Norton seems to be working hard to lose my business!

@td47

Please read my previous post again.  Also refer to my thread below:
https://community.norton.com/en/forums/recent-forced-nis-update-xp-sp3-v...

The "system error" message issues are annoyances that appear under XP only.  However, this may point to even more serious issues with v22.x in that this client software version may be sagging system and memory resources in any unhealthy way.

If you're on Vista or later then you won't experience those "Application Error" messages that happen under XP.  However, the memory sagging behavior may still happen which can affect system performance.  It's the entire v22 software architecture that is in question.

As far as completing online orders, I don't know -- it can be other unrelated issues and such.  BTW do you know your relative's system specs, and what browser she's using currently?  Note that for XP there aren't many viable choices in browsers, and even so the very latest compatible version may not be compatible with certain websites.

As for not moving to w10, many power users who have a distaste of this OS will understand why.  The Agile development strategy which results in many bugs after each update, the forced update mechanism, the botched Start menus, user policy restrictions in lower-tier versions (anything below Enterprise), the cutoff of various legacy supports etc. etc. etc.  The general UX is simply nothing close to w7.

I think I may have read the wrong URL posted initially, as it seemed mostly about the forced update with auto-renew set off. Anyway, I had a look at the other one, and noted that there are many issues, but mostly with memory address reference errors, adobe, and DDE stuff, and some other products that my relative would not be running. I did set that up for her some years ago, prior to retiring (an old Dell SFF PC that our computer centre staff could not be bothered with fixing), so I know she would ONLY be using Outlook with Office 2003, IE, Firefox (the last ESR release most likely), and Chrome. She only uses it for email, word docs, and web stuff, and TeamViewer a few times a year with myself. As she is managing with a half full 80GB HDD, you can get the sense of how little facilities she uses/needs.I DO rmember the memory reference errors a while back, but since I ran the trial MalwareBytes, and it removed a lot of tracking and AD Malware, and I re-installed Norton, it went away. As she CAN still do Moonpig ordering, via Firefox, I don't think it is a total blockage, maybe a Java level, or site specific thing (or a Firefox ESR update affecting certain sites). When I know more specifi detail, I will let you know, but thanks for the feedback, most appreciated.

As for Windows 10 VS W7, yes I know what you mean, the Control Panel VS the UWP APPS Settings kluge debacle, and removal of the Home Group, what are MS thinking??!!

The memory reference error exists in different flavors.  You'll have to notice the specific hex values on each error instance to determine a pattern.  For me and another member we've determined that pattern of such memory reference error which only occurred with v22.xx installed, but not on the previous v21.7.xx.  Your Mom Ref errors may have pointed to something else, which apparently can be corrected easily -- but that's NOT our case.

I'm not sure if the Java version has to do with any problems you (or relative) have encountered.  Do note that with XP you can only have up to Java 7 (forgot the last build) installed.  You can also force-install Java 8 (with warnings) but you can't update to a later build.

As for the Win reference: it points to something even more severe, something which S/NLL may be doing the same: using software as a service and nothing else.  The client software v22 was released since late 2014 but so far only updated build versions have been released over the course of some six years.

And with that, the future can (and will) be really ugly.  You've already seen howM$ has messed up with w10; now S/NLL seems to be replicating the entire practice and screws up v22 -- no matter how many fixes they promise (and have issued).  The reputation of v22.x software has been tarnished forever......

I know what you mean @AntiCorr3lation - I smelled that rat too, when they started pushing the overblown N360 some years ago. I also felt that they were trying to add too many unwanted functions, that only added to the load on any user's system. I also saw it as a marketing thing rather than a technical need, just putting perfume on the pig really! I only ever went to NIS (Now Norton Security) on my home systems, but STILL it insists on having Norton Safe Web active, in your default browser, otherwise you get a red flag (despite modern browsers, especially Firefox and Chrome being very secure internally).

td47,

Agreed with the browser bloat, and even if you surgically extracate Norton Safe Webs from both system drive and the registry, it will be back. It was the VPN for me - the tipping point. When I brought up my dismay on this forum, I got nothing from Norton. I guess that everyone else is happy to have a VPN activated without their knowledge. Maybe that has changed. And what of the total inability to backup your policy data? It took (notice the past tense) me about 4 hours to properly configure the firewall. After the second remove-and-reinstall, I was not a happy user I brought that up on this forum also. I guess most people don't even know what a firewall is.

