Hi everyone,
How do I complain (give input) to Symantec about Norton?
I’ve been a loyal Norton user since the early 90’s. Until now, I personally hadn’t had any major problems with Norton. That had enabled me to convince a lot of people over the years to switch to Norton; even disgruntled users. (I always emphasized the importance of disabling Norton before installing any new trusted software and the importance of definitions updates.)
Before, when the Norton subscription expired, only the definitions stopped updating. Everything else kept working. This gave me some leeway to update Norton. I could update it when it was convenient to me: before or a little while after it expired.
Now, instead of just the definition updates ending after the subscription expires, all of the Norton protection shuts down. At first I thought they just made it appear that way to scare people to purchase the renewal faster. But after looking at it and from what I’ve read about it, the protection does end.
It appears that Symantec wants everyone to purchase their renewal or even set up their auto-renewal. I purchase the latest version of Norton every year. This is why I don’t purchase their renewal. Now, since Norton shuts down after the subscription expires, I have to purchase and receive the new version, plus I have to schedule time to uninstall the old Norton and install the new Norton before the subscription expires. This means I will no longer get my full year’s subscription. This may sound petty of me, but I use computers for my business. This also means if I forget to purchase and install the new version on one of my computers before the subscription expires, just once, I could catch a virus (or something) and loose valuable irreplaceable information. That’s too risky for me.
Another bothersome inconvenience is that I now need to contact a lot of people and warn them about this Norton problem. Unfortunately, I’m expecting hostility toward me and Norton.
I am very disappointed and upset with Symantec. They may think this will raise their sales and it may for a short while. But I think in the long run it will be detrimental to them.
I’m hoping that this was simply a bad decision by Symantec and that they will correct it. Does anyone know if they’ve decided to change future versions back to the way it was? Or, should I look for a different company to keep me computers safe?
Best regards,
CalvinOU812
I think Norton started this with their N360 in2008.
I also do not renew on-line, I prefer to buy the disk each year for the benefit of being able to reload it if necessary, without having to be on-line.
My feeling is that there should be say a fortnights grace, for people on holidays, or, heaven forbid, who are ill.
Not nice when you come out of Hospital, and have to sort this worry out before you can go on the Web.
Still, I suppose Norton have their reasons, don't know if they're allowed to tell us though.
We are just purchasing the subscription to use Symantec's software for a year. When the year is up, the software no longer works. The subscription is finished. Even a grace period is difficult, because people being people, would then wait to the end of the grace period to update their subscription.
I don't think the idea is to increase sales, but to prevent users from becoming infected while continuing to use a product with out-dated definitions. It is a poor security company that allows people to continue with a false sense of security that they are being protected, when they really aren't protected at all.
You can get the latest version of the “same” Norton product for free with a valid subscription. For example, you can “upgrade” from NIS2009 to NIS2010 for free, online at the Norton Update Center, and carry over whatever remaining time there is on your subscription. So, if the problem with renewals was that you thought you could not get the latest version, that is not so. You could purchase online renewals, get the latest versions and not lose any subscription time at all. The Update Center will check you product and tell you if there is a newer version available, direct you to the download and even start the process of downloading / updating to the latest version if you wish. Of course, you can still download the latest installers, Norton Recovery Tool, etc. from the web site if you wish to have a “hard” copy on hand.
Hi Calvin
To answer your question that you stated in your first line of your post, you just did complain to Symantec by creating your thread. Symantec employees do read these threads and sometimes make comments also. The Symantec employees are those in RED.
Hi! CalvinOU812,
It is unwise to use a security product beyond the subscription time because it leads to a false sense of security. This is why Symantec and almost all other security program manufacturers have the program shut down completely; I say almost all because there are some security programs out there that are free and do not have a subscription period. However, these security programs do not provide the level of security that Norton does. Besides this, Symantec does start giving you notice of expiration 30 days prior to the subscription expiring and every day during the 30 day time frame. If you purchase your new product during that time you can wait until the subscription expires and then install the product. You can also do as was suggested earlier in this thread and use the update center to get the latest version of the software and just simply enter in the product key from the purchased copy thereby minimizing product down time.
