Either Safer Networking Ltd. or Symantec leaving the Anti Spyware Coalition...

[Fire_Phoenix]

Check this out, if you take the "Is Windows a virus?" argument and replace the word "Windows" with "Nortons", it still fits perfectly.

Is Nortons a virus?

No, Nortons is not a virus. Here's what viruses do:

They replicate quickly - okay, Nortons does that.

Viruses use up valuable system resources, slowing down the system as they do so - okay, Nortons does that.

Viruses will, from time to time, trash your hard disk - okay, Nortons does that too.

Viruses are usually carried, unknown to the user, along with valuable programs and systems. Sigh... Nortons does that, too.

Viruses will occasionally make the user suspect their system is too slow (see 2) and the user will buy new hardware. Yup, that's with Nortons, too.

Until now it seems Nortons is a virus but there are fundamental differences:Viruses are well supported by their authors, are running on most systems, their program code is fast, compact and efficient and they tend to become more sophisticated as they mature.

So Nortons is not a virus.

It's a bug. :spider:

[/end funny quote]

I'd say that Nortons deserves to have its arse kicked. They're arrogant enough not to realise that their competitors are, performance-wise, beating them. They'd be scanners such as McAfee and PcCillin (Trend Micro) just to name two, there are more (although McAfee probably has some resource drawbacks as well). Not only that, but they seem to have little respect for the others on their side. Not on. I say either detect them completely or show how weak their virus scanner really is by creating a virus that trashes their servers, hehehe. (that suggestion is a joke, btw. That'd probably be quite unwise on your behalf)

Yes, it's true. I AM using Nortons at the moment. But as soon as I get my arse up and buy a better, more resource efficient scanner, it's going.

 

[Chikago]

Ouch!
:

I must renew my subscriptions in 30 days and I saw what they charge me for it.
These virus definitions should arrive wrapped in gold, as far as the price is concerned.

 

[Tom.K]

I`ve voted 1etect NIS Completely!
Norton:Must pay
Spybot-S&D:Free
Norton:Big size:798 MB
Spybot-S&D:Small size:20 MB
Norton:Non-protected quarantines
Spybot-S&D-Protected quarantines
Norton:Small log info
Spybot-S&D-Big log info

 

[spirit_in_exile]

NIS vs Spybot

Spybot is a fantastic tool, make no mistake. Symantec's NIS is unable to give the end-user the level of control and options Spybot offers in dealing with and, in some cases, preventing malware.

However, there are certain users out there that think Spybot is a replacement for real-time and on-demand detection suites such as NIS. It isn't. Mostly, it's a removal tool for after-the-fact infection cleaning.

It would definately be inaccurate to classify NIS as malware. It's simply poorly made software, which informed users who may need the resources it notoriously gobbles-up simply will not tolerate. I won't advocate any other suites here. It's up to the user to care enough to make their own decision based on research, and unfortunately, some expensive trial and error, too. But there are far faster, as-complete or better security suites out there, and they don't take over your PC, or cost an arm and a leg. And these competitors play nice with such useful and benevolent tools as Spybot.

Keep up the good work, and if the average internet sheep take heed to NIS's misdiagnosis, then so much the better: Their ignorance is best removed from our digital midst by the PC troubles that will come from NIS itself - as well as infections Spybot could have properly removed for them - crippling their machines and getting them off the net.

 

[CalvinOZ]

In the last week I have had to do two rebuilds on computers, thanks to Symantec. My clients had downloaded and installed their new 2007 edition. Only to see their computer continuously rebooting. This problem is not new with Norton. The programme is so invasive that it loves itself and wants to take over the computer.

The solution is after the rebuild; install Spybot S&D and AVG7 to protect yourself! This is what I recommend to my clients. I have not got a complaint yet from them.

Sorry Symantec, I was an avid supporter and user of your products. But not any more, I feel you have crossed the line over an individual’s privacy. In so far as what a person can and cannot install on their computer.

I fully support what Niall said: The original products written for the IBM PC by Peter Norton were first class and ground breaking technology in their time. I have several of Peter's books and found him an excellent teacher - somebody who OBVIOUSLY really knew what he was doing. Unfortunately, once Symantec got hold of the Norton name, the rot well and truly set in. The Symantec suite of products are now garbage - overly invasive bloatware.

