Norton 2009?

[Jon Light (deceased)]

I've got a good 10 months left to my subscription to Norton 2008 and I'm satisfied with how it's working. I've been notified of a free update to 2009.
I couldn't google up useful info----are there known issues or any other reason not to upgrade on this Vista system? I'm more & more inclined to not fix what ain't broke. When it ain't broke, it's usually because I ain't screwed with it.

[Jack Stoner]

I have no idea about Norton, anymore, but i still see problems and negative comments about it on the Dell users forum. I gave up on them several years ago because of their "bloatware" and poor tech support (it's not in the US).

But if it works for you, that's fine. A lot of software is really just now coming up to speed with Vista, even tho Vista has been around for almost two years. So, the 2009 version may better support Vista.

[Don Sulesky]

I had Norton with my New HP.
I dumped it days before it was to expire and download the free version of AVG program.
I've been very satified with it.
It has caught all the viruses and all my junk mail.
And it's FREE.
Don

[John Bresler R.I.P.]

The problem I've had with Norton products is that it takes over your whole system. I ran it for a couple of years, but once I dumped it and got the AVG stuff my computer runs much faster and I never have to wait on it.

Just my .02 cents worth.

[Cal Sharp]

I've never read or heard anything good about Norton on tech blogs and podcasts. Takes over your system, really hard to uninstall, etc. AVG works good for me.

[Wiz Feinberg]

Jon;
May I suggest that before you make your decision you try Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 free for 30 days? I have been getting excellent reports on it from our members who have switched.

[Jon Light (deceased)]

I've got a good 10 months left to my subscription to Norton 2008 and I'm satisfied with how it's working. I've been notified of a free update to 2009........

There is only one question I'm asking. Are there any known reasons that the upgrade to 2009 from my perfectly acceptably performing 2008 is ill advised. I have no reason to and no interest in walking away from my subscription.

[Don Sulesky]

Jon
Why pay for a service when AVG is FREE and as you can see we all like it?
Mine was originally installed by a service tech at a computer repair shop.
I've used it ever since and installed the latest free version with no problems.
It does the job.
Don

[Jon Light (deceased)]

This new computer came with Norton. It works well. I had AVG for several years on my old computer and it bogged it down severely. When my trial period was up with this Norton and I had to decide what to do, I just wasn't going to risk turning this fast moving rig (a HUGE change from the old one) into a slow moving barge.

For all the bad opinions about Norton, mine is just fine. And for all the glowing reports about AVG, I can't help but assume that it was responsible for hobbling my old rig.
When it's time to re-up this Norton next year I will again consider my options.

My only concern at the moment is whether should leave well enough alone or I should take their free upgrade. Just because I'm saying nice things about them doesn't mean I trust that their offer won't screw everything up.

Sorry if I sound snippy in my last post. Ditching Norton simply makes no sense. It is paid for and it is working perfectly well.

[Jack Stoner]

If you have the older version that you can reinstall if you don't like the 2009 version, that would give you an option to "fall back" if you didn't like the 2009 version. As I mentioned previously, companies are tweaking and improving their Vista support on new versions and Norton probably is no exception.

[Wiz Feinberg]

Jon;
I gave the wrong reply to your question. I apologize for that.

I did a little digging through my affiliate correspondence and in reading about the new 2009 versions of Norton products Symantec does claim to have reduced the load on system resources. I don't use their products anymore so I can't vouch for this claim. <strike>I think you can upgrade for little more than the price of an additional year of coverage for NAV 2008.</strike> I see it is a free upgrade for you. Go for it!

One of the things Symantec is now doing (in 2009 products) is they are moving a lot of malware definitions into the cloud, which reduces the size of the definitions database loaded into RAM on your computer. This is only of benefit to broadband customers. Dial-up customers would notice increased latency as each activity is checked on the Internet for threat assessment.

[Jon Light (deceased)]

This upgrade to 2009 is free. I'm not sure I like the sound of that cloud thing. My broadband connection isn't all that sparkling and I could see the process bogging things down.
As far as I can tell, they are not requiring me to switch and they are still supporting '08. I think that unless and until they show persistence and require me to move on to '09 I'll just leave things be.

Thanks to all.


---aw, I just saw your edit, Wiz, saying go for it. Now I don't know what I'm doing....

[Wiz Feinberg]

I'm not trying to talk you into doing something you'd rather not do. It's just that normally, Symantec charges customers to upgrade to a newer version of a security product.

Why don't you ask them, by email to sales, if you can retain rollback to 2008 rights, if you are dissatisfied?

Set a System Restore Point before upgrading. You can restore to the previous version right away, if it bogs down your PC.

