Mcafee vs Norton 360

[upthecreek]

Anybody have an opinion on which or you prefer.? My new Dell all-in-one came with McAfee free for 6 months I have had Norton 360 for 5 years from Comcast w/o any issues
Thnx in advance!

[JustRalph]

They both suck the life out of your system. McCafee is worse. Be smart and you don't need either.

Just make sure you never let any anti virus run in the background. It slows everything.

You can call up the anti virus when you need it to scan downloads etc.

But never let it run. On it's own

[FocusWiz]

I would never use either of them.

At one time, I used McAfee exclusively, but they have become as bloated as Norton. In recent years, Norton has completely rewritten their real-time scanning engine, so I am using Norton Internet Security on my faster systems. I have no use for many of the Norton 360 features and am not fond of their "Automated, all-in-one, set-it-and-forget-it" feature so I refuse to use that.

As an aside, some of us use odd niche software which may not be fully vetted with the antivirus companies. I am comfortable with my ability to restore files that Norton Internet Security deems "unsafe" but I am unclear if the more automated character of Norton 360 allows this as easily.

All in all, I am happy with Norton Internet Security.

As an aside, when I tried using one of the lower versions of McAfee, it constantly nagged me that my computer was not fully protected and that I should buy additional products. When it was shareware back in the 1980s, it was easily the best product. Now, it is nearly as bad as having a virus.

Just my 2¢.

[LottaKash]

They both suck the life out of your system. McCafee is worse. Be smart and you don't need either.



I agree whole heartedly with that...

Me personally, I use and have had no major incidences, starting with late last year, by simply using "ZoneAlarm's (free) Security suite....It includes a tested tough Firewall, Anti-Virus, and Identity Security....all in one....

One thing, with the free version being all I use, you have to manually update the latest and greatest protocols....It catches a lot of chit tho....I would be pretty certain that the PRO version with it's automatic updates and a few other perks would be worth the kash...

I also use Advanced System Care for disk cleanup duties and SpyBot Search and Destroy which also does a good job at keeping things humming along... Both, also FREE...:jump:

[Dave Schwartz]

This year, for the first time ever, I actually purchased virus protection.

After using AVG Free for years - and occasionally getting bitten - I bought Kaspersky.

$34 per year for a 3-pack. Two of those covers all the machines in our network that ever get email or browse the web.

[Marshall Bennett]

They both suck the life out of your system. McCafee is worse. Be smart and you don't need either.

Just make sure you never let any anti virus run in the background. It slows everything.

You can call up the anti virus when you need it to scan downloads etc.

But never let it run. On it's own
I'm sort of computer-stupid so this may seem like a dumb question. Are you saying to turn it off unless I'm downloading something? Suppose I go to a link sent to me and it's infected?
I'm using Norton and yes, it slows everything down.

[JustRalph]

I'm sort of computer-stupid so this may seem like a dumb question. Are you saying to turn it off unless I'm downloading something? Suppose I go to a link sent to me and it's infected?
I'm using Norton and yes, it slows everything down.

I'm saying turn it off until you download something. Download the file to your desktop, leave it there. Don't run it, click on it or anything. Open your antivirus and then tell it to scan the downloaded file/package etc. often you can do this just by right clicking on the file you just downloaded and the option to scan it will be there. After you scan it, then open it.

This means your anti virus is not running in the background slowing your system down etc.

Links don't contain virus product. The pages they send you to, can, but most browsers will set off alarm bells immediately. As long as your browser is setup right, you would have to activate a script or something similar on the page. Even if you do this the browser might scream at you first. That's why you can no longer do installs direct from web pages anymore. The browsers won't allow it due to the risk. They force you to download the package, and hopefully scan it.

One note: as Dave mentioned earlier, if you have servers online that are online serving files or running email servers ( I know some here run their own email servers) you need to leave your anti virus running to scan anything going in and out in real time. That's a different scenario.

I haven't used an anti virus program full time in 15 yrs. i don't even have one installed. You must be vigilant. But I never open anything unless I know where it is coming from and you should never open anything that was sent in email.

Pic's and such are different and they carry very little risk. But zip files and EXE files NEVER.

[HUSKER55]

i HAVE TRIED THEM ALL over the years and in one way or another they came up short. If you are on the internet it is not a question of it you will get screwed but when.

