Re: Norton vs "?"
From: Panda_man (Pandaman_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 10/10/05
- Next message: David H. Lipman: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Previous message: Ian Kenefick: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- In reply to: Phil Weldon: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Next in thread: Diane M.: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:10:13 -0700
Please read this OFFICIAL document by Symantec
Special look at "Who should use Live Update" and especially on the second
sentence.
Thanks !
Panda_man
"Phil Weldon" wrote:
> Oddly, I am offered 'Live Update' every two days on average.
> Do you suppose it has anything to do with using Norton Antivirus as a part
> of SystemWorks? Or have you not used Norton Antivirus lately?
>
> As for why use Norton Antivirus, with careful timing, the price is right;
> $0.00 US.
>
> Phil Weldon
>
> "Panda_man" <Pandaman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:FA5A63A1-3F0F-44D9-9AAA-B31E6BF3012D@microsoft.com...
> | Norton antivirus and any other security Symantec products has many
> | disadvantages:
> | 1.Live Update - used from many people and from you,of course,offers
> updates
> | only ONCE a week which is critical for new viruses like Sasser
> ,Zotob,Sober
> | critical.
> |
> | 2.Norton always creates too much files and folders and reg keys and it
> isn't
> | possible to be cleaned withouth something else.I mean it is possible but
> need
> | time and special expert skills in "How to clean a computer after Norton"
> | Norton's files are so much that even a malware creates less.
> |
> | 3.Symantec's tech support is terrible.They never do not know why something
> | has happended
> |
> | 4.In my opinion Norton is bad in dealing with Trojans (this is my personal
> | opinion)
> | I think so, because I have helped many people but nowhere Norton helped
> | with dealing with trojans
> |
> | 5.Please read this post and you'll see what kind of problem can Norton
> create:
> |
> http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.security.virus/browse_thread/thread/ee04b0b9a2b1e661/2766975658608580?lnk=st&q=norton+av+2005+(in+Microsoft)&rnum=5&hl=en#2766975658608580
> |
> | It is being discussed in the group you are posting to.
> |
> |
> | At the end I would recommend you to have one of these better than Norton
> | things:
> |
> | Panda Titanium (at about $ 40 a year)
> | http://www.pandasoftware.com
> | http://www.pandasoftware.com/virus_info/truprevent.htm
> | http://www.pandasoftware.com/about_panda/technology
> |
> | or
> | F-prot AV + Panda TruPrevent ( at about $ 60 a year)
> |
> | http://www.f-prot.com/products/home_use/win/
> | http://www.pandasoftware.com/virus_info/truprevent.htm
> |
> |
> | You can get trials and learn why they are better.
> |
> | Panda_man
> | " Let's beat malware black and blue "
> | " No new epidemics of all kind of malware -> Panda TruPrevent "
> |
> | "Film Fan" wrote:
> |
> | > I've used NAV for years and have had no bad results. It's saved my ass
> on
> | > several occasions.
> | >
> | > Why is everyone so down on NAV?
> | >
> | > What is better?
> | >
> | > If I get a good answer, I will switch to something else.
> | >
> | > Suggestions?
> | >
> | > R.D.
> | >
> | >
> | >
>
>
>
- Next message: David H. Lipman: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Previous message: Ian Kenefick: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- In reply to: Phil Weldon: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Next in thread: Diane M.: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
