Norton AV 2005 better or worse than 2004?

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

It's time to renew my subscription or get something else. I've been
using Norton since DOS days. I know that NAV 2004 is a resource hog,
but I figure that's because it's working hard to keep my machine clean.
Question: does anyone who's been using Norton for more than a cycle or
two know whether 2005 is any better or worse than 2004 in the resource
department? As good as I've got I can live with, but don't really want
to take a step back.

(Why is this question being posed in a flightsim newsgroup? Mainly
because the only time system resources become a serious issue is when
I'm running Flight Simulator, and I figured the folks here would
understand why it matters.)

_________________________________________________________
Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
11 answers Last reply
More about norton 2005 worse 2004
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 May 2005 09:46:21 -0500, David Wilson-Okamura <David
    Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> brought the following to our
    attention:

    >It's time to renew my subscription or get something else. I've been
    >using Norton since DOS days. I know that NAV 2004 is a resource hog,
    >but I figure that's because it's working hard to keep my machine clean.
    >Question: does anyone who's been using Norton for more than a cycle or
    >two know whether 2005 is any better or worse than 2004 in the resource
    >department? As good as I've got I can live with, but don't really want
    >to take a step back.
    >

    let's discuss this a bit. one comment recently is that Norton is very
    invasive. That's true for the most part. Here's some input. I advise
    some average non-technical people to stop by local monthly `PC show'
    and pick up old version of NAV and NPF install CD for low cost like 9$

    And advise to get version appropriate and proportional in complexity
    for the vintage of their hardware. That means sometimes Norton 2002..
    (for $9) and they install and run LIVE-UPDATE.. and all is well.

    I explain that N2002 is designed for 1.2 GHz processor (as example -
    could be different) and New version of Norton is proportional to 3GHz
    processor (relatively speaking - you get the idea).

    So.. you can do well without upgrading to NEW and complex version..
    and purchase the yearly update subscription. Norton 2002 is still
    supported by LiveUpdate. BTW.. some folks disable all this to Sim..
    and even disable the LAN connection as well (if no WAN Sim involved).


    -Gregory

    >
    >Why is this question being posed in a flightsim newsgroup? Mainly
    >because the only time system resources become a serious issue is when
    >I'm running Flight Simulator, and I figured the folks here would
    >understand why it matters.)
    >

    as stated already.. if no RW weather or WAN Sim is needed.. then LAN
    connection (and FW-AV) can be disabled during Sim flight.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    I've been using NAV for many, many years and subscribe to their LiveUpdate
    feature each year. I've gone through three computers with this system, and
    so far, NO viruses and NO problems.

    Arthur

    "David Wilson-Okamura" <David Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> wrote in
    message news:1115869640.12202@forums.simradar.com...
    > It's time to renew my subscription or get something else. I've been
    > using Norton since DOS days. I know that NAV 2004 is a resource hog,
    > but I figure that's because it's working hard to keep my machine clean.
    > Question: does anyone who's been using Norton for more than a cycle or
    > two know whether 2005 is any better or worse than 2004 in the resource
    > department? As good as I've got I can live with, but don't really want
    > to take a step back.
    >
    > (Why is this question being posed in a flightsim newsgroup? Mainly
    > because the only time system resources become a serious issue is when
    > I'm running Flight Simulator, and I figured the folks here would
    > understand why it matters.)
    >
    > _________________________________________________________
    > Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
    > Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    Norton AV is a resource hog because it's poorly written, not because
    it's working hard :-) . And nothing's changed with 2005 - it's been that way
    for years. My long-standing advice has always been to dump Norton, free up
    some resources, and get back control of the machine. Norton lives on the
    name, not the quality of the product. There are FAR better AV alternatives
    out there (NOD32 and Kaspersky are at the top of my list). If you do decide
    to dump Norton, and I hope you do, be sure to get the "remover" program from
    Symantic (downloadable from their website) as that's the only was to unhook
    all the junk that that's been written to both the HDD and the Registry.

    Trip

    ---------------------------------------

    "David Wilson-Okamura" <David Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> wrote in
    message news:1115869640.12202@forums.simradar.com...
    > It's time to renew my subscription or get something else. I've been
    > using Norton since DOS days. I know that NAV 2004 is a resource hog,
    > but I figure that's because it's working hard to keep my machine clean.
    > Question: does anyone who's been using Norton for more than a cycle or
    > two know whether 2005 is any better or worse than 2004 in the resource
    > department? As good as I've got I can live with, but don't really want
    > to take a step back.
    >
    > (Why is this question being posed in a flightsim newsgroup? Mainly
    > because the only time system resources become a serious issue is when
    > I'm running Flight Simulator, and I figured the folks here would
    > understand why it matters.)
    >
    > _________________________________________________________
    > Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
    > Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: RIPEMD160

    Hi Trip,

    On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:07:12 -0400, you wrote:

    > Norton AV is a resource hog because it's poorly written, not because
    > it's working hard :-)

    [snip]

    > There are FAR better AV alternatives out there (NOD32 and Kaspersky
    > are at the top of my list).

