Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View



Quoted text here. Click to load it


MY TURN.....

It's not hard to get a great result from a paid review but it's hard
to get a great result from a reader survey unless you bribe all the
readers.

17,000 readers voted Eset Smart Security Suite into First Place and
NOD32 into Second Place in the 2009 PC Authority Tech Awards last
month, so shove your Symantec "Product of the Year 2009" up your
big fat bum.


--
AFL ROOLZ!




Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition

wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ah gee....that last remark is gonna ruin my whole weekend...NOT!
But it is quite typically what an 'anonymous' poster would submit.

Listen folks..this is an age-old argument ( 'which AV is best' -or-
'Norton is bloatware' ) and it may well be the last surviving thread
if and when Usenet finally dies.

 My purpose was not to perpetuate this AV pissing contest but simply
to EXPOSE  David Lipman for the charlatan he is. The subsequent facts
that have been brought to light by myself  about Norton 2009/2010
remain TRUE -and- unlike David's rants...100% SUBSTANTIATED.

Here are a few of dozens of  very POSITIVE Norton 2010 security
product  reviews I have gathered. They were easy to find - there are
SO MANY of them!

Oh yeah and of course Symantec paid ALL these firms to LIE and risk
their corporate reputations in the AV industry...sheesh!

http://www.antivirusware.com/norton-antivirus /
"Norton AntiVirus is the world's best-selling security program"

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2349866,00.asp
- PCMag 'EDITOR'S CHOICE" is Norton Internet Security 2010 -
"Last year Symantec pulled out all the stops to reduce Norton Internet
Security's impact on system performance. This year's version of the
suite, Norton Internet Security 2010 ($69.99 direct for 3 licenses),
focuses both on improving the user's experience and raising overall
protection. As we saw with our early look at the beta of Norton
Internet Security 2010, the release version succeeds at both aims
without sacrificing performance, securing its position as our Editors'
Choice."

http://download.cnet.com/Norton-AntiVirus-2010/3000-2239_4-10592477.html
"In the 2010 version of its well-known antivirus program, Symantec
continues to build on the unexpected progress it made last year. In
addition to maintaining the quick load and scan times, and
significantly smaller system footprint, Norton 2010 includes a
behavioral detection engine based on both behavior and reputation"


http://www.howtogeek.com/reviews/norton-internet-security-2010/ <-
"Fast loading new interface that is light on system resources"

http://www.av-comparatives.org/index.php
"Gold-Rated - Top security product 2009"



As I said regardless of hard cold facts and figures from professional
security products testing agwencies there will still be criticism from
myopic, small-minded, meglomaniacs who know-nothing and work hard to
stay that way.

Let the FACTS speak for themselves..if YOU dare!


Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



fat.charlie@yahoo.com says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

And yet there are as many, if not more, negative reviews.

How many of the "positive" reviews were compensated in some manner?


--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.  
Trust yourself.
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

OK - post the links to all the negative reviews.Make sure yoyu find
ALL the reviews since YOU SAY there more negative than positive
reviews. Well.....it's 7:17 CST on Jan 9, 2009..tick tock, tick tock!

Quoted text here. Click to load it

A simple question does not infer it's explicit truthfullness. Show us
some PROOF that Virus Bulletin or say rthe ICSA are on Symantec's
payroll. You don't even know where to begin do you?

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



fat.charlie@yahoo.com says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Why not do a google (or other search provider) search for Symantec 2010
BAD or SYMANTEC 2010 PERFORMANCE PROBLEM or SYMANTEC 2010 FAILED TO
DETECT?

Are you such a stupid troll that you can't even use a search engine?

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.  
Trust yourself.
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

IOW you are put of ammo.

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



fat.charlie@yahoo.com says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I guess you just proved that you're not interested in Truth, that you
ARE A TROLL, and that you can't learn.

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.  
Trust yourself.
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Is name-calling what you are all about?

I POSTED links ro to my so-called 'trolling'. All you post is
bad-mouthing trash. Bet you're caucasion as well? Right?  Hmm.....??

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition




Without visiting the links...

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Best selling is not a good indicator IMO.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I dislike suites just as a matter of principle.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I did hear that Norton improved the scanning speed of their anti-virus
engine.

Again, speed is not a good indicator IMO.

