Real world this, real world that. I have shown real world examples showing that Norton is good. I have shown more then root has. Credible examples done by credible sources. Norton is far better then McAfee. McAfee is bloated junk. I have given plenty of reason and plenty of credible reviews, dude. Norton is a lot better then horrible McAfee.. bloated and terrible. Athlon is better then Intel by the way. It is pretty clear cut.
Mcafee VS. Norton VS. ZoneAlarm
- Thread starter Computergen1
- Start date
- Status
What isnt good about Mcafee.... i use their antivirus and firewall and have for 3 years and ive never been hacked. You think you have a clue but you dont, and thats easily backed up by your claim that Mcafee is terrible. Terrible means it sucks and doesnt work. Phroof? Honestly give me ONE solid reason besides a magazine review that says Norton is good yet speaks NOTHING of Mcafee being bad.......also doesnt say Norton is the best either. Btw for gaming Athlons are better for apps and servers Intel still is a bit better (not much). The FX-55 is definately the best processor made though. Oh and Geforce is better then ATI 
If norton is so fantastic why are you using Sygate and not norton IS?
re-read your link (specifically the left side bar
http://www.software-antivirus.com/program/norton-anti-virus-review.html
further more the provide professional critic backup that norton
and rate it's stabillity as poor
they also recomend the NOD32 AVpackage that you said was crap (quite clearly you were wrong)
http://antivirus.about.com/library/ reviews/winscan/aaprnav2002.htm
Editors rating: 4 out of 5
is actually a dead link...
perhaps you should have checked it out yourself instead of gaining all your infor from just one source.
the correct link is
http://antivirus.about.com/od/antivirussoftwarereviews/gr/nav2002.htm
the correct rating is also lower with only 3.5 / 5
and again confirms
in fact all of their norton revies click!
seem to say
They also carry norton sponsored links on their site, so it's hardly impartial, (or will we be including the mcaffe sponsored shop as proof that mcaffe is better than norton?
http://www.pcplus.co.uk/reviews/def...eid=34245&subsectionid=373&subsubsectionid=65
what PC plus actually have to say about norton is
about.com
http://antivirus.about.com/library/weekly/aa071101c.htm
also say
so...
from my earlier post, (which I do believe is quite credible) seems the users don't like norton.
Norton (according to user testement) lets virusses and hackers slip by...
Norton, according to users resource monitors, and reviewers is resource insensive, and a complete bitch to ever uninstall.
it seems in all the evidence that you have posted the critics don't like norton.
in fact the only clear winner on any of the sites you linked to was NOD32.
re-read your link (specifically the left side bar
http://www.software-antivirus.com/program/norton-anti-virus-review.html
It seems they hate norton as well...
further more the provide professional critic backup that norton
they rate unistalling as terrible (which is what I said)
and rate it's stabillity as poor
they also recomend the NOD32 AVpackage that you said was crap (quite clearly you were wrong)
http://antivirus.about.com/library/ reviews/winscan/aaprnav2002.htm
Editors rating: 4 out of 5
is actually a dead link...
perhaps you should have checked it out yourself instead of gaining all your infor from just one source.
the correct link is
http://antivirus.about.com/od/antivirussoftwarereviews/gr/nav2002.htm
the correct rating is also lower with only 3.5 / 5
and again confirms
in fact all of their norton revies click!
seem to say
They also carry norton sponsored links on their site, so it's hardly impartial, (or will we be including the mcaffe sponsored shop as proof that mcaffe is better than norton?
http://www.pcplus.co.uk/reviews/def...eid=34245&subsectionid=373&subsubsectionid=65
what PC plus actually have to say about norton is
and
about.com
http://antivirus.about.com/library/weekly/aa071101c.htm
also say
so...
from my earlier post, (which I do believe is quite credible) seems the users don't like norton.
Norton (according to user testement) lets virusses and hackers slip by...
Norton, according to users resource monitors, and reviewers is resource insensive, and a complete bitch to ever uninstall.
it seems in all the evidence that you have posted the critics don't like norton.
in fact the only clear winner on any of the sites you linked to was NOD32.
NOD32 can kiss my rear end. I'm sorry, root. But you cannot and will not win this. At all. Norton is better and the people are for it. So the hell with your assertions and un-backed B.S claims. My reviewers are right, and yours are wrong. I'm sorry, but you are just plain wrong here. THere is no other way around that.
Don't make me look like a stupid moron. The sites I posted gave Norton respectible scores. Again you ever try to make me look like a moron, you will be proven wrong beyond belief. STop lying to people on here about the facts, you fact denier.