    I'll second your opinion/suggestion here on both counts! I'm a long
    time and happy NOD32 user myself. I like Kaspersky too, but it is a
    bit slower and more resource hungry than NOD32 (though still nowhere
    near as bad as NAV, and I feel it does its job better than NAV as
    well).

    - --
    Melissa

    PGP Public Keys: http://www.freewebs.com/kuviahunnihautik/

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQCVAwUBQpIVyzEYqNTZBqoEAQN+UwP/bSL0WzRs/7TY1Jm81B2FdXv1qRmhj5gz
    5skX6FYslCwIdQfSEMEOmdMuQXKM9q1F9gs+L/PuZ3rGNP/x6rP4IdZwQzdwHAKy
    VGQqr/TsUh1eAul+WNVhJThyvhFCqjZslegqSofXHbeuXUT4ols7JIOQArvvi7DP
    EH4UgQ4Y/EU=
    =o3gl
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:07:12 -0400, "Trip Lane" <Trip@hotmail.com>
    brought the following to our attention:

    > Norton AV is a resource hog because it's poorly written, not because
    >it's working hard :-) . And nothing's changed with 2005 - it's been that way
    >for years. My long-standing advice has always been to dump Norton, free up
    >some resources, and get back control of the machine. Norton lives on the
    >name, not the quality of the product. There are FAR better AV alternatives
    >out there (NOD32 and Kaspersky are at the top of my list). If you do decide
    >to dump Norton, and I hope you do, be sure to get the "remover" program from
    >Symantic (downloadable from their website) as that's the only was to unhook
    >all the junk that that's been written to both the HDD and the Registry.
    >

    Trip.. also have a suspicion that a virus or two is released from time
    to time.. scaring everyone into buying product.. and some poor-smuck
    fallguy is hauled in for display to the public. It's one of those
    thesis-synthesis dialectic things.

    -G
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    NOD32 is what I'm using also Melissa. And it's a truly great product.
    Like you, I found Kaspersky a little on the slow side but it's a close
    second. I don't think folks could go wrong with either but NOD32 just
    "feels" better to me. Less resources used, faster updating, and it's stopped
    cold every virus I've ever encountered. And never, ever, a false positive.
    Good stuff indeed.

    Trip

    ---------------------------------------------------

    "Lawn Dart" <willkayakforfoodREMOVE_THIS@gmx.net> wrote in message
    news:tqzzscw76qdi$.dlg@uni-berlin.de...
    > I'll second your opinion/suggestion here on both counts! I'm a long
    > time and happy NOD32 user myself. I like Kaspersky too, but it is a
    > bit slower and more resource hungry than NOD32 (though still nowhere
    > near as bad as NAV, and I feel it does its job better than NAV as
    > well).
    >
    > - --
    > Melissa
    >
    > PGP Public Keys: http://www.freewebs.com/kuviahunnihautik/
    >
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    >
    > iQCVAwUBQpIVyzEYqNTZBqoEAQN+UwP/bSL0WzRs/7TY1Jm81B2FdXv1qRmhj5gz
    > 5skX6FYslCwIdQfSEMEOmdMuQXKM9q1F9gs+L/PuZ3rGNP/x6rP4IdZwQzdwHAKy
    > VGQqr/TsUh1eAul+WNVhJThyvhFCqjZslegqSofXHbeuXUT4ols7JIOQArvvi7DP
    > EH4UgQ4Y/EU=
    > =o3gl
    > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    David Wilson-Okamura wrote:
    > It's time to renew my subscription or get something else. I've been
    > using Norton since DOS days. I know that NAV 2004 is a resource hog,
    > but I figure that's because it's working hard to keep my machine clean.
    > Question: does anyone who's been using Norton for more than a cycle or
    > two know whether 2005 is any better or worse than 2004 in the resource
    > department? As good as I've got I can live with, but don't really want
    > to take a step back.
    >
    > (Why is this question being posed in a flightsim newsgroup? Mainly
    > because the only time system resources become a serious issue is when
    > I'm running Flight Simulator, and I figured the folks here would
    > understand why it matters.)
    >
    > _________________________________________________________
    > Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
    > Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!

    I've been using Norton since 1994. My subscription just ran out last
    week so I switched to the protection provided by my isp, Road Runner.
    The company is Computer Associates, Ez Anti virus is the software. This
    package also comes with EZ Firewall, Spy & Add blockers. I figured free
    was worth a try.

    Since I uninstalled Nortons and turned off the windows firewall
    everything runs so much better. I haven't had a lock up, regular
    occurrence, since.

