Hi SonOfJive
No i have not. I will do so right away and see if it changes anything. Ive never had to do that for any site now that i think of it, but i will do so anyway.
I will post back later on.
Edit: I just added it and rebooted comp (just incase) and it still required me to refresh the page a few times for those icons to appear.
UnionJack
SoJ and bjm:
"works for me"
You two provide lots of useful help so much of the time. I just don't know where you're going with this Safe Web denial.
There are threads about Safe Web failing almost every month. This isn't new. It's not specific to the O.P. in this thread.
There was a thread on this just a few days ago! ("NIS 18.5, safe Web checkmarks in Googe search").
You two are too knowledgeable and experienced to dismiss this _continuing_ problem with the "it works for me" excuse.
You should realize that many/most problems in this forum do not affect _every_ customer/user. This Safe Web failure is no different.
Well, one difference is that Symantec has allowed _this_ significant failure to exist for a long time now.
There is a _belief_ by some frequent posters here that it is caused by Google "making some changes". I say "belief" because they cannot cite any specific change that Google has made that causes it to break. Or a specific date. Or a release version. Further, since they are not privy to the NIS code, it's not possible for them to _know_. They just repeat what others here have posted before. It may be true. It may not be true. But they have no way of knowing. It's just a repeated "belief". Do you agree or disagree with this point?
> Next to the search bar on the Google results page change "Instant is on" to "Instant is off."
The Safe Web problem existed _before_ Instant On became available.
uj:
> I reset IE8 to default and tried it out, and it's still exactly the same
> I still need to refresh the page for the safe web icons to appear.
Correct. Me too. And others too. New threads virtually every month.
SoJ:
> If you do a Google search from the browser's search bar,
> instead of your Google homepage ...
That is a less useful way to use Google. Getting a million search results back is not helpful. I _always_ use Google advanced search. It allows me to:
Use phrases.
Use "one or more of these words"
Use "none of these words"
Specify English
Specify a specific website, when that is useful
Specify the _region_ (e.g., U.S.)
That last point _alone_ is enough reason to use Google advanced search. It is a verifiable fact that the number of yellow and red Safe Web marks are reduced when the searches are limited to the U.S. And I almost never need additional search results from foreign countries.
What are some clues?
IE8, using the Google search _webpage_, ...
What are some possibilities?
1. Changes by Google.
Maybe, maybe not. Not proven. Even if it is the cause, corresponding changes by Symantec developers to NIS can fix this.
2. Some failure in NIS.
It is a _fact_ that last year Symantec said that they "fixed" the problem. Here is proof.
Date: 4/1/10
Thread: Site Safety Symbols disappear when using Google search"
Poster: Karthik_Swamy (Symantec Employee)
"This issue is fixed in the patch NIS 17.6.0.32 / N360 4.1.0.32. This patch will be available soon through Live update and announcement will be made in the forum when it's available."
What do you make of that?
3. Browser setting.
This would be par for the course.
My money would be on some combination of the above.
Here's a particularly perverse scenario.
a. Google makes a change.
b. Depending on a user's browser settings, when the user searches from the Google webpage,
c. NIS fails to check for some condition and fails.
Bottom line: Symantec can make this work correctly. If they choose to.
Do you agree or disagree with this point?
Hi joen,
"Works for me" means everything. It means that the program itself is not defective - if it were nobody would see the site safety icons. So we need a theory to explain why this feature is so troublesome to some but not to others. If you want me to explain what the specific issue might be, I cannot - anymore than you could explain why, if the program is faulty, it works flawlessly for bjm_ and myself. I am sure it works great for most users - people who do not experience a problem do not post issues.
The experiment of using the browser search box rather than the Google home page was not so much intended as a workaround but as a test. In the past there have been cases where observed behaviors were dependent on which avenue was used to do a search. It could be a scripting issue for example.
To address your point about the blame being placed on changes that Google may make: That indeed has happened in the past and Symantec has responded to these issues on several occasions, fixing the problem only to have the feature break again shortly thereafter when Goolge changes things again. It is not an empty excuse - it has happened so frequently that it is always the first thing we suspect when the icons go missing.
"Bottom line: Symantec can make this work correctly. If they choose to.
Do you agree or disagree with this point?"
This actually depends on what the cause of the problem turns out to be. From my perspective it is working correctly. The problem is that the Safe Web feature is dependent on too many other factors, including Google itself and the user's browser, with its many possible settings options and array of add-ons. I will grant you that the program is not working for some and Symantec should try to determine the cause of that and fix it. However, the problem is definitely not totally Norton's since it does not affect all users. When we throw out suggestions we are not trying to make excuses - we are trying to help pinpoint what the problem might be by offering possibilities that we know have been implicated with similar issues in the past.
Thank you for your response. I appreciate the advice you and bjm give in this forum and respect your opinions.
> It means that the program itself is not defective - if it were _nobody_ would see the site safety icons.
I disagree. Software bugs are usually more perverse than your simple scenario. It is often true for almost any software -- some users experience the problem and others do not.
Historically, posts in this forum from a user who is having a problem -- when most others are not -- have resulted in finding a bona fide problem. Which, in most cases, have then been fixed.
In those examples, because you did not experience the problem that _that_ poster did, does not mean that "the program itself was not defective." It just means that you should buy a lottery ticket. :)
> The problem is that the Safe Web feature is dependent on too many other factors,
> including Google itself and the user's browser,
> with its many possible settings options and array of add-ons.
But that's the very definition of NIS! How it -- the _whole product_ -- works is "dependent on many other factors." It's called Windows. And MS changes it _every month_ with their patches.
Yet the Safe Web problem lingers on. New posts every month. Or more often.
To the extent that browser settings might affect this problem, Symantec should man up -- they're being paid for the product, after all -- and do a little research to determine what settings cause problems. And then prominently post that information.
In my previous post I listed a couple of clues. I omitted an important one that others have mentioned also. Safe Web works correctly on the _first_ results page, but fails on the second and subsequent results pages. There's a huge clue in there somewhere.
So after trying everything thats been suggested here, its still an issue. So does anyone, have any clue why its doing this, and more importantly how i can solve this, assuming i can offcourse?
The guys who have suggested stuff sound like they know what they are talking about, so maybe i need to take this up further with Symantec. That said this is their web site is it not?. I would of thought this is the right place to get help with Norton issues?.
Thanks again.
UnionJack