Comments on: Norton Internet Security 2007 Not Much Better Than 2006 http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/ Technology News Sun, 22 Nov 2009 13:29:52 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: John http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-118429 John Wed, 17 Oct 2007 01:17:32 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-118429 Purchased Norton Internet System 2007 for three personal computer terminals and installed January 2007 on three terminals owned by me. In July 2007 one terminal began indicating an premature expiration date. After three months of communication and implementing suggested fixes by support the erroneous expiration date remains the same. If the software expires premature it will be theft of services paid for and I will never patronize this company again in this lifetime. Purchased Norton Internet System 2007 for three personal computer terminals and installed January 2007 on three terminals owned by me. In July 2007 one terminal began indicating an premature expiration date. After three months of communication and implementing suggested fixes by support the erroneous expiration date remains the same. If the software expires premature it will be theft of services paid for and I will never patronize this company again in this lifetime.

]]> By: VIRUS http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-44850 VIRUS Tue, 28 Nov 2006 03:09:52 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-44850 will Symantec buy AVG??? rssssssssss will Symantec buy AVG??? rssssssssss

]]> By: David http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-31936 David Fri, 03 Nov 2006 16:07:15 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-31936 I am running AVG full scanning of all files, along with Anti-vir SCANNING ALL FILES and my computer is running much much smoother than when I ever had Norton Antivirus…Before with just AVG full scanning of all files on it is still not a resource hog. Adding also that AVG BEAT ALL ZOMBIE, TROJANS, and viruses on a pcworld test and Norton only caught a few, then they gave Norton the pick. A way majority of these magizines are bias and get paid to say one is better than the other product. Which ever company/person pays more for their product it will come on top. I have way better protection than ever when one is using/paying for norton anti-virus for FREE, compared to a TON of money to pay to license the product(buy a copy) re-new every month, pay a TON for Telephone support,etc… and then if one month later a new version comes out, having to have to pay another TON to RE_BUY it… I have NO gripes on the other anti-virus programs including MCAFEE..JUST NORTON… I am running AVG full scanning of all files, along with Anti-vir SCANNING ALL FILES and my computer is running much much smoother than when I ever had Norton Antivirus…Before with just AVG full scanning of all files on it is still not a resource hog.

Adding also that AVG BEAT ALL ZOMBIE, TROJANS, and viruses on a pcworld test and Norton only caught a few, then they gave Norton the pick.

A way majority of these magizines are bias and get paid to say one is better than the other product. Which ever company/person pays more for their product it will come on top.

I have way better protection than ever when one is using/paying for norton anti-virus for FREE, compared to a TON of money to pay to license the product(buy a copy) re-new every month, pay a TON for Telephone support,etc… and then if one month later a new version comes out, having to have to pay another TON to RE_BUY it… I have NO gripes on the other anti-virus programs including MCAFEE..JUST NORTON…

]]> By: Ryan http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24403 Ryan Tue, 26 Sep 2006 21:37:44 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24403 Hey Rowan, I would love to hear the details about your results and how the tests were conducted. Feel free to contact me at tech@cybernetnews.com . Hey Rowan,

I would love to hear the details about your results and how the tests were conducted. Feel free to contact me at tech@cybernetnews.com .

]]> By: Rowan Trollope http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24382 Rowan Trollope Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:06:16 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24382 Our performance lab test manager is going to contact you to discuss test methodologies. In our performance test lab, we see very different results, both for our products, and for competitors. We just had a session with many magazine test reviewers and went over a significant amount of the testing methodology, and we can share that with anyone who wants to take a look. Also, the fact is that performance is about more than just boot time, we categorize it into 5 different areas: Boot time, scan time, memory usage, http file download time, UI Launch time. I posted to the Symantec blog the numbers that we have, which include both our 07 results vs 06 and our results compared to industry averages. <a href="http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/blog/detail.jsp?blogid=new_2007_releases&profileid=rowan_trollope" rel="nofollow">See the my blog posting on this topic here</a> When you look across the boards, you'll see that we made great progress, so that we now have a product which is some cases is leading the industry (e.g. Memory Usage), and in others, we are on-par or in the top 3. While we've made leaps and bounds, we still have work to do. We are now somewhat fanatical internally about performance improvements, and will be constantly striving to deliver the best performance with the right level of protection. Our performance lab test manager is going to contact you to discuss test methodologies. In our performance test lab, we see very different results, both for our products, and for competitors.