    I had to buy FS 2002 because 2004 was so sluggish. I'm not having
    problems with 2004 anymore, I hope:)

    Mike
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 May 2005 09:46:21 -0500, David Wilson-Okamura <David
    Wilson-Okamura@forums.simradar.com> wrote:

    >It's time to renew my subscription or get something else. I've been
    >using Norton since DOS days. I know that NAV 2004 is a resource hog,
    >but I figure that's because it's working hard to keep my machine clean.
    >Question: does anyone who's been using Norton for more than a cycle or
    >two know whether 2005 is any better or worse than 2004 in the resource
    >department? As good as I've got I can live with, but don't really want
    >to take a step back.
    >
    >(Why is this question being posed in a flightsim newsgroup? Mainly
    >because the only time system resources become a serious issue is when
    >I'm running Flight Simulator, and I figured the folks here would
    >understand why it matters.)
    >
    >_________________________________________________________
    >Posted via the -Web to Usenet- forums at http://forums.simradar.com
    >Visit www.simradar.com and try our Flight Simulation Search Engine!


    I just uninstalled Norton 2005 and replaced it with PC Cillin Internet
    Security which has Anti Virus, Firewall and everything else. My PC
    seems to jump from screen to screen now, compared to the way it was
    with Norton.

    http://www.trendmicro.com/en/products/us/personal.htm


    Bob
  9. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    Trip Lane wrote:
    be sure to get the "remover" program from
    > Symantic (downloadable from their website) as that's the only was to unhook
    > all the junk that that's been written to both the HDD and the Registry.
    >
    > Trip

    Looked but no see. They don't have a search option (that I could see) so
    where is that remove tool?


    --

    boB,
    Master_Caution_70

    U.S. Army Aviation (retired)
    Central Texas - 5NM West of Gray Army Airfield (KGRK)
  10. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    It's here:
    http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039? .
    If uninstalling Norton 2004 or 2005 you won't need the cleanup program if
    the uninstaller completes normally. But, since it only does a complete
    uninstall about half the time the SymNRT.exe file from section 2 may well be
    needed. If you're uninstalling Norton 2003 or earlier, you must use the
    Rnav2003.exe file from section 3. Even on a normal uninstall of 2004 or 2005
    there will probably be some "stuff" left in the Registry but there isn't yet
    a tool available to do the final cleanup. It's just amazing that a company
    has to write special code to undo what the original code did to the system
    and then couldn't undo itself. Peter Norton would never have let that
    happen... :-) .

    Trip

    ------------------------------------------

    "boB" <akitaREMOVECAPS77@excite.Icom> wrote in message
    news:f2uke.121491$h6.5854@tornado.texas.rr.com...
    > Trip Lane wrote:
    > be sure to get the "remover" program from
    >> Symantic (downloadable from their website) as that's the only was to
    >> unhook all the junk that that's been written to both the HDD and the
    >> Registry.
    >>
    >> Trip
    >
    > Looked but no see. They don't have a search option (that I could see) so
    > where is that remove tool?
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > boB,
    > Master_Caution_70
    >
    > U.S. Army Aviation (retired)
    > Central Texas - 5NM West of Gray Army Airfield (KGRK)
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

    This page tells you how to get everything out of the registry also
    using regedit. I used it and it worked perfectly. Print it out and
    follow the instructions word for word.


    http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2004110113064039?Open&src=&docid=2005033108162039&nsf=tsgeninfo.nsf&view=docid&dtype=&prod=&ver=&osv=&osv_lvl=


    Bob

    On Mon, 23 May 2005 20:53:31 -0400, "Trip Lane" <Trip@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    > It's here:
    >http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039? .
    >If uninstalling Norton 2004 or 2005 you won't need the cleanup program if
    >the uninstaller completes normally. But, since it only does a complete
    >uninstall about half the time the SymNRT.exe file from section 2 may well be
    >needed. If you're uninstalling Norton 2003 or earlier, you must use the
    >Rnav2003.exe file from section 3. Even on a normal uninstall of 2004 or 2005
    >there will probably be some "stuff" left in the Registry but there isn't yet
    >a tool available to do the final cleanup. It's just amazing that a company
    >has to write special code to undo what the original code did to the system
    >and then couldn't undo itself. Peter Norton would never have let that
    >happen... :-) .
    >
    >Trip
    >
    >------------------------------------------
    >
    >"boB" <akitaREMOVECAPS77@excite.Icom> wrote in message
    >news:f2uke.121491$h6.5854@tornado.texas.rr.com...
    >> Trip Lane wrote:
    >> be sure to get the "remover" program from
    >>> Symantic (downloadable from their website) as that's the only was to
    >>> unhook all the junk that that's been written to both the HDD and the
    >>> Registry.
    >>>
    >>> Trip
    >>
    >> Looked but no see. They don't have a search option (that I could see) so
    >> where is that remove tool?
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> boB,
    >> Master_Caution_70
    >>
    >> U.S. Army Aviation (retired)
    >> Central Texas - 5NM West of Gray Army Airfield (KGRK)
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Norton Microsoft Video Games