I was planning to renew within days. I was waiting for my credit card billing date which occurred at about the time of the subscription expiry date. When I started my computer and was greeted with the warning that NIS was disabled and that I couldn't even access my passwords stored in the password manager I decided to think twice about renewing my subscription.
I find it hard to trust a company that uses this type of marketing, essentially holding their customers hostage, to get them to open their wallets. Who are these guys, mafia?
It's too bad because the product has been greatly improved since the debacle with the 2007 version. I subscribed during the version 2006 period for 2 years and removed the product after 1 because it was a dog eating up resources like crazy. They've managed to pull a complete 360 and are once again the top recommended product. I have no qualms about the goods, but...
Fortunately for me I kept my passwords in a separate database just in case. I pity the people who didn't, although, subscribing for another year as long as it works as well as it does now wouldn't be that onerous. I just don't like rewarding a company that uses such practices out of principal.
-Still undecided...
Hi
Didn't you get warnings for like 30 days that your subscription was ending? If you have car insurance for a year and you don't renew it before it expires, does it not end on the expiration date? If you have a prescription for a medicine that has renewals on it and you try to renew it again after the prescription period ends, do you not have to get another doctor's prescription in order to get your necessary pills? If you had a reason like wanting to wait a day or 2, you should have contacted customer support. They MAY have been able to help you out, I don't know if they could have or not.
rug wrote:
Fortunately for me I kept my passwords in a separate database just in case. I pity the people who didn't, although, subscribing for another year as long as it works as well as it does now wouldn't be that onerous. I just don't like rewarding a company that uses such practices out of principal.
Just as a point of information, there is a method to recover your Identity Safe data once your subscription has expired. The data can be accessed and exported as a comma delimited file. Norton does not prevent you from recovering this information simply because you no longer have a valid subscription.
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/nco.nsf/0/e5a44e06f97b3f89882572260060120f?OpenDocument&seg=hm&lg=en&ct=us
We are warned, via a popup, of what will happen when our subscriptions run out.
So we have been warned, and it's Norton who are calling the shots, whether we like it or not.
Saying that, I for one would like to see a 14 day grace where Norton is still usable, but without Updates of course.
This would be the choice of the user, and give the chance to renew, belatedly, for whatever reason.
Any renewal would count from the original expiration date.
This would show goodwill on Norton's part, and perharps stop a few clients from going elsewhere.
I know Norton may say that without updates, it could be false security, but then, it's better than searching for/downloading another security prog without any anti-virus protection at all.
Goodwill goes a long way.
As I said earlier, Norton calls the shots, we paid for 1 or 2 years, and that's what we get.
We are warned, so we make our choice.
Let's hope it's the right one,
The saying goes, " Don't jump out of the Frying Pan, into the Fire".
In general I have to agree with Calvin not particularly on his main point but the whole online industry seem hell bent on obtaining the maximum out of it's customers. I have used Norton products for more years than I care to remember, spent many hundreds of £'s not only on anti-virus software but the whole range which Norton provide They hate it when you don't use "Auto Renewal", I want to control my finances and decide when I want to release my funds not some far off corporation.
I will have a problem when my 85 year old fathers subscription comes to an end as I have always looked after things like this for him however, this year I have been away from home for more than 6 months and will probably not have the opportunity to visit before the subscription ends, so he will more than likely be completely unprotected for a time rather than having a slightly out of date protection which with other things I have in place on his laptop would be sufficient cover for a short period. We would be happy for Norton to "backdate" the actual renewal so that he does not obtain more than 12 months subscription but I guess this will not be possible now. Other companies are able to do this eg WinZip let you continue and when you pay the annual fee it is back dated to the end of the previous subscription.
I do find the blind faith in companies rather disturbing.
Michael
I found it sad too that Symantec has gone this route. I can understand the updates not working anymore but the rest should continue to work. Having the backup side and other functonality shut down is just wrong. The box should clearly state that you are renting the software not buying it. I have been using norton forever and this is a basic business policy shift. I know al the arguements about keeping updated but being left naked and terminating other functionality was enough to cause me to leave Norton. Customers should not be treated this way by putting a generic reference in small print on the side of a box about updates expiring and disabling the entire product.
