Re: Why are Symantec/Norton products such pieces of sh*t?

Discussion in 'A+ Certification' started by Barry Watzman, Sep 21, 2003.

  1. I don't know what your problem is, but in my opinion the Symantec
    products are fine.

    The default installation of SystemWorks and Norton Utilities used to be
    too invasive and cause as many problems as it solved, if you didn't
    configure it to not run so much stuff in the background. But about 3
    years ago they got rid of "Crashguard" and they changed their default
    install so that very little stuff ran automatically in the background,
    and ever since then the default install has been fine.

    Note, I don't use "Personal Firewall" or "Internet Security", just
    Systemworks (e.g. just Anti-Virus). I don't recommend ANY software
    "firewall" products, they all seem to cause a lot of problems. Just get
    behind a hardware router (even if you are not sharing the internet
    connection) and use AntiVirus and you will be fine.


    techshare wrote:

    > Especially with the latest SWEN worm ...
    >
    > In the past two years I've made more money fixing problems, removing, or (in
    > many cases) replacing POS Norton "anti-virus" and "Internet Security" with
    > competing products like Mcafee Scan. I have seen Symantec products cause SO
    > many different problems ... on top of that ... easy removal is nearly
    > impossible (just take a look at RNIS - what a bunch of sh*t!). I refuse to
    > sell the Symantec products as I'd surely lose money big time .... but lately
    > it's actually getting tough to make money on removing the product or
    > (rarely) "fixing" installations. The product seems to be like a worm in and
    > of itself. What gives, and what's the best alternative? I've had good luck
    > with Mcafee for a virus scanner. After I install it, I rarely receive
    > callbacks with any problems.
    >
    >
    Barry Watzman, Sep 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Barry Watzman

    RussS Guest

    I am intrigued that you found a virus in the McAfee excecutable. Are you
    sure it was a virus, or was the scanner you use detecting it as it had
    similar properties to a virus. I have seen this with a couple different AV
    progs and also with boot loaders like System Commander or Partition Magic.


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 11/09/2003
    RussS, Sep 22, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:56:23 -0400, "Glenn \(SBfan2000\)"
    <> wrote:

    >I use to like either Norton or Mcafee until I found a virus infecting the
    >executable of Mcafee! I have refused to use it since then! That was about
    >4-5 years ago and have used Norton (Systemworks) since then and have sold
    >many, many copies to customers and I have yet to see me or a customer get a
    >virus while running it! I have only got one virus since the switch to
    >nortons and that was while setting up w2k on my second partition and getting
    >my e-mail before installing the software! Norton is tops in my book!


    Almost certainly what you found was the signature of a virus, encoded
    in the McAfee executable so that McAfee could use it in scanning.

    McAfee did this once or twice a few years ago, and these "false
    positives" gave a lot of anxious moments. They soon learned their
    lesson.
    Gordon Findlay, Sep 23, 2003
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RussS
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    298
    techshare
    Sep 21, 2003
  2. dave
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    395
  3. MF
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    418
  4. Allen Howell
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    361
    RussS
    Sep 24, 2003
  5. techshare
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    279
    techshare
    Sep 25, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page