Norton IS 2012 total Fail! Reviewed by Languy99

[Tom172]

Yes, I brought up the point of languy99's reviews being untrustworthy. In hindsight that point doesn't even matter. I would still put forward the same view had it been any other reviewer on YouTube.

These tests are so hit and miss, I don't pay much attention to the results.

As you said, NIS had a bad day. If languy had tested NIS on another day, we could all be on here praising it to high heaven.

Let not forget that you, as user, are safe if you only keep yourself to known site, make sure that you don't take usb sticks from friends, and so on. Even Claim AV will be enough...

Yep, the application is only as good as the user.

 

[Valentin N]

I have seen many people making review and Langguys is one of the best if not the best; many say the computer is infected when it's not and why it isn't...

I would like to understand what you mean by "These tests are so hit and miss"

Regards,

 

[Tom172]

I would like to understand what you mean by "These tests are so hit and miss"

Regards,

Results gathered on one test may be dramatically different from another.

 

[Valentin N]

That's true and nothing new but that doesn't make them so hit and miss or untrustworthy...

 

[mhartsellm]

Languy99 is a well known Comodo promoter and there is nothing wrong with that, however I'm not going to take his youtube review of NIS 2012 seriously as a totally unbiased objective professional test. I watched him review NIS 2011 and it nailed everything he threw at and it was kinda funny he was stumbling all over himself trying not to say anything good about it all through the whole review.

 

[illumination]

What I see with products when they fail, is not in a VM, but in real time on a production machine's. On the side, just for fun, i utilize my 15 and 16 year old nephew's... I have a Dell tower with windows xp 32 bit on it, i keep it fully patched with updates from microsoft, and once a week, i will change what they are running on it.. Great way to test, almost never fails, with in a weeks time they manage to get an infection on it..
None of these suites and or products are 100 percent, and depending on a user, will prove that point.. I am biased as to these test using URL's from sites that can be watched and blacklisted into products.. What i see, as said, is from real time, on production machines..

 

[LochNess]

I've serviced a number of Pc's with infections and found that many were using Norton.. but I've always been persuaded that most average users tend to 'stick' with Norton since it's already loaded on the PC when purchased... ergo, since such a large majority of users have Norton installed, it seems only logical that there would be a proportionate share of problems... and, in most cases, I've found that Norton had neither be renewed and/or updated... so, in my case, I really don't have a serious problem with Symantec... all in all, for the average user, a very nice suite (but, one must be sure to renew and/or update)... JMHO

 

[enaph]

And here we can see how CIS 5.8 BETA reacted on rootkit that killed NIS 2012:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8X2yovM6AQ [Languy99]

 

[Littlebits]

Languy99 is a well known Comodo promoter and there is nothing wrong with that, however I'm not going to take his youtube review of NIS 2012 seriously as a totally unbiased objective professional test. I watched him review NIS 2011 and it nailed everything he threw at and it was kinda funny he was stumbling all over himself trying not to say anything good about it all through the whole review.

Completely agree. Let's say that I was a Norton promoter, would you trust me to review Comodo Internet Security?

I honestly don't believe someone can do an unbiased review if they are a promoter of a competitor.

I know Languy99 is popular with Comodo fans, but to most other people they don't take his reviews seriously. Not to say anything bad, it is just the way it is.

Thanks.

 

[jamescv7]

And here we can see how CIS 5.8 BETA reacted on rootkit that killed NIS 2012:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8X2yovM6AQ [Languy99]

Well for CIS it handles with D+ and Sandbox when the file was executed. Some files that was uploaded in VT there is no detection in Norton but probably Sonar will block the suspicious behavior.

 

[MrXidus]

No product is perfect no product can provide or guarantee 100% protection. Every product has its pros...and cons.

Pinch of salt kindly taken. Thanks.

 

[WinAndLinuxTutorials]

I have never trusted Norton, nor do I like it..

^^You got the point exactly...

 

[enaph]

No product is perfect no product can provide or guarantee 100% protection. Every product has its pros...and cons.

You're 100% right. In my opinion only DWPF is really close to ideal solution.

 

[MetalShaun]

No product is perfect no product can provide or guarantee 100% protection. Every product has its pros...and cons.

Pinch of salt kindly taken. Thanks.

Is that a pinch of chicken salt?

 

[MrXidus]

Indeed Metal.

 

[NathanF1]

FYI, When Symantec released the 2009 versions of NAV and NIS, everything was rewritten from scratch so it will operate much faster than what it used to be, And Starting with the 2010 versions, NAV and NIS greatly improved their detection and protection rates, This had been proven again with the release of 2011 versions. So tell me, What's that bloated program you're talking about? You're posting NONSENSE. And the reason why it doesn't "block what needs to be blocked" is because your customers owns an expired subscription, Turned the security software OFF and didn't updated NAV/NIS in the first place.

Thank you for the sensible post! Reason before rash statements and hear-say verdicts.

I haven't held Symantec in such a regard before 2009, but since then they've managed to clean their act, released one of the most lightweight security applications, introduced SONAR, Insight, provide pulse updates at an excellent speed, etc. I'm not saying give them credit for that and look the other way if something like what happened in that review actually happens, but as many members pointed out, there are ups and downs, and cycles in applying your knowledge and ability.

Some days you're the pigeon, others - the statue...

Edit
P.S. Regardless of the product in question, these people work on providing us with better security and peace of mind, and we should give them some respect, whatever our personal preferences are.

 

[moonshine]

The truth is, The user is the one to blame why they got infected in the first place. Like the others have said, A Security Software is only as good as its user.

 

[GabiCRX]

The fact that he missed a virus or two is not a problem, but Norton was removed by a virus, that's a big problem !

 

[jamescv7]

This is why self protection must be hardened to any products to protect against any unwanted termination. From the malware its bypassed the self protection of Norton so it made some serious error.

 

[Littlebits]

The fact that he missed a virus or two is not a problem, but Norton was removed by a virus, that's a big problem !

The right malware can do that to just about any AV, but some malware target the most popular AV's which puts Norton under the line of fire. Awhile back there was this malware that could close and disable most AV's, the about the only one that wasn't effected was Dr.Web because it wasn't a popular target. I just wonder if Norton's tamper protection was enabled. I know when I first installed Norton 2011 and tested it awhile back for some reason the Tamper protection wasn't enabled. I had to manually turn it on. If Tamper Protection was on, then Norton really needs to improve it.

Thanks.