PDA

View Full Version : What to replace my Norton with.



8ftmetalhaed
24-06-2011, 01:24 AM
My sub runs out in 10 days. I'm either gonna renew it (much to your horrors, I guess), or switch to either Eset or MSSE.

Wondering which option would be the best. What can Eset do that MSSE can't? And are they both full suites or just antivirus?
And what of windows firewall if they are just antivirus?

I mean, I've had few/no problems with norton, but I took offense to it when it repeatedly let a program called RelevantKnowledge through and said it was safe, just because a few hundred thousand people had it. Hmm.
It was only market research stuff but still. on MY pc?!

Other than that it's been fine, but yeah if the benefits/performance gains are good enough I'll switch or something.

Speedy Gonzales
24-06-2011, 01:32 AM
Depends what version of NOD you install. One installs the AV the other the AV and firewall. MSSE doesnt inc a firewall. But it can pick up viruses etc over a network (if you copy whatever to a shared folder)

relevantknowledge is classed as malware (http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/uninstall/1054/RelevantKnowledge.html)

8ftmetalhaed
24-06-2011, 02:39 AM
yeh i know about RK, i MBAM'd it. I would like to have something pretty secure, as it is i've had but a few intrusions, all self inflicted, and i want it to basically stay that way, what with our use of ebay and internet banking and the like. Looks like I might have to spring for an Eset suite.
Is it easiest to get it through their website?

Iantech
24-06-2011, 03:14 AM
Eset was ranked 9th in the top 10 paid AV software in 2011, according to PCWorld..

It does a reasonable job at blocking brand new attacks and it's fast, but it has trouble detecting known malware and cleaning up infections, which makes it tough to recommend. That speed is good, but all the speed in the world doesn't mean much if a security product doesn't effectively stop malware. And given NOD32's struggles, we can't give it our recommendation.

Nortons was ranked No.1

Of the free ones, MSSE was ranked No.3. MSSE utilises Windows Firewall.

If I was going to pay for one, I would probably stick with Nortons AV - I dont like their Internet Security package much though.
But Eset running with Malwarebytes might be a solution if you really wanted to go with Eset.

Hope that helps a little. Cheers

bob_doe_nz
24-06-2011, 03:31 AM
Don't forget that those were 'laboratory tests' NOT real world examples. We've got users on here who have used and have proven the effectiveness of NOD and MSSE.

pctek
24-06-2011, 07:43 AM
Eset was ranked 9th in the top 10 paid AV software in 2011, according to PCWorld..

Nortons was ranked No.1

Of the free ones, MSSE was ranked No.3. MSSE utilises Windows Firewall.


But they picked the results out of the air.
A little search through this forum will show some real world tests done by Wainuitech and it shows Nortons does not find much.

My own experiences as a tech confirm that.

The main difference between MSSE and NOD32 is one is free.
Although I'm inclined towards NOD more, I think it has the slight edge in detection.

Iantech
24-06-2011, 08:29 AM
I dont think any respected company would publish results "picked out of the air". I think you would find the results are based on the tests carried out using several types of viruses, malware, spyware etc. which detected the most and what did a better job of sanitising the system.

PCWorlds results along with WT's results will vary depending what they have been tested with as no AV engine is 100%. Some pick up some better than others. If a system I was working on had Nortons and I knew it had a virus and nortons wouldnt pick it up, I would install AVG which often picked it up and dealt with it and I do the same with MSSE when required.

In my own experiences, you might as well install MSSE for a general cover and deal with any other bugs when they turn up. However, if I was going to pay for AV software, I would like a product that detects and deals with a broader cross range of virues/malware and I believe Nortons picks up around 90-95% of known issues which is better than most.

GameJunkie
24-06-2011, 09:22 AM
I dont think any respected company would publish results "picked out of the air". I think you would find the results are based on the tests carried out using several types of viruses, malware, spyware etc. which detected the most and what did a better job of sanitising the system.

PCWorlds results along with WT's results will vary depending what they have been tested with as no AV engine is 100%. Some pick up some better than others. If a system I was working on had Nortons and I knew it had a virus and nortons wouldnt pick it up, I would install AVG which often picked it up and dealt with it and I do the same with MSSE when required.

