My instinct in reading the article is that it's pay for play journalism.
It doesn't contain a lot of specs/ test reports, details etc and the
best rated security suite of recent years... Zone Alarm Security Suite
... isn't even tested or mentioned and the big corporate solutions are
all at or near the top... which hasn't been the case for quite some time
... until now.
And it's not going to erase my bad feelings for the years of problems I
have had removing Norton's viralware from computers. Leopards don't
change their spots overnight...and I doubt their code is a top to bottom
rewrite
Maybe the article should be: "Top Internet Security Suites: Paying for
Ratings..."
db
Tony B wrote:
Multiple recent reviews are giving Norton Internet Security 2009 top
ratings, so I thought I'd make sure the list was aware of this. None
of us has particularly liked Norton for several years now, but
apparently they've gotten this newest one right.
So, the next time someone mentions Norton, there's no reason to pile
on with reasons why they should avoid it. We've still got a year on a
10 seat Kaspersky subscription, so I won't be trying it anytime soon
myself.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/158157/top_internet_security_suites_paying_for_protection.html
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
