Norton 2002 and XP?

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

I just put XP on my machine, and was wondering if Norton System Works 2002
will run on an XP machine. (I don't even remember when XP came out.). I
don't want to install if it just messes XP up and doesn't work.
Anyone know?
-Pete
10 answers Last reply
More about norton 2002
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    it works.. and it will give you 1 year of updates.. I have it on mine.. and
    it works just fine.. Rainy
    "Pete" <Pete@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:Rbnqe.7872$_A5.2910@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
    >I just put XP on my machine, and was wondering if Norton System Works 2002
    > will run on an XP machine. (I don't even remember when XP came out.). I
    > don't want to install if it just messes XP up and doesn't work.
    > Anyone know?
    > -Pete
    >
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Pete

    A newer version would not go amiss..

    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User
    http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


    "Pete" <Pete@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:Rbnqe.7872$_A5.2910@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
    >I just put XP on my machine, and was wondering if Norton System Works 2002
    > will run on an XP machine. (I don't even remember when XP came out.). I
    > don't want to install if it just messes XP up and doesn't work.
    > Anyone know?
    > -Pete
    >
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
    > Pete
    >
    > A newer version would not go amiss..

    Personally, I'd give Norton a miss altogether...
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Rainy wrote:

    > Would you please be specific :) you said that some of Norton's
    > utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
    > Rainy
    >
    > ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
    > AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
    > better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
    >
    Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
    registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
    my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
    don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
    *do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
    the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
    can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
    want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
    been rather a lot of threads about that lately.

    CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
    "duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
    alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
    I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
    - I know they removed it in later versions.

    Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
    XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
    XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
    cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
    machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
    sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
    run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
    with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
    firewalls.

    But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
    and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
    the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.

    Cheers,

    Malke
    --
    Elephant Boy Computers
    www.elephantboycomputers.com
    "Don't Panic!"
    MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Hi Malke, I may be wrong.. but doesn't Windoctor correct missing shortcuts?
    As far as I know it doesn't correct registry errors?.. I have jp power tools
    for that.. I do know a little bit.. but not enough to manually fix the
    registry but there have been times I have done just that after getting step
    by step instructions.

    The reason I am so gung ho about Windoctor is the visible difference it
    makes on my computer. I do use a defragger outside of xp, simply because xp
    defragger takes forever and a day! :) So I use Diskeeper Lite.. it works
    great and it's quick..I have owned a computer going on 7 years..my last
    "tech built" computer was about a year ago.. and I try to learn at every
    opportunity! But I have a lot to learn.. just know what works for me..
    Rainy

    ps. I have come to find out, people swear by Norton's or hate it...

    pss... I never mess with duplicate files.. I did about 6 years ago.. and
    windows 98 would not boot! :) sometimes I learn the hard way.

    "Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
    news:Oby2OnjbFHA.3200@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Rainy wrote:
    >
    >> Would you please be specific :) you said that some of Norton's
    >> utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
    >> Rainy
    >>
    >> ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
    >> AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
    >> better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
    >>
    > Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
    > registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
    > my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
    > don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
    > *do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
    > the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
    > can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
    > want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
    > been rather a lot of threads about that lately.
    >
    > CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
    > "duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
    > alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
    > I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
    > - I know they removed it in later versions.
    >
    > Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
    > XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
    > XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
    > cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
    > machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
    > sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
    > run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
    > with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
    > firewalls.
    >
    > But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
    > and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
    > the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Malke
    > --
    > Elephant Boy Computers
    > www.elephantboycomputers.com
    > "Don't Panic!"
    > MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Norton 2002 will work, BUT you need to install it fresh for XP. If it was
    already installed under 98/ME, it will not work correctly under XP. Norton
    loads different detailed software from the CD, depending on the operating
    system on the PC at the time the software is installed. The pre-XP software
    is usually not compatible with XP and vice versa. Thus, I recommned
    uninstalling all Norton products and reinstalling them.

    The advice to uninstall/reinstall applies to all near-system level products
    by Norton, McAfee, and to all CD/VD writing software. Additionally, most
    pre-XP CD/DVD witing software requires one r more patches to be XP
    compatible, or a newer version is required. Finally, your pre-XP DVD player
    will probably not work, and you will need to obtain one that is compatible
    with XP.

    Other software may or may not work under XP and/or under XP+SP2. Check the
    support website for each software, if you have any problems.

    Had you run the free Microsoft upgrade advisor before upgrading to XP, it
    would have flagged potential software incompatibilities and offerred this
    sam advice.


