Norton jumps the Stark

Wow. Tony Stark protecting your PC? Does this mean those stupid Geek Squad cars are going to be upgraded to Audis, too?


This strikes me as a last-ditch attempt by Symantec to prop up a failing consumer franchise. I hope I’m right.

(Thanks, AB!)

16 thoughts on “Norton jumps the Stark

  1. Compared to te “Protect Your Chicken From Dokken” ads, this is a step up.

  2. Unfortunately, Symantec’s consumer franchise is still going strong. In 2009, consumer accounted for 29% of revenues, and had a healthy 53% profit margin.

  3. The Blu-Ray disc isn’t “free” if you have to pay for it now, is it?

    Like it says save $10.

    Have another read…

  4. Geoff, if you believe the ad (a big if), the normal price of the Norton product alone is $69.99, and you get $10 off that price plus a Blu-ray copy of Iron Man at no additional cost. That sounds close enough to “free” to me. However, it doesn’t sound like something I would pay for.

  5. I’ll stick to safe surfing practices and MS’s nice little freebie AV program.

  6. “Symantec to prop up a failing consumer franchise.”

    Huh? Norton Internet Security 2010 is the best consumer anti-virus product on the market.

    Ed, you’re behind the times. Symantec has significantly improved NIS over the past couple years.

    1. John, I’ve used the current version of NIS. Yes, it’s much improved, but it is still too heavy (IMO) and too intrusive. It caused so many problems on a test system that I finally deleted it in disgust.

  7. In contrast, in December “AV Comparatives” awarded Norton Internet Security 2010 anti-virus “Product of the Year: Gold”, and highlighted it’s “very high detection rates”, “low system impact”, and “ease of use”.

    It’s also a PC Magazine “Editor’s Choice”.

    Even in it’s default settings, I don’t find it to be at all intrusive.

    I have had zero problems with it.

    BTW, I haven’t tried it, but NIS 2011 is currently in public beta.

  8. I used it back in the day. It might have been a hog but It caught just about everything. 2010 is a streamlined sob.

  9. In my experience the consumer version is pure junk. I have had instructors not be able to access their courses because of the toolbar that Norton insists on installing. On the other hand, their corporate version is lighterweight. Still, I find that Microsoft Security Essentials has outperformed Norton and McAffee in my experiences.

    If your antivirus has to install a network driver, it’s probably not worth the money you paid for it.

  10. Ed I am with you on this one. Symantec has made a fortune over the years on perceived weaknesses in Windows operating systems. This is a lame attempt to gain some credibility as users have finally woken up to the fact they don’t need bloated internet security software to protect them whilst online. Common sense while surfing & Microsoft Security Essentials is all you need IMHO and better yet its free.

  11. Norton got better in 2008 by 2009 it was a pretty light weight effective antivirus. I don’t think Norton makes bad products at all, I’m just not sure I need to pay for this kind of program anymore.
    I think Norton is better than McAfee or Trend Micro and overall probably better than Security Essentials.

  12. Mark, MSE is building a pretty good track record with me, and my former colleagues. I recently had to service an employee’s computer that had been infected where McAfee would not even detect the virus. I installed Security Essentials and had the offending virus removed in about 15 minutes. I was speaking to a former colleague that also had the same issue happen with him. Norton refused to detect the virus, but MSE detected and knocked it out within 30 minutes. Security Essentials, while free and from MS is getting the job done without the unneccessary overhead that you will find with other vendors.

Comments are closed.