Norton vs McAfee
- Thread starter Korora
- Start date
- Aug 22, 2014
- 1,027
I don't know which exactly I'd choose since I think they're both at least mediocre choices. But if I had to, I think I'd go with Norton.
Let's take it step-by-step:
Resource usage: Norton
Real world system impact: well, McAfee is better while browsing (ONLY if you use supporting browser), but both AV modules are pretty weak (Norton, though, has a good firewall, I think)
User friendliness & user interface: clear winner, Norton
Level of protection and features: Norton has more features (especially online services integrated), but still no clear winner
Overall winner: Norton (maybe..)
Just as I said above, though, both products are not so well-rounded.
Let's take it step-by-step:
Resource usage: Norton
Real world system impact: well, McAfee is better while browsing (ONLY if you use supporting browser), but both AV modules are pretty weak (Norton, though, has a good firewall, I think)
User friendliness & user interface: clear winner, Norton
Level of protection and features: Norton has more features (especially online services integrated), but still no clear winner
Overall winner: Norton (maybe..)
Just as I said above, though, both products are not so well-rounded.
- Jun 5, 2015
- 462
- Oct 20, 2014
- 804
No clue. I think Norton is a bit more effective in detection and resources.
- Oct 23, 2012
- 12,527
- Jul 22, 2015
- 58
I see, but this one does not include Trend Micro thus making it a different post.
- Jun 9, 2013
- 6,720
Norton for me, six years and zero infections. 
- May 8, 2015
- 881
Norton. Doesn't slow down the computer, much better zero day capabilities, a lot less resource usage. It's not as bad as most would think. They changed a lot and no longer focus on signatures but instead on zero day which is good. Signatures are just not good enough anymore. I also really like that community watch which is not a new thing with Norton. If not a lot of people have the file, it's safe to assume it might not be a good file unless rated good by Norton themselves.
Sure Norton has some false positives (but so do all the others). I personally like false positives (I know that sounds weird). When vendor makes someone sensitive enough (or you can configure it to be sensitive), it's a good indicator that real malware will be picked up in a flash. Norton is WAY better at adding exclusions to false positives whereas McAfee, you'd need to turn off the AV to add it to exclusions or it would instantly delete it after restore. Norton? They give you the option to exclude a file WHILE you are trying to restore it so it doesn't do this.
Don't get me wrong, McAfee WILL protect you sufficiently, but Norton has been doing a far better job and without the headaches that McAfee would give you such as slow boot times, slow program starts, and the adding of exclusions I was just speaking of. McAfee also has FAR less customization than Norton.
Do I use either of them? No. If Norton gave me the right away with detected files (add to exclusion, add to quarantine, delete, etc) before acting upon a file, I'd use it. That is literally the only thing I don't like about it. McAfee also has this problem. I will say that both in certain cases will ask you if it needs user intervention (mostly in zero day which both have or low risk threats). If you want a set and forget, Norton has the best configuration by default to do this for you. You can also manually make it even further self reliant by switching some settings. The main thing that McAfee would be better at is offline protection. Norton is mostly cloud but does contain some offline signatures if I recall correctly.
My choice is overwhelmingly for Norton.
Sure Norton has some false positives (but so do all the others). I personally like false positives (I know that sounds weird). When vendor makes someone sensitive enough (or you can configure it to be sensitive), it's a good indicator that real malware will be picked up in a flash. Norton is WAY better at adding exclusions to false positives whereas McAfee, you'd need to turn off the AV to add it to exclusions or it would instantly delete it after restore. Norton? They give you the option to exclude a file WHILE you are trying to restore it so it doesn't do this.
Don't get me wrong, McAfee WILL protect you sufficiently, but Norton has been doing a far better job and without the headaches that McAfee would give you such as slow boot times, slow program starts, and the adding of exclusions I was just speaking of. McAfee also has FAR less customization than Norton.
Do I use either of them? No. If Norton gave me the right away with detected files (add to exclusion, add to quarantine, delete, etc) before acting upon a file, I'd use it. That is literally the only thing I don't like about it. McAfee also has this problem. I will say that both in certain cases will ask you if it needs user intervention (mostly in zero day which both have or low risk threats). If you want a set and forget, Norton has the best configuration by default to do this for you. You can also manually make it even further self reliant by switching some settings. The main thing that McAfee would be better at is offline protection. Norton is mostly cloud but does contain some offline signatures if I recall correctly.
My choice is overwhelmingly for Norton.
Norton, in my opinion: many security technologies and low system impact.
- Mar 15, 2011
- 13,070
These two products are commonly known to be included in OEM laptop/desktop.
But today they took the different way but still one of them can lead to be a winner in the pick.
Therefore the overall, in such angle Norton may gather the most capable on the categories meet however McAfee can do it but sometimes they both binds of bad experience even though they improve due to the way they advertise the products to include on all OEM computers.
- Both have mediocre protection from their collection of older version before where technology enhancement are not totally evolved.
- They experience unstable performance/unoptimize for computer before.
But today they took the different way but still one of them can lead to be a winner in the pick.
- McAfee's Artemis technology totally improved a lot but as per aggressiveness then FP rates are occurred at any chances, their flagship Siteadvisor also revamped compare from older version. However its stability on the system varies where lots of processes running and lots of accumulate resources gathered. HIPS and other components are primarily from business products concern.
- Meanwhile Norton Security strong points are from their Sonar and Cloud reputation which they mostly rely thus reducing the possible FP rates, however FN (False negative) may increase since it can flag either mistake or not enough information. Fine tune on the stability of the system both boot up and shutdown times, and such capable to be an OEM for computer.
Therefore the overall, in such angle Norton may gather the most capable on the categories meet however McAfee can do it but sometimes they both binds of bad experience even though they improve due to the way they advertise the products to include on all OEM computers.
- Aug 31, 2014
- 439
- Oct 20, 2014
- 804
Norton for me, six years and zero infections.
Great mate, and I remember in 2004-05 my paid Norton kept things safe and running fine.
If the Norton ain't broke, don't uninstall it
- Jun 9, 2013
- 6,720
I am very happy with the new Norton Security 2015 thanks friend.Great mate, and I remember in 2004-05 my paid Norton kept things safe and running fine.
If the Norton ain't broke, don't uninstall it
Still got 10 days short of a year to go. 
- May 1, 2015
- 314
I am very happy with the new Norton Security 2015 thanks friend.
Installed Norton 2015 in. security and i am like it (never used norton before)
got a question for you:
how do i set the firewall to interactive, so i would choose what to allow and what not.
thanks!
- Oct 20, 2014
- 804
I am very happy with the new Norton Security 2015 thanks friend.
Sounds good, Norton improves again it seems... I like the newer UI's and seems lighter then it used to a few years ago.
I did use and liked McAfee, around 2007 when it used to be LIGHT. If anyone can believe.
Here's a screen pic of my old Norton AV 2004-2005.
Attachments
- Jun 9, 2013
- 6,720
- Jun 9, 2013
- 6,720
Wow cool i only started using a PC six years ago, very interesting to see the old screenshot. Thanks for that.
- Status
Similar threads