I feel VERY sorry for Peter - having his good name and reputation totally TRASHED by the rubbish being sold by Symantec under his name

I also recommend a combination of Sybot S&D and AVG as current "Best Practise" installation for dealing with Malware !

Calvin.

 

[DaveWeigel]

]I just joined the forum and agree with comments about NIS and Microsoft. I used NIS for several years and got disgusted with it. It was pretty difficult to root out but found that Tenebril Uninstaller did a nice job of that.
I now use BitDefender 9.0, Webroot Spysweeper and Zone Alarm for my anti--virus and anti-malware protection and am planning to install SpyBot S&D. I have already installed it in computers of people who I help.

As for Microsoft, I use XP Professional and will avoid the Vista bloatware as long as possible. It's then on to Mac or UBUNTU.

 

[ENIAC 2]

I've been using SB SnD since time began and would not think of powering up without it. I am on my third upgrade of NIS and am getting pretty disgusted with it. I'll ca+d NIS in a heartbeat before even considering forsaking my faithful Spybot. I think I see Bitdefender over the horizon. :red:

 

[Chikago]

What would you advise

Then I have a simple question: what would you people advise instead of NIS? You cannot say Spybot S&D because that works AFTER the fact, and I use it a lot and yes, I love it too. I have to have a reliable firewall and antivirus to keep nasty stuff from entering. I don't mind paying for it.
And what shall I install instead of Norton System Works? I rely on this program to keep my computer running smoothly. I have had no need to reinstall Windows for a year now, thanks to NSW?

 

[Chikago]

Offensive

Keep up the good work, and if the average internet sheep take heed to NIS's misdiagnosis, then so much the better: Their ignorance is best removed from our digital midst by the PC troubles that will come from NIS itself - as well as infections Spybot could have properly removed for them - crippling their machines and getting them off the net.

I find this an offensive remark. I thought forums like these were meant to help and advise each other. If you pose like an elite group far above the "average internet sheep" then I am in the wrong place here and I will pose my question elsewhere.
Thank you.

 

[PepiMK]

I agree with Chikago - while it is true that using computers especially connected to the Internet requires some kind of responsibility, the goal has to be to educate those users who're not aware of the risks, not to expel them from online life.

I do also about Norton products past. Norton Commander is something I still use - in the clone version of Midnight Commander - in everydays work, and couldn't do without it.

After just having read the PC World article, I want to repeat one important thing that's often pushed back in discussions: warning about existing incompatibilities is a very important thing, since it helps users to understand the situation better when problems arise. We are just complaining about incompatibility warnings when they cannot be proven, and there don't even exist the smallest protocol of them on Symantecs side.

Regarding the definition - Spyware or Potentially Unwanted Technology - that's how the ASC defines software that reduces system security.

By the way, now that the harm is done and any printed box of NIS will show this warning for the next 12 months, Symantec of course said "lets continue discussions again".

 

[Samantha]

its not a bug - its NIS!

Jeder halbwegs versierte Mensch weiß, das eine DFW nichts auf dem lokalem System zu suchen hat. Und wenn dann dieses Produkt auch noch versucht, Spybot auszuhebeln, dann ist das richtig traurig.

Mein Rat: noch mal versuchen, mit SYMANTEC zu reden, vielleicht gibt es ja noch eine Lösung. Ansonsten in Zukunft 2 Spybot Versionen anbieten, die eine läßt NIS drin und die andere entfernt NIS radikal. Ich persönlich würde mich heute schon für die 2. Variante entscheiden.

--Samantha--

 

[Ross Boyd]

I am really angry that Symantec are choosing a non-cooperative approach to solving this 'compatibility' problem with your product Spybot.

I'm a PC service technician working for a Computer shop. We service about 100 PCs per month. About 75% of these are badly virus/spyware afflicted. Of the 75% about 40%-50% are running a Symantec/Norton security tool.... either NAV, NIS or NSW.

Without fail we counsel our customers to immediately replace Symantec products as we have continual first hand experience that they are inadequate and almost invariably the cause of performance and software issues.

Products we recommend are Eset's NOD32 - not just because of the excellent advanced heuristic protection but also the incredibly light footprint and high performance of the AV engine. (No, I am not affiliated with ESET, I just know that it works.

