Dolph Lundgren vs. Unicorn

shuacsays...

Agreed about Norton products sucking. In my 25 years as a PC enthusiast, I've tried all the AV products at one point or another and the New Orleans levy system had fewer breaches than Norton.

Duckman33says...

>> ^shuac:

Agreed about Norton products sucking. In my 25 years as a PC enthusiast, I've tried all the AV products at one point or another and the New Orleans levy system had fewer breaches than Norton.


That's why it's the #1 selling Av product, because it sucks so much.

Tymbrwulfsays...

@Duckman33: I've been a Norton user until '05, when I switched to ESET. As far as Norton goes, I wouldn't say it sucks, but it does not have a good track record over the past 5 years.

I would argue that your lack of development of FAST AV software is what gave you guys the shit reputation you have today. I heard Norton 2010 isn't as bad as previous versions, but I won't touch it until I read positive reviews citing benchmarks, detection rates, and other things.

I've recently made the switch over from ESET to Panda Cloud due to owning a netbook, and haven't looked back since.

Of course we all know the BEST AV out there: Common Sense™ 2011. Using this you'll avoid 99% of all viruses.

dingenssays...

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^dingens:
Norton products suck, but this is funny.

They do? Obviously you haven't used them recently. As someone who works for Symantec I can tell you they certainly don't suck.


That might well be the case.
But I agree with Tymbrwulf: BRAIN v0.9.2 together with a fully patched system is the best AV

CrushBugsays...

I have had so many bad experiences with Norton, and almost none of them had anything to do with the actual virus scanning. It was the interface, the self-updating, the nag screening, the OMFG why won't it uninstall! and all that crap.

Duckman33says...

That last post got all fucked up, let's try again.

Indeed. Common sense goes a long way! I have been a computer user since 1995, a support technician since 1999, and I have had a total of 2 viruses on my systems.

I can also say that back when I first worked here (1999) I wouldn't touch the consumer stuff either. It was bloated and basically took over the computer. But as you said, the 2010 products are much, much improved over the older stuff. Things may still get by us but that's rare and mostly due to new variants of old threats or new threats altogether. Other products may catch more threats but they also have a higher false positive rate. Norton products have the lowest false positive rate of any AV software in the market today. The main problem with AV products is they are reactive instead of proactive. Once we can get to a proactive state things will change drastically.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5278&review=Symantec+Norton+Antivirus+2010+Review

>> ^Tymbrwulf:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://duckman33.videosift.com" title="member since January 10th, 2008" class="profilelink"><strong style="color: rgb(43, 104, 238);">Duckman33: I've been a Norton user until '05, when I switched to ESET. As far as Norton goes, I wouldn't say it sucks, but it does not have a good track record over the past 5 years.
I would argue that your lack of development of FAST AV software is what gave you guys the shit reputation you have today. I heard Norton 2010 isn't as bad as previous versions, but I won't touch it until I read positive reviews citing benchmarks, detection rates, and other things.
I've recently made the switch over from ESET to Panda Cloud due to owning a netbook, and haven't looked back since.
Of course we all know the BEST AV out there: Common Sense™ 2011. Using this you'll avoid 99% of all viruses.


EDIT: /sigh, I give up...

Tymbrwulfsays...

@Duckman33 I'm glad they finally got their shit together when it comes to getting rid of the bloatware and CPU-killing. Good luck going up against MSE, they're rep is going up quick because of the seamless integration with windows (not surprising when both programs are made by the same company).

shuacsays...

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^shuac:
Agreed about Norton products sucking. In my 25 years as a PC enthusiast, I've tried all the AV products at one point or another and the New Orleans levy system had fewer breaches than Norton.

That's why it's the #1 selling Av product, because it sucks so much.


Yes, it's got a huge market share but not because it's an effective product. It's simply marketed well (this commercial for instance). And how much did it cost to produce this commercial? Those funds could have been used to make a better product, no? You see, son, maintaining/increasing market share is the important thing when you're as big as Norton, not program effectiveness.

I hate stating the obvious because it's such a waste of time & effort...but biggest does not mean best. I mean, duh. And aren't you just a tad biased, being a Norton employee? I have boatloads of PC experience. I've forgotten more about PCs than most people know and in my experience, Norton is a mediocre anti-virus/anti-malware shield.

Yes, I've used them recently. When you guys started using disc imaging tech for your install routines back in 2006-2007 (I may have the year wrong but you know what I mean), I figured I'd give you another try. Damn, it really did install the quickest I'd ever seen, I gotta give you that. But within the year, I found a fucking keylogger happily recording all my keystrokes. Seems to have slipped between the tightly-machined cracks of the #1 selling AV product. Well done. After changing all my passwords and getting a new debit card, I uninstalled that shit and never looked back.

