I'm not all that pleased with Norton AV 2004!

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:39 am

Norton 2004 just allowed me to become infected with Beagle A. Even after saying it deleted the file, I found 2 others that would have gone undetected had I not shut everything down, locked up internet access, and do a full system scan. Heck I even manually scanned the darn file before opening it and not a peep. I'm afraid it's going to have to do better then that for me to keep it and pay for it.

This is for the inquiring minds that like to know!

qball15j · Post by **qball15j** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:50 am

That's why I say use AVG...

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:24 am

ya i had that on the comp i got to fix and updated it, it missed a virus that avast found.

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:52 am

My other beef with it is that it takes forever to scan 10 gigs. A little over an hour and 10 minutes. My old 2000 would've done the samething in about 35 minutes.

Storm90 · Post by **Storm90** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:53 pm

Blebbs, My sister uses Norten to . She bought the 2004 version. She complained about in the same respect. She ended up reinstalling her 2003 version and bring its dats up to date. It was a good thing she did. She found three virus. She had said she was sure the computer had a virus by the way it was acting. But her new version of norton was showing nothing. She said she was going to email norton about this. I will have to contact her and see if she found out anything.

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:03 am

A little update: I unfairly beat upon Norton 2004 yesterday.

I found out later last night that what infected me was a variant of Beagle that at the time, I did not have the definitions for. I submitted what I had to Symantec and I see they had quite a few definition revisions yesterday. I guess it can't be expected to detect something that definitions don't exist for at the time.

Road Runner has been doing an excellent job of picking these things off before mail delivery however, this variant even got past them.

Watch yourselves people. The virus writers are working overtime right now.

fredra · Post by **fredra** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:54 am

So would you give Norton 2004 the overall stamp of approval?
Cheers

Storm90 · Post by **Storm90** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 2:05 pm

Thats good to here blebbs.

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 3:30 pm

Fredra I honestly don't know. I'm either so used to my 2000 version that I loved or this new thing isn't my bag. It takes for freaking ever to scan my files. 1:10 vs :35 with 2000. Sure, it has more features, but I'm not sure I like the trade off. Lets say that I'm still evaluating it.

fredra · Post by **fredra** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:09 pm

blebs
I value your judgement so I will wait for your evaluation.
I am still using 2003 Professional Edition
Cheers