In fact, there is *always* a compromise between speed and accuracy.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

...which is a *good* thing, but again - suites - well..they try to do
too much for the user and usually end up being mediocre if taken all
together. Better to opt for several best of class programs of your own
choosing.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well, that blurb doesn't tell me much. Guess I'll have to visit to see
if they are basing their opinion on more than the effectiveness of the
AV component (regardless of speed).




Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 22:02:44 -0500, "FromTheRafters"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Your opinions  are noted however they do little to refute the facts
offered up by lab tests and reviews by respected  industry and
journalistic sources, wouldn't you agree?  After all who would one
researching the net for pre-sales AV data regard..your opinion or
sources like Virus Bulletin, ICSA, AV-Comparatives.org and other
similarly recognized authorities?

As an example Virus Bulletin has awarded Norton  security products
their top Gold award (Best of 2009) and they have been lab testing AV
software for 10 years now. We all have opinions...on AV matters mine
are based on TEST DATA not feelings or what someone else has told me
without citing credible sources. I  have politely cited very
well-known and highly credible sources and still the shills and morons
continue to clamor about paid-for reviews and parrot back what some
other parrot told them once-upon-a-time.  To me it is fact vs. fiction
- a no brainer IMHO. Regardless your civility was appreciated but
likely misplaced in this cess pool of shoot-from-the-hip baseless
Norton bashing and name calling.

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition




Quoted text here. Click to load it

The fact is, that they don't test for what I believe is relevant.

They should test against "viruses", not non-replicating malware. Use an
anti-malware application for that (much of which is more properly
addressed by policy- self-imposed or otherwise).

People shouldn't complain about speed, and it shouldn't factor in to the
"score" given a specific product.

The 'touchy-feeliness' of the gui is irrelevant.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

:o(     well, there's no accounting for taste.   :o)

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Is *that* what they were doing?

Really, the only thing I know about Virus Bulletin is that Nick
Fitzgerald was once associated with them. I just now discovered he is
also (now?)associated with AVG.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It is no surprise that anecdotal revelations often skew the actual
reality of a situation.

Dealing with a subset (infected computers) which has a large marketshare
being "protected" by a "best selling" security program and other's being
"protected" by lesser marketshare security programs, will make one
believe the "best seller" is the worst performer because of sheer
numbers of "best seller" protected computers encountered. Especially
when the "best seller" is actually the "best enabler" for otherwise poor
practices.

(my dislike for suites again - mostly used by people so that they don't
have to be security aware or use best practices).

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Was Gibson a highly credible source for the value of leak testing?

...I'm just sayin'

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Just give Polly her damned cracker and be done with it! :oD

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Many facts have been proven false, enough to make me feel vindicated for
saying to my teachers that there is no such thing as a fact - only
consensus of opinion (or not).

Quoted text here. Click to load it

...but that's what I *like* about usenet. :oD



Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 23:32:23 -0500, "FromTheRafters"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well if you want to set your own criteria for what tests are
meaningful and that the AV testing industry has gone astray
from actual facts..then so be it for you and you alone.

Your public testimony pertaining to AV test methods goes against
over a decade of compiled test method and test method revision.

It might seem like a noble quest for your self but you have not
persuaded me nor probably anyone else UNLESS you have established
credibility in this field. Do you?  Years ago I spoke with ICSA Labs
on the phone and they informed me they use NAV as thier in-house AV
client. I thought that was a pretty good endorsement above and beyond
thier stellar reviews of the saame product.

OK..I have been on and off Usenet over 20 years now and I know when to
post and discuss and when to move on.

"Arguing on usenet is like competing in Special Olympics...
Even if you win you're still retarded"

I know better but at least Lipman was once AGAIN exposed....he's been
so FULL of BULLSHIT for so many years it is a discredit to mankind.

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition




Quoted text here. Click to load it

I doubt that I'm alone in this, Charlie.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, it doesn't. Why do you think the tests used to use carefully
maintained virus sets where each sample was proven to be an actual
viable virus.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Move on then, don't let the door hit your behind.

[...]



Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition




Quoted text here. Click to load it

Probably the best norton product ever, and they didn't even make it;
either. :)
 


--
... Those are my thoughts anyways...


Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition


Quoted text here. Click to load it

You just keyword troll huh? I understand. I suppose it's easier to lock
onto keywords when one is getting his said ass kicked so badly..

