«

Norton sucks. It uses a lot of system resources. I sugguest that you use

1. AVG Free anti-virus
2. Zone Alarm - Free firewall
3. Ad-aware Se Personal - Free

Rob



"Sue" <> wrote in message
news:FheQg.189874$...
>I just "upgraded" from Norton Internet Security 2005 to 2007. It now takes
>4 to 5 minutes for my computer to start up completely. Is this normal? Is
>there anything I can do to speed up the process? If not, is it possible to
>go back to the 2005 version? I've tried unsuccessfully to find any on-line
>Norton support.
>
> Thanks
>

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:48:37 +0000, Sue Has Frothed:

> I just "upgraded" from Norton Internet Security 2005 to 2007. It now takes
> 4 to 5 minutes for my computer to start up completely. Is this normal? Is
> there anything I can do to speed up the process? If not, is it possible to
> go back to the 2005 version? I've tried unsuccessfully to find any on-line
> Norton support.
>
> Thanks

Uninstall the Norton BS and get Ewido and Antivira, both free.

http://www.ewido.net/en/
http://www.free-av.com/

Chalk up the waste of money on Norton to inexperience.


--
Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004

COOSN-266-06-25794

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 23:18:35 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<> wrote:

>Jimmy Dean wrote:
>
>> SpyBot is much more thorough, Ad-Aware often misses threats
>
>Spybot S&D is for spyware, and Ad-Aware is for .. well .. adware. Two
>different types of malware.

The spyware/ad-ware distinction is blurred. "Spyware" tends to be
applied to anything which is not covered by traditional antivirus
software i.e. viruses, trojans, worms.

Spybot and Ad-Aware overlap in what threats they deal with (their
names notwithstanding), but SpyBot is notably more effective.

If your're relying on freebies like these, use both + one other like
Windows Defender if you can (XPsp2 reqd). SpyWareBlaster is another of
a small group of effective freebie "anti-spyware" progs which is worth
having on one's PC.

There are many so-call AS progs which are ineffective or a nuisance
(too many false positive) or positively bad (extortion scams).

See http://www.spywarewarrior.com/rogue_anti-spyware.htm

jd

Jimmy Dean wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 23:18:35 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
> <> wrote:
>
>> Jimmy Dean wrote:
>>
>>> SpyBot is much more thorough, Ad-Aware often misses threats
>>
>> Spybot S&D is for spyware, and Ad-Aware is for .. well .. adware.
>> Two different types of malware.
>
> The spyware/ad-ware distinction is blurred. "Spyware" tends to be
> applied to anything which is not covered by traditional antivirus
> software i.e. viruses, trojans, worms.
>
> Spybot and Ad-Aware overlap in what threats they deal with (their
> names notwithstanding), but SpyBot is notably more effective.
>
> If your're relying on freebies like these, use both + one other like
> Windows Defender if you can (XPsp2 reqd). SpyWareBlaster is another
> of a small group of effective freebie "anti-spyware" progs which is
> worth having on one's PC.
>
> There are many so-call AS progs which are ineffective or a nuisance
> (too many false positive) or positively bad (extortion scams).
>
> See http://www.spywarewarrior.com/rogue_anti-spyware.htm

Did you mean to post this as a reply to the OP? (None of it is new news
to me...)

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck.

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:26:09 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<> wrote:

>Did you mean to post this as a reply to the OP? (None of it is new news
>to me...)

In that case I find it odd you should make this assertion:

"Spybot S&D is for spyware, and Ad-Aware is for .. well .. adware.
Two different types of malware."

jd