I’m thinking of buying Norton 360. I’ve been looking at reviews, and noticed somthing strange: most professional review sites seem to think it’s a good S/W (see, e.g., CNT and pcmag).
However, most user reviews are rather poor (even on those two sites).
Any idea why?
And, does anyone here uses that SW?
This is more IMHO, but payola comes to mind.
The reviewers might just install it on a clean machine, try it out, write the review, and then uninstall it. They don’t have to live with it day to day.
From what I hear the newer versions of Norton are better, but still not great.
I get by fine on Firefox (never IE), AVG 7.5, and Comodo Firewall (although I don’t like Comodo that much.)
Not strict payola, with actual cash changing hands. Just the knowledge in the back of the reviewers head that their paycheck ultimately comes from ads in their magazine/website, and companies don’t buy ads in media that gives them bad reviews.
That’s certainly a factor, too. Many of the complaints related to such packages are about problems/annoyances that only become apparent after long-term daily use.
Well, since no one else wants to say it I will. Norton is what Satan checks under his bed for before he goes to sleep at night. The security model is simple: bog your computer down so massively that it becomes a doorstop and therefore cannot be used for any kind of nefarious purpose.
There are many many many other good AV/privacy software packages out there. I’d encourage you to consider ANY of them first. Hell, I’d buy no name brand AV software from the discount rack at Wal Mart before I’d consider Norton. I wouldn’t install Norton if God Himself recommended it, gave me a free copy and threw me $50 as a bonus.
Did I mention that I don’t like Norton? There’s much better options out there. Keep looking.
Norton 360 version 2.0 user here .
Speed is slow . But I want to be safe rather than sorry. I am 6 to 10 hours online everyday.