I'll ansewer your question:
"How can I disable the "fix now" function when it wants to scan?."
The answer is you don't.
There is no registry key or way to stop it.
However it's very very easy to get it to stop. But I can't tell you without violating one of the conditions you set.
But I will tell you that nothing bothers me more than popups and warnings and some of the other things you mention.
I have been very outspoken in the past about some of the dialog boxes.
Dave
StefCoulombe wrote:...you keep telling me that the "solution" is to just do it Norton's way--and you do so in a way that implies my preferences are wrong (despite claiming that I'm free to have those preferences).
Your preferences aren't wrong, but the software does not bend in the direction of your preferences. I provided an alternative that would keep Norton from annoying you. I suggested it for its practicality (it will work), not because it is "Norton's way." I even pointed out that "if you are opposed to allowing these scans to run under any circumstances - even when you are not using the computer - then the..suggestion is not going to be a suitable solution for you." Can't be more even-handed than that. If I were aware of any other alternatives that had any chance of working, I would certainly have mentioned them (I tell people how to turn off annoying security features in Norton and other software, like IE, all the time - even when I advise them not to). But I do not know of any method of modifying Norton to accomplish what you want to do.
Ai-yah, I have to stop responding to this. Look, you tried and *succeeded* at explaining why it would be hard to find. You also succeeded at other things, clearly (from your protestations) completely unintentional. I recommend Dave's answer (above) as an excellent example of answering the question. As to the software not bending in the direction of my preferences... that would be *exactly* why I am looking for a workaround. (I know, I know, the workaround doesn't exist, and if it did, it would be impossible to find.)
(Man, would it be fun to use this thread in Discourse Analysis class.)
StefCoulombe wrote:
[...]
There may not be an answer; perhaps nobody, not even Norton themselves, can "fix" the problem for me. I know, however, that there are workarounds for other issues: for example, if you want to shut Norton down *quickly* (for example, when you're not online, and say, watching a movie, and it keeps popping up with that "background tasks" window), then you can [...]
You could also use either of the following Norton Settings to address that issue rather than use a workaround:
1. Open NIS > Settings > General > Norton Tasks > Norton Task Notification > Off
2. Open NIS > Settings > General > Silent Mode Settings > Quiet Mode on Detection of: > User-Specified Programs > Configure > (add path to your media player).
Your word processor may have been a candidate for Quiet mode (triggered by the launch of the application rather than manually setting it) if the Silent Mode test you performed earlier had addressed the issue. Thanks for reporting back on this; I will test your workaround for the above scenario though. 
From my perspective, the core issue that we need to address first here before anything else is this one that you reported earlier:
"One of the reasons that it has no idle time is because I hibernate it when I leave it for more than a few minutes--and one of the reasons I do that, is because I don't trust it on its own. (It has blue-screened on me a few times, when I've left it alone for a few minutes--I suspect it's a background-task issue interacting with a sleep/HD power-down issue, but I haven't been able to prove it, as the BSOD usually destroys all the evidence.) ;p"
(emphasis mine)
If resuming from the hibernation process takes longer than a Quick Scan takes to run on your laptop, then aren't you in a 'rob Peter to pay Paul' situation here if you don't first address what's causing the blue-screen issue?
Let us know your thoughts on this.
Thanks
Thanks for the thoughts. Actually, it usually comes out of hibernation fairly quickly; the main reason why I prefer to let it "un-hibernate" though is that I don't have to supervise the waking process as carefully. With the quick scan... I just don't trust it enough to let it run without close supervision. One instance of an AV (Norton 360, I'm pretty sure) burning me, by automatically "dealing with" a file, almost wiped out a mid-term project: there was no virus, Norton just didn't like the way *I* had archived a file. (As in, the archive was produced on my computer--and Norton still tried to auto-deal-with it.) Fortunately, there were back-ups (paranoia is good for some things); now, it's been over a year since that particular event, but it was not the only time that an AV tagged and tried to bag an innocent (but important) file, and I just don't trust automatic scans. (Even with full system scans, I usually try to do something near the computer for the duration of the scan so that I can watch it.)
This is also why I hesitate to turn the task notification off. I want to turn the tasks themselves off--and if the tasks are going to try to run, I want to know about it. (It would be nice, though, if running a movie actually counted as the computer being used; I wouldn't think of a laptop running a DVD as "idle".) You know, a happy solution would be an "exclude items from scans" option that could distinguish between automatic scans and manual scans. I have no problem with the program automatically scanning running processes and whatnot--I just don't trust it with my files. If I could exclude my folders from the automatic scans, but still *conveniently* include them in manual quick scans, then I'd be quite happy with letting Norton do the background autoscans. (Erm, I should probably clarify, though, that "my files/folders" means "my harddrive", for me.)
As to the blue screen, I suspect it might have something to do with me installing XP Home on an XP Pro laptop, and perhaps not getting every last driver exactly right--though, given the age of the laptop, it may just as well be electronic senescence. ;p (I'm not worried about fixing the potential driver issue; I know that the important ones are right, and there's a strong chance that it's completely unrelated anyway.)
Wow that was fun dad. Can I ride it again?
Sorry, I just had to say it. Mods, you can delete my rudeness
Stef
<< this thread (whatever else it may do) is not going to help with the problem in the subject line. >>
Congratulations on realizing that what you want to alter in Norton cannot be done by you (or any of the users) for the reason given to you earlier that in its design Norton would regard such action as an attack and stop it.
Now that you accept that, there is a Forum here called Product Suggestions which is designed specifically for users to tell Norton what they would like changed so go ahead and post a request for a change in the way Norton behaves since that forum is in fact monitored by top Norton management.
Hugh,
Well, there's quite a difference between "this thread won't help" and "nothing can help", and whether Norton would recognize and choose to stop such a workaround is debatable (but if the workaround doesn't exist, then I guess we'll never know...). What I "accept" is that this forum isn't the best place to look for the answer (although certain individuals have provided useful information). ;p
However, I may try for the Product Suggestion thing; I mean, it's not like it's ever made a difference before, but hey, Norton may well be the one company that handles things differently. ;p (It's actually a fair enough suggestion, so I will take it seriously.)
Oh, and "Congratulations on realizing that..."...? Weren't you the one insisting on civility?
Cheers.
I thought I was replying politely and in the spirit of the discussion.
Oh? Well, my apologies, then. ;p