If you use Acronis True Image you can save an image of the computer with the latest updates to NAV 2008, then restore that image if things don't work out with 2009.

Let us know what you decide and how it all works out.

[Brint Hannay]

This is interesting to me because I recently ditched Norton, which came pre-installed in my Dell computer originally, largely thanks to all the bad "press" about it here and elsewhere, and installed the paid-for version of AVG, largely thanks to all the good "press" about it, here and elsewhere. It may or may not be related--I wish I could be sure--but since more or less the same time my computer is bogged down more than ever. It takes fully ten minutes upon cold start for everything to be loaded so work is possible. I took pains to TRY to download only AVG anti-virus, as I have ZoneAlarm free firewall and Spy Sweeper anti-spyware. Don't know if I succeeded--all these programs want to hook you into big packages of services these days, and it's darn hard to determine if the programs you attempt to install for discrete functions are conflicting with each other and impairing system function. Also hard to be sure whether, after supposedly removing something like Norton, it has left orphan files who knows where that are fouling up the system. again!

[Jack Stoner]

Although "Bloatware" such as Norton or McAfee can bog down a PC, there can be many other areas. First, what operating system and how much memory? If you have XP you need at least 512MB of memory - anything less (and a lot of PC's were sold with less) can be one area. If you have Vista, at a minimum 1GB of memory. What is loading at startup is probably the main culprit; many programs want to star and put a "quick start" icon in the Sys Tray (lower right) and the majority of them are not needed. If an application needs to access the internet at startup that can also cause a delay in Windows fully starting.

You can "control" most of the startup that is not needed either by removing the quick start in the programs user options or by disabling it in the startup via "msconfig" that will call up the configuration panel. If you have XP the msconfig can be accessed by entering msconfig in the "Run" option. If you have Vista just type it in the "Start Search" window.

I maintain very basic "vanilla" PC's with only minimum in the startup and it takes a couple of minutes for my 32 bit systems to fully startup. My Vista 64bit system is much quicker but it still takes some time (I've never timed it)to complete startup.

[Paul Norman (RIP)]

BE CAREFUL There is a virus out that says
your computer is infected and you need to
download Antivirus 2009. This is the virus and
it is already in there. It does not have a name
other than that. AVG ir McAfee will not knock it
out.
So if Norton has one MAKE sure it is Norton.
I use Defender Pro 2009 5-in-1.

[Jon Light (deceased)]

Yeah---that fake antivirus thing has been around for quite a while. I'm proud of them for being up to date with the 2009 thing.

My own update---after receiving pop-up notification of the Norton 2009 upgrade every time I booted up I relented and went for it. But during installation I got a conflict message requiring me to uninstall Zone Alarm in order to continue.
I googled this and found that it is a known issue. Not being sure what-all firewall protection Norton provides or how it compares to ZA and hence not caring to ditch ZA, I canceled the upgrade installation and am going along fine with what I had.
If anyone cares to comment on Norton's firewall re: whether it is sufficient as a full replacement for ZA, I'd rather not be running two full time applications.
As before, I will not be ditching Norton, at least not before my subscription expires later this year.

[Wiz Feinberg]

Jon;
The Norton Personal Firewall is based on one of the oldest and most commonly used free firewall of yesteryear: OnGuard. I used to have OnGuard protecting my computers until its demise, sometime in the late 1990's. To my surprise it reappeared as the Norton Personal Firewall when Symantec bought the rights to OnGuard. It has been refined and now accepts definition updates to block specific threats. As far as I know it is capable of stealthing your computer from hostile Internet port probes.

ZoneAlarm is a more robust firewall generally speaking. It is easier to configure for exceptions and network ranges. ZoneAlarm completely took over the Free Firewall market in the early to mid 2000's.

You absolutely do not want or need two software firewalls on the same operating system. ZoneAlarm, like all other third party firewalls turns off the Windows Firewall when installed. If you are happy with ZoneAlarm, keep it. However, the Norton Firewall as part of a security suite is plenty of protection, although bloated.

[Jon Light (deceased)]

Excellent info. Thank you.
Actually I just discovered that all along, even this old wheezy wore out Norton '08 has a firewall. Meaning I've been running the two together all along.
Guess I'll ditch ZA.
I have no sophisticated needs. A simple firewall without maximal versatility should be just fine for me as long as it is good, solid and airtight.

[Wiz Feinberg]

Excellent info. Thank you.
Actually I just discovered that all along, even this old wheezy wore out Norton '08 has a firewall. Meaning I've been running the two together all along.
Guess I'll ditch ZA.

Good decision Jon. If you have been using the Norton Personal Firewall all along, you may as well upgrade to NIS 2009 at the discount price. ZoneAlarm is one of the best software firewalls to use as a stand-alone security layer, but is not needed if you have a security suite with a firewall included.

