Page 1 of 1

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

Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:39 am
by blebs
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!

Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:50 am
by qball15j
That's why I say use AVG... :D

Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:24 am
by YARDofSTUF
ya i had that on the comp i got to fix and updated it, it missed a virus that avast found.

Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:52 am
by blebs
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.

Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:53 pm
by Storm90
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.

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:03 am
by blebs
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.

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:54 am
by fredra
So would you give Norton 2004 the overall stamp of approval?
Cheers :)

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 2:05 pm
by Storm90
Thats good to here blebbs.

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 3:30 pm
by blebs
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.

Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:09 pm
by fredra
blebs
I value your judgement so I will wait for your evaluation.
I am still using 2003 Professional Edition
Cheers :)