other side of nortons

  mobileman1953 19:20 10 Apr 2005

been running nortons internet security 2005 since it was released, ran 2003 before that apart from a few minor problems it has served me well, does not slow down machine or cause any problems, updates itself automatically every week or when new viruses are on the rounds i would recommend it to anybody, this is my opinion i suppose others will disagree

  GANDALF <|:-)> 19:44 10 Apr 2005

Norton must be doing something right or else they would have gone under yonks ago. However I have seen to many slow computers that miraculously speeded up once Norton was removed and some of the computers went from a crawl to super speed. The complicated process for deleting Norton should give some indication on how invasive it is. I ha ea feeling that Norton sems to conflict with one or more common programmes on a computer and the fact that it takes a huge amount of RAM to fire it up can cause other problems. Finally, there are IMHO, much better firewalls and AV programmes around that are free and I fail to see why anyone is paying for a home AV/firewall.


  jimv7 20:18 10 Apr 2005

Another thing to consider is that norton actually changes windows system files, not a good thing.

  VoG II 20:23 10 Apr 2005

It is a bit like Marmite really ;o)

  mobileman1953 20:26 10 Apr 2005

seems i am out voted still it suits me

  hzhzhz 20:34 10 Apr 2005

I was running norton firewall but have now got rid.It caused more problems than it cured.

  Mr Mistoffelees 20:39 10 Apr 2005

I've been using Norton software for 7 years, currently using Norton Systemworks 2003 and Internet Security 2003. For me they just work, unobtrusively, no problems and no slow down.

  jimv7 20:48 10 Apr 2005

VoG™, nowt wrong with marmite,

Mr Mistoffelees, remove norton and see your puter speed up.

  Mr Mistoffelees 21:31 10 Apr 2005

If you have a reasonably powerful pc with plenty of ram I don't believe Norton's will slow your pc down to a noticeable extent. What little difference there may be with my pc would, I am sure, only be detectable with benchmarking software apart from the few seconds extra time taken booting-up.

  Flying Teddy 21:43 10 Apr 2005

I've just 'uninstalled' norton systemworks 2003 and norton internet security 2003. I then ran 'RegSeeker', and found 148 registry entries still remaining related to Norton or Symantec. I then deleted 89 further entries manually. Not to mention a whole pile of stuff in explorer that remained. Altogether a very unsatisfactory uninstall.

Although in isolation it did a good job, unless I read a great deal of evidence on these pages to the contrary, I remain of the opinion that Norton is far too insidious, and leaves far too much garbage behind for my peace of mind.

I'm now with AVG (which incidentally immediately picked up two virus' that Nortn hadn't) and Zone Alarm.

DYOR and good luck.

  PA28 21:53 10 Apr 2005

I used to defend Norton and used it under Windows 98 - it got me out of more than a few problems. The golden rule, I found, was to let it do as little as possible automatically.

Under XP I have found it far less useful. I don't trust Speedisk after it seriously trashed my NTFS disk (this may not have been Norton's fault, but I ran the program and the trashing was unstoppable total destruction) and like others AVG and Zonealarm do a better job for nothing. In fact the only thing I use it for is a quick Windows check now - and Registry Mechanic (V3 free) again does a better job.

So sorry Norton, I no longer defend you. Even when I buy new hardware and get a free 6 month trial, I now don't even bother to put it on.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5T review

How to draw a mandala

iPhone X review

Les meilleures enceintes Bluetooth à moins de 150 euros