|
|
Norton Internet Security 2005
Hi,
I use Norton Internet Security 2003. In 2004 I opted not to upgrade to NIS 2004 but just to renew the subscription. There seemed to be a consensus that 2004 version was less reliable. Now, in 2005, I have the same dilemma: upgrade or renewal? While I understand that a lot of folks here are in favor of dropping Symantec altogether, let's keep this option out (at least for now). Those who either got or upgraded to NIS 2005, what is your opinion about the product? Any known issues and/or incompatibilities? TIA, Eugene |
On 12 Apr 2005 13:36:55 -0700, "E. Fridman"
wrote: Hi, I use Norton Internet Security 2003. In 2004 I opted not to upgrade to NIS 2004 but just to renew the subscription. There seemed to be a consensus that 2004 version was less reliable. Now, in 2005, I have the same dilemma: upgrade or renewal? While I understand that a lot of folks here are in favor of dropping Symantec altogether, let's keep this option out (at least for now). Those who either got or upgraded to NIS 2005, what is your opinion about the product? Any known issues and/or incompatibilities? TIA, Eugene Why don't you look at other solutions. If you like the all in one solution then look at bitdefender.com for BitDefender 8 professional or f-secure.com for F-Secure internet security 2005. Personall the best solutions are a combination of best of breed applications from different vendors. I have Nod32 from www.nod32.com and Kerio Personal Firewall 4 from www.kerio.com . I also use Sygate Personal Firewall Professional on another machine with Nod32. Symantec doesn't get any better with age :=) |
Andrew,
If you don't mind the inconvenience of reconfiguring: cheat. Uninstall NIS, then re-install it. This will reset the subscription to your install date + 1 year. The price of renewal is not cost prohibitive for me. I don't mind paying for the version upgrade either as long as I'm not getting less stable incarnation. |
I'm a "Norton basher", but I can honestly suggest that NIS 2005 will be
a *worse* problem for Win9x users than even NIS 2004. I much prefer EZ Armor, from ETrust (aka Computer Associates.) See the "Security" article in my sig. -- Gary S. Terhune MS MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm "Eugene F." wrote in message ups.com... Andrew, If you don't mind the inconvenience of reconfiguring: cheat. Uninstall NIS, then re-install it. This will reset the subscription to your install date + 1 year. The price of renewal is not cost prohibitive for me. I don't mind paying for the version upgrade either as long as I'm not getting less stable incarnation. |
Gary,
I can honestly suggest that NIS 2005 will be a *worse* problem for Win9x users than even NIS 2004 Is it a hunch or do you have solid reasons for your suggestion? (I'm not implying that your hunch isn't good enough.) |
A well-founded hunch... But you might also peruse Google Groups. I see a
fair number of reports about NIS 2005. http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=Norton+NIS+2005 -- Gary S. Terhune MS MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm "Eugene F." wrote in message oups.com... Gary, I can honestly suggest that NIS 2005 will be a *worse* problem for Win9x users than even NIS 2004 Is it a hunch or do you have solid reasons for your suggestion? (I'm not implying that your hunch isn't good enough.) |
A while ago, I upgraded from Norton AV 2002 to NIS2005. Be aware that
NIS2005 is a huge resource hog. Yes, it works, but again, slows the system down dramatically. It also installs itself all over the place, so I went to uninstall it (to try to reinstall - per Symantec's suggestion for 'fixing' a live update problem), it really hose up my system. In the end, the system really slowed down after the reinstall....so, I reformatted the HDD and reinstalled Windows/etc. I chose a different AV/Firewall solution. Juan "E. Fridman" wrote in message ups.com... | Hi, | | I use Norton Internet Security 2003. | | In 2004 I opted not to upgrade to NIS 2004 but just to renew the | subscription. There seemed to be a consensus that 2004 version was | less reliable. | | Now, in 2005, I have the same dilemma: upgrade or renewal? While I | understand that a lot of folks here are in favor of dropping Symantec | altogether, let's keep this option out (at least for now). | | Those who either got or upgraded to NIS 2005, what is your opinion | about the product? Any known issues and/or incompatibilities? | | TIA, Eugene | |
Zone Alarm Professional stopped a 17,850 hack attempt on my 98SE machine that
originated from the government of China. According to Zone Alarm Information anything above a 1000 is considered a hack attempt. "Andrew Rossmann" wrote: [This followup was posted to comp.security.firewalls and a copy was sent to the cited author.] In article . com, says... I use Norton Internet Security 2003. In 2004 I opted not to upgrade to NIS 2004 but just to renew the subscription. There seemed to be a consensus that 2004 version was less reliable. Now, in 2005, I have the same dilemma: upgrade or renewal? While I understand that a lot of folks here are in favor of dropping Symantec altogether, let's keep this option out (at least for now). Those who either got or upgraded to NIS 2005, what is your opinion about the product? Any known issues and/or incompatibilities? If you don't mind the inconvenience of reconfiguring: cheat. Uninstall NIS, then re-install it. This will reset the subscription to your install date + 1 year. Otherwise, on my parent's computers, I've been using Zone Alarm (free version) and Grisoft Free AVG for AntiVirus -- If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying! All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law!! http://home.att.net/~andyross |
Norton (aka Symantec) products are a huge resource hog. I limit myself to
one Norton/Symantec product and that is GoBack because it was a Roxio product for a long time. Have a nice day! "Eugene F." wrote: Gary, I can honestly suggest that NIS 2005 will be a *worse* problem for Win9x users than even NIS 2004 Is it a hunch or do you have solid reasons for your suggestion? (I'm not implying that your hunch isn't good enough.) |
Juan,
