Norton

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:30:07 -0000, Geoff A. wrote:

> I've recently been advised via these newsgroups to ditch most aspects of
> Systemworks (possibly excluding the AV) and use win XP's own utilities, as
> well as other free anti spyware and anti adware programs.
> Can someone also please advise on Norton Internet security Professional?
> Should I be using this? If I don't, what will protect me from whatever it
> does????
> Thanks.

I'm not a fan of Symantec BUT if it's working well for you and it's already
installed - why not use it?

I never worry about what I "should" be using. Instead I look for programs
that do what they're supposed to, do it well and that don't cause other
problems with my system. If Symantec is behaving itself on your system,
leave it alone. Trying to remove it could cause another whole world of
woes...

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows Shell/User

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In article <djOPd.10439$vI5.398@fe01.buzzardnews.com>, noone@here.com,
Miss Perspicacia Tick says...

> My opinion is to ditch the software firewall altogether - I have a router
> which acts as a hardware firewall - you have no idea how much faster my
> system has been since ditching it - it munches clock cycles like - well like
> a clock cycle munching thing.
>
> If you've no need for a router then, yes, ZA is good.
>
>

And this catches all your outgoing also?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In article <#oSueMhEFHA.4052@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
bruce_a_chambers@h0tmail.com, Bruce Chambers says...

> Miss Perspicacia Tick wrote:
> >
> >
> > My opinion is to ditch the software firewall altogether - I have a router
> > which acts as a hardware firewall - you have no idea how much faster my
> > system has been since ditching it - it munches clock cycles like - well like
> > a clock cycle munching thing.
> >
>
>
> I disagree.
>
> If you use a router with NAT, it's still a very good idea to use a
> 3rd party software firewall. Like WinXP's built-in firewall,
> NAT-capable routers do nothing to protect the user from him/herself (or
> any "curious," over-confident teenagers in the home). Again -- and I
> *cannot* emphasize this enough -- almost all spyware and many Trojans
> and worms are downloaded and installed deliberately (albeit unknowingly)
> by the user. So a software firewall, such as Sygate or ZoneAlarm, that
> can detect and warn the user of unauthorized out-going traffic is an
> important element of protecting one's privacy and security. (Remember:
> Most antivirus applications do not even scan for or protect you from
> adware/spyware, because, after all, you've installed them yourself, so
> you must want them there, right?)
>
> I use both a router with NAT and Sygate Personal Firewall, even
> though I generally know better than to install scumware. When it comes
> to computer security and protecting my privacy, I prefer the old "belt
> and suspenders" approach. In the professional IT community, this is
> also known as a "layered defense." Basically, it comes down to never,
> ever "putting all of your eggs in one basket."
>
>
>
>

Couldn't of said it better myself............ ;0)

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I am using Norton Systems Works. I have found their features one button
check up (which does registry scan and its shortcut scan checks for
mismatched or missing programs and file shortcuts) very useful.

The feature Norton Utilities (which have optimize performance and find and
fix problems) is also very useful.
Is their any free alternatives for these features or we can do without these
features?

Your view in this will be very useful.
TIA.

<billurie@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:edqpxyiEFHA.3416@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Sharon F wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:30:07 -0000, Geoff A. wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I've recently been advised via these newsgroups to ditch most aspects of
> >>Systemworks (possibly excluding the AV) and use win XP's own utilities,
as
> >>well as other free anti spyware and anti adware programs.
> >>Can someone also please advise on Norton Internet security Professional?
> >>Should I be using this? If I don't, what will protect me from whatever
it
> >>does????
> >>Thanks.
> >
> >
> > I'm not a fan of Symantec BUT if it's working well for you and it's
already
> > installed - why not use it?
> >
> > I never worry about what I "should" be using. Instead I look for
programs
> > that do what they're supposed to, do it well and that don't cause other
> > problems with my system. If Symantec is behaving itself on your system,
> > leave it alone. Trying to remove it could cause another whole world of
> > woes...
> >
> Sharon is SO right!!! When a Norton program goes bad,
> just uninstalling it can be a monumental task, involving
> pages and pages of printout of instructions, and then
> messing with the (ugh) registry.
>
> --
> William B. Lurie

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

"Geoff A." wrote:
>
> I've recently been advised via these newsgroups
> to ditch most aspects of Systemworks (possibly
> excluding the AV) and use win XP's own utilities,
> as well as other free anti spyware and anti
> adware programs. (snip)


Well, then you've been advised wrong. There is absolutely nothing wrong
with Norton SystemWorks (or the individual components purchased separately),
as many millions of long-term users can attest. Each of the individual
components, while rarely the very best in the industry, are more than
adequate for most users. Therefore, unless you have a particular reason to
demand more, I suspect the same may be true for you.

And, of course, nothing stops you from also using WinXP's tools when they
serve you better. For example, I use Window's Disk Defragmentor instead of
Norton's because my computer feels slightly faster afterwards, but rely
heavily on Ghost to back up my computer (it has restored my computer twice
with only very minor problems afterward - Microsoft Office had to be
reactivated, for example).

Finally, freeware alternatives are a very mixed bag. Some work well, and
some can cause more harm than good. Likewise, some are updated and supported
well, while others are not. I personally would never comfortably rely on
freeware for the critical, and potentially damaging, activities reliably
handled by SystemWorks (disk backups, virus scans, disk and Windows repairs,
and so on).

One final note. You talked about trashing SystemWorks except for
Anti-Virus. The individual components of SystemWorks cannot be installed
separately and work properly (the documentation mentions this). Instead, if
you actually decide to trash SystemWorks, you would need to purchase the
stand-alone version of Norton Anti-Virus.

Stewart