2006-11-14 06:45:55 · 12 answers · asked by ? 5 in Computers & Internet ➔ Security
That Norton is a resource hog is a myth. In my experience products like Trend Micro, Coutner Spy use far more RAM, 80. 000 and 150.000k respectfully. Norton with ALL it's process at the mo is running under 25k. More likely to do with people a) having malware / spyware b) other applications ie multi- antispyware apps and or multi anti-virus apps c) low leverls of ram i.e 512mb or less.
Also, I run ClamWin (a free antivirus) every week, and it never detects anything Norton doesn't. Neither does Bit defender, Panda or Trend or Mc Afee on-line scans. Yes Norton can be a pain once it plays up but in my experience this is more likely to result from people using reg-cleaners on an over zealous basis.
2006-11-14 09:36:28 · answer #1 · answered by purplechris145 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The primary key reason people are giving Norton a thumbs down is because Norton antivirus is a resource hog! Once you install this program on your system, you'll notice that your system runs 50 to 60% slower than it did before. It is constantly updating, but yet it only catch is about two thirds of the viruses that are online. And don't even get me started on trying to uninstall this beast. You have to download special software from Norton to uninstall it from your system! McAfee software is worse than Norton!
2006-11-14 14:53:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Norton crashed my PC several times, and you have to configure everything just to open IE or yahoo ,msn etc, I hate Norton it sux and it takes up most of your disk,For a program that big it should be all you need,But Avg has picked up stuff Norton never got so i will stick with it
2006-11-14 15:41:05 · answer #3 · answered by tr2thhrt 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Norton isn't the problem. Its the program that Norton initializes everytime it runs called CCAPP.EXE. That's the program and it slows everything way down, and uses up every resource to support that one program. Within CCAPP.EXE, there are countless amounts of stability issues, holes, and major security issues. The Norton 2007 version has no problems, and it runs great.
2006-11-14 14:51:25 · answer #4 · answered by Jay 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why are people giving "Norton" the thumbs down, you ask? It's because they have tried Symantec's Norton Anti-Virus, and IT SUCKS !!! ....enough said. =PandaPaw=
2006-11-14 15:07:20 · answer #5 · answered by PandaPaw 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can only speak for my own experince when I had Windows
Norton crashed and hosed my system after my experince with
system works 2004 never bought any of Symantec stuff
again took me 5 hours to fix the computer.
Plus I didn't get my $30 rebate.
2006-11-14 15:06:38 · answer #6 · answered by markm 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am completely satisfied with Norton. I have never had a virus. Nor has anybody I know who has Norton.
2006-11-14 14:51:13 · answer #7 · answered by Chris M 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because its way to big and bloated, it tries to do too many things and be too many different kinds of programs at once, a result of which it does none of them well. Get a good stand alone anitvirus, a good stand alone antispyware, don't mess around with a software firewall they are worthless, get a router instead.
2006-11-14 14:55:24 · answer #8 · answered by Christopher J 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They sell you things that other companies provide for free. And yes the free alternatives are just as good if not better.
Norton software also tends to be bloated using up lots of resources.
2006-11-14 15:38:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
well obvuisly no pogram is perfect for everybody. It makes your computer amazingly slow so if the virus doesn tslow it down this pogram will.besides it not good. Its tools are so simple and its definitions are the most outdated
2006-11-14 17:27:52 · answer #10 · answered by lohanaddict 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