In my own experiences, you might as well install MSSE for a general cover and deal with any other bugs when they turn up. However, if I was going to pay for AV software, I would like a product that detects and deals with a broader cross range of virues/malware and I believe Nortons picks up around 90-95% of known issues which is better than most.

you'd be surprised what gets published as results

I would go on Wainuitech's testing/reccomendations any day of the week over what "lab results say about AV products.

Example: when we got out brand new desktop several years ago, it came with a Norton subscription.

it began to constantly crash/lockup, a tech friend of mine, and this forum which i joined as a result, all suggested ESET Nod32 and to get rid of Norton asap.

running Nod32 picked up so much bad stuff that Norton's missed it wasn't funny, been using it every since.

does Norton's pick up malicious links???, Nod32 does.

AV test under "lab" conditions are not representative of what really happens or has happened to those who have asked for real world opinions/advice.

You'll find no-one on this forum holds Norton's in any high regard nor would recommend it to anyone

wratterus
24-06-2011, 09:29 AM
There is nothing like real world experience with AV products - NOD32 walks all over Norton. You couldn't pay me to use it.

Chilling_Silence
24-06-2011, 09:31 AM
There is nothing like real world experience with AV products - NOD32 walks all over Norton. You couldn't pay me to use it.

+1!

Gobe1
24-06-2011, 09:33 AM
Ahahhaaaaaaa hahahaaaaaa haaa haa ha ,.,......Here we go again.

EDIT: +1 They could pay me to use it if i was an antivirus tester :)

Zippity
24-06-2011, 09:35 AM
AVAST Pro :)

and I am not on a commission either.................

Chilling_Silence
24-06-2011, 10:56 AM
and I am not on a commission either.................

...yes you are!

Iantech
24-06-2011, 11:03 AM
GJ, I would have totally agreed with you a few years ago. Nortons was rubbish in my opinion from about 2004 through to and including 2009, it was boardering on bloatware, it was resource greedy, had compatibility issues and indeed made many machines crash as a result. It was the first programme I would get rid of for clients. However I have ran the 2011 version (Norton AV & Norton Inernet Security), Norton AV is very slick but didnt think much of NIS.
I'm sure Eset has changed just as much over the last few years. I have a few clients that still use it, they are happy with it and their machines are virus free which is all I am concerned with.
As I have said, no programme is 100% and luckily NZ has very little viruses compared to other countries I have worked in (South America being the worst). I base my recommendations to my clients based on their internet habbits & in most cases for my residential & small business users, MSSE is just as good and free.
Cheers

Zippity
24-06-2011, 11:37 AM
...yes you are!

Nope :) :)

I just love to make these posts to PO the NOD32 supporters :)

Like routers, some things work better for some people.

pcuser42
24-06-2011, 11:51 AM
You couldn't pay me to use it.

You could pay me to use it, as long as I would be able to use it only on my test PC :p

1101
24-06-2011, 11:52 AM
GJ,
.......I'm sure Eset has changed just as much over the last few years. I have a few clients that still use it, they are happy with it and their machines are virus free which is all I am concerned with.....


I'd agree & disagree with what you've said..
I dont think NOD has changed enough over the last 3 years
I have many clients using it. It misses far too many REAL infections that are easily detected by Malwarebytes or the MK1 eyeball.
Not good enough for a product that you have too pay for.
Unfortunately the other free AV's are often not much better. Malware/spyware detection is abysmal in most AV products, even though they claim to scan for Malware/spyware. So its hard to justify a pay AV for home users. :badpc:
Corporate AV is another story ....

I wouldnt recommend Norton, for a few reasons. There dodgy business practices are just 1 good reason : for which they were fined by the US Govt.

wratterus
24-06-2011, 12:47 PM
You could pay me to use it, as long as I would be able to use it only on my test PC :p

You know what I mean. I'm sure if someone was paying me to use it I could find some crusty old PC that i don't use and install it on that too... :p

pcuser42
24-06-2011, 01:00 PM
You know what I mean.