    "Pete" <Pete@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:Rbnqe.7872$_A5.2910@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
    >I just put XP on my machine, and was wondering if Norton System Works 2002
    > will run on an XP machine. (I don't even remember when XP came out.). I
    > don't want to install if it just messes XP up and doesn't work.
    > Anyone know?
    > -Pete
    >
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    my mistake.. it does scan the registry and offers to fix problems.. well I
    learned something today... :) I just went online to find out exactly what
    windoctor does.. :) Rainy
    "Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
    news:Oby2OnjbFHA.3200@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > Rainy wrote:
    >
    >> Would you please be specific :) you said that some of Norton's
    >> utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
    >> Rainy
    >>
    >> ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
    >> AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
    >> better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
    >>
    > Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
    > registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
    > my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
    > don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
    > *do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
    > the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
    > can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
    > want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
    > been rather a lot of threads about that lately.
    >
    > CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
    > "duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
    > alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
    > I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
    > - I know they removed it in later versions.
    >
    > Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
    > XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
    > XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
    > cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
    > machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
    > sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
    > run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
    > with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
    > firewalls.
    >
    > But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
    > and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
    > the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Malke
    > --
    > Elephant Boy Computers
    > www.elephantboycomputers.com
    > "Don't Panic!"
    > MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    "Rainy" <rainydays38@sweetwrapz.net> wrote in message
    news:TgWqe.50197$nG6.35257@attbi_s22...
    > my mistake.. it does scan the registry and offers to fix problems.. well I
    > learned something today... :) I just went online to find out exactly what
    > windoctor does.. :) Rainy
    > "Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
    > news:Oby2OnjbFHA.3200@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > Rainy wrote:
    > >
    > >> Would you please be specific :) you said that some of Norton's
    > >> utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
    > >> Rainy
    > >>
    > >> ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
    > >> AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
    > >> better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
    > >>
    > > Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
    > > registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
    > > my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
    > > don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
    > > *do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
    > > the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
    > > can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
    > > want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
    > > been rather a lot of threads about that lately.
    > >
    > > CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
    > > "duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
    > > alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
    > > I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
    > > - I know they removed it in later versions.
    > >
    > > Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
    > > XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
    > > XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
    > > cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
    > > machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
    > > sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
    > > run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
    > > with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
    > > firewalls.
    > >
    > > But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
    > > and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
    > > the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > >
    > > Malke
    > > --
    > > Elephant Boy Computers
    > > www.elephantboycomputers.com
    > > "Don't Panic!"
    > > MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
    >
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    49408-8634-0880-0000-0000-5346-22
    "Rainy" <rainydays38@sweetwrapz.net> wrote in message
    news:TgWqe.50197$nG6.35257@attbi_s22...
    > my mistake.. it does scan the registry and offers to fix problems.. well I
    > learned something today... :) I just went online to find out exactly what
    > windoctor does.. :) Rainy
    > "Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
    > news:Oby2OnjbFHA.3200@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > Rainy wrote:
    > >
    > >> Would you please be specific :) you said that some of Norton's
    > >> utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
    > >> Rainy
    > >>
    > >> ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
    > >> AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
    > >> better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
    > >>
    > > Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
    > > registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
    > > my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
    > > don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
    > > *do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
    > > the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
    > > can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
    > > want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
    > > been rather a lot of threads about that lately.
    > >
    > > CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
    > > "duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
    > > alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
    > > I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
    > > - I know they removed it in later versions.
    > >
    > > Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
    > > XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
    > > XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
    > > cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
    > > machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
    > > sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
    > > run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
    > > with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
    > > firewalls.
    > >
    > > But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
    > > and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
    > > the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > >
    > > Malke
    > > --
    > > Elephant Boy Computers
    > > www.elephantboycomputers.com
    > > "Don't Panic!"
    > > MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
    >
    >
    >
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    "Rainy" <rainydays38@sweetwrapz.net> wrote in message
    news:TgWqe.50197$nG6.35257@attbi_s22...
    > my mistake.. it does scan the registry and offers to fix problems.. well I
    > learned something today... :) I just went online to find out exactly what
    > windoctor does.. :) Rainy
    > "Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
    > news:Oby2OnjbFHA.3200@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > Rainy wrote:
    > >
    > >> Would you please be specific :) you said that some of Norton's
    > >> utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
    > >> Rainy
    > >>
    > >> ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
    > >> AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
    > >> better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
    > >>
    > > Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
    > > registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
    > > my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
    > > don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
    > > *do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
    > > the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
    > > can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
    > > want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
    > > been rather a lot of threads about that lately.
    > >
    > > CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
    > > "duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
    > > alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
    > > I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
    > > - I know they removed it in later versions.
    > >
    > > Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
    > > XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
    > > XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
    > > cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
    > > machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
    > > sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
    > > run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
    > > with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
    > > firewalls.
    > >
    > > But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
    > > and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
    > > the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > >
    > > Malke
    > > --
    > > Elephant Boy Computers
    > > www.elephantboycomputers.com
    > > "Don't Panic!"
    > > MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
    >
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Norton Microsoft Windows XP