Mcafee Vs. Norton

**asmithz** · 09-05-2003, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by RPerry@5 September 2003 - 04:12
only gripe I have with Nortons is the pain in the ass it is to do a total uninstall....

And install and full system scan

**RPerry** · 09-05-2003, 11:24 AM

actually, re-install is what made me say uninstall sucks, lol

**sArA** · 09-05-2003, 11:53 AM

Using version 6.02

**mail2me** · 09-05-2003, 02:31 PM

I had Norton myself and this happened to me:
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/nav.n...dSection=2&Src=

It also happened to one of my friend's father's computer who never even noticed that Norton was not running anymore until I brought it to his attention after seeing his PC. Your computer is unprotected when it happens making it vulnerable to viruses again. It also doesn't allow to uninstall the software to even reinstall after this happens. You have to download a special tool from the Norton website or edit the system registry manually which makes it very difficult to even fix it. Some say that Norton gives better protection than McAfee in general but what good is it if it has a bug that suddenly causes it to turn itself off and cannot be relied for protection when you need it. Any Anti-Virus slows down your PC to an extend but the system resource greedy Norton slows down the PC a lot more than McAfee. I have tried both and the difference is very noticeable. Norton used to be the best previously but now McAfee is much better especially with Windows XP.

**toddiscool** · 09-05-2003, 02:35 PM

I did have that problem with 2002, constantly trying work arounds to no avail. Have not had a prob with 2003 though.

**BawA** · 09-05-2003, 02:41 PM

if u have zip file or too many file in single folder with mcafee it take time to load that folder but in norton it dosent take time cuz it dosent cheak for virus in zip file which is not needed when u extract it if there is any virus norton catch it

so i think norton is best

**mail2me** · 09-05-2003, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by bawa@Klite_user@5 September 2003 - 14:41
if u have zip file or too many file in single folder with mcafee it take time to load that folder but in norton it dosent take time cuz it dosent cheak for virus in zip file which is not needed when u extract it if there is any virus norton catch it

so i think norton is best

IIRC, this can be customized in both under options. Any good anti-virus program will catch an infected file as soon as a file is extracted. I found that just running Norton alone in the background slows down the PC considerably, so it also takes away any advantage that it may have thereafter when checking individual files/folders. In this case however it looks more like a user preference in settings.

**asmithz** · 09-05-2003, 11:08 PM

I got say something about the new norton 2004 pro. not norton 2004. It fixed the resouce eating problem. It would take like 10 minuets for to scan my comp with 2003 now it take 1 min.