I am disgusted with LifeLock. It's not the software, but the idea that you can scare people into buying it. I would guess that a majority of users have no concept of the mechanics of lifeLock (and don't ask) - They hear $1,000,000 to pay for a "serious" intrusion, and a conference room table with Hollywood-like, serious actors dressed as high-priced "jurus meretrix" (my words). It's not what it does, it's what it appears to be. It's a symptom of a much larger problem.

I have spent my last reinstall efforts, in agony. I am out. I never thought this would happen, but I now use Windows Defender, locked down through local GP, and manually tweaking the firewall, which, BTW, Microsoft remote firewall management rarely approves of.

Take care, have fun, and whatever you do, don't execute any unsigned binaries !

<>

Hi td47,

I have been meaning to respond to your last post for a few days. I can hear the intonation of your voice when I evaluate the composition of your post. I have to say that being reminded of the certificate errors made me spit out a few bees.

So a while back, my logs were overrun by a component from Symantec's AMSI (Anti-Malware Scan Interface) that used a credential that was not per Microsoft's schema. I looked at the strings in the code (symamsi.dll) and could see that there was a Microsoft cert, of at least the guts of one. Regardless, Win 10 would not load the dll. Certificate requirements are not news.

I watched the progression of code modules load prior to performing a scan, and M$ was true to their word. Symamsi.dll did not load. Now I'm not the smartest person in the world, and I know a little about software, and virii code (I played with many strains in a sandbox I built a few years ago). And I also know a little about the processes used to scan files on a HDD / SSD. My thinking is that not only are my logs plugged up, but if the dll file with the bad cert does not load, you could hypothesize that maybe the level of aggression, or sensitivity in applying heuristics will affect the results of my scan. It was only after no one in this community would even take a stab at answering my questions about AMSI, that in the several years I used the 360 model, the software found only one item, and it was a false positive. I coupled MWB with Norton because I trusted, and still do, MWB;s product. It found many items, while the bloated pig was taking inventory of every single byte on my root drive(s).

It really pissed me off. The gurus were nice, but you can tell when there is obfuscation going on. After I was told to remove and reinstall three times to solve the cert problem ( which I knew would not work, but hey !  Who am I?) and then found that all my firewall settings were gone, that was the beginning of the end.

I had to laugh when I read the end of your post. You could not be more right ! If you had a choice of doing one thing really, I mean really well, and doing ten things that suck badly, what would you do?

".... and NOT add in all sorts of "other" differentiators that I JUST DON'T WANT OR NEED!"  - I love this statement. To me, it says much about you not just as a customer, but as an intelligent, critically thinking individual who is caught in the swift and unrelenting rip currents of stupidity. Sometimes you have to say what needs to be said.

My conclusion is that it is about money and marketing. You have to keep up with the piezo beepers and LED's that other vendors are loading into the the little box. When Symantec shoved a VPN into the mix, that validated my thoughts. They will not spend the few dollars for a root or trust cert, or the time to integrate it into the AMSI code, but they can put together a POS VPN and and bump up the margins. So when the talk of the town is about how Symantec is really taking the lead in protecting its customers from evil blackhats, the people who really know can see that its a case of the emperor's new clothes. I imagine they had a sales and marketing blow out to introduce, which at the time, was a real piece of work, it probably still is. Code only gets fixed on a new release cycle, depending on risk. Who knows what is really different about a new revision of code. With memory, disk space, and fast uP's s filling in 90% of the gap in AV performance, they can ride that train right to the bank.

As much as I loathe M$, I am now using stock WinDefend only one a couple machines, and the other is coupled with MWB.

I tell you the truth, when you cancel your Symantec autopay, it will feel like a massive stone was taken off your back.

It's a good feeling, when self-respect has enough inertia to turn one away from something that isn't working - anymore.

In Peace.

<>