If you really believe NAV is the best of all time, then by all means use
it; I am completely okay with your decision. After all, when all is said
and done, its your computer and Your decision. no one elses.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Heh, you really want to use this? Okay; I'll go for it. I got one better,
Symantec used us (malwarebytes) and recommended it in their forums when
their NAV failed to deal with a specific piece of malware.

I only mention this (and you can google for the proof, it's all cached in
the web; was really funny to see tech support recommending us lol!)
because you thought speaking to an ICSA rep over the phone was a life
changing experience or something. It isn't. The world isn't really, that
big...
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nah, I'm alright thanks. I have a previous career as that of a VXer, my
experience with antivirus is far.. more low level than yours would likely
ever be. :)
 
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I won't make any claims about norton. I have no desire to get into a
pissing contest. As i said previously, if you love it, then use it. Just
don't try to convince everyone else to drink your koolaid. More
intelligent people just aren't going to take a sip, sorry. We've been
burned by too many previous versions with the same empty promises.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Especially when one can twist whats said to suit his definition of fact.
Wouldn't you agree?
 



--
... Those are my thoughts anyways...


Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition




Quoted text here. Click to load it

You do realize, if said product fails the test, not only can they
resubmit again for testing; they get copies of the samples they missed?
Just wanted you to have a more well rounded, opinion (as your sources do)
of Norton.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Even if the test data is flawed? (not saying vb's is, mind you; but icsa
labs does allow resubmission and testing until your product does pass.)



--
... Those are my thoughts anyways...


Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



fat.charlie@yahoo.com says...

<snip>

Quoted text here. Click to load it
<snip>

Of the "dozens of positive" reviews you reference here how many are of
the of the bogus type like the PCMag article? It is a well established
fact that PCMag is heavily influenced by the purchase of advertising
space. The objectivity of such a publication is very open to question.
Such an article does not constitute an independent review of the
software.

Dave's opinion is backed by his long experience. His credulity in this
group is well established. If you want to argue fact then do so. But
here mere numbers of reviews are not going to cut it. You have a right
to your own opinion but the burden of backing it up with facts fall
squarely on you alone. PCMag in particular will not carry much weight
here.

--
James E. Morrow
 Email to: jamesemorrow@email.com

Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 13:19:13 -0600, James Morrow

Quoted text here. Click to load it

James..I noticed you snipped out the link to AV Comparatives site and
the text stating that Virus Bulletin awarded Norton security products
the Gold "Best of 2009' award. Those are NOT credible sources? Out of
the past 46 quarters that VB has been testing AV products (10+ years
now) Symantec products TOP all others in detection having passed 45
out of 46 quarterly tests for the 100% detection of the well-known and
respected "In the Wild" testing award.

 My 'proof' was snipped by YOU to help falsely spin my post as a
"magazine reviews are gospel" soliloquy. Please James be a truthful
soul .because the Usenet archives expose your snipping and spinning
used ineffectively by you to buttress your self-serving and misleading
replies. Is Dave you brother or what?

If you want to publicly kiss Dave's ass that is fine with me. I have
never met him and it's very likely neither have you. I asked him to
substantiate his false and misleading claims and the best he did was
say they are the result of closed, private forum testing. I asked to
see data and so far..none. UNLIKE your butt-buddy Dave I DID supply
links to very respected AV testing agencies (which YOU snipped out)
and also magazine reviews. Those AV testing agency links supplied hard
cold testing results from as far back as 1999. David hasn't done
anything but make wrong and misleading claims about AV and backs it up
with hot air...but to his credit AFAIK he has not yet stooped to
'snipping and spinning' my re-quoted text as YOU have done. So to
summarize, both you and your sidekick need to brush up on your people
skills and take a beginners course in personal  integrity.


Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition




[...]

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wow! 100% - that *is* good.
(you've tipped your hand)




Re: Queries about Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition



On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:51:59 -0500, "FromTheRafters"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Oh I see....well then you must know I'm holding a royal flush.
Opinions are one thing (yours -and- mine) but facts are another.

Personally for AV product evaluation and pre-sales selection I prefer
facts based on demonstratable and repeatable testing by competent
agencies. I have posted a few links to respected testing sites (ICSA
and VB) that supply facts..not opinions.

Folks AV implementation is not religion - OK?

Let the FACTS -not- hearsay, old tired rumors, and superstition be
one's guide.  Free thought, free inquiry...not mental bondage.

May the best FACT win.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Site Timeline