I downloaded a 15-day trial version a few days ago and so far I am pleased that it delivers as advertised and has a very small footprint in my system.
I used to be a Norton user of long standing and then abandoned them a few years ago vowing never to go back for all the reasons we all know. I was using Zone Alarm but recently my system started to act up every to ZA was installed. If I deleted it I was fine, if I re-installed I was getting very spurious results, non-shut-downs and other annoying things. So I started looked for alternates. Tried a trial of Kaspersky. Was clearly a good product but not very user oriented. ESET (Nod32) was next. But then I read a few recent reviews of NIS 2009,like the one below, and decided to give it one last try for old times sake. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2330024,00.asp - this strikes me as a very thorough review... Have to say that so far I am actually very impressed, and I had a big anti-Norton bias to get back over. I may even keep it...:) Michael ________________________________ From: db <db...@att.net> To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:36:12 AM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Norton revisited 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/ ** ************************************************************************* ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
