• All Community
    • All Community
    • Forums
    • Ideas
    • Blogs
Advanced

Not what you are looking for? Ask the experts!

Kudos0

Norton AntiSpam

AntiSpam as written has a number of bugs and deficiencies:


1. When messages are selected and This is Spam is clicked, the Processing dialog and its associated processes completely take over. You cannot do anything in the mail client until it finishes whatever it's doing, and it's pretty slow at it. The program should be rewritten so that, once you've clicked This is Spam, the processing is done as a background process, and no dialog is displayed. If there's risk of interference from users attempting to do things with the messages previously selected, just forbid access to those messages, but don't restrict the user from any other actions in the mail client.


2. Periodically, This is Spam and This is not Spam in the AntiSpam menu are greyed out and remain greyed out until Outlook Express is closed and restarted. It doesn't matter how long you wait. These options are greyed out and never become active again until Outlook Express is closed and restarted.


3. When the unnecessary Processing dialog box is displayed (see #1), it causes the mouse cursor to jump to the left most of the way across the screen every time it processes a message. The best thing would be to just get rid of the Processing dialog box altogether, since it doesn't provide any useful information.


Most of the apps in NIS 2011 seem to be well designed and well implemented, but AntiSpam seems just the opposite. It seems to be poorly architected and poorly coded. It's slow, clumsy, and amateurish.

Replies

Kudos0

Re: Norton AntiSpam

AntiSpam as written has a number of bugs and deficiencies:


1. When messages are selected and This is Spam is clicked, the Processing dialog and its associated processes completely take over. You cannot do anything in the mail client until it finishes whatever it's doing, and it's pretty slow at it. The program should be rewritten so that, once you've clicked This is Spam, the processing is done as a background process, and no dialog is displayed. If there's risk of interference from users attempting to do things with the messages previously selected, just forbid access to those messages, but don't restrict the user from any other actions in the mail client.


2. Periodically, This is Spam and This is not Spam in the AntiSpam menu are greyed out and remain greyed out until Outlook Express is closed and restarted. It doesn't matter how long you wait. These options are greyed out and never become active again until Outlook Express is closed and restarted.


3. When the unnecessary Processing dialog box is displayed (see #1), it causes the mouse cursor to jump to the left most of the way across the screen every time it processes a message. The best thing would be to just get rid of the Processing dialog box altogether, since it doesn't provide any useful information.


Most of the apps in NIS 2011 seem to be well designed and well implemented, but AntiSpam seems just the opposite. It seems to be poorly architected and poorly coded. It's slow, clumsy, and amateurish.

Kudos0

Re: Norton AntiSpam


mbrazil wrote:

AntiSpam as written has a number of bugs and deficiencies:


1. When messages are selected and This is Spam is clicked, the Processing dialog and its associated processes completely take over. You cannot do anything in the mail client until it finishes whatever it's doing, and it's pretty slow at it. The program should be rewritten so that, once you've clicked This is Spam, the processing is done as a background process, and no dialog is displayed. If there's risk of interference from users attempting to do things with the messages previously selected, just forbid access to those messages, but don't restrict the user from any other actions in the mail client.


[ ... ]


You mention Outlook Express. I was using Outlook Express in XP Pro on a desktop computer with a 1.8GHz CPU and 2GB of RAM for years until moving over full time onto WIndows 7 and I never experienced any delay in marking as SPAM or unmarking. It was instantaneous so the question of processing delaying anything else never arose. I don't know why it should.

But hang on and see if any of the programmers (Norton Staff have names in red) can comment on it.

I can't comment on the others although I see that elsewhere you mentioned Orca which was unknown to me, as software, but I see is an add-in to Firefox. If that's correct, what version of FF are you using.

You really will help yourself if you give technical background in a way that does not require helpers to go searching for it.

Would you please post the version ID of your Norton Internet Secutiy / Norton AntiSpam -- it's under HELP-SUPORT / About in the format nn.nn.nn.nnn

 

TIA

Hugh
Kudos0

Re: Norton AntiSpam

Orca is not an add-on to Firefox, but is a browser in itself that uses the Mozilla Gecko engine, which is also used by Firefox. I don't know whether Orca includes the code for the Gecko engine or if it uses the engine as installed with Firefox, but I am using Firefox 4. Once again, this has nothing whatsoever to do with NIS AntiSpam, as I'm using AntiSpam with Outlook Express, which is not implemented in a browser. If Outlook Express uses any components of a brower engine at all, it would be the Trident engine, which is used by Internet Explorer. I have IE8 installed on my computer, and all of the available updates and security patches for both IE8 and XP SP3 are installed.

