- Average user rating: stars out of 471 votes Back to product review
- My rating: 0 stars Write review
Full user review
-
118 out of 133 people found this review helpful
2 stars
Version: Norton AntiVirus 2010 17.0
"Norton is to heavy."
Pros: Nice looking interface and easy to use.
Cons: Norton came with my computer pre installed. Norton slows my computer down while in fullscan. It also slows down my boot up and boot down time and I am using 1 GB of memory. You can get better anti virus for free like Avast.
- 15 replies to this review
-
excuse me, norton is the lightest and best antivirus as far as i noe
it is because ur com is xtreme slow n lousy, nt that norton is heavy n do nt use previous exp on the new ver of norton -
First off, ALL programs slow down your computer during full scan. In fact, I have tried so many personally and Norton is the only one not eating up a lot of CPU. Most programs eat up more than 50%.
Second of all, Norton 2009 products are proven and tested by companies like AV-Comparatives to be one of hte fastest suites around.
Check your facts and TRY the program before writing these reviews. -
dont you know that 2gb is recommended for vista for a fast speed, you can blame norton for this. other antivirus will also slow ur com down
-
:) okay, norton not only won AV test in av-comparatives but also win IS test for in pc world...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/158157/top_internet_security_suites_paying_for_protection.html
Internet Security Suites Test Result:
1Symantec Norton Internet Security 2009
2BitDefender Internet Security 2009
3Panda Internet Security 2009
4McAfee Internet Security Suite 2009
5Avira Premium Security Suite 8.2
6Kaspersky Internet Security 2009
7F-Secure Internet Security 2009
8Webroot Internet Security Essentials
9Trend Micro Internet Security Pro 2009 -
Norton 2009 is very light. Older versions were heavy however please actaully try the newest version. Its proven by many many companies to be one of the lightest software around.
Free ones often have lower security features than paid subscriptions. If you didn't like Norton in the past, give it another chance. It listened to customers and the new products is the lightest of them all.
To everyone: Please don't write a 1 star review based on previous versions. Try the version you are rating. If you're rating an older version, go to the reviews of older versions by choosing from the Older Versions menu. -
According to http://www.av-comparatives.org/
(english pdf link down so i download spanish ver instead)
Overall Award (For Performance Of CPU/RAM):
ADVANCED+
1. ESET
2. Symantec
3. VBA32
4. Avast
5. McAfee
6. Microsoft
7. BitDefender
8. GDATA
9. AVIRA
ADVANCED
10. Norman
11. Kaspersky
12. AVG
13. eScan
14. Sophos
STANDARD
15. TrustPort
16. F-Secure
*note:
they test it on xp(i think 2 gb ram) & i test it on vista(4gb ram)...
& norton claim their minimum requirment is 256-512mb(not sure if it true)...
for old pc u may need to stop some useless program from auto run/startup(misconfig) & may be uninstall other AV that is the real memory hog(like avg) by using revo uninstaller & may be ccleaner if u can't remove it & btw, norton is overall the fastest AV custom/quick/full scanner(kingsoft cheated so i don't count) & definition update is also the fastest... -
According to http://www.av-comparatives.org/
Overall Award(For Detection & F/P):
ADVANCED+
1. Symantec
2. ESET
3. Kaspersky
4. McAfee
ADVANCED
5. G DATA*
6. AVIRA*
7. Avast*
8. BitDefender*
9. eScan*
10. TrustPort*
11. F-Secure
STANDARD
12. AVG*
13. Sophos
14. Microsoft
TESTED
15. Authentium*
16. Norman*
17. Kingsoft
*: those products got lower awards due false alarms
The Awards are not only based on detection rates - also False Positives found in our set of clean files
are considered. A product that is successful at detecting a high percentage of malware but suffers
from false alarms may not be necessarily better than a product which detects less malware but which
generates less FP?s.
4 We suggest to consider products with same the award to be as good as the other products with same award.
5 McAfee without Artemis would have earned ADVANCED, please see comments on pages 5 and 10. -
if you are using vista 1gb of memory is nowhere nearly enough you need at least 2gb
however on xp its plenty. -
:) new av-test result r out now(big surprise for norton/mcafee hater & avg/avira/avast lover)...
http://www.av-comparatives.org/ -
>v< norton use hdd(11mb)/cpu(in-active:1%/scan:10-50%)/ram(in-active:2-4mb/menu-screen:7-14mb/quick-scan:12-16mb/full-scan:5-10mb according to my task manager by average under process memory)...
-
:) to all the hater out there after testing & researching, i can confirm that its not only use less hdd/cpu/ram & update/scan alot faster than avg/avast/nod32/kaspersky/mcafee/microsoft etc but also...
AV Test Result:
ok, avira get the highest detection rate but even some lousy brand can do almost as good as that w false positive(F/P), so basically, this charts(a bit old since there r no new one out there for now) confirm that if the F/P take into account, norton 2009 beta(not complete ver), could be better than avira(& keep in mind detection doesn't mean it can remove)...
http://www.secureblog.info/articles/270.html
http://security.nl/artikel/22931/1/34_virusscanners_getest,_G-Data,_Avira,_F-Secure_en_Norton_bovenaan.html
http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02
http://www.av-test.org/down/papers/2008-04_vb_rootkits.pdf -
100% agree w MikeLierman & b_o_e2001, to add on, this NAV/IS09 is surpisingly lighter than avg/avira/avast/adaware/kaspersky/nod32 & btw, its quick scan took only 45sec so its faster than any AV out there too but malwarebytes/spywareblaster/HJT is lighter than norton for sure...
http://www.youtube.com/user/mrizos -
Zane55: You don't know what you are talking about. Before you speak out against Norton 2009 actually use it. I 100% agree that Norton used to be a complete resource hog but not anymore. It installs in under a minute, uses the least amount of RAM out of all the 2009 security suites (a total combined memory usage of about 6MB).
I used to tell everyone to stay away from Norton, now I am actually telling everyone that it's worth the price. I never usually go back on my word, but Norton 2009 has changed, A LOT! -
don't talk about the things you don't know anything!
The benefits of new Norton is that it's now engineered for Performance, very light, it also has norton insight technology to speed up your system.
it only has 2 process in your computer and totally less than 10 MB of your RAM, it install in less than 1 minute and would get a few of your hard drive, so, how do you say it's heavy? -
It is very heavy. Avast is good.
Submit your review
You must be 13 years of age or older to submit personal information to CNET Networks. In compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, CNET Networks does not accept name and e-mail address information from users who are under 13 years of age.
All submitted ratings and written comments become the sole property of CNET Networks, Inc. (CNET) and may be used at CNET Networks' sole discretion. Ratings and written comments are generally posted within two to four business days in batch groups, not in real time. However, CNET Networks reserves the right to remove or refuse to post any submission for any reason. You acknowledge that you, not CNET Networks, are responsible for the contents of your submission.
CNET Networks is not responsible for the content of the publisher's descriptions or user reviews on this site. We encourage you to determine whether this product or your intended use is legal. We do not encourage or condone the use of any software in violation of applicable laws. CNET Download.com does not sell, resell, or license any of the products listed on the site. We cannot be held liable for issues that arise from the download or use of these products.
