Norton wants me to uninstall AVG

[Michael Abrams]

OK - I am admittedly a bit naive about the security process.

I currently have the paid version of AVG on my PC, and I'm happy with it.

I also have Comcast as my Internet provider and they are offering me the Norton Security Suite for free (I do like that word).

When I attempted to install Norton, it "encountered a problem" and said I needed to uninstall AVG. (I didn't)

Couple of questions:
If I uninstalled AVG & installed Norton, would I be able to re-install AVG and have both running?
Is there a benefit to doing this ? Even though Norton is free, AVG doesn't cost too much and I am happy with it.

I am using Windows XP.

Any opinions?

Thank you,
Michael Abrams

[HansV]

You should not run two antivirus applications at the same time - it will cause conflicts and performance problems.

If you're satisfied with AVG, I'd stay with it. Otherwise, Norton is nowadays a good choice.

[stuck]

As Hans said, if it (i.e. AVG) ain't bust don't fix it. However, if the offer of (there's that word you like again ) Norton is still available when your paid AVG subscription runs out, then you might want to think about switching.

Ken

[Michael Abrams]

The "Free" Norton is good until 3/31/2010.
Thanks guys - I'll stick with what I like for now (AVG).

I appreciate your opinions !!

Michael

[BobH]

I have heard nothing good about Norton products in a long, long time.

Their AV is a resource hog, runs slowly, and in my experience and the experiences of all who have ever reported to me, no better at catching malware than other AV programs. In fact, there was a time when I was seeing frequent complaints that the paid Norton was not as effective as Grisoft AVG or avantis (both free).

Further, many people report having difficulty removing Norton when they finally throw up their hands and try to get rid of it. There was a time that normal uninstall processes would not get it done. You had to download special software, stand on your head, spit nickels and whistle Dixie backwards and it would only remove it you happened to catch the right phase of the moon.

If you mention Norton AV to me, it's about like talkin' bad about my Momma. You better be kiddin' and just funnin' me 'cause you like me. Otherwise we might have to get physical, as ONJ was wont to say lo these many years ago.

Not even for FREE - no NOT EVEN IF THEY PAID ME GOOD MONEY EVERY DAY, I would never install another Norton or Symantec product - such has been my experience with them.

[HansV]

Their AV is a resource hog, runs slowly, and in my experience and the experiences of all who have ever reported to me, no better at catching malware than other AV programs.

I'm sorry Bob, but this is absolute rubbish. Yes, there was a time that Norton AV was a resource hog - about 6 years ago or so. Since then, Symantec has been gradually improving it, and Norton AntiVirus 2009 and Norton AntVirus 2010 have received glowing reviews for being very light on resources and performing an excellent job.

I find it regrettable that people keep on repeating prejudices without ever taking the trouble to investigate whether things have changed.

New security tools help protect your PC (Windows Secrets newsletter, March 18, 2010):

In a close race, Symantec's Norton Internet Security 2010 wins a plurality of honors as today's top security suite. Norton Antivirus 2010 — a key component in the suite — earned high scores in a recent PC World review, where the editors noted its polished user interface. PC Magazine's review of security suites gave Symantec's product an Editor's Choice award.

Also see the recent thread Interesting positive article on some Norton products, and recent editions of AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Main-Tests.

[BobH]

I defer to your more recent favorable experience. I was only reporting my opinion of the company and its products based on problems I had with them some years ago. More recently I've advised friends who were still having problems - perhaps with older versions, I don't know for sure. I do know that removing it and going to either avast! or AVG Grisoft free edition resolved all issues.

My original post might reflect my prejudice against vendors who fail badly and perform poorly on support. I tend to remember those experiences and remove those vendors and their products from my future considerations. More recently Dell computers have fallen into that status of disrepute and that causing me prejudice against their products.

Usually, after having a bad experience with a product or service, I avoid that product or service if there are others of nearly the same utility to me; and I don't consider their future products because they broke the trust I placed in them. Such is the case with both Norton and Dell in my recent experience. I will be hard pressed to ever consider their products again; if asked, will report my experience and advise anyone asking my opinion of said products to avoid them.

Such was the case in my post. I no longer work in the field therefore do not track products as closely as I once did. As I said, I defer to your more recent information but choose personally to avoid Norton because of bad experiences. For me, it is, "Once bitten, twice shy."

[HansV]

Suppose you bought an orange in a supermarket in 2004, and it turned out to be moldy. Perhaps you also heard someone else complain about a moldy orange from that supermarket. So you decide to do your shopping elsewhere.

But now it's 2010, 6 years later. You haven't visited that supermarket ever since your bad experience. In the meantime, the management has improved the produce section, with stringent quality control. The supermarket has won several awards for its produce section. However, you don't go back - that's fine, you fully have the right to do that. But you keep warning everybody "Don't set foot in that supermarket! All their oranges are moldy!" That's a bit over the top, isn't it?

[JudyJones]

My home computer is Dell and Norton is my antivirus software. I have been very pleased with both and have nothing but good things to say about the support from both companies.

I make it a habit to read reviews people have written about products I plan to purchase. When most of the reviews are very good and only one are two are poor, I feel that the product must be good if the majority were pleased with their purchase. I know that no company can have 100% satisfied customers no matter how good their product is.

[BobH]

Staying with your analogy, even though oranges are a product of nature not of human decisions as is software, I'll state that my position is, indeed, Darwinian. But I believe in Darwinian capitalism as the best means devised in human history thus far to produce the highest quality results.

