What do you think about NIS 2009?

dinesh · Jan 26, 2009

I have been using Norton Internet Security 09 since beta version and its working just fine for me. Its not a resource hog as well. Has anyone ever faced any problems with NIS 09? I m getting an option to get Mcafee security center 10. I have never used mcafee either. so which one is the best amongst these two? :sick:

emptystreets130 · Jan 26, 2009

NIS 2009 is pretty good. I've been using it for a few months and haven't run to any problems. What I didn't like is that the Vista version is slightly different from the XP version. You don't have the option to right click and scan like the XP version. That's the only thing it lack on a Vista machine. Other than that, works great. The first couple of days will be a little crazy. I was wondering why the suite was disable until I download and applied the updates.

I don't like Mcafee products in general but their site advisor is pretty good compare to Norton.

dinesh · Jan 26, 2009

Yeah i will stick to NIS 09.

z3r010 · Jan 27, 2009

They both suck.

emptystreets130 · Jan 27, 2009

That's really helpful :huh:

joel406 · Jan 27, 2009

Both Norton and Mcafee day has long passed. Just because your not having problems now dosent mean you wount in the future.

Theres only one good AV these days. Only one that really works.

NOD32

Just because your AV dosent say it sees a treat dosent mean its not there. It just means Norton sucks and cant see the infection. Same for Mcafee.

See bellow.

AV-Comparatives

Norton should be avoided at all cost.

emptystreets130 · Jan 27, 2009

Mind interpreting the data. To me, reading the chart, NOD32 and Norton is about the same, if not Norton scored better than NOD32.

dinesh · Jan 27, 2009

z3r010 said:
They both suck.

Should i switch to Avast?

rive0108 · Jan 27, 2009

emptystreets130 said:
Mind interpreting the data. To me, reading the chart, NOD32 and Norton is about the same, if not Norton scored better than NOD32.

Norton failed to recieve 3 star certification due to excessive detection of legimate files/programs as malware (false alarms), and a low detection rate of malware using hueristics. NOD32 was the only Antivirus product to recieve 3 start certification in the most recent round of AV testing.

1. The data for the NOV, 2008 testing period shows Norton lagging behind NOD32 in hueristic (proactive testing) 44% to 54%
2. Norton has an excessive number of false positives which is the detecting of legitimate program/Windows Files as malware, and when deleted this can result in Program/Windows instability and crashes. 12% to 7%
3. Test results for hueristic and retroactive testing over a 4 week period:

On demand detection capabilites of malware (Higher % is better)
(Heuristic) Proactive detection of new samples (1st week)
Norton 44%
NOD32 54%

(Heuristic) Proactive detection of new samples (all 4 weeks)
Norton 44%
NOD32 51%

False positives are the detecting of malware that is fact not malware which when removed can cause program/Windows instability and crashes. (Lower % is better)
Norton 12%
NOD32 7%

Component Detection Results (Heuristic/Virus Signature). (Higher % is better)
Windows Viruses
Norton 57%
NOD32 57%

Script malware detection
Norton 27%
NOD32 11%

Worms detection
Norton 53%
NOD32 60%

Backdoor Trojans detection
Norton 50%
NOD32 58%

Trojan Horse detection
Norton 42%
NOD32 48%

Other Malware detection
Norton 47%
NOD32 51%

On demand detection capabilites of malware (Higher % is better)
(Heuristic) Proactive detection of new samples (1st week)
Norton 44%
NOD32 54%

(Heuristic) Proactive detection of new samples (all 4 weeks)
Norton 44%
NOD32 51%

False positives are the detecting of malware that is fact not malware which when removed can cause program/Windows instability and crashes. (Lower % is better)
Norton 12%
NOD32 7%

Component Detection Results (Heuristic/Virus Signature). (Higher % is better)
Windows Viruses
Norton 57%
NOD32 57%

Script malware detection
Norton 27%
NOD32 11%

Worms detection
Norton 53%
NOD32 60%

Backdoor Trojans detection
Norton 50%
NOD32 58%

Trojan Horse detection
Norton 42%
NOD32 48%

Other Malware detection
Norton 47%
NOD32 51%

RichFrogg · Jan 27, 2009

Picking an AV program is a little like playing poker. I like that MS One Care has very few false positives.

dinesh · Jan 27, 2009

I will try NOD32. I just hope it wont be a resource hog.
Has anyone experienced performance issue after installing NOD32?

rive0108 · Jan 28, 2009

RichFrogg said:
Picking an AV program is a little like playing poker. I like that MS One Care has very few false positives.

