Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Monday, July 6, 2009 at 7:05 pm Posted by triplate (20834 messages posted) Get rid of Norton. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 1:55 am Posted by oleg (154 messages posted) And get rid of windows defender . Over kill with security doesnt work . If you have a NAT router , your services and 1 sensible security system set up properly you have your system about as secure as you can get it without getting the chainsaw out and castrateing it . Some people will recomend "Black viper" for setting your services up , i say keep away from it unless you realy , realy know what your doing . Some of his settings cause error reports and its VERY hard to know from reading them what is a real error and what is the system looking for bits the black viper settings turned off . There is a much better services set up program you can get here :- http://www.ntsvcfg.de/ntsvcfg_eng.html [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 5:18 am Posted by Ricer46 (23825 messages posted) In general, you can't run two active AV programs simultaneously; and as already indicated you could hardly have picked a worse pair to protect your system. On Monday, July 6, 2009 at 4:25 pm, ptp2 wrote: >My computer recently crashed. The hard drive was formatted and the original WXP Home > was installed with all the updates including SP3 and Windows defender. I added Norton >antivirus 2009. Everything was fine for a while, but since yesterday I get a message >when the computer turns from windows Security Center indicating that the firewall >is not turned on and my copmputer is at risk. After I click on the red balloon icon >on my task bar (as suggested by the Windows security center) Norton loads, the firewall >is on and the computer is fine. > >I have changed the Windows Defender Services to "Manual". Hopefully if it does not >load on at start up I might eliminate the problem. >I would feel a lot better if I could have these two programs protecting my computer >but somehow they are conflicting. > >I was wondering if anyone has a suggestion. > >Thanks for any help > >ptp [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 5:54 am Posted by triplate (20834 messages posted) Norton..........destroying systems since 1998....... [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 8:35 am Posted by oleg (154 messages posted) The only good norton i`ve ever seen was a motorbike........... [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 8:41 am Posted by Ricer46 (23825 messages posted) And it was not produced by Symantec. On Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 8:35 am, oleg wrote: >The only good norton i`ve ever seen was a motorbike........... [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 8:42 am Posted by Ricer46 (23825 messages posted) Only since then? Seems longer.... On Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 5:54 am, triplate wrote: >Norton..........destroying systems since 1998....... > >target="_blank"> >border="0" alt="Photobucket"> [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 9:26 am Posted by MartinM (7551 messages posted) Now that's the truth ! [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 9:57 am Posted by Dan Sarandrea, MCSE (7132 messages posted) Norton AntiVirus 2009 has antispyware and firewall components, and typically when you install a commercial package like NAV 2009 it will automatically disable the corresponding (if any) built-in Windows protection to eliminate conflicts. The antispyware and firewall components of NAV2009 are better than the Windows Firewall and Windows Defender on XP, so best to leave them disabled and let Norton do its job. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 10:09 am Posted by triplate (20834 messages posted) Snorton Norton 750 Commando with a Manx motor. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 10:09 am Posted by triplate (20834 messages posted) LMAO********** could be!!! ;) [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 11:59 am Posted by Peter (278 messages posted) Oh dear, Norton is having trouble shaking off its poor reputation. It was once a troublesome resource hog ; my understanding of the latest offering is that it's one of the lightest and most effective protection programs available. On Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 9:57 am, Dan Sarandrea, MCSE wrote: >Norton AntiVirus 2009 has antispyware and firewall components, and typically when >you install a commercial package like NAV 2009 it will automatically disable the >corresponding (if any) built-in Windows protection to eliminate conflicts. > >The antispyware and firewall components of NAV2009 are better than the Windows Firewall >and Windows Defender on XP, so best to leave them disabled and let Norton do its >job. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 9:22 pm Posted by Dan Sarandrea, MCSE (7132 messages posted) Norton products started to develop a "bad reputation" around the same time that it began to leave obfuscated registry entries on a system to try to protect itself against the trick of uninstalling it then reinstalling to get another year of free defintion updates. That's the root of all the complaints about not being able to completely uninstall Norton products from a system. Norton products also developed a "bad reputation" for being a "resource hog" (a phrase normally uttered by the Norton "haters" LOL) because Symantec retained or added additional functions (some of which, while useful back in the day of Norton Commander et al, are of dubious value today) in the several different Norton suites; these functions necessarily added complexity and "weight" to the product compared to the almighty FREE simple AV programs. Objective comparison tests done by the computer magazines measured the overhead that AV and security suites and showed that Norton products were always pretty much mid-pack in the slow-down department. No AV or security product can do its job while exacting zero impact on a system. IME Norton's 2009 products are without question their best products ever. Having said that, I regularly install AVG Free Edition on the computers of qualifying customers who do not want to spend the money on a commercial product. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Wednesday, July 8, 2009 at 2:14 am Posted by oleg (154 messages posted) After our short nostalgic excursion to the Isle of Man..... back to solveing issues . ptp2 if you are satisfyed with norton keep it . If you look at security system test in the net you will see trhat the first 5 or 6 best results in each test are always from the same systems , but often in different orders . Usualy their results are all 95 % plus wich means that the only real differences are in how much system resources the program uses and the ease of use . The other thing to realise is that they are all not good enough . An example . I use kackperksky but its realy anoying . Either it takes all your desisions off you and does stupid things , wich in my case ment deleteing over 200 files i didnt want it to delete , or it hits you with a never ending barage of stupid , unanswerable , questions and you have to baby sit it . The other BIG problem is its very jealous with resources and hogs them . That means that often , for no obvious reason , it steals 99% of the power of the computer and either the computer crashes or freezes or programs crash . [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Wednesday, July 8, 2009 at 6:30 am Posted by Steve (23810 messages posted) Thought I would try "Microsoft Security Essentials" out. Might be a good freeware alternative. The Browsers seem to take a bit longer to connect, but no noticeable CPU slow down Hits seen on the Task Manager when using the Real time Protection. I normally don't use AV software, and I never get hit with Malware, so I might not be a good Tester on how good it protects, but some reviews I read it was as good as most the Pay as you go AV products. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: Windows Defender /Norton 2009 Wednesday, July 8, 2009 at 7:57 am Posted by Sgt (1525 messages posted) Buy Norton or any commercial AV package. Or download any free AV. (Frankly there best use is cleaning up infections once you do get infected). Use a router and a software firewall. Ditch IE use Firefox. Patch windows with duct tape updates if you want. That's a reasonably secure PC. Yet it still gets infected, identities get stolen. Bluntly put all the above does.. is treat symptoms of stupidity. Treat a symptom and the disease rages on. Your best defense isn't Norton not Windows Defender or any other placebo. It's yourself. No point saying what people shouldn't do online because they already know. I don't need to tell people not to leave there car running when they run into a store either. Listen to and use your common sense. Sgt Back up your Data Soldier! [Reply or follow-up to this message] Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread Search this forum Start a new thread on a different subject Report abuse of the forum Return to the Windows XP Discussion Forum