Oranges are oranges - a commodity - just as AV software has become a commodity. As with any commodity, features and functions are relatively the same among the options for AV software. Qualification then devolves to evaluating management of the companies. Symantec failed when they promulgated bloated, troublesome, difficult to remove software. To overcome that failure, they must produce markedly better products at markedly favorable value. I haven't seen that from Symantec. If I have AV software from other sources and experience no viruses and that software is free, simple, economic in use of machine resources, why should I go back to a company that has demonstrated their opinion of my patronage by having made such bad decisions in the past?

Yes! That is a 'tough' position. Yes! It is Darwinian in principal. But the burden of attracting my custom again lies with Symantec.

Why do I repeat the old experience when asked? Because Symantec lost credibility with me and have done nothing to re-establish it. Perhaps they have improved their product, but they didn't offer it to me free in recompense for having made bad decisions in the past. In fact, IMO, Symantec compounded their product management errors by never publicly acknowledging and prolifically apologizing for their hubris in the product decisions they made. If they make a better mousetrap, I will follow the rest of the world in beating a path to their door. Until then, I have the memory of an elephant; and I make no apology for it.

[IanWilson]

Staying with your analogy, even though oranges are a product of nature not of human decisions as is software, I'll state that my position is, indeed, Darwinian. But I believe in Darwinian capitalism as the best means devised in human history thus far to produce the highest quality results.

Oranges are oranges - a commodity - just as AV software has become a commodity. As with any commodity, features and functions are relatively the same among the options for AV software. Qualification then devolves to evaluating management of the companies. Symantec failed when they promulgated bloated, troublesome, difficult to remove software. To overcome that failure, they must produce markedly better products at markedly favorable value. I haven't seen that from Symantec. If I have AV software from other sources and experience no viruses and that software is free, simple, economic in use of machine resources, why should I go back to a company that has demonstrated their opinion of my patronage by having made such bad decisions in the past?

Yes! That is a 'tough' position. Yes! It is Darwinian in principal. But the burden of attracting my custom again lies with Symantec.

Why do I repeat the old experience when asked? Because Symantec lost credibility with me and have done nothing to re-establish it. Perhaps they have improved their product, but they didn't offer it to me free in recompense for having made bad decisions in the past. In fact, IMO, Symantec compounded their product management errors by never publicly acknowledging and prolifically apologizing for their hubris in the product decisions they made. If they make a better mousetrap, I will follow the rest of the world in beating a path to their door. Until then, I have the memory of an elephant; and I make no apology for it.

Bob - I understand your disgruntlement with Symantec because of your bad experiences with previous versions of their product. The main thing though is, whatever past products were like, making sure you have AV and other security software which you are sure gives your PC adequate protection. If AVG does it for you, why switch? If it ain't broke ... (BTW, I don't use Norton or AVG, so I have no axe to grind, being an Avast! user.)

Ian

[BobH]

Hi Ian!

Yes, I agree with you completely.

I run both Avast! and AVG Grisoft - the free editions - without problems or conflicts between them (so far). I keep them updated and run full scans frequently. In addition I have installed and run several anti-malware programs and several 'cleaner' programs. This works for me.

As stated in earlier posts - and much to Hans' chagrin - I do not use and discourage others from using Symantec products because of my bad opinion and their failure to support my problems when I was using their paid license version. When the time comes that I can't avoid virii and malware using any other software, I will - perhaps - give Symantec another try.

No! Who am I kidding! I wouldn't use their products if they paid me everyday to do so!

Yes! I'm prejudiced and I earned those prejudices painfully.

[IanWilson]

Hi Ian!

I run both Avast! and AVG Grisoft - the free editions - without problems or conflicts between them (so far). I keep them updated and run full scans frequently. In addition I have installed and run several anti-malware programs and several 'cleaner' programs. This works for me.

You mean you run both AVG and Avast! at the same time?

Ian

[viking33]

Hi Ian!

I run both Avast! and AVG Grisoft - the free editions - without problems or conflicts between them (so far). I keep them updated and run full scans frequently. In addition I have installed and run several anti-malware programs and several 'cleaner' programs. This works for me.

You mean you run both AVG and Avast! at the same time?

Ian

Hopefully, he means he has them installed on his machine but not running concurrently.

[IanWilson]

Hi Ian!

I run both Avast! and AVG Grisoft - the free editions - without problems or conflicts between them (so far). I keep them updated and run full scans frequently. In addition I have installed and run several anti-malware programs and several 'cleaner' programs. This works for me.

You mean you run both AVG and Avast! at the same time?

Ian

Hopefully, he means he has them installed on his machine but not running concurrently.

That's what I hoped too!

Ian

[BobH]

Yes, Ian and Bob, I'm running both simultaneously and have done for quite awhile. I'm yet to detect any conflict between them; but, who knows, it might all go South at any moment.

[viking33]

Yes, Ian and Bob, I'm running both simultaneously and have done for quite awhile. I'm yet to detect any conflict between them; but, who knows, it might all go South at any moment.

I'm sure you must know the difference between running simultaneously and just having them installed at the same time?
Even if you are lucky enough to not have detected any problems, I think two is a bit of overkill but that's your decision.
If it were my choice, I would dump AVG and just run Avast and forget about Norton.
However, different strokes for different folks.

[BobH]

Curiosity is the only reason that I run them both. I wanted to find out if one would detect something while the other one failed to.

And they both do run at the same time. Task Manager confirms this.