It detected eicar but didn't say. It didn't detect a lot with the signatures but the download protection prevented a lot. As long as it prevents in some form it is good. You just need to know what you are doing.
By the way, you are completely wrong. Norton 2010 is almost perfect if you know how to use it. Norton 2009 worked very well, if not better than most. Before than yes norton sucked.
Yep, and since the first public beta release it removes the EICAR-Test-File completely automatically, no worries. :) I've personally liked Norton since 2008, even 2009 was a complete turnaround in all kinds of ways. 2007 was a hater for all. 2010 is even more of a turnaround.
There's nothing like the best, and any experienced person knows that. Norton's not the best, Kaspersky not the best, and nothing else is the best - even if if it does indeed look like Norton could "catch" any threat if you actually knew what you're talking about and did some research.
So you tested Norton 2010, regardless of being NAV or NIS, in a VM? Now, what is the possibility - unless you're running an On-Demand scan, cause that's useless measuring - that something comes through since, if it's not determined bad by any of the components in real-time straight away, Quorum incl., you should get a prompt like seen in this video, telling you there's not enough data, and you're recommended to block?
In other words, Quorum was active on those malware files and it would still let it through altogether? You could always post your findings over at their official forums if you want them to even be able to improve, or you can continue to complain that they're not "the BEST". Just my two cents. SONAR2 and Quorum is also going to improve significantly even through the beta, so I still wouldn't worry too much. Contributing would make them able to improve faster on the other hand.
I think one malware file got through, then another. But I think norton 2010 is a HUGE improvement over 2009. Im looking for an antivirus right now, kaspersky trail ran out. Tried COMODO, That was a pain in the ass. Error after error with it.
Most important thing I'm personally trying to find out is if Quorum won't do a thing on things that are already on the machine - only things that get added (through the Internet). I can't think that's correct, even if I understood it that way, since it would be completely useless to clean a system with in that case. Like I said, would be great if you contributed over at the forums so that they can improve even faster. You're already arguing with much more maturity. ;)
Just curious, since you mentioned Kaspersky also long ago, did you test it on the same set previously and how did it do? Was it able to take care of everything with ease for comparison?
Sounds interesting... so, what you're saying is, even if the FW had not been there, the BB would have caught it as well? Is the BB that you're refering to a part of KAV too? I prefer to save myself from the hassle and resource usage/bandwidth slowing of software FWs and rely on a properly configured hardware FW, so that's why I'm wondering this.
Okay, now, I'm a member at Wilders, and not only is browsing speed decrease and such reported over there, but it's also from personal experience. Also, RAM is not what's interesting, but CPU cycles used if talking resource usage. RAM is usually overwhelming in today's PCs when it comes to general computing, so that's never of worry unless something is bugging and getting a leak.
No offence, but again; Even if the FW had not been there, the BB would have caught it as well? Is the BB that you're refering to a part of KAV too? I also don't want some of the features that are included in KIS, I simply want to run an Express Setup in order to have Automatic Mode and such and just go and do what I want. ;)
Okay, thanks. Have you considered posting your findings in details over at the official forums of Symantec so that they have the ability to get things right faster?
norton sucks... havent you ever read the PROFESSIONAL antivirus review sites? Avira and Avast beat ALL big name antiviruses on EVERY comparative
wolfpup118 8 months ago
I love its design, but as you have shown in the video, I don't like its virus detections :O
GrellesLicht28 2 years ago
how can you give it a good rating if it didnt do anything?
kevingp12 2 years ago
Didn't do anything? It did very well.
Cudgelwap1 2 years ago
didnt you say in the video that it didnt detect anything... it didnt even detect eicar when i tested avg that little cheap junk detected it..
kevingp12 2 years ago
It detected eicar but didn't say. It didn't detect a lot with the signatures but the download protection prevented a lot. As long as it prevents in some form it is good. You just need to know what you are doing.
Cudgelwap1 2 years ago
glad i abandoned Norton since NOD32 v2.7
Now I am using Eset Smart Security 4. Best product ever.
eternalkp 2 years ago
@eternalkp i have eset smart security 4 and norton antivirus 2010 and they work correctly
thepredatorwinner 1 year ago
2010 and norton still sucks ballz >.>
hax0rman101 2 years ago
By the way, you are completely wrong. Norton 2010 is almost perfect if you know how to use it. Norton 2009 worked very well, if not better than most. Before than yes norton sucked.
