- Jul 1, 2008
- 4,491
- 0
- 22,780
Symantec Campaigns Against Free Antivirus
- Thread starter Marcus Yam
- Start date
- Status
ubernoobie
Distinguished
- May 29, 2009
- 886
- 0
- 19,010
Avast (Home Edition) scans web pages, IMs, and even P2P application traffic. Zonealarm and Comodo firewalls (free versions) provide excellent incoming and outgoing network traffic control and security. The video is a little misleading when it starts addressing security software.
Talk about wasting two minutes of my life. That was one of the dumbest goddamn, pieces of shit "commercials" I have ever seen. I will laugh when Microsoft's "free" anti-virus program outperforms Symantec's shit program.
Unlike that dogshit commercial tries to tell people, Microsoft's anti-virus program is not free, since you need Windows to run it. I figure that that is the least Microsoft can do since I gave them $300 for the OS.
Unlike that dogshit commercial tries to tell people, Microsoft's anti-virus program is not free, since you need Windows to run it. I figure that that is the least Microsoft can do since I gave them $300 for the OS.
ag3nt smith
Distinguished
- Feb 12, 2009
- 23
- 0
- 18,510
Ok I see why Norton wants people to pay for their product; it keeps their company running. But that video is as misleading as Apple's Get A Mac commercials. My free version of Avast scans webpages; blocks hackers and scans my e-mail. NOD32 30-day trial can be downloaded over and over again and it scans e-mail and webpages. Avast will tell you if a website is infested with malware; but it's up to the user to continue or not. Comodo Firewall is freeware and it kicks major ass aswell as blocking intrusions and DDoS attacks. But they got one thing right; they don't offer recovery disks; but computer manufacturers do, and if you build your systems you obviously know what to do.
I've had more customers complain about Norton than anything. If Norton finds a virus in a system file it deletes it; often causing system corruption and BSODs. I have put over 200 of my customers on Avast Home and they love it so much better than Norton.
I've had more customers complain about Norton than anything. If Norton finds a virus in a system file it deletes it; often causing system corruption and BSODs. I have put over 200 of my customers on Avast Home and they love it so much better than Norton.
The_Blood_Raven
Distinguished
- Jan 2, 2008
- 2,567
- 0
- 20,790
I love Avast, it is a great free virus protector. I hate Norton, I wouldn't use it if I was PAID $100 a year to do so. Nod32 is a great virus protector and it only costs $30 and wont ruin your computer.
So Norton sucks balls and should never, ever, be used on ANY PC just like Mcafee? Your catching on.
So Norton sucks balls and should never, ever, be used on ANY PC just like Mcafee? Your catching on.
Transmaniacon
Distinguished
- Nov 3, 2008
- 1,617
- 0
- 20,160
The average PC user will find more than enough security from a free anti-virus solution. I am glad Microsoft went through with this, they really ought to include it with the operating system, and offer a complete package, ready to go after installation.
SEP 11 (aka Symantec Endpoint Protection)+ LiveUpdate Server are the two biggest trouble software solutions on my network. If my vendor allowed me I will deleted SEP on the spot. It accounts for 80% of all my problems. And their Enterprise Support is one of the worst out there. Every time I have to fix something they ask me to install the new version, but only clean install fixes the issue on hand. The biggest problem is that every time the new version fix something, but it breaks something else. It is devil circle. Just search on the Internet and see how many problems are reported.
FAIL
still won't buy... ya know... the internet is not that dangerous if you know how to use it in a wise manner.
you NEED to get a virus, spywear, adwear, worm, ...etc. at least once in your life in order to learn how not to let em' get you the next time.
stay away from shiny links and good to be true ads like "YOU JUST WON 1M $" and stuff like that.
There are plenty of free products that does the job of protecting you. just make sure you don't click ON an executable file before knowing what is it.
If you need almost perfect protection for like... protecting your host or very important data on a network... it's worth the money.
still won't buy... ya know... the internet is not that dangerous if you know how to use it in a wise manner.
you NEED to get a virus, spywear, adwear, worm, ...etc. at least once in your life in order to learn how not to let em' get you the next time.
stay away from shiny links and good to be true ads like "YOU JUST WON 1M $" and stuff like that.
There are plenty of free products that does the job of protecting you. just make sure you don't click ON an executable file before knowing what is it.
If you need almost perfect protection for like... protecting your host or very important data on a network... it's worth the money.
This ad is amusing.Im sorry Norton is the worst antivirus ive ever seen.Ive seen it slow machines to a crawl,BSOD them,miss blatant viruses,have viruses comprimise it and block all net acess even after its uninstalled.MSE is actually damn good,its the first av ive seen that as soon as i stick an infected thumb drive in the machine it tells me its removed the crap that was on it.MSE picks up stuff AVG and Mcafee miss ,even rootkits.
