HTH,
Twayne`
Careful: Very often those types of "free" offerings are bastardized to allow certain "applications" to NOT be determined as malware! Yahoo's favorite at one time was to keep a hole open to allow GAIN trojans in which would have been stopped in the "real" product. Knowing Comcast, I'd suspect they have bastardized things like that too. Anytime a pay-for application is provided, there IS a monetary reason for it - it's no great gift, for sure. I'm not saying there ARE holes they created, just that if there arean't, then there's something else involved that's not obvious and isn't ethical.
HTH,
Twayne`
Have a look at the 2009 and 2010 product; I think you'll be very pleasantly surprised at the recovery they've accomplished. Oh, and the problems started before Symantec; check the history dates.
HTH,
Twayne`
As a more or less happy Norton user for many years I feel the need to add a couple of comments to this thread.
There were in fact some issues with the Norton uninstaller prior to the 2008 release. I might be off by a year or two. They did resolve those problems with later versions and their site does offer a complete removal tool for anyone who needs it for the older versions.
There is an issue that current users need to be aware of. The 2009 and newer versions shut down and offer no protection when your subscription expires. It doesn't just quit getting updates. It shuts down.
They extorted the renewal fee from me because the 2010 retail version I ordered online was two days late getting here. My choices were to pay or do without.
Needless to say I will be exploring other option the next time I purchase AV protection. And if this post costs them a few sales; well paybacks are fun!
Colbyt
That "point" was never made until very recently. So much for writing ability.
No secrecy about it; it's clearly spelled out in the documentation and includes all the caveats.
Nah, the tool gets rid of everything that can run or be run. Nothing can execute after their too has been run.
Then you have to delete - often
Nah, that's preposterous. Actually, that's part of the removal tool operation so that you don't have to "take ownership" of files and/or directories to remove them. It does so automatically for you.
Only then can you be certain you have "removd" Norton's products.
Neatly, everything in 2009 and 2010 versions runs a memory use display that perfectly matches the Task Manager numbers, and it uses very few resources. Actually, I'd be ecstatic if every program I had only ever used 15% of the cpu time; most jump to the hign 90s or 50s, but for very short periods of time. It's how LONG an application requires that much time that's important.
Now that we've established the usefulness and inaccuracy of your allegations and closed minded spew:
There are OTHER solutions available. Not many better, some worse, some just plain hackware or fraudulent to start with, but there ARE others available. A few decent and reliable ones are even free! I don't know what-all tends to "come to mind" for you, but it sure ain't much or anything accurate in the overall! Your post appears to be that of a followerk and a powerless feeling person with little consideration for others. Or, maybe you're just having a bad day; who knows? Everyone's entitled to that once in awhile; no harm, no foul there if the subject realizes it.
HTH,
Twayne`
Okay, what DID happen?
Name one other program that requires a download to remove it. Just one.
Further, using an external tool violates both custom and Microsoft's standard that removal facilities be included with the installation.
Well, there's that.
Two things with norton: it does very little about malware installed by the user. Install weatherbug, wildtangent games etc., get popup ads, and watch norton do nothing. Spybot is the tool for that kind of crap.
Other thing is norton internet security is a pig. Pretty tremendous by XP standards, but mild compared to the mountain of pigshit known vista. NIS alone needs 200-300M of ram. Put NIS and XP SP3 on a 512M XP system and watch it require 2 minutes to load google's home page with nothing else running. Can you say thrashing? Install a router, don't let teenagers run out of anything but a limited account and you can leave NIS switched off. Or just buy more ram.
That's for you to say when you decide to describe it honestly or correctly whichever the case may be.
Actually, there are quite a few others. Usually there's a good reason for it as described preivously. Why did you decide to snip out your own contentions? You may not be aware of them because you simply don't use the products. I know of 5 off hand I have that carry them for the same reasons previously stated and snipped by you.
