Every single tech review blog in 2003 said that Norton Utilities 2004 had become a resource hog. Same thing for every year after that. You can not believe anything Norton Techs say on this or any blog. There just like Microsoft. Bull Shirt, More Shirt, Horse Shirt, Piled Higher and Deeper Shirt.
Thanks for pointing that out, fixed it now.
Cavehomme1
Your Norton link does not work for me for some reason.
I found this. It looks like the same link as yours. Let me know if your link works for you. I'm using Chrome.
https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/juni-2017/norton-norton-security-22.9-172216/
I normally don't answer trolls, but for the benefit of other people perhaps, yes, Norton used to be resource hog and I would not touch if for many years other than doing occasional tests to see if it's any better. I eventually came back to using it again a few months ago and it's now as light as using Windows Defender, in some cases even lighter. Protection is also amongst the very best.
Like any complex AV / suite, it does suffer issues, but credit where credit is due, they've done a very good job to get where they are now compared to others.
Norton: https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/juni-2017/norton-norton-security-22.9-172216/
WD: https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/juni-2017/microsoft-windows-defender-antivirus-4.11-172247/
How about this "Shirt".
You need to update your reading to 2009 when Norton Internet Security was redesigned from the ground up and has ever since been widely recognized as one of the security products with the lightest demand on system resources.