I'd like to point out a couple of relevant facts about firewalls. Internet threats can reach you "over the wires" via hostile TCP and UDP port scans. If you get scanned by an Internet Worm and it is able to connect to an open "port," for which it is coded, your computer can be compromised instantly and malware will be downloaded to it. These scans are not initiated by you, thus they lack an ACK flag (acknowledge) that indicates that they are responding to your request for data. An incoming firewall logs outgoing connection requests and allows responding traffic to flow in, but blocks unsolicited incoming transmissions that are port probes. A full-featured incoming firewall should make your computer totally invisible to such hostile port scans. This is known in the business as stealthing your computer.

Every NAT router contains or is a firewall against unsolicited incoming transmissions. But, router firewalls do not normally block outgoing traffic emanating from your computers. There are exceptions to this, like the popular Checkpoint router/firewall, which provides two way security and receives regular malware definition updates from Checkpoint. I am affiliated with this product if anybody is interested in it.

All current software firewalls, other than the Windows XP Firewall, are two way, blocking unrecognized outgoing transmissions unless you allow them. The XP Firewall allows outgoing communications to occur without any monitoring or interference. Should a Trojan manage to install itself into your operating system it is free to "phone home" to its owner, to download more malware, or to make your PC an active member of a Botnet.

My recommendation for broadband users is to have a router/firewall between your modem and your PC, which protects against unsolicited incoming TCP/IP threats, plus a software firewall against unsolicited outgoing communications. Dial-up users absolutely must use a two way software firewall if they are going to be protected at all: your ISP is probably not blocking all of the dangerous TCP ports from scanners. In fact, some dial-up ISPs don't block any ports, except port 25; the outgoing email port.

In order to secure your computer from hostile outgoing connections from the computer (by installed malware), use a two way software firewall that requires permission for any new outgoing connections. If you initiated a contact (e.g. open a just updated browser) and the firewall pops up a notice asking you to allow or disallow it, allow that outgoing contact and have it remember your decision. But, if you are not using a new or just updated application and some warning about an outgoing contact attempt to an unknown IP address happens, it is best to disallow it, then search for more information about that contact. Your firewall should keep a log of all blocked traffic. You can unblock safe programs later.

Recap:
All PCs should have a two way firewall system to protect against both incoming and outgoing hostile connections. ZoneAlarm is an excellent stand-alone two way software firewall, but is not needed if you have an Internet Security Suite installed, containing its own firewall. Virtually all third party firewalls will disable the Windows XP and Vista firewalls, to avoid conflicts.

[Al Marcus]

Jon-Wiz says go for Norton 2009 free. I have had Norton for years, and it has been bloated and slow in the past years,but my 2008 has been fine, I kept getting notices to upgrade to 2009 Free until my 2008 subscription runs out. Which is next August.

I finally decidied to download 2009 and it went lika a charm and has some good features that the 2008 didn't have. So I am happy with the 2009 version and will keep it till expired and we'll see what they have then....Happy New Year...al.:)

[Wiz Feinberg]

I received some promotional links and information about the 2009 versions of various Norton security products and they all have less bloat and less drag on system resources than previous builds. Norton has followed Trend Micro's lead and has moved new definitions into "the cloud," greatly lightening the load on system memory. Norton Internet Security is still a little heavier than PC-cillin 2009, but they're getting closer.

Norton/Symantec is offering existing 2008 customers some tantalizing upgrade prices and I think it is worth upgrading, if you are already a basically satisfied Norton customer. If you're not currently a Norton customer, but are interested in getting that brand, you can contact me for links, prices and any current discounts, for most Symantec and Norton products.

Note:
Symantec's business model includes automatic renewals of annual subscriptions, until you actively cancel, which causes a lot of aggravation for some folks. You should stipulate up front if you wish to opt out of automatic renewals. Alternately, get a one-time-use credit card number to pay for your annual subscription. They do provide an opt-out link in the renewal process for existing customers, but it is well concealed!

[Robby Springfield]

You could not pay ME to use Norton again. My computer was infected a while back and the intrusion came directly through Norton antivirus. It attacked Norton and would not let me go to any help site that had anytning to do with virus removal, including Symantec. Whats worse is, I could NOT remove Norton completely from my system. The Norton tech support was as bad as it gets...can't believe they get away with running a company like that. Do you think they would admit to thier software being attacked? No way! Had to take it to a tech for a clean up and they were able to get a tool from Symantec to remove all Norton/Symantec software. As soon as the tech got Norton removed, the virus' started showing up when the computer was scanned by other antivirus programs.