Norton Internet Security / Norton AntiVirus

[GreyGhost]

The av-comparatives tests are very accurate and reiiable.

Regarding the Whole Product Dynamic Tests, if you look at the March-June 2011 Summary Report,

you will see Symantec  was dropped a level in rating due to wrongly blocked domains and wrongly blocked downloads.

Symantec had 24 wrongly blocked domains and 7 wrongly blocked downloads over this time frame.

[huwyngr Norton Fighter]

---

GreyGhost wrote:

The av-comparatives tests are very accurate and reiiable.

Regarding the Whole Product Dynamic Tests, if you look at the March-June 2011 Summary Report,

you will see Symantec  was dropped a level in rating due to wrongly blocked domains and wrongly blocked downloads.

Symantec had 24 wrongly blocked domains and 7 wrongly blocked downloads over this time frame.

---

But were top in protection apart from this and footnote 16 to the dropped domains listing explains why this can happen and uses the phrase that these false positives result from higher protection -- I'd copy paste the exact text but the document does not permit content copying.

Pesonally I'd rather have the higher protection than lower false positives which can always be achieved by never flagging anything! <s>

[GreyGhost]

Conversely, anyone can write a program that  marks all domains and files as malware and achieves 100% detection. Not very useful.  How about the possibility of a user removing a critical system file which was incorrectly marked as malware?

Do you consider that trivial?

[timboyboy]

i think it is important to give the correct and reliable info to consumers.

i find that people on this forum kind of side norton alot.

given how buggy NIS 2012 are, the choice is clear.

[artee]

With all due respect I don't think this would be fair imo. Give them a reasonable time frame to improve on the product and then see what the results are.

[timboyboy]

with all respect for symantec, i think consumers need something that can work

rather than something which came out buggy and improve over a period of time.

[Lexionline]

That's no good!

All reported problems (detection,
prevention, false positives, internal bugs) confirm
fears that the 2012 version of Norton product
is far from being a success. Go back to NIS 2011 or.... hopefully
things will change quickly.

[Bombastus]

This was an on-demand scan, and NIS 2011 wouldn't have done any better at all, since it uses exactly the same definitions.

[Lexionline]

You're right.It  using the same definitions. But what about the scanning speed? It  should be more efficient overall than the previous product. It’s clear that there is not. What  the God happened?

[ALiasEX]

According to that report and the last report, the scanner is 0.2 MB/Sec faster than 2011