Don't make me look like a stupid moron. The sites I posted gave Norton respectible scores. Again you ever try to make me look like a moron, you will be proven wrong beyond belief. STop lying to people on here about the facts, you fact denier.
Nod32 sucks all in all people. Don't listen to the liars on this forum who spread dis-information. Root works for the disinformation ministry at Nod32's PR section I bet.
The facts, that root loves denyng:
http://hardware.earthweb.com/systems/article.php/11060_1489511_2
"Overall, Norton Internet Security 2003 succeeds superbly at its mission -- to offer a friendly, all-in-one, peace-of-mind package for everyday Web and e-mail users. Yes, it could be even nicer with a few more features added; yes, tech-savvy users can roll up their sleeves and configure even stronger protection via a combination of other programs. But for $70 a year ($40 if you're an upgrader), Symantec's insurance policy is hard to resist."
Oh and Root, I just use Norton Anti-virus. Not the security suite. So there is no firewall.
The facts, that root loves denyng:
http://hardware.earthweb.com/systems/article.php/11060_1489511_2
"Overall, Norton Internet Security 2003 succeeds superbly at its mission -- to offer a friendly, all-in-one, peace-of-mind package for everyday Web and e-mail users. Yes, it could be even nicer with a few more features added; yes, tech-savvy users can roll up their sleeves and configure even stronger protection via a combination of other programs. But for $70 a year ($40 if you're an upgrader), Symantec's insurance policy is hard to resist."
Oh and Root, I just use Norton Anti-virus. Not the security suite. So there is no firewall.
Sorry I wasn't aware, I just assumed yu were using the full system works package.
I linked the same articles as you did, and I provided the inportant quotes in my post just as you did...
All the links in my last post came from a credible source...
Here are the facts (as I see them)
for professional reviewer opinion, I've posted more than you gian stating how Norton is resource hungry, hard to uninstall, and has gaps in the protection it provides.
There are links to back it up... we are not talking about bedroom reviewers here, we are talking about industry professionals.
I still think that for user opinion you can't beat a forum, and it seems that a lot of users do think that norton is a little buggy...
Don't worry I agree that the protection norton offers is good, I'm just sayinf that it's not the best...
that's not just my opinion either, all the sites you linked to a few posts ago rate NOD32 as the best...
I'm sure NOD32 would kiss nortons (and your) ass if it wasn't so much higher on the laddrer of AV ratings.
you can't try to deny the six sources of (professional reviewer) evidence that I supplied or the 7 sources of (user) evidence with just one quote from a review which again carries 4 norton sponsored links at the bottom of the page
besides that link reviews Internet security NOT antivirus
I'm starting to think that you don't even read you'r own linked sources of information.
Of the last four you posted,
1 is regarding a different product
2 meagerly rate norton, and the sites recomend other products.
and I adminitidly didn't read one because I felt the post was getting too long....
Other quotes you made without links weere later discredited by the links that I provided...
(I'm getting really tired of this)
Either give up or post some better evidence...
root said:
You have never posted more then me. I outsourced you and defeated you because my sources are better and my posts are better. I'm tired of you. I easily uninstalled norton in the past (when I switched to Avast and later, AVG). But I came back to norton. Norton is not resource hungry and has no noticeable gaps in its protection. It is good. I have backed myself up far more then you and defeated your argument.
I think the people who like norton outnumber the people who don't.
Your sources are not professional. They are unprofessional. The sources I provided that spoke well of norton are professional. Again, you need to understand the facts. Forums aren't good sources, nor are anti-norton sites.
You ever try to make me look a dumbass, I swear... you will regret it.
All my sites regard Norton. Again mr fact denier, mr wrongness you need to admit your shortcomings and admit you are wrong.
I provided links to the quotes I made. I don't get discredited by anything you posted. I never have, and never will because you are not credible to begin with.
You post some better evidence. You can't defeat the master of debates on this forum, not now or not ever. Maybe if you would actually come to the realization you can be wrong, you would see the light.
I can't stand liars and people who throw straw mans like you.
Man you're downright hilarious. You claim you're right and hes wrong......youre damn sure of it. Ummmmmm what do you base that off of? Norton 2002 reviews? A couple magazine site reviews? You still havent given one reason in specifics as to how Norton is better then Mcafee. At all. Youre hardly a debater.....most your so called facts come from other peoples opinions as well as his (hypocrite) You have no knowledge as to why Norton is better then Mcafee, you just happen to think it is for whatever reason. Now what is that reason???
- Status