These days, I run a combo of BitDefender and Emisoft Anti-Malware on Win 7 64 and manual-run-only version of Spybot. Emisoft in particular is a frighteningly effective malware shield. But I am completely non-loyal when it comes to AV programs. I buy a one year license and if I get stung during that year, out it goes.

Duckman33says...

>> ^shuac:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^shuac:
Agreed about Norton products sucking. In my 25 years as a PC enthusiast, I've tried all the AV products at one point or another and the New Orleans levy system had fewer breaches than Norton.

That's why it's the #1 selling Av product, because it sucks so much.

Yes, it's got a huge market share but not because it's an effective product. It's simply marketed well (this commercial for instance). And how much was it to produce this commercial? Those funds could have been used to make a better product, no? You see, son, market share is the important thing when you're as big as Norton, not program effectiveness.
I hate stating the obvious because it's such a waste of time & effort...but biggest does not mean best. I mean, duh. And aren't you just a tad biased, being a Norton employee? I have boatloads of PC experience. I've forgotten more about PCs than most people know and in my experience, Norton is a mediocre anti-virus/anti-malware shield.
Yes, I've used them recently. When you guys started using disc imaging tech for your install routines back in 2006-2007 (I may have the year wrong but you know what I mean), I figured I'd give you another try. Damn, it really did install the quickest I'd ever seen, I gotta give you that. But within the year, I found a fucking keylogger happily recording all my keystrokes. Seems to have slipped between the tightly-machined cracks of the #1 selling AV product. Well done. After changing all my passwords and getting a new debit card, I uninstalled that shit and never looked back.
These days, I run a combo of BitDefender and Emisoft Anti-Malware on Win 7 64 and manual-run-only version of Spybot. Emisoft in particular is a frighteningly effective malware shield. But I am completely non-loyal when it comes to AV programs. I buy a one year license and if I get stung during that year, out it goes.


Norton products were #1 in the market when I started here in '99 and we didn't have adverts like this back then, so what's you're explanation for that? Symantec didn't really start pushing the products until the last 5-6 years or so.

Yes I know that bigger isn't better, but Symantec has made strides to improve the product, and has accomplished that goal. Proven by the reviews and benchmark tests. And no I'm not biased. If it was shit, I'd be the first to say it was. I already admitted that I wouldn't touch the consumer products when I first started working here, what more do you want?

So let me get this straight, SON. You are blaming an AV software for your inadequacies? If you have "boatloads of PC experience" and have "forgotten more about PCs than most people know" you wouldn't get keyloggers on your system to begin with. I certainly have never had one on any of my systems. Guess you should stay away from warez, and games you download from torrent sites, eh? Because that's typically where they come from. Again, I have been using computers since '95 and I've had a total of 2 viruses, one from an ISP's installation floppy, and one that a roommate downloaded onto my system 2 years ago when I was at work which ended up to be a fake AV program or what I like to call extortionware. As Tymbrwulf said, you can't rely ONLY on AV, anti-spyware, and anti-malware products to protect your system, if you do you're a fool. It also takes common sense, OS patches, software patches, etc. Viruses/malware/spyware can, and do use vulnerabilities in OSes and installed software to infect a machine even though it has a 100% perfectly working AV software installed on it. But why am I telling you this? You're the computer expert you should already know this right?

"I hate stating the obvious because it's such a waste of time & effort", but there's no AV software that 100% effective. If you find one let me know because I can tell you it doesn't exist. As I said in a previous post, things will always get by AV software because they depend on customer submissions, and definitions in order to stop threats. They are REACTIVE not PROACTIVE. Which means if a new variant of an old threat, or a new threat altogether gets released in the wild. Guess what? You, or somebody else is going to get infected, period. Again, if you were the computer expert you claim to be you'd understand this fact. Also, if you seriously think that you will find an AV software that will protect you 100% from threats, you are in for a rude awakening my friend. I wish you good luck in your endeavors.

HugeJerksays...

http://www.av-comparatives.org

AV Comparatives does very thorough testing of Anti-Virus software... going into the performance hit on systems, false positives, interference with other programs, and capability in determining new viruses. The new version of Norton scores very high. I had issues with Norton in the past, but it really seems like they have done a lot to correct the problems.

However, a handful of free non-commercial use programs like Avast and Microsoft Security Essentials also score nearly as high.

crillepsays...

I wouldn't touch Norton with a 10-foot pole. Sure their newest product is probably great, but they already had their chance. And market share definitely has something to do with all the free trials they gave away. The ones that you get when you buy a new computer.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More