Norton Anti-Virus for Windows XP OH BOY!!!!

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by fuzzy_4706, Dec 18, 2004.

  1. fuzzy_4706

    fuzzy_4706 Guest

    I like the product, but had one hell of a time getting everything to
    work after installing it several times, downloading pictures from
    camera, printer ect. Called Norton, they were little, or NO help. They
    blamed it on the camera and printer software. Why did it work fine
    before? Computer is a lot slower at first, but it gets with the program
    after I used it some. It seems like this $69 software takes our
    computer. Comments--------?????????????
     
    fuzzy_4706, Dec 18, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. fuzzy_4706

    Paul - xxx Guest

    fuzzy_4706 composed the following ...
    I quite like Norton AV, I have 2002 though, can't be bothered to upgrade as
    it seems fine to me. Maybe your computer simply isn't fast enough, have
    enough ram or enough HD space to run it properly.
     
    Paul - xxx, Dec 18, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. fuzzy_4706

    Noel Paton Guest

    Most Norton software is 'Harmful to your PC's Health' - particularly if
    you're running Win9x.
    I've heard marginally less horror-stories when on XP - but would (and do)
    remove it from any PC I work on, before attempting any remedial work (like
    defrag! or spyware removal)
     
    Noel Paton, Dec 18, 2004
    #3
  4. fuzzy_4706

    Fred Kasner Guest

    Norton Antivirus hogs resources. This tends to be less of a problem when
    the OS is XP Pro. But NAV hogs resources so much that I can't run AOL
    version 9.0 (yes I know that is a terrible program but I am a volunteer
    under some AOL help for students and I can't to the volunteering unless
    I use AOL's software.) Generally you can turn off many of your startup
    programs before you do a virus search with NAV and make it run faster
    but I found that NAV ran slow with Win 95 and even slower with Win ME
    but was fair with Win XP Home and decent with Win XP Pro. But NAV has
    the best response time to new malwares. So it does a decent job in
    rooting out the stuff. Other pgms may be better for a while in catching
    malware but on the whole the best is NAV. So learn to live with it.
    FK
     
    Fred Kasner, Dec 19, 2004
    #4
  5. Are you afraid you cannot run aol version 9?

    --
    Lady Chatterly

    "Congrats Lady Chatterly! That soc.moron swallowed so hard your hook
    is dangling from his asshole. It must be flattering to have someone
    talking about RL threats with you." -- Daedalus
     
    Lady Chatterly, Dec 19, 2004
    #5
  6. fuzzy_4706

    fuzzy_4706 Guest

    I have a new Gateway with plenty of RAM, hell I don't even have office
    works or anything else, never download anything. I'm not one to load up
    my comp with things I don't need or use. All I use it for is ebay and
    email some small work related issues. I run Windows XP Home Edition for
    an OS. Like I said, it works fine when I finally got all the little
    quirks, and bugs out of it. I guess I'm more P.O. at Norton for their
    lack of support more than anything else.
     
    fuzzy_4706, Dec 19, 2004
    #6
  7. fuzzy_4706

    Paul - xxx Guest

    Noel Paton composed the following ...
    Norton AV on it's own, which is what the thread is discussing, seems
    absolutely fine to me. I run XP Home and Pro on different systems, desk and
    laptop, with the same version of NAV on both, and working absolutely fine
    with no slowing down of the systems.

    I _did_ run CA EZav for a while and I've tried many other AV's but frankly,
    Norton AV works for me extremely well. I have no other Norton stuff on any
    system, and would urge anyone else who runs Norton stuff to remove it, but
    AV seems OK .. though I only have the 2002 version. I don't buy a new
    version unless it adds something I need.
    But when doing any remedial work I turn all other software off anyway,
    unless trouble-shooting particular wares, whether Norton, Microsoft, or
    whoever the manufacturer is.
     
    Paul - xxx, Dec 19, 2004
    #7
  8. fuzzy_4706

    Paul - xxx Guest

    fuzzy_4706 composed the following ...
    In that situation I'd probably not use Norton in it's 'Auto protect' mode
    then, I'd just use it for email scanning and for manual hard drive scans
    every so often.

    In fact, in that situation I probably wouldn't have bought Norton at all,
    I'd go with any, or a few, of the freebie AV's that are out there. I also
    use AVG, F-Prot and on-line scanners occasionally to get a different
    perspective on what shit is being picked up. If you do go for another
    freebie AV then don't have two or more automatically scanning at once, use
    one as a primary auto scanner and others as on-demand scanners. I rotate
    them occasionally, just for the hell of it .. ;)
     
    Paul - xxx, Dec 19, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.