This thread may help you install a 30 day "trial" version of NIS (Norton Internet Security 2010) http://community.norton.com/norton/board/message?board.id=nis_feedback&message.id=83877#M83877
BTW, if you REALLY need NIS in a hurry, go buy it in you local store (using cash).
Plus, a magazine subscription (or just about any subscription) is using the same route as Symantec. For example, you have a subscription to Times magazine. Does Times keep sending you magazine AFTER your subscription is over? I think not... It should be right that Symantec shut down after it's subscription is over. As I said above, there is other ways to go around this issue. One way is to install a 30 day "trial" version. Another way is to go to the stores and buy the CD version (full version or upgrade version doesn't matter).
iebfr14 wrote:
The box should clearly state that you are renting the software not buying it.
Hi iebfr14,
Actually I would be surprised if you had ownership rights to any software on your computer. Virtually all software is licensed, giving you the right to use the software under the terms of the dreaded Licensing Agreement. The Norton box clearly states "1 Year Protection (See top for details.)"
It should be noted that many other security software vendors, even if their product continues to function after expiration, also prohibit the user from continuing to run the product. The License Agreements will state something similar to the following McAfee clause:
Upon any termination or expiration of this Agreement, you must cease use of the Software and destroy all copies of the Software and the Documentation.
So even if the product does not stop working on its own, you have agreed to render the product non-operational at the end of the term of the license, anyway. So unless one wants to argue that a user should be less bound by an agreement than the software provider, I really don't see the issue here.
We could all give details of where Companies, Clubs, Organisations and other bodies give or do not give a short period of grace. I guess it depends on how seriously an organisation takes customers service and how how important individual customers are to them.
Surely it is not beyond the gumption of a large organisation to work out the serious long term customer who has renewed each year for many years and the "freebie" program hopper!!!!
Michael
I've been using NIS for years and at times it has been a bit of a love/hate relationship. I made the mistake of upgrading from NIS to 360 when it first came out and despite having bought a 3 user license I only ever installed it on 1 machine as it was so bad. I've worked in the software industry for 30 years so I want something that isn't too nannying which is why I prefer NIS to 360.
However in the past I understood that I BOUGHT the software and SUBSCRIBED to the updates. Tonight I have been presented with a screen telling me if I don't renew I won't be protected. This is a first, I'm being held to ransom without even stepping outside my front door. This tosh about this being a "feature", that Symmantec are so concerned about peoples secuirty that they don't want them running software with virus definitions that are a few days out of date, is a load of marketing spin (I'm being polite).
(Un)fortunately I had already purchased a 3-user license copy of NIS 2010 for considerably less than the renewal price I was offered. So now I will go thru and install the new version tomorrow so I will be protected again and then I will make a note in my diary for next November to research an alternative, before my subscription runs out.
This new policy is outrageous. Regardless of the yards of fine print that no one ever reads, the standard in the industry is that we buy the software and subscribe to the updates. I have never - never - before run across a program that just stops working.
It is particularly disgusting that this new policy first appears on a program upon which we depend to keep our computers safe from malicious attack.
I disagree that this is "for our own good", so we don't depend on outdated virus definitions. If that were the case, warning messages could be displayed that definitions are outdated, as in previous versions. It's just greed.
What it amounts to, Symantec is using all those virus-writing hackers out there as a weapon to extort us into buying another year from them. For me, this crosses the line from commerce to thuggery.
I feel like there is a gun to my head, and the company holding it is the one I've trusted to keep my computers safe.
Yes, strong language. But in my opinion, Symantec has crossed not only a marketing line but a moral one.
As previously discussed on this forum, Other paid for AV software have in their agreements that once you subscription expires you are to remove /uninstall our software and refrain from further use.