My system dual-boots XP SP3 and Win 7, but I'm still in the process of migrating to 7, and I'm still sending and receiving email only in Outlook Express 6 on XP. My system has a 2.8 GHz, quad-core Intel Q9400 with a total of 8 GB of RAM installed, so speed, power, and available resources should not be a problem.CPU utilization averages around 17%, RAM load averages around 25%, and responsiveness rarely falls below 100%. I monitor all of these parameters on a regular basis.

With regard to the RAM, XP uses what it can of the first 4 GB, and the second 4 GB is used as a RAMdisk. I am not running any other security software that could interfere in any way with NIS, .

I've tried quite a few other spam filters in the past, and while some of them were even more intrusive and annoying than Norton AntiSpam, there were some that were able to do their job quite well while remaining relatively unobtrusive. I purchased NIS 2011 because I saw a number of reviews that indicated it was, overall, the best product of its type currently available. I was specifically looking for a dependable security suite that didn't nag me to death and didn't put much load on the computer during normal operation. For the most part, NIS lives up to the reviews, but the AntiSpam seems to be quite poorly implemented. If necessary, I'll turn it off and go back to a standalone spam filter, but I'd rather be able to use all the features of an integrated security suite. As it stands, I don't think I'll be able to put up with Norton AntiSpam.

My comments here were intended not to solicit help for problems I'm experiencing but to provide feedback to Symantec regarding what I consider to be defects and/or shortcomings in their software. This should be taken as constructive criticism, but it seems like that isn't welcome in this community.

Kudos1 Stats

Re: Norton AntiSpam

As I said I don't know Orca but I based what I said on their website:  http://www.orcabrowser.com/ 

Why choose Orca Browser?

Orca Browser is an extremely fast and user friendly web browser, designed to add more functions on to the latest version of Firefox. [ ... ]

It is already known that Norton is not yet fully compatible with FF4.

Our OS history is very similar -- I too am using more RAM than XP can use with 32 bits. The 2GB was on an earlier PC but I used XP on this one for about a year and as I said, I don't experience any slowdown or freeze.

Could you please answer: << Would you please post the version ID of your Norton Internet Secutiy / Norton AntiSpam -- it's under HELP-SUPORT / About in the format nn.nn.nn.nnn  >> whether you think it is useful or not.

We welcome constructive criticism here and that's why there is the Norton Ideas Forum.

These other forums are for helping people with problems and to do that on computers we cannot see or access we need information; some questions may not be relevant but firstly we deal with many messages and so often use boiler plate as a starting point and secondly there are two many situations dealt with here when it was blatently obvious that it was Norton causing the problem ...... until it was discovered that Norton was blameless and that it was actually caused by a combination of a delayed change by Microsoft and an out-of-date element in a third party program which they had made a fix for but not advised their users ....

I didn't invent that -- I lived thorugh it here with a number of other users. Since then I believe in probing for the nature of situations and not rejecting anything as clearly irrelevant "just because".

And I also lived through some problems with Outlook Express going offline until Norton were able to pin it down after repeated test, retest and reretest and fix an element in NIS a few years ago. That's why version information is relevant.

Hugh
Kudos0

Re: Norton AntiSpam

I'm not reporting an issue that in any way is browser-related, so it's a little irritating that there's so much focus on that. Outlook Express and AntiSpam have no relationship whatsoever with Orca or Firefox. There is no connection.

I'm using NIS 2011 18.5.0.125. It does not provide a separate version number for AntiSpam. The only way I could be using anything but the most current version available would be if I disabled LiveUpdate, which I haven't. I'm not saying it's not useful or unimportant, but why ask what version I'm running when the program always updates itself to the very latest version? If 18.5.0.125 isn't the very latest version, then there's something wrong with the LiveUpdate function also.

The Norton Ideas Forum is apparently malfunctioning, as it won't accept new posts. When I try to submit to that forum, it always comes back saying to correct highlighted errors, of which there are none shown. It's broken.

I've been using computers, Windows, and security software pretty much since they first became available. My earliest personal computers were home-built Heathkits. Prior to that, I used terminals on mainframes and minicomputers at work. In no way do I know everything, but I do know enough to diferentiate between a potential browser incompatibility and something to do with how the anti-spam function UI works. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but none of the discussions I've had with anyone here so far has taken us any closer to convincing Symantec to look into the situation.

Kudos1 Stats

Re: Norton AntiSpam

<< I'm using NIS 2011 18.5.0.125. >.

Thank you -- that is what I wanted to know. It is the current version and I ask because we have had in the last few days people in here with "problems" .... using NIS 2007 ....

Any way -- I've done what I can to clarify what you are on about..

You just want Norton to know you don't like their programming because you are having a problem that no-one else is and you don't like the way people won't jump in to agree with you when we don't have your problem and don't use your configuration that you just absolutely know is not relevant.

Good luck.

Hugh

This thread is closed from further comment. Please visit the forum to start a new thread.