We just had a session with many magazine test reviewers and went over a significant amount of the testing methodology, and we can share that with anyone who wants to take a look.

Also, the fact is that performance is about more than just boot time, we categorize it into 5 different areas: Boot time, scan time, memory usage, http file download time, UI Launch time. I posted to the Symantec blog the numbers that we have, which include both our 07 results vs 06 and our results compared to industry averages. [symantec.com]

When you look across the boards, you’ll see that we made great progress, so that we now have a product which is some cases is leading the industry (e.g. Memory Usage), and in others, we are on-par or in the top 3.

While we’ve made leaps and bounds, we still have work to do. We are now somewhat fanatical internally about performance improvements, and will be constantly striving to deliver the best performance with the right level of protection.

]]> By: Inferno_str1ke http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24233 Inferno_str1ke Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:38:58 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24233 Exactly - in the same way that you pointed out how routers advertise their name to anyone accessing the front end (who can then go and search for vulnerabilities), all a hacker needs to do is find out the suite you're using and they have a basis to work on. If a virus is made to disable the suite, that's all your protection out of the window. Exactly – in the same way that you pointed out how routers advertise their name to anyone accessing the front end (who can then go and search for vulnerabilities), all a hacker needs to do is find out the suite you’re using and they have a basis to work on. If a virus is made to disable the suite, that’s all your protection out of the window.

]]> By: Ryan http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24211 Ryan Mon, 25 Sep 2006 21:47:55 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24211 <div id="commentquote"><a href="#comment-24167">Inferno_str1ke wrote:</a><blockquote>Now I'm not a fan of these things, and I don't really think Eset should waste time making a 'suite'. I'm of the opinion that it's better to have one program for each use than to have single 'catch all' programs. I'd rather be able to select the best in each field and use that, upgrading or switching when necessary, than to have one program to do everything.</blockquote></div> I'm not really a big fan of the all-in-one suites either. I think it would be harder for hackers to get through a mixture of different software rather than one suite. Inferno_str1ke wrote:
Now I’m not a fan of these things, and I don’t really think Eset should waste time making a ’suite’.

I’m of the opinion that it’s better to have one program for each use than to have single ‘catch all’ programs. I’d rather be able to select the best in each field and use that, upgrading or switching when necessary, than to have one program to do everything.

I’m not really a big fan of the all-in-one suites either. I think it would be harder for hackers to get through a mixture of different software rather than one suite.

]]> By: Inferno_str1ke http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24167 Inferno_str1ke Mon, 25 Sep 2006 17:30:39 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24167 Now I'm not a fan of these things, and I don't really think Eset should waste time making a 'suite'. I'm of the opinion that it's better to have one program for each use than to have single 'catch all' programs. I'd rather be able to select the best in each field and use that, upgrading or switching when necessary, than to have one program to do everything. Now I’m not a fan of these things, and I don’t really think Eset should waste time making a ’suite’.

I’m of the opinion that it’s better to have one program for each use than to have single ‘catch all’ programs. I’d rather be able to select the best in each field and use that, upgrading or switching when necessary, than to have one program to do everything.

]]> By: david http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24141 david Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:56:42 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24141 What Norton needs to realize is that it's not about doing a full scan as fast as possible. It's about doing as little as possible, and knowing when you can get away with nothing at all. It doesn't matter if their scanning engine is really fast if it's still scanning every single file for every single virus. Full active scanning will always make a modern system behave like a 5 year old system. What Norton needs to realize is that it’s not about doing a full scan as fast as possible. It’s about doing as little as possible, and knowing when you can get away with nothing at all. It doesn’t matter if their scanning engine is really fast if it’s still scanning every single file for every single virus. Full active scanning will always make a modern system behave like a 5 year old system.

]]> By: Norton security 2007 neka spartesnis už senesnÄ™ versija « Paranormalaus pasaulio užeiga http://cybernetnews.com/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/comment-page-1/#comment-24123 Norton security 2007 neka spartesnis už senesnÄ™ versija « Paranormalaus pasaulio užeiga Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:21:30 +0000 http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/09/23/norton-internet-security-2007-not-much-better-than-2006/#comment-24123 [...] Norton Internet Security 2007 Not Much Better Than 2006 [...] [...] Norton Internet Security 2007 Not Much Better Than 2006 [...]

]]>