Commentary: Does anyone like Norton Antivirus?

 

Five years ago, I asked if anybody liked using Norton Antivirus and the response from readers was an overwhelming 'no'.

Since that time, Symantec has completely rewritten the software and claims to have addressed many of its customers' concerns.

So today I'm throwing it over to you - has your experience of Norton Antivirus changed?

On Friday, I spent some time chatting to John Harrison, a product manager for Symantec Security Response. He diplomatically admitted that previous versions of Norton AV were resource hungry and inefficient and said the company was fighting an uphill battle to prove to customers that Symantec had changed it ways.

"A lot of people still think of our products from three or four years ago where [Norton AV] may not have been the fastest thing," said Harrison. "The installation time of Norton 2009 and Norton 2010 alone is a sign. It used to take ten or 15 minutes to install. I installed Norton 2009 last year in about one minute 30 seconds, and the Norton 2010 product is faster".

According to Gartner, Symantec remains the global market leader in security software but its share fell from 24.4 percent in 2007 to 22 percent last year. McAfee and Trend Micro's market share remained virtually flat, with 10.09 percent and seven percent of the market respectively.

Harrison knows user perception will take some time to change and although the company's product may have improved, its mantra remains the same: "I think for any user that has a negative perception, get the latest version and really give it a try," he said.

Like many other software companies with a strong brand and large market share, Symantec has focused on annually incrementing Norton AV's effectiveness and features.

Around the same time, the people developing malware have evolved from online vandals into hard-core criminals who had discovered there was lots of money to be made from infecting PCs. Unlike the traditional software industry, they have been concentrating on creating slick, efficient and effective software.

Symantec's Harrison explained that the company's change of direction was led by senior vice president of consumer products Rowan Trollope, who urged development teams to think about the way customers interact with their security software instead of blindly adding new features and functionality.

"Rowan got us looking at the real world perspective, I think that got us to be smart about the capabilities we were putting under the hood - less being more. Rewriting Norton from scratch to do that was painful," said Harrison.

I think it's time to ask you again: Does anyone like (the new) Norton Antivirus?

Do you trust Symantec and Norton to protect your PCs? Have you noticed the change in Norton over the past few years? Do you plan on buying Norton 2010?

 


Commentary: Does anyone like Norton Antivirus?
"Just to keep it even, here's a link to the download for AVG 8.5 Free edition - get it here: http://tinyurl.com/o488qz"
By Zaphiren
 
 
 
Comments: 24
arrow224
Sep 23, 2009 7:27 AM
Norton AV is great. I have used it since 2002, and found each version to be better, more streamlined and easier to use.

Yes I found that Norton 2002 to 2007 was a resource hog, but if you left your computer on overnight and did the scan it didn't bother me.

Norton 2008, and currently 2009 are very good. Very quick to install and to scan. I will definitely be purchasing 2010 version when my subscription runs out.
ray73864
Sep 23, 2009 7:52 AM
My problem with Norton and McAfee was never just speed related, i always had a problem with the cost and the size of updates.

I use AVG Free and ClamWin and both do daily updates that are less than a MB each. Yet Norton and McAfee always preferred the weekly or fortnightly updates which came in at a very heavy 20MB on occasions.
Schikitar
Sep 23, 2009 9:17 AM
Existing subscribers may be entitled to a free version upgrade, check here - http://updatecenter.norton.com/

I stopped using Norton after version 2003 but I came back when 2009 came out and just upgraded (for free) to version 2010 - and it's even better!
TonstantWeader
Sep 23, 2009 9:25 AM
The disparity between what I know most colleagues think and the reactions here is interesting. Norton/Symantec has only ever become large, more complex, harder to control and more paternalistic in its operation. It has feature bloat, totally inflexible operating modes, requires open-heart surgery on your machine if anything goes wrong with an update or upgrade. It's only a lack of better alternatives that has ever made me use it.
anonymous
Sep 23, 2009 10:19 AM
Norton is certainly better now in many respects than it was some years ago, but most of the competition have improved even more.