Cudgelwap1 2 years ago
Yep, and since the first public beta release it removes the EICAR-Test-File completely automatically, no worries. :) I've personally liked Norton since 2008, even 2009 was a complete turnaround in all kinds of ways. 2007 was a hater for all. 2010 is even more of a turnaround.
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
gamepro127onPSN you cant blame them
after years of norton being such a cpu and ram hog, their finally taking a aim at it
pacorocks1 2 years ago
Just like 2009, Norton focuses more on performance than detection+removal. Kaspersky focuses on both.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
You have no point - you only acted like a fanboy in this comment.
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
Norton is still good, but not the BEST. Its good for normal computers users though. =)
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
There's nothing like the best, and any experienced person knows that. Norton's not the best, Kaspersky not the best, and nothing else is the best - even if if it does indeed look like Norton could "catch" any threat if you actually knew what you're talking about and did some research.
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
I never said norton couldn't catch any threats. I do my own test in sun virtualbox and some things got through...Norton blocked most though.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
So you tested Norton 2010, regardless of being NAV or NIS, in a VM? Now, what is the possibility - unless you're running an On-Demand scan, cause that's useless measuring - that something comes through since, if it's not determined bad by any of the components in real-time straight away, Quorum incl., you should get a prompt like seen in this video, telling you there's not enough data, and you're recommended to block?
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
I had the real-time and I done the recommended action always. It done a pretty good job. It let it c1-c5.exe though =(
Had to use MBAM to fix that.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
In other words, Quorum was active on those malware files and it would still let it through altogether? You could always post your findings over at their official forums if you want them to even be able to improve, or you can continue to complain that they're not "the BEST". Just my two cents. SONAR2 and Quorum is also going to improve significantly even through the beta, so I still wouldn't worry too much. Contributing would make them able to improve faster on the other hand.
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
I think one malware file got through, then another. But I think norton 2010 is a HUGE improvement over 2009. Im looking for an antivirus right now, kaspersky trail ran out. Tried COMODO, That was a pain in the ass. Error after error with it.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
Most important thing I'm personally trying to find out is if Quorum won't do a thing on things that are already on the machine - only things that get added (through the Internet). I can't think that's correct, even if I understood it that way, since it would be completely useless to clean a system with in that case. Like I said, would be great if you contributed over at the forums so that they can improve even faster. You're already arguing with much more maturity. ;)
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
Just curious, since you mentioned Kaspersky also long ago, did you test it on the same set previously and how did it do? Was it able to take care of everything with ease for comparison?
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
Yea I tested it, it blocked everything except for a downloader which the firewall blocked and the behavior-blocker got easily.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
Sounds interesting... so, what you're saying is, even if the FW had not been there, the BB would have caught it as well? Is the BB that you're refering to a part of KAV too? I prefer to save myself from the hassle and resource usage/bandwidth slowing of software FWs and rely on a properly configured hardware FW, so that's why I'm wondering this.
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
The firewall only takes 1MB of RAM usually.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
Okay, now, I'm a member at Wilders, and not only is browsing speed decrease and such reported over there, but it's also from personal experience. Also, RAM is not what's interesting, but CPU cycles used if talking resource usage. RAM is usually overwhelming in today's PCs when it comes to general computing, so that's never of worry unless something is bugging and getting a leak.
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
No offence, but again; Even if the FW had not been there, the BB would have caught it as well? Is the BB that you're refering to a part of KAV too? I also don't want some of the features that are included in KIS, I simply want to run an Express Setup in order to have Automatic Mode and such and just go and do what I want. ;)
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
Yea the BB would have gotten it.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
And KAV includes it too?
dinmamma333k 2 years ago
Yea im pretty sure.
gamepro127onPSN 2 years ago
Okay, thanks. Have you considered posting your findings in details over at the official forums of Symantec so that they have the ability to get things right faster?
dinmamma333k 2 years ago