I have found that if you save your data to a disc, flash drive or even another hard drive and only play with the C-drive that when you get nailed you don't lose your data and unless you screw up the data you save is free of defects.

That is the purpose of virus protection. To protect your data.

When you are on the internet is when the problems happen and I use MSN Essentials and move on. It comes with the software you buy.

Will you get nailed...yep. But you can reload your software.

Also, according to my repair guy, no software likes to run with another which can cause problems of its own.

SAVE YOUR DATA TO A DIFFERENT SOURCE. Flash drives are cheap. But then again, so are cd's.

Save your money and take what ever is available for free. in the end, they all fail. The question is when and how.

JMHO

[Augenj]

Anybody have an opinion on which or you prefer.? My new Dell all-in-one came with McAfee free for 6 months I have had Norton 360 for 5 years from Comcast w/o any issues
Thnx in advance!
I dropped both of those awhile back. I now use MalwareBytes (https://www.malwarebytes.org/) and like it. It's compatible with the free Microsoft Security Essentials and finds PUPs (potentially unwanted programs) that the others didn't. It also has gotten good reviews.

[headhawg]

I debated about whether to bother to comment in this thread as my advice tends to go unheeded. So I promised myself that this would be the last time I post in any virus-related thread.

First of all, most people aren't diligent with computer use. They view/download pr0n :eek:, use "free" software, click on pop-up ads that warn them that they have 22,000 pr0n images on their computer, etc. So while JR's advice works for him and others like him, he is in the 10-20% of the population that is computer savvy. The people on this site are likely a good representation of the population of computer users. Only a small percentage of people here know enough about proper computer usage to take their advice or do what they do. The rest of you need to have good -- really good -- anti-virus/anti-malware programs installed.

And speaking of malware, viruses and other malware such as spyware are NOT the same thing. Because of the proliferation of bad stuff (e.g. rootkits, trojans, keyloggers, worms, etc.) it was easier to group them under one category (malware) then to have the general public know all of the subcategories. That said, you should be running ONE antivirus program (like Kaspersky) and at least one anti-malware program (like Malwarebytes). Why? Because they detect different things. Why the emphasis on ONE antivirus program? Because if run two or more simultaneously they would really slow your system down AND be less effective at preventing the bad stuff from invading your computer!! The same is true for something anti-malware programs if they run in the background. You could install use 1000 anti-malware programs if you used them in an on-demand scanning role and they would not conflict. For simplicity, just stick with the paid version of Malwarebytes and call it a day.

Here's what I've used in the fairly recent past. McAfee -- it blows the big one. Pass. Norton Internet Security 2012-- Very good. Doesn't slow things down as much as people say it does. Haven't used the latest version. Norton 360 -- something different in the code compared to NIS. Slower, and had conflicts with another program on my 'puter. Pass. Kaspersky Internet Security -- very good except for the interface which needs to be improved. For this post I am evaluating these in terms of the interface and overall system slow-down; I am not rating these based on their protection ability. Why? Because I didn't test them in a lab. There are companies that already do that. So when someone post that the free AVG (or whatever) is great, take it with a grain of salt. What you should do (and I have posted this a couple of times before) is look at three websites that test the major free and paid AV programs and look at the results. Draw your own conclusions from that rather than taking advice your neighbor who tells you that Avast is the best. (And the kid-down-the-block may know less about computers than you do.) Simply google "anti-virus lab tests" and you will get the information that you need.

And for those of you who say that such-and-such AV program slows down your computer, of course it does! It's running in the background essentially checking everything that's happening. What do you expect? So, what's the solution? Get a faster computer with at 8 gigs of RAM and an SSD. Problem solved. As a caveat, I would also recommend having a traditional 1TB (or more) hard drive in addition to the SSD. That way programs that don't need exceptional speed or your data files and pictures can be stored there instead.

Anyway...my 2 cents. Sorry for the long post.

[spiketoo]

...And for those of you who say that such-and-such AV program slows down your computer, of course it does! It's running in the background essentially checking everything that's happening. What do you expect? So, what's the solution? Get a faster computer with at 8 gigs of RAM and an SSD. Problem solved. As a caveat, I would also recommend having a traditional 1TB (or more) hard drive in addition to the SSD. That way programs that don't need exceptional speed or your data files and pictures can be stored there instead.