Of course I do, I'm just messing with you :p

fnphoto
24-06-2011, 01:48 PM
I've just repaired a laptop which had a fully updated version of Nortons on it. According to Nortons the machine was completely secure & clean. I then ran Malwarebytes... it found 411 infections! nuff said, the lappy is now running MSSE & Malwarebytes.

pctek
24-06-2011, 03:34 PM
GJ, Nortons was boardering on bloatware, it was resource greedy, had compatibility issues and indeed made many machines crash as a result. However I have ran the 2011 version

NZ has very little viruses compared to other countries I have worked in

It has nothing to do with it's bloat problem, fixed or not. It's the fact that it misses so much, try it for real next time, run the piece of ****, then run MSSE or NOD and see what it missed.

Chilling_Silence
24-06-2011, 04:02 PM
Yes, agreed. Granted neither is 100%, but I am still yet to see something NOD32 misses that Nortons will come along after and pick up. It is 100% always the other way around.

8ftmetalhaed
24-06-2011, 07:44 PM
ok well norton vs eset is fine, but what of eset vs msse?

pcuser42
24-06-2011, 07:53 PM
ok well norton vs eset is fine, but what of eset vs msse?

I believe that race is close.

goodiesguy
24-06-2011, 08:29 PM
I have no issues with MSSE. It protects me fine.

wainuitech
24-06-2011, 09:08 PM
While its "hogging power" is less, and it installs quick ( big deal) Norton Still misses a lot.

Earlier this week, a customer asked me to extend his current Nod32 to include a second laptop that his daughter had purchased since she was coming back home.

She had Norton INS 2011 on it as a trial , as it came pre installed since its newish ( 2 1/2 months old). I uninstalled Norton 2011, put Nod32 on and even while updating the latest defs, nod flashed up with a warning about an active infection.

I set a scan going which was estimated to take an hour or more (teens and junk they must have on a laptop :rolleyes: ), I left, after I had configured Nod to its max protection -- got a call later on, found 5 infections 2 of which were Trojans of some kind ( didn't say which ones).

He ran MalwareBytes, and super antispyware as well -- all clean.

Generally, I reccomend the following;

Free = MSSE. then Avast

Paid = Nod32 - it is better than MSSE & Avast.

AVG === :lol: >>>wont go there, better off with a fly swat.

Chilling_Silence
24-06-2011, 10:20 PM
My sentiments exactly!

8ftmetalhaed
25-06-2011, 12:41 AM
Sounds about what I already figured anyway, but of course best to get opinions from those in the know :D
I'll look into eset in the next few days then.

Iantech
25-06-2011, 01:23 AM
pctek, GJ was talking about why Nortons made his system crash, not to why it was crap at picking up viruses.

pcuser42, I was given a 5 user licence of Norton AV 2011 end of last year, I would have sent it to you for nix to have/try/use but I cant find it in the office, it might have got dumped when the office took a beating in the Feb quake. Sorry mate, but if I do come across it, I'll pm you.

Anyway...
Pretty much agree with you WT, first programme I uninstall on a pre-installed factory system is Norton Internet Security.
And as for AVG, yeah, wouldnt go there . lol

Had any experiences or thoughts about Kaspersky (AV or Internet Security)?

Digby
25-06-2011, 09:23 AM
I wouldn't use Norton if they paid me.
I'd rather go bareback than use that bloatware.

I'm using Avira free version and finding it to be good so far

DarkFather
25-06-2011, 09:41 AM
There is nothing like real world experience with AV products - NOD32 walks all over Norton. You couldn't pay me to use it.

Ive used NOD 32 for years now. Minimal background and services use. Norton is a service HOG!! NOD 32 is the Best imo.

pcuser42
25-06-2011, 09:41 AM
pcuser42, I was given a 5 user licence of Norton AV 2011 end of last year, I would have sent it to you for nix to have/try/use but I cant find it in the office, it might have got dumped when the office took a beating in the Feb quake. Sorry mate, but if I do come across it, I'll pm you.


But I didn't want it :p

pctek
25-06-2011, 09:41 AM
Had any experiences or thoughts about Kaspersky (AV or Internet Security)?
I've tried it, it seemed to be close to NOD but it did tend to do the hog resources more.