I have OneCare (perpetual beta), and as a tester I have noticed issues;

1. The defrag utility does not perform well.
after running tuneup, I went into CMD and it showed 4% fragmentation of drive still.

rive0108 · Jan 28, 2009

dinesh said:
I will try NOD32. I just hope it wont be a resource hog.
Has anyone experienced performance issue after installing NOD32?

None.
But keep in mind the NOD32 is really designed for advanced users. Whereas NIS and OneCare and others like them are designed for those users with very little computer knowledge, or experience. This has always been the achilles heel of NOD32. The default settings are ok, but to really get the best performance out of NOD32 you need to enter the advanced setup tree and tweak it.

emptystreets130 · Jan 28, 2009

rive0108 said:
emptystreets130 said:

Mind interpreting the data. To me, reading the chart, NOD32 and Norton is about the same, if not Norton scored better than NOD32.

Click to expand...

NIV failed to recieve 3 star certification due to excessive detection of legimate files/programs as malware (false alarms), and a low detection rate of malware using hueristics. NOD32 was the only Antivirus product to recieve 3 start certification in the most recent round of AV testing.

Then I don't understand why you say Norton sucks when it ranks in the middle in the pix you provided. Not all of us want to mess with the advance setting in NOD32. :rolleyes:

rive0108 · Jan 28, 2009

Symantec did not rank in the middle- it ranked "2 star" as shown in the certification chart for the November 2008 test for the above reasons. The test was performed not using a "tweaked" NOD32 but only the default settings. Whether you choose to use Norton or NOD32, or any other AV is entirely your choice as is the security level of your pc-some are even naive enough to think that if they are "safe surfers" they do not need antivirus/antimalware at all. In the end It's your system, your documents, your Bank accounts, passwords, and your Identity. Make your own choice.

emptystreets130 · Jan 28, 2009

Let see 1 is below 2, 3 is above 2. What does that make 2. The middle or whatever you want to call it.

dk70 · Jan 28, 2009

I suggest you read AV-Comparatives 2008 rapport instead of looking at mashups from invisible sources. Getting silly to see the same old misinterpretations and number juggling, rive0108. If so in love with numbers showing only part of what matters with AV then may be separate them according to source.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse/summary2008.pdf

There are many fake "reviews" of AV, no reason to try and do the same on forums.

dk70 · Jan 28, 2009

And AV of the year was Avira not ESET - may be because it smokes ESET easily with detection?

Not really why I posted the link. It is the easiest way of understanding how they test and have they look at AV. Which is very different from manipulating lists on forums, you just did it again btw. You pick what you like to see/troll about and skip the rest, if not directly changing it for own convenience.

rive0108 · Jan 28, 2009

A close second...
Ill stick with a winner the last two years, and a close second the third year. :cool:

Top marks for 3 years running, I guess that speaks for itself. Either way, it still beats NIS.

rive0108 · Jan 28, 2009

dk70 said:
I suggest you read AV-Comparatives 2008 rapport instead of looking at mashups from invisible sources. Getting silly to see the same old misinterpretations and number juggling, rive0108. If so in love with numbers showing only part of what matters with AV then may be separate them according to source.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse/summary2008.pdf

There are many fake "reviews" of AV, no reason to try and do the same on forums.

Source:
A-V comparatives November 2008
Virus Bulletin VB100 April 2008 Vista SP1
Virus Bulletin VB100 December 2008 Vista x64
Virus Bulletin VB100 Results Summary 2008

What do you think about NIS 2009?

Vista Expert

My Computer

New Member

My Computer

Vista Expert

My Computer

My Computers

New Member

My Computer

Senior Member

My Computer

New Member

My Computer

Vista Expert

My Computer

My Computer

New Member

My Computer

Vista Expert

My Computer

My Computer

My Computer

New Member

My Computer

My Computer

New Member

My Computer

Member

My Computer

Member

My Computer

My Computer

My Computer