Anyway...my 2 cents. Sorry for the long post.

No, long post is good as you saved me (in essence) stating the same. I run ESET NOD32, WinPatrol and Comodo FW all in real-time with no noticeable lag compared to not having them active - it all depends on your config which IMHO is the most important part of determining why things may run slow. A good portion of software is designed to be all things to all people so performance is not necessarily the first consideration in design (contrary to some popular belief). Having a good PC build can help to 'compensate' for less than stellar software design.

RAM is cheap. Very. I have a 3YO intel i7 box (which is kinda old in PC years) running 64 bit WIN7 with 12GB RAM (better to have it and not need it than...). The only diff on my box is that only the OS and pgms run from the SSD as I'm not quite comfortable yet with SSD longevity for data (but then again, I'm just paranoid :cool: ). All data is stored on 2 1TB HDs (again, better to have it and ...).

As always, YMMV.

[headhawg]

No, long post is good as you saved me (in essence) stating the same. I run ESET NOD32, WinPatrol and Comodo FW all in real-time with no noticeable lag compared to not having them active - it all depends on your config which IMHO is the most important part of determining why things may run slow. A good portion of software is designed to be all things to all people so performance is not necessarily the first consideration in design (contrary to some popular belief). Having a good PC build can help to 'compensate' for less than stellar software design.I couldn't agree more about performance not being number one on the priority list of software coders. I also agree with configuration being important, but for the average user they should just stick with the defaults. (Or read the documentation. :D )

NOD32 should have been in my post as well. I liked it when it was version 4 (years ago), but when they updated to v5 it ran poorly on my system at the time. Not sure how v7 would be, but AV-test.org gave it 3.5/5 for performance so I probably won't try it again.

[GameTheory]

The better programs don't make any noticeable difference to performance -- I wouldn't really recommend turning off the background stuff. (I actually have 2 or 3 background programs that guard against different things -- my system runs plenty fast and I've tested it both off and on.) There are some settings you might want to tweak (like when you plug-in an external drive don't automatically scan the whole damn thing) and some processes you know are safe and unlikely to get hijacked you could put on the "do not scan" list. But if an anti-virus program is noticeably slowing down your system, that program sucks, that's all. Both Norton & McAfee have always been terrible. In general stay away from the products you get for free from your ISP or cable company or bundled in something else -- being bundled like that makes them lazy to make it perform better. If you are not computer savvy and just want a decent maintenance-free (as well as actually free) program, Microsoft Security Essentials does the job. (It will slow down your system for certain activities, but not bad.)

I am currently using Bullguard as my main anti-virus, btw, and am mostly happy with it. (I don't think it is possible for any such program to make me completely happy.) I also use something called "RUBotted" to make sure I don't end up on a botnet, and the HitManPro people also have a free product called HitManPro.Alert which will guard against certain type of browser hijacks and misdirections. (And I run a HitmanPro scan regularly to get rid of tracking cookies, etc that otherwise don't get blocked by my ad-blockers, etc.)

[DJofSD]

Here's a couple of reports for comparing most products:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/avc_sum_201312_en.pdf

http://www.av-test.org/en/home/

Remember, antimalware software is, at best, one step behind, always. They react to what the code writers and hackers do.

And no software is going to protect you all of the time especially when you do something not very smart.

[upthecreek]

Thnx for all the replies and input I just found out I only got 30 days free from McAfee(thought it was 6 months) so I'm going to back to Norton ,no trouble with it for 5 years
I have to have something do to multiple users,if was just me probably would do what was suggested

[judd]

have Kaspersky-- :ThmbUp:

[judd]

I dropped both of those awhile back. I now use MalwareBytes (https://www.malwarebytes.org/) and like it. It's compatible with the free Microsoft Security Essentials and finds PUPs (potentially unwanted programs) that the others didn't. It also has gotten good reviews.

I tried malwarebytes--it helped my computer speed etc

[DJofSD]

It does not make any difference whether you use Mcafee or Norton when Microsoft leaves the doors and windows open.

It's closing some of them. See: http://threatpost.com/emet-av-disclosure-leak-plugged-in-ie/108175