08-27-2012 11:23 PM
...that I have deleted Norton Antivirus.
Now, if by some chance the Norton people will respect my opinion and not bring the hammer down and delete my post and tell me how wrong I am, I thought it beneficial to the community to at least briefly express my research.
Don't get me wrong. I like the Norton products very much. I suppose my system is so old now (4 years; 2.2ghz dual core 2GB SDRAM Windows Vista SP-2), that the efficiency rating (what I call the overall speed of my computer when everything is running) dropped considerably enough to delete Norton and reactivate Windows defender and the malicious software removal tool. I know the Norton people will cringe and reply that I am at risk. I know that. I am well aware of that. But I have noticed only one thing now that Norton is gone: speed increase across the board. I have tons more free RAM available, my hard drive is not always busy in the background, and my connection is not always being tapped, also in the background. My keyboard and browsers do not stall any more (freeze temporarily, checking keystrokes, etc.).
I decided to remove Norton after watching the movie, "Apollo 13". I know it sounds weird. On their mission had a catastrophic failure as you may know, and when they were figuring out the power up sequence the rule was "essential systems only." I really like the sound of that. And so far everything is running so fast and efficient now that I have all the unnecessary services and background programs turned off. I'm not saying Norton will lead to the same problems the astronauts had on the Apollo 13 Mission, as that would be a false analogy.
Should something happen in the future, and yes, it is my risk and I'm willing to take it, then I won't hesitate to put Norton back on. I thank the moderators for letting me respectfully express my opinion. I'm abandoning the posts, because I've already heard the replies. Thank you.
08-28-2012 02:52 AM - edited 08-28-2012 02:55 AM
What are you using for protection instead then? Only Windows Defender? That's more of a spyware scanner. As far as I know and in my experience, there is only one lighter security solution than the current version of Norton, and a few as light, and I don't think any of those offers the same comprehensive protection.
If you have been using an old version of Norton, then yes, Norton was something of a resource hungry monster back in pre-2007. If you have been using a version that old, you might consider checking out the latest version instead.
08-29-2012 12:03 AM
Ah, the old efficiency versus security paradox. I know a lot of people who talk a great game about security, until it becomes the least bit inconvenient.
Imagine how fast getting through airports would be if they'd just do away with those silly security screening lines.
08-29-2012 03:08 AM
I agree with Cister in this thread.
All of my computers have NIS 2012 installed and they are running very efficiently.
PC 1: 3.3 GHz Intel Core i7 980X Hexa core, 12 GB DDR3 Triple Channel RAM, Vista Ultimate 64 bit SP2
PC 2: 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7 2600K Quad Core, 16 GB DDR 3 Dual Channel RAM, Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, SP1
PC 3: 2.93 GHz Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800 Quad Core, 4 GB DDR 3 Dual Channel RAM, Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit, SP1
Since you have experienced a dramatic speed increase after uninstalling Norton, this suggests to me that there was a conflict between it and any previously installed anti-malware software that you uninstalled before installing Norton. It is very likely that there are components of an old anti-malware solution still on your PC (if you had another brand of security software installed before Norton).
I always ensure that all previous installations (and other brands of software) are removed before installing Norton.
If you become infected, your PCs performance will get much worse and the infection may block Norton from re-installing.
I realize that my PCs high specifications could make you assume I don’t notice any slowdown but this is not the case.