Balderdash & BS: Nice try, but that is NOT a MS regulation. It's the FTC that provides that little bit of protection to the consumer. Not only that, it's not the same thing - entirely different - apples and oranges.
Please try it out.
HTH,
Twayne`
lol, can you say you're a dummy? I have NIS 2010 running. Opening Google's home page on my XP Pro SP3 machine takes approximately 3 seconds from keycick to ful page displayed. And I can say "thrashing" et al, and I can also say I recognize a poorly maintained and setup computer when I hear such a description. The issue of knowingly running programs that have more RAM than the program needs is abundantly silly and using the minimums they offer, do not and will not create the symptoms you describe on a properly running machine. It can even be done with less than 512 of RAM too. But those experiments I'm sure would be beyond your capabilities to understand.
Twayne`
I missed what point, "they intruded, installed themselves" what planet are you from, they dont install anything "by themselves"
Are you refering to the newer Norton products since 07, Ive had norton
360 since 07 and have no negative issues, even system speed. Every new review Ive read from 07 on also rates it tops with no more system degradation than other brands, maybe old norton products were different, I had Mcaffe but my free run expired so I bought norton, I notice nothing for the worse with Norton and its more thorough.
Was that a 512M system, you pathetic heap of human garbage?
Try not to be such an arrogent ignorant moron if you can help it.
I can't imagine anything ever useful ever come your hole.
There is such a thing as a "clever MBA"????
When you use either the remove function of the software itself or the Windows "add-remove program" ALL of the program should be removed.
With Norton it is NOT. You need to get the norton product eraser off the internet to remove the droppings left behind in all the corners of the OS by the invasive, bloated, and misbehaving program. It's almost as bad as the programs that pop up pretending to be your antivirus.
I no longer recommend ANY Symantec product to my customers.
Ed made your point earlier and he was correct. So to you I will simply say "Get Screwed!" Is that clear enough?
I purchased the PC in September of last year after a lightening strike. I was already running McAfee on the damaged PC, so I very deliberately uninstalled Norton because I knew McAfee was going to require removal anyway. This morning, when I booted up, I had a brand new Norton Icon on the desktop and a new entry in my start up menu. I uninstalled both. Ten minutes later Norton was preparing to scan my machine from a dialogue panel that had no minimize or close options. I did, again, uninstall from another new start up menu entry and got the application stopped.
I don't know if this new Norton intrusion has been lurking since I uninstalled in September; or if it came into my PC recently. Either way it was unwanted and non-professional. When I uninstalled it six months ago that should have been a pretty clear indication that we didn't need it.
Much like I didn't need your smart-assed, repetitive comment regarding my writing ability. Now if that wasn't clear I can get more clear.
So there!
RonB
That's got to really hurt. Now, his posts won't appear on one computer, in one room, in one house, at one adress.
Good Grief guys. I wasn't even asking for help. I was simply reporting an apparent PC intrusion by a software company that used to have pretty good credentials. I even OT'ed it.
Two guys knocked my writing ability. I respect the first one and he was correct. Twayne was clearly just jumping on - as he often does. Why should I respect a copycat. Some of us contribute to these newsgroups quickly and even remotely so our writing products might not be up to the doctoral thesis standards.
Hell, from looking at his profile I'm not even sure Twayne owns a house let alone improves it. I have tried to provide some halfway useful input to this group and a couple of other similar newsgroups.
I shouldn't have brought this up in the first place.
RonB
Apparently it never occurred to you that someone _else_ may have installed it...
I'm sure your friendly attitude is just as effective at getting people to help you in real life as it is on Usenet. Buh-bye!
"HeyBub" wrote
There have been a couple of crap programs my grandson managed to DL onto my wife's computer that you had to go to their website and do something. Been a while so I forget the details, but they were a real PITA to get rid of. Gator was one.
I don't think so. But hell, I have screwed up most everything else since I started this stupid string. the only part I don't regret is biting back at Twayne!
In the future I'll stick with Wood, homes and leave the nerd stuff to him.
RonB
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.