| > :) I'd call anything from Symantec crapware.
| > And when it's pre-installed as a free trial version
| > it's sleazy crapware. Symantec would be out of
| > business if they didn't pull that trick on onwitting
| > computer buyers.
| I guess I must be one of those "unwitting" buyers. My HP came with
| free Norton for a year. When I bought it, they had a deal where for
| a nominal fee, I think it was ~$30, you could get two additional years.
| I took advantage of that. I got 3 years of Norton and it's performed
| fine by me, no issues at all.
Symantec has a long history of buying good products,
then bloating them, cutting down functionality, and
raising the price. They then make those products a
success through marketing. (There's been a current
discussion about this on the XP group.)
Last I saw, Norton was among the most bloated of
the AV options, and that's not good because AV is
already very demanding in terms of resources. Other
products Symantec has ruined that I used personally:
* Quarterdeck CleanSweep - They bought it, added it to
System Works, and pretty much removed any useful
* AtGuard firewall - One of the best firewalls ever made.
Symantec licensed it, doubled the price, repackaged
it as their own Norton Internet Security, and set over 700
program files to be exempt from the firewall, making it very
easy to use but of little value.
* Powerquest Drive Image and Partition Magic - Powerquest
was no sweetheart. They carefully separated one program into
two, overcharged for them, and claimed they were only licensed
for use on a single hard disk! But at least PM and DI worked.
When Symantec bought them out they were turned into a
massively bloated backup program, which is now off the market.
| I think I saw where you posted suggesting
| that anti-virus isn't needed. I'd say it's that view that's unwitting.
I install AV for friends who's computers I manage.
Usually Avast Free. All of them are significant
resource hogs, but if you don't know how to protect
from online risks and/or you can't be bothered, then
AV is a good idea.
I don't use AV personally. I haven't for many years.
installed, don't have Adobe plugins of any kind, and don't
have Java installed. I also know what to look for in
terms of risky email.
be made safe. But script is required if you use webmail,
Facebook, do a lot of online shopping, etc. I don't do
those things in general, so I have no need for AV. Nearly
When AV started out they were small programs that
were updated with a 1 MB file once per month. The number
of viruses were in the thousands. Now that number is in
the millions and virus "signatures" are updated in terms
of hours rather than months. The whole approach of AV
is outdated. It's comparing those millions of signatures
to the byte patterns in every file you touch -- a vast
amount of work, and wasteful -- especially when most
of the files you touch are already on your computer!
I guess maybe a good AV analogy would be having 8
attack dogs rather than having a front door. The dogs
are expensive to maintain, they shit all over the yard,
they bark a lot, and they make it hard for friends to visit.
But if you're not going to install a locking front door on
your house then I wouldn't argue with the usefulness of
the dogs. :)