" new policy first appears on a program upon which we depend to keep our computers safe from malicious attack"
" one I've trusted to keep my computers safe."
hahahaha,
Keep your PC's safe from what?? when the software is out of date and any definitions and other updates won't be on those PC's, So any new exploit, Malware or breach (new way to bypass) won't be detected anyway as new Malware appears every day.
So your PC's are NOT safe using outdated security software of any brand. Any one who thinks it is, is mis guided.
If people trust a certain piece of security software then paying for the years subscription is a lot cheaper than every time having a PC tech reverse what the Malware has done including to the OS, Can be that one visit from a PC tech can cost the same or more than 1 years subscription.
Let alone the PC techs expression when he/she looks and sees any security software way out of date. and that is why the malware that has infected a PC got though even though the malware is 2 months old.
Quads
CalvinOU812 wrote:
... [a lot of stuff] ...
I'd like to summarize the responses to this query and add one or two remarks of my own.
1. The software industry is moving toward a subscription model. There is too much "lending" of software and too little acceptance of upgrades for software companies to make a profit. While this in itself doesn't bother me in general, there are too aspects of it that does concern me: a) without making a sufficient profit, they will stop providing support. b) without making a sufficient profit, they will stop upgrading their product to work in new operating systems, in extended venues, with other software, to work with new features. Most of us have been forced to move to an upgrade eventually, not for lack of support but because eventually they have features that have become essential to us. So, yes, I have no problem with a good company needing to maintain self-sufficiency. The subscription model will probably prove more effective in that happening in a fair way.
2. What to do when the subscription expires? Well my newspaper (remember them?) is desperate for subscribers to add to their numbers to sell themselves to advertisers, so they "advance" me numerous weeks, begging me to extend my subscription. If I do, I have to pay for those extended weeks; if not, well, they eat it. That model won't work for Symantec. They can extend me a week to a month, after which I can then cancel that subscription and install a retail model I bought for almost free and they will have to eat the extended time. Period. As a user model, that might make sense, but when it extends to a large portion of the general public, it makes no business sense. Because ...
3. The warning nags start a month before expiration. 30 whole days! Only an absolute brain-dead moron would not be able to cope with preparing for that deadline. They could have coped with it last year: Buy two copies of that almost free NIS and use the activation code when the clock has ticked down -- for those really desperate and who believe that protecting their computer and everything it relates to is less valuable than buying two tickets to a football game or eating one dinner out by themselves. Come on, now. Thirty days - and it will warn you right up to the last minute. So at the last minute, pop in your activation code and you're set for another year. Because ...
4. Upgrades as we think of them has become "updates" in the Symantec nomenclature. I may not like the mangling of the English language, but the reality of what it does for me is very satisfying. Whatever version of NIS is currently being hawked, I can download that version for free and install it at will as long as my account is active.
Personally, I have a suspicion that eventually Symantec will extend a free week. No updates, but a week to get your act straight. If you're willing to have your credit card account "borrowed", your email redirected, your computer turned into a "zombie" in order to gain an extra week of free Norton, then what the hay, why not let you have it. You can lead an idiot to a good idea, but you can't make him think. Hmm, at full, non-discounted retail, $80 for three licenses, you will have saved -- let me calculate -- ummm -- $1.60.
OMG!
I forgot:
5. But what if I want to keep the software and not worry about updating the signature files?
The problem, though, is all the good people out there who are nice and don't really want to hurt themselves, but who aren't computer savvy enough to "get it". They really believe in their hearts that it is the application and not the updates that provide them protection. Heaven help me, the clients who have called me up in desperation back in the days when they could decide when to update their antivirus signatures ... and then never did so because it wasn't convenient or when it would have been convenient they had forgotten. Those poor, sweet, harmless human beings who just didn't get it ... until it got them!
Those are the people I want to look out for. Not you people who know what you're doing and are trying to save a buck; but the three million or so other people who don't really know how to use a security suite properly. So Symantec is making it clear to them. If you don't subscribe, you don't have a security suite. Period. So wake up and get one. The next time they start getting those nag notices, they'll start paying attention. Or the time after that. 
[edit: Please refrain from posting content that could be considered offensive per the Participation Guidelines and Terms of Service.]