVirus and again that confirmed the need to purchase (another) Norton, (Internet Security 2004 this time, but found that I preferred Norton SystemWorks).

Last month, a Download and install of NSW2005 and Personal Firewall resulted in an initial consumption of an extra 9GB of HD space (beyond GoBack's Bin) but that was resolved with the next LiveUpdate.

Norton used to catch an Email Virus weekly until Earthlink added AntiVirus/AntiSpam service, NAV has not spotted one since, but I still appreciate its protection.

Last week, Automatic UpDate from Microsoft installed an AntiVirus protection from MS that they promise will be reinstalled and run monthly, I am happy for that but still want NAV watching out for me.

In addition, it is said (and I agree) that you need to have at least two AntiSpyware programs installed, updated and run on a regular basis,  for protection from harm.

I had heard that it was not a good idea to run two Firewalls, but Norton said that WinXP, SP2 Firewall provided protection from inbound threats and you needed to also run Norton's Firewall to provide protection from data being sent outbound to the 'net' from your system.

I can understand the concern of any slight slowdown of a system in the minds of serious gamers, but I choose to have a system with a capability that exceeds my needs (no games) and accept the possible delays caused by NAV looking at something before I do.