But getting back to the Symantec issue, I would advise avoiding the legal avenues unless you have a bottomless bank balance. If Symantec won't play fair it would be great to see Spybot develop its own Symantec product removal tools... and I'm sure they will prove superior to Symantec's inhouse removal tool they ironically developed to help users uninstall their own crappy products.

Thankyou for Spybot... fantastic product!

Ross Boyd
Interbit Computing

 

[Frank C]

AVAST Instead ?

I too have become disencanted with Symantec. I recently tried to report a problem that I thought was a false positive. I got nowrere with their email support.
I have 110 days left on my current susscription. At that time I am goiing to switch. Right now, I am considering AVAST 4 professional edition.
Does anyone have a recomendation on AVAST?
Thanks
FRank C

 

[ALBERT HRV]

Bonjour !
this my first post here..I have just register to vote at this pool..
I am a long time user of spybot, on my pc's ad spreading it as far as it is possible among friends.. go on, get them out of use,
they really deserve it ...

And a very big thank to all the team for your fabulous job

Albert

 

[Terminator]

RE:AVAST Instead ?

I've been using AVAST! Free edition for the last year and the only problem I ever had with it was when I had the NetVeda Firewall installed, once I got rid of that particular firewall and went back to Zone Alarm i've not had a single problem. For the best protection I use Avast! Free Edition 4.7.892 (Latest Version which only needs a free re-registration once a year), Zone Alarm Free 6.5.737.000 (latest version), Spyware blaster 3.5.1, Ad-Aware Pro 1.06, Firefox 1.5.0.7 (Latest version), Spybot 1.4, EULAlyza 1.1 (To scan EULAs). McAfee Site Advisor, Message Defender (to prevent Messenger spam) and the Firefox version of the Google Toolbar for the phishing and homepage protection.

Use this combination and you can't go far wrong.

 

[planet_rob]

Norton

Norton is a resource hog. Things like that are malware in my opinion.

 

[omega_shadow]

completely remove all symantec products from a computer, and while your at it have S&D remove windows and install linux, a much more stable OS


I used to use S&D all the time back when I was a Windoze user (over 4 years ago) the only thing that kept my computer clean was S&D. All sysmantec does is open a computer up to infection. And I say if they want to play hardball like microcraps then play hardball. Hit them where it hurts and get the word out about their buggy software. It's working for linux which has a larger userbase then ever, it can work for you guys. Have at them!!!

 

[kermidge]

Symantec vs. Safer Networking? No contest.

I had to register just to say that after using Spybot S&D for over three years, and Norton AV for less than one, my opinion oughta be plain.

S&D now runs on three of my computers, Symantec on none.

[And, yes, I run Ashampoo Firewall (free), NOD32, Anti-Vir (now Avira), or AVG, along with Spyware Blaster, Spyware Guard, A-Squared Free and a few other utilities.]

I did write a note to Center for Democracy and Technology.

Good luck, Patrick.

 

[Briansaab]

Ouch!
:

I must renew my subscriptions in 30 days and I saw what they charge me for it.
These virus definitions should arrive wrapped in gold, as far as the price is concerned.

Why not take a look at AVG Free via http://free.grisoft.com/.

I use this in combination with Spybot S&D and Spyware Blaster (http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html).

If you are happy with the free verdsion AVG has a Professional product which is cheaper to support per annum than Norton.

 

[scarulu]

big thanks!

I just register after reading this shameless acting from Symantec against Spybot.

I like many have been using Spybot for 5 years now and recommend it to everyone of my customers. I support more than 300 PCs, and have customer base ot about 50.

It is not coincidence that Symantec is outrated, 10 out of 13 PCs a fix used Symantec's products, however I have not have a single customer complaining after I install Spybot on their PCs. I would recommend only to the developers of Spybot to make the interface hidden whenever it starts. or to have the choice of hiding it from viewing.

I have found that Spybot works flawlessly with McAfee, ZoneAlarm, AVG, and AdAware, so how come Symantec claims it is incompatible with? Looks to me that Symantec maybe playing a dangerous game of being the only one, well that does not work at all, remember the "blue frog" that claim to be able to stop all attacks, it fell to DoS attacks to their servers.

Having 2 or more programs working together is the best chance to deter attacks.

If Symantec does not want to cooperate I support the motion of have a detection and removal tool for it.

In the name of all my customers and mine as well I just want to said Big thanks!