Thank you for sharing your experience. A while ago, I upgraded from Norton AV 2002 to NIS2005. Be aware that NIS2005 is a huge resource hog I understand that when you're moving from AV only to full NIS package (Firewall, Parental Controls, etc.) the bloat increases. My question is whether NIS 2005 hogs more resources than its 2003 counterpart does. |
I can say that NIS2005 hogs significantly more resources than other lesser
known 2005 suites. Not sure about Symantec's 2003 vs. 2005 versions. "Eugene F." wrote in message oups.com... | Juan, | | Thank you for sharing your experience. | | A while ago, I upgraded from Norton AV 2002 to NIS2005. Be aware | that | NIS2005 is a huge resource hog | | I understand that when you're moving from AV only to full NIS package | (Firewall, Parental Controls, etc.) the bloat increases. | | My question is whether NIS 2005 hogs more resources than its 2003 | counterpart does. | |
The problem with package suites is the same problem with an all in one fax
machine with phone and other stuff. It usually does what it is supposed to do -- generally -- but it never does anything really well -- My 2 cents for what it is worth is the following for a bare minimum of protection as well as using common sense and being really careful: Zone Alarm Professional or Computer Associates software firewall Antivirus -- still researching -- possibly Norton, or paid AVG or ZA or EZ Antivirus Spyware -- Spysweeper by Webroot -- $20-$30 for a year and even Microsoft knows it is good since MSN users can get it for free or a small fee if they are subscribers to MSN and remember MSN is part of Microsoft LOL!! "Eugene F." wrote: Juan, Thank you for sharing your experience. A while ago, I upgraded from Norton AV 2002 to NIS2005. Be aware that NIS2005 is a huge resource hog I understand that when you're moving from AV only to full NIS package (Firewall, Parental Controls, etc.) the bloat increases. My question is whether NIS 2005 hogs more resources than its 2003 counterpart does. |
NIS2005 can be/is very problematic to 98/SE machines. I believe that many who
continue to use Symantec, updating each year, never update any system elements such as their processor, RAM and/or HD size. I currently use NIS2005 in a 98SE self-built machine, Celeron 500Mhz, 512MB RAM and 2 160GB HD's. At present I have no problems and never have with that machine and Symantec products, although now it is used as a secondary machine. You asked another poster in this thread if there is any significant difference between NIS03-05 in resources, the short and simple answer is YES. NIS05 has added 2 new categories I can think of right now, spam control and outbreak warnings. It's up to you to try it if you wish, but I would suggest at the very most the Trial version first to see if you have issues. I would also suggest that you use a registry monitoring program to take a snapshot of before/after installing NIS05 so you can do a thorough cleanup if warranted. The best suggestion is to use an imaging application such as Norton Ghost to create an image before installing, then if all goes haywire you can restore the image to before the install. -- Brian A. Sesko MS MVPShell/User Conflicts start where information lacks. http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Eugene F." wrote in message oups.com... Gary, I can honestly suggest that NIS 2005 will be a *worse* problem for Win9x users than even NIS 2004 Is it a hunch or do you have solid reasons for your suggestion? (I'm not implying that your hunch isn't good enough.) |
Brian,
Thank you very much for the reply. I believe that many who continue to use Symantec, updating each year, never update any system elements such as their processor, RAM and/or HD size. I'm adding 256Mb of RAM to the original 128Mb and swapping CD-ROM for DVD-R drive, but plan no processor and/or HD upgrades. NIS05 has added 2 new categories I can think of right now, spam control and outbreak warnings. I'm not interested in their Spam Control. Never heard of Outbreak Warnings, however. What is it about? |
stop updating symantec. Go to http://www.isagency.net and secure your
pc and home with the finest security products and services. The Internet Security Agency provides all on security matters. |
"E. Fridman" wrote in message
ups.com... Brian, Thank you very much for the reply. You're welcome. I believe that many who continue to use Symantec, updating each year, never update any system elements such as their processor, RAM and/or HD size. I'm adding 256Mb of RAM to the original 128Mb and swapping CD-ROM for DVD-R drive, but plan no processor and/or HD upgrades. That's all fine and dandy, yet with the amount of bloat added by NIS/NAV each year IMO they understate their sys requirements which appear never to change. One has to question that! NIS05 has added 2 new categories I can think of right now, spam control and outbreak warnings. I'm not interested in their Spam Control. Never heard of Outbreak Warnings, however. What is it about? Even though you're not interested in Spam Control, it gets installed. It doesn't matter that you can disable it in NIS, the extra bloat is already in place. I realize I mentioned outbreak warnings while it is really named Outbreak Alert. As per the manual on OA: "Notifies you of security threats affecting internet users worldwide and recommends actions to ensure that you are protected" -- Brian A. Sesko MS MVPShell/User Conflicts start where information lacks. http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm |
On 14 Apr 2005 12:31:07 -0700, (Jimmy V.) wrote:
stop updating symantec. Go to http://www.isagency.net and secure your pc and home with the finest security products and services. The Internet Security Agency provides all on security matters. Stop spamming! Regards, Ian Kenefick http://antivirus.ik-cs.com |
On 14 Apr 2005 12:31:07 -0700, (Jimmy V.) wrote:
stop updating symantec. Go to http://www.isagency.net and secure your pc and home with the finest security products and services. The Internet Security Agency provides all on security matters. You will have to excuse my lack of tolerance for spamming but I have to say that your website doesn't provide any such security services. My toilet bowl provides more service than your website. Regards, Ian Kenefick http://antivirus.ik-cs.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Win98Banter.com