Anyone Tried Norton 2006 Yet? Feedback Please

[sandeep1405241520 0]

hi friends,Has any one tried Norton 2006. I am currently using Macfee.Do give your feedback about this software, if you have used it.I have also heard that Avast is also good. Regards.

[organicbmx 0]

we have it on one of our computers and it practically doubles your boot time, give you this stupid, ugly, useless extra on the taskbar that i cannot get rid of. other than that is seams exactly the same as 2005. norton is not great by anyones standards. i recormend anything but.

[roggle 0]

I have to agree with sandeep. I used to be a fan of Norton as it used to boast great detection rates but it really is a resource hogger and other antivirus companies like kaspersky and mcafee now have similiar if not better detection rates while taking a lot less resources.

Boot up times become slow, your faster computer slows to a crawl and it eats a hell lot of RAM. That is my experience with Norton 2005/6. Most reviews report Norton being unresponsive though having a lot of protection.

Nowadays, I'm using a free one called Antivir available at http://www.avira.com/en/free-antivirus-windows which is actually pretty good. Very lightweight in terms of system use, reasonably fast scanning and respectable detection rates. Lacks features but does its basic job well which I like.

But yes I've heard good things about Avast but didn't really like its interface and apparently has a much poorer detection rate.

Take a look at http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ and http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1864601,00.asp to compare the free ones.

For a look at the pay ones you can take a look over here http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1891760,00.asp

http://www.consumersearch.com/ also is a good source for checking out antivirus reviews.

[inevitable 0]

I have to agree with sandeep. I used to be a fan of Norton as it used to boast great detection rates but it really is a resource hogger and other antivirus companies like kaspersky and mcafee now have similiar if not better detection rates while taking a lot less resources.

 

Boot up times become slow, your faster computer slows to a crawl and it eats a hell lot of RAM. That is my experience with Norton 2005/6. Most reviews report Norton being unresponsive though having a lot of protection.

 

Nowadays, I'm using a free one called Antivir available at http://www.avira.com/en/free-antivirus-windows which is actually pretty good. Very lightweight in terms of system use, reasonably fast scanning and respectable detection rates. Lacks features but does its basic job well which I like.

 

But yes I've heard good things about Avast but didn't really like its interface and apparently has a much poorer detection rate.

 

Take a look at http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ and http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1864601,00.asp to compare the free ones.

 

For a look at the pay ones you can take a look over here http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1891760,00.asp

 

http://www.consumersearch.com/ also is a good source for checking out antivirus reviews.

 

Even I dislike the Avast interface, but it has a few built-in skins that makes it look way better.

Don't get close to Nortan Anti Virus, unless you have atleast 2 GB of RAM. (Only then you woudn't feel the difference )

 

It used to be very good, but the interface started hogging alot of memmory even though it wasn't impressive. Im my opinion Norton products are for novice users.