It may install and run quicker now (just as well!), but it still hooks into the system and is a brute to remove cleanly.
HyRax
Sep 23, 2009 10:33 AM
Norton lost me as a customer years ago. Too late to make a comeback now when there are perfectly good free solutions like Avast! out there. Besides that, I use Linux 90% of the time now anyway - no need for anti-virus there. Avast! mostly gets used in my Windows VM's. No issues ever.
pkruss
Sep 23, 2009 11:11 AM
I have stopped using Symantec products for several years - too much overhead, slowing computer perfromance and the annual license fee is out of touch with reality. I recommend products such as AVG and The Shield. Neither have these problems, and work happily in the background
Mun
Sep 23, 2009 11:15 AM
@TonstantWeader I agree that old versions of Norton were bloated but i'm curious about how much the user experience has changed.

It's really interesting to read the comments from anonymous and HyRax because personally, I haven't used NAV in years because i switched to a Mac and OS X - and am unlikely to go back.

Also, you might be interested to know that when i met up with John Harrison, he was using a MacBook that didn't have any AV software.
Schikitar
Sep 23, 2009 11:25 AM
You guys need to keep the 'mums and dads' in mind - AVG, Avira etc., are freebies (unless you pay for the full versions) that don't have the full protection capabilities of a complete package such as Norton NIS etc.,

For you guys who had previously given up on Norton but haven't tried version 2009/10 then check it out, it's vastly superior to the previous versions. I was using NOD32 but I found that was far more expensive to license across 3 machines than Norton.

I would never trust freebie AV - I value my data way too much! A number of times I've had to do virus/malware removal on AVG-protected machines - I'll never go there!
frances
Sep 23, 2009 11:25 AM
Dear Munir,
Like many others here, I used to use Norton until it became user-hostile and resource-greedy. It also used to freeze my older operating systems, so now, even when it comes bundled "free" I delete it and go with something else. I currently run PC Tools, McAfee (soon to drop this for similar reasons as Norton) and AVG; which goes to prove: don't EVER lose your customers, you never get them back. Hope this helps you. Frances
akoulianos
Sep 23, 2009 11:56 AM
My laptop came with Norton (07). Along with Vista being on it the experience I had was terrible. I was looking for anything that made my system more stable. Harvey's recommended McCafee or Trend. Went with McCafee and that was fine but when it expired I looked into AVG. Better price and it does the same thing.
Mun
Sep 23, 2009 11:59 AM
@frances Thanks for your response and i agree with you completely about losing customers - once they have a bad experience, they are unlikely to come back.

Also, i find that computer savvy users -- who experienced the big bloaty versions of Norton -- are always going to be looking for alternatives (for example, HyRax)

Munir Kotadia
Mun
Sep 23, 2009 12:05 PM
@ akoulianos: Ouch, Windows Vista and Norton 07 -- sounds like a match made in hell!
nate.cochrane
Sep 23, 2009 12:06 PM
I remember when Peter Norton brought out his tools so many moons ago for DOS; they were magic. They put the power in the hands of ordinary users. But for too many years to count the products that still bear his name but no resemblence to his vision were bloated, difficult to use and just too cumbersome. Security is an area where a company needs a lot of trust from its users to succeeed and I haven't felt that way towards to it since long before Norton removed his face from the box.
BrettWinterford
Sep 23, 2009 12:21 PM
I experienced both the horror story of a few older versions, and the ease-of-use of the latest version. I'm now a convert.

@Frances makes an interesting point. Its a lesson for all vendors... and yet so many seem to have forgiven Microsoft for Vista already!!!
mbkitmgr
Sep 23, 2009 2:18 PM
As an IT Manager I continued to recommend it to others. I would often suggest the user load the SW and disable everything except the AV. I would suggest that they download other utils like Spybot etc to take care of other threats. I have copped a lot of flack over the last few years over my recommending Norton AV. It was also interesting that I brought Symantec AV Corp Edition to my organisation, and could not believe the diffence in performance. Its hard to imagine how two products under the same parent company, can be so different.