The only problem ive had with it is installing it on some machines that have Onecare installed(theres a cleanup tool for that),no proper windows installer(on un-updated xp machines),not genuine or totally messed up with viruses(on xp machines where nothing will run due to virus curroption of certain key files.)There is also a minor bug in xp where the icon wont show up in the system tray but a window will pop up.They might have fixed that in the full release but there is a patch out for that.Finally it takes a long time to scan since it looks in all manner archives.Apart from that its the best antivirus ive used, my machines runs faster than it did when i used avg and its found stuff that it and spysweeper missed and i thought i was clean.Norton and Mcafee are really worrying about this.
The only problem ive had with it is installing it on some machines that have Onecare installed(theres a cleanup tool for that),no proper windows installer(on un-updated xp machines),not genuine or totally messed up with viruses(on xp machines where nothing will run due to virus curroption of certain key files.)There is also a minor bug in xp where the icon wont show up in the system tray but a window will pop up.They might have fixed that in the full release but there is a patch out for that.Finally it takes a long time to scan since it looks in all manner archives.Apart from that its the best antivirus ive used, my machines runs faster than it did when i used avg and its found stuff that it and spysweeper missed and i thought i was clean.Norton and Mcafee are really worrying about this.
nekatreven
Distinguished
- Feb 20, 2007
- 415
- 0
- 18,780
Windows has a built in firewall that is just fine for most users.....don't sit there and tell my they aren't FAR more likely to get infected by gambling online and downloading their porn.
For support, retail PC users have their manufacturer (which is no worse than Symantec's support, who probably sit in the very next cubicle at the call center), retail OS purchasers have MS support (which contrary to some rants, is excellent).
Having a firewall and blocking intrusions are the same things, unless you mean updates to the OS, which Norton doesn't do anyway, Windows updates does.
Webpage scanners and safe/block lists slow down your system and are mostly based on user input anyway. Someone has to get infected first for the flags to go up...Symantec doesn't care if its you.
Their backup and recovery options are no better than free options and other WAY better commercial options are out there for less money.
...basically for all of their points, I either don't need that "feature" or it blows, really, really hard. (except for the sucking it does of system resources)
For support, retail PC users have their manufacturer (which is no worse than Symantec's support, who probably sit in the very next cubicle at the call center), retail OS purchasers have MS support (which contrary to some rants, is excellent).
Having a firewall and blocking intrusions are the same things, unless you mean updates to the OS, which Norton doesn't do anyway, Windows updates does.
Webpage scanners and safe/block lists slow down your system and are mostly based on user input anyway. Someone has to get infected first for the flags to go up...Symantec doesn't care if its you.
Their backup and recovery options are no better than free options and other WAY better commercial options are out there for less money.
...basically for all of their points, I either don't need that "feature" or it blows, really, really hard. (except for the sucking it does of system resources)
More problems had me with symantec ghost many mobos are not supported and forum support is the worst.The only good thing symantec has is symantec antivirus cause it can be used easily on domains.Freeware FTW
At one time, Norton's was a great product....ABOUT 15 Years ago!!!!!!!!
Since then they are BLOATWARE............
My God, Norton.....You are so far out of touch. Norton's does work, but its size is so bloated that it always drastically slow down any computer.....
Get a clue Norton!!!
Since then they are BLOATWARE............
My God, Norton.....You are so far out of touch. Norton's does work, but its size is so bloated that it always drastically slow down any computer.....
Get a clue Norton!!!
umm... think the vid's gone?
Anyway, I wouldn't call the windows one free, I'd call it a part of windows. And seeing as how I'd rather risk viruses than suffer the constant slowdown of having a virus scanner, I sure as hell don't want to pay for one. Release one that has NO noticeable effect on my PC's performance or usability (except for killing viruses) then I might buy that.
Anyway, I wouldn't call the windows one free, I'd call it a part of windows. And seeing as how I'd rather risk viruses than suffer the constant slowdown of having a virus scanner, I sure as hell don't want to pay for one. Release one that has NO noticeable effect on my PC's performance or usability (except for killing viruses) then I might buy that.
Norton is nothing more than Bloatware.
Even worse, it can cause problems which can make it difficult to work on a Norton Infested system.
If Norton were to get their way, you could possibly say goodbye to such tools as MalwareByte's AntiMalware, SpyBot - Search & Desroy and many other very useful tools.
Chances are, Norton would probably do what ever they could to get rid of them. Probably by buying up the competition and throwing away the software or worse, incorporate it into their own, thereby making it worthless.
Even worse, it can cause problems which can make it difficult to work on a Norton Infested system.
If Norton were to get their way, you could possibly say goodbye to such tools as MalwareByte's AntiMalware, SpyBot - Search & Desroy and many other very useful tools.
Chances are, Norton would probably do what ever they could to get rid of them. Probably by buying up the competition and throwing away the software or worse, incorporate it into their own, thereby making it worthless.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Nvidia 4700 Super vs Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse
- Started by Hyedwtditpm
- Replies: 3
-
Question Something might've gone wrong during PC upgrade.
- Started by Karasio
- Replies: 3
-
Question My pc beeps 9 times while shutting down. How do i fix it.
- Started by Jeremy32
- Replies: 3
-
-
RTX 4070 vs RX 7900 GRE faceoff: Which mainstream graphics card is better?- Started by Admin
- Replies: 5
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram