NORTON POLL ...

Those that use Norton Internet Security and think it's BRILLIANT say "Yeah,"
And those that have grossly inadequate hardware to run Norton, or had a
messy Windows platform with an unfortunate software mix that collapsed when
they tried to install Norton say "Nay," :-)

regards, Richard

"RJK" wrote in message
...
Those that use Norton Internet Security and think it's BRILLIANT say
"Yeah,"
And those that have grossly inadequate hardware to run Norton, or had a
messy Windows platform with an unfortunate software mix that collapsed
when
they tried to install Norton say "Nay," :-)

Are you in charge of the elections in Florida this year?

I *used* to think that NAV (and NU) were pretty good, up to and including
2001.

For some reason (probably the usual idiocy from software developers in
thinking that, if a program is successful, you go adding more bells and
whistles than a demented fairground engine in the mistaken belief that this
*improves* it), NU 2002 started causing problems, and NAV 2004 was a
blue-screen dream from the beginning.

Given that my setup was much the same as it had been, and that I am quite
meticulous about keeping the system tidy, then your blanket assertion that
problems with Norton are exclusively to do with the user's own negligence or
incompetence is an example of ostrich-like behaviour.

The number of complaints about how sh!t much of Norton's recent product has
been simply can't be dismissed so sniffily.

It's worth noting that ZoneAlarm seems to be going the same way : v5.x has
been cursed in the same way. Just like Symantec, ZoneLabs seem to be equally
unhelpful to previously loyal customers suffering from the problems their
developers have created. Perhaps it's something which happens to software
companies once they get beyond a certain size, or get taken over by people
who know squat about software. It certainly can't be waved away as being a
handful of disgruntled know-nothings, and any attempt to do so is, frankly,
insulting.


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

reply e-mail address will bounce

I think you're largely right :-)

regards, Richard


"Nigel Stapley" wrote in message
...

"RJK" wrote in message
...
Those that use Norton Internet Security and think it's BRILLIANT say
"Yeah,"
And those that have grossly inadequate hardware to run Norton, or had a
messy Windows platform with an unfortunate software mix that collapsed
when
they tried to install Norton say "Nay," :-)

Are you in charge of the elections in Florida this year?

I *used* to think that NAV (and NU) were pretty good, up to and including
2001.

For some reason (probably the usual idiocy from software developers in
thinking that, if a program is successful, you go adding more bells and
whistles than a demented fairground engine in the mistaken belief that
this
*improves* it), NU 2002 started causing problems, and NAV 2004 was a
blue-screen dream from the beginning.

Given that my setup was much the same as it had been, and that I am quite
meticulous about keeping the system tidy, then your blanket assertion that
problems with Norton are exclusively to do with the user's own negligence
or
incompetence is an example of ostrich-like behaviour.

The number of complaints about how sh!t much of Norton's recent product
has
been simply can't be dismissed so sniffily.

It's worth noting that ZoneAlarm seems to be going the same way : v5.x has
been cursed in the same way. Just like Symantec, ZoneLabs seem to be
equally
unhelpful to previously loyal customers suffering from the problems their
developers have created. Perhaps it's something which happens to software
companies once they get beyond a certain size, or get taken over by people
who know squat about software. It certainly can't be waved away as being a
handful of disgruntled know-nothings, and any attempt to do so is,
frankly,
insulting.


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

reply e-mail address will bounce

How dare you, sirrah! Only 150 pounds, and it's all evenly distributed! :-)


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

reply e-mail address will bounce

"RJK" wrote in message
...
I think you're largely right :-)

regards, Richard


"Nigel Stapley" wrote in message
...

"RJK" wrote in message
...
Those that use Norton Internet Security and think it's BRILLIANT say
"Yeah,"
And those that have grossly inadequate hardware to run Norton, or had
a
messy Windows platform with an unfortunate software mix that collapsed
when
they tried to install Norton say "Nay," :-)

Are you in charge of the elections in Florida this year?

I *used* to think that NAV (and NU) were pretty good, up to and
including
2001.

For some reason (probably the usual idiocy from software developers in
thinking that, if a program is successful, you go adding more bells and
whistles than a demented fairground engine in the mistaken belief that
this
*improves* it), NU 2002 started causing problems, and NAV 2004 was a
blue-screen dream from the beginning.

Given that my setup was much the same as it had been, and that I am
quite
meticulous about keeping the system tidy, then your blanket assertion
that
problems with Norton are exclusively to do with the user's own
negligence
or
incompetence is an example of ostrich-like behaviour.

The number of complaints about how sh!t much of Norton's recent product
has
been simply can't be dismissed so sniffily.

It's worth noting that ZoneAlarm seems to be going the same way : v5.x
has
been cursed in the same way. Just like Symantec, ZoneLabs seem to be
equally
unhelpful to previously loyal customers suffering from the problems
their
developers have created. Perhaps it's something which happens to
software
companies once they get beyond a certain size, or get taken over by
people
who know squat about software. It certainly can't be waved away as being
a
handful of disgruntled know-nothings, and any attempt to do so is,
frankly,
insulting.


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

reply e-mail address will bounce

With all prejudices expressed, and not answering the intent of the original
post
This newsgroup represents a statistical sample of computer users, a constant
percentage of the entire internet linked world will be able to find the
newsgroup and post to it, by CDO by Google news from outlook express by any
means, and care enough to do so.
There is a constant stream of new users asking questions, semi skilled
persons, up to recognised MVPs.
The users use every piece of software made in numbers so large they become
statistically equal. example the difference between 1 & 2 is 100%, the
difference between 1000000 and 1000001 is an insignificant fraction 0.0001%
Within the statistical universe the proportion of reported occurrences
directly represent the proportion of errors.
Thus the more reported problems the more problems exist
Search this and all the other newsgroups for reported problems mentioning any
antivirus other than Norton and divide that number by the number of Norton
posts
the calculation is left up to the reader

Not to say that Norton products are bad the statistics do that, early Versions
of Norton products were very good, later Versions steadily less so, 2004
versions, seem to be deadly.

My favorite quotes
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the
experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to
do so.
Nothing travels faster than light, with the possible exception of bad news,
which follows its own rules
(Douglas Adams)

anything from Norton 2001 on is rubbish
"RJK" wrote in message
...
Those that use Norton Internet Security and think it's BRILLIANT say
"Yeah,"
And those that have grossly inadequate hardware to run Norton, or had a
messy Windows platform with an unfortunate software mix that collapsed
when
they tried to install Norton say "Nay," :-)

regards, Richard

"RJK" wrote in message

Those that use Norton Internet Security and think it's BRILLIANT say
"Yeah," And those that have grossly inadequate hardware to run Norton,
or had a messy Windows platform with an unfortunate software mix that
collapsed when they tried to install Norton say "Nay," :-)

regards, Richard

I have tested and used every version of NAV now SAV there is.
Actually I've tested every top brand of AV out there.
Many of them are very good in there own way and so it can be just a matter
of what you like and what needs are best for you.

In my experience, and for my likes, the single NAV v2001 version was the
best AV ever, and I currently use it on everything except WXP.

I wish v2001 worked on WXP - but it doesn't

Any NAV or now SAV after version 2001 for the most part is not advised for
various 'more often than not' 'fatal' reasons.

As far as NIS itself goes, I would not care to use any version of it.

Rick

"AlmostBob" wrote in message
...

edit

There is a constant stream of [...], semi skilled
persons,...

Ah! Thank you. I was wondering how best to categorise myself in the context
of this group!

(I'm a sysadmin....)


--
Regards

Nigel Stapley

www.judgemental.plus.com

reply e-mail address will bounce

-----Original Message-----
With all prejudices expressed, and not answering the
intent of the original
post
This newsgroup represents a statistical sample of
computer users, a constant
percentage of the entire internet linked world will be
able to find the
newsgroup and post to it, by CDO by Google news from
outlook express by any
means, and care enough to do so.
There is a constant stream of new users asking questions,
semi skilled
persons, up to recognised MVPs.
The users use every piece of software made in numbers so
large they become
statistically equal. example the difference between 1 & 2
is 100%, the
difference between 1000000 and 1000001 is an
insignificant fraction 0.0001%
Within the statistical universe the proportion of
reported occurrences
directly represent the proportion of errors.
Thus the more reported problems the more problems exist
Search this and all the other newsgroups for reported
problems mentioning any
antivirus other than Norton and divide that number by the
number of Norton
posts
the calculation is left up to the reader

Not to say that Norton products are bad the statistics do
that, early Versions
of Norton products were very good, later Versions
steadily less so, 2004
versions, seem to be deadly.

My favorite quotes
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability
to learn from the
experience of others, are also remarkable for their
apparent disinclination to
do so.
Nothing travels faster than light, with the possible
exception of bad news,
which follows its own rules
(Douglas Adams)


.I bought Norton 2004. I use another. I can make this
thing freeze up myself. PS. nice post. Bob.