It will take a lot for me to go back to recommending Notron AV, I'll stick with recommeding AVG and the likes. Its hard enough to get Joe Averge to load an AV solution for their own good, let alone pay for one that hogs resources
heggz
Sep 23, 2009 3:33 PM
Is great if you got the money and the grunt, otherwise NOD32 all the way..
Opa Eric
Sep 23, 2009 5:04 PM
I had used Nortons for many years and gave up on them in 2006. Used Kaspersky for a year. Then got a free copy of Nortons Internet Security 2009 and it is great. It is not a hog and it updates all the time so you don't have to wait for it to update when you bootup and log on.
Hmmm - OK
Sep 24, 2009 5:56 PM
I run a small Home PC repair business, so see many users with Norton AV. Most of my customers are happy when Norton is running and the subscription is up to date, but tend to be a little naive about the alternatives. They are also usually only using Norton because it came bundled on the machine when they bought it.

Some of the Norton products try to "encourage" the users into on line storage and backup (which they have to pay further for!) and I dislike this intensly.

I have never (nor will I ever) recommend subscription based AV to home users.

@Schikitar I agree with you - most people's data is valuable, but just because you use a subscription based AV doesn't give it super-powers! NO AV package is 100% safe - nor should it be treated as such - a good and simple backup policy is your best protection (and there are plenty of excellent free packages for that too!)

I have no problems with Norton AV per se and it does provide excellent protection for the novice users - but its a real pain if you want to remove it and when its subscription runs out - so I don't recommend it.

There are equally good free AV products available and team them with some free equally good malware products a good backup regime and a little education you can keep your system and data totally safe - for free!
Dr Nic
Sep 24, 2009 6:22 PM
I'm quite a fan of the recent iterations – excellent stuff.
MerariSchroeder
Sep 25, 2009 10:01 AM
Norton has always been too "imposing". More imposing than some viruses! I haven't seen the more recent versions, but I get by with AVG Free.

Security is not all about the AV though.
* Keep the AV up to date - to the second.
* Keep up to date with OS patches - and no, Linux and Mac also get them.
* Spam filter - most ISPs and free mails - like gmail do this for you. Most users get viruses from attachments, so it doesn't matter what system you're using.
* Don't visit dodjy websites - you know the ones
* Backup your stuff! Backtrack.com is awesome for this.
D2011
Sep 25, 2009 1:51 PM
Havent used it in years since the last bad experiences with it. It used to be a given that any client experiencing issues, that you turned off Nortons & it all worked again. I have AVG on my home pc, Avast on my work pc & nothing on my Linux & MAC. I find AVG good at stopping the viruses, but it seems to be more of a resource hog than ever. Plus AVG causes html signature issues in outlook. As much as I love my Linux & Mac, its silly to say they are invulnerable to viruses. Does someone designing a phishing app, virus, worm, malware app etc want to design something for 1% (Linux) & 6% (Mac) of the market? Or do they want a 93% market penetration? Its like getting a grafiti artist to design something he will paint in a stormwater tunnel 20M below the road. Its just not worthwhile, your peers will never know what you achieved.
Natalie
Sep 25, 2009 6:53 PM
I work for Symantec, for those interested you can download a free 30-day trial of the new version from http://tinyurl.com/30-daytrialNIS2010
Zaphiren
Sep 28, 2009 12:42 AM
Just to keep it even, here's a link to the download for AVG 8.5 Free edition - get it here: http://tinyurl.com/o488qz
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Vito Forte: A CIO for tough times
Fortescue Metals CIO talks vendor management and innovation.
 
Tech staff spared in ANZ's 1000 job cuts
Cost cutting hits middle management.
 
Telstra shifts BigPond email to Windows Live
All data to be migrated to Microsoft cloud.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Would you be concerned about your business' email data being hosted offshore?

   |   View results
Yes
  83%
 
No
  17%
TOTAL VOTES: 245

Vote