RSSSymantec opens Norton 2009 products in public beta
By Tim Conneally | Published July 16, 2008, 4:05 PM
This week, Symantec opened the public betas of both Norton Internet Security 2009 and Norton Antivirus 2009, products which the company claims run faster and consume fewer resources.
The lighter weight and reduced resource consumption are thanks in part to what Symantec calls Norton Insight, or the ability for Norton programs to statistically determine which files are trustworthy based upon prior scans as well as the findings of other Norton community members. Trusted files are avoided in quick scans.
![Norton Antivirus 2009 "trustworthy" files](http://images.betanews.com/media/1800.jpg "Norton Antivirus 2009 "trustworthy" files")
Catering to resource-conscious users such as gamers, Norton 2009 products feature several options which pertain to its goal of "Zero Impact" performance. A less-intrusive Silent Mode has been added which suspends alerts and updates to prevent slowdown during games, movies, or presentations.
Immediately noticeable is the new user interface, which has been designed to simplify the navigation through the software's newly added features. Among these new features is the ability to monitor all devices on the home network. Each can be named and classified according to its type and IP address, and then be monitored for vulnerability and exploit simply by being chosen in the "home network" tab.
Anti-Bot and Identity Safety features have been added to the browser vulnerability protection which includes Intrusion Prevention Systems, anti-rootkit, anti-virus, and anti-spyware technologies.
Interesting. For me its going to be the digital footprint of this thing. last several versions of norton were resource hogs and monitored more then I cared to have monitored with little option to narrow that...
And if you wanted something to run like say Gotomypc or WinVNC, or Teamviewer, or any other type of remote desktop that was not the legally licensed remote desktop usage. Norton often pegged those as vulnerabilities, when they were not. As well as many tools for Voice communication, and Resource Archiving seem to get nailed all the time as security risks , but not viruses or Trojans. Just not wanted... How about I decide what I want on my machine and when I tell you its ok Norton Backs the hell off and stops saying Well ok but you really shouldn't you know.
If it uses more then 1/4 of the resources on a computer when idle, then it is still not even worth a look.
Score: 0
|I see that they fixed Cnet's complaint. They got rid of the brown and yellow interface. Thats a good thing but I felt that Cnet's complaint was a tad irrelevant to whether the product did the job it was supposed to.
2008 is working quite well for me. I have tried demos of
Kasspersky
Zone Alarm
Trend Micro
AVG
Iolo
and I am using Norton at the moment.
It gets to stay. I didn't have to pay for it though. I would yank it if it sucked. Most likely I would buy Zone Alarm because its cheap and works pretty much exactly the way I like. Not quite as its spyware and AV scans are separate if I recall correctly.
I had to get rid of Iolo which gave me BSOD's and the firewall couldn't handle bit torrent clients. At least it came out clean. Its gotten pretty good reviews so maybe its my PC it didn't like.
Kasspersky was OK except that I had it in manual mode. Don't do that. It gets really old fast. Should be fine in automatic.
For those complaining about Norton try the 2008. It works and its as fast as any of the others I tried. Less annoying than Trend Micro and its weekly scans run in low priority unlike AVG which made my system slow to respond if I was using when the weekly scan started.
I find it amazing how many sing the praises of AVG free with no anti-spyware while saying they got only few viruse or spyware attacks. If you got any it didn't do the wonderful job that was claimed.
Trend doesn't like hackerware. It had to go but might be a good choice for parents.
Kasspersky is one of, if not the best at detecting new malware. It costs more than any of the others though.
Score: 0
|Not directed at you Ethelred, in particular, but...
All this talk of resource-usage and good/bad GUIs is pointless if you don't have any data on how well the software actually works. I don't think enough people know about
http://www.av-comparatives.org
Personally, I agree with one of the other posters in that I wouldn't put NAV on a machine if I was paid to. However, I have paid for dozens of installs of Eset's NOD32 over the years (for small businesses). AV-Comparatives' results over the years have continually reinforced my faith in Eset and their software.
Data people. Data.
Score: 0
|Let's start with the fact that I am with Symantec - fair disclosure.
AV-Comparative and Virus Bulletin's VB100 both provide insight into virus detection. However, neither test provide much information on real-time detection of threats as they execute - i.e. they don't test IPS functionality or tools that hook into the browser to block drive-by downloads and related attacks. Also, neither tell you performance metrics.
In other words, they don't test performance or host or network IPS, firewall, application protection, vulnerability assessment . . . all important layers of security even on a home PC.
For performance results, you might want to look at PassMark's test of security products:
Vista results:
http://www.passmark.com/avreport_08_vista
XP results
http://www.passmark.com/...ormance-testing-ed3.pdf
Dan Schrader
Symantec
Score: 0
|AV-Comparatives and Virus Bulletin are only part of the bigger picture when comparing antiviruses. Performance is also important because antiviruses constantly monitor files, which affect the performance of the computer.
The past two years have been good for Symantec. They definitely listened to the consumers and made performance a major factor when revising their code.
If I were you, I'd give this beta a chance. If it doesn't stray from its current direction I may well dump my NOD32 license in favor of NAV 2009. No offense, but NOD32 is mediocre when it comes to cleaning and detection of malware. It's antivirus component and system resource usage is excellent, though.
Score: 0
|Will the beta versions be more or less buggy than the production versions?
Score: 0
|2008 version was a significant improvement over the nasty bloat of 2005/06/07. It wasn't particularly trim, by any means, but more on par with other AV/ISS solutions out there.
If 2009 trims down even more that would be fantastic. Many people have lost faith in Norton after it's pathetic versions over the last few years - be nice to get a decent product back on the shelves.
Score: 0
|Not even if they paid me...
Score: 0
|no this does not run "faster" than other versions and it does not consume less resources... all that is BS
Score: 0
|Thing is, I was a Norton Fan for YEARS!!! I swore by it. I am still a BETA Tester and I have gotten my invite to participate in this BETA which @ the end, gets me a free version of the package, but ever since the 2004 release, this page overall is so much BLOAT and a Memory Hog.
The 2003 Edition was the most complete / useful edition they had. It was everything from Antivirus and Ad-Blocking to Firewall. Only thing it missed was Spyware, but in 2003 Spyware was not that big if an issue yet.
Now they have made everything separate / optional, yet the BLOAT still goes on.
I will test it and take my free software @ the end, but I am now an ESET User! Best $80 I spent on Antivirus / Firewall software and has very little impact on system resources:
ESET Smart Security: http://fileforum.betanew...t_Security/1175818695/1
Score: 0
|NOD32 is, quite simply, the best AV available, but you can buy it for $40.00. It updates several times each day and the antispyware component also works very well. Norton isn't in the same league.
Score: 0
|I have to agree the Norton I still use today is 2003, and I love it. I just keep my Signatures up to date. The day they stop allowing me to update my signature subscription on this will be the day I start complaining about Norton Full time. Otherwise I tend to at least take a look at their next versions... Always seems it takes a few years for Norton to get everything back to perfect. Small footprint, Fast scans, and stable background monitor. As well as cutting down on the Bloatware. 2008 was very close IMHO. 2009 could be it... Lets hope...
Score: 0
|NOD32 is not the best AV in the world. I can attest to that because I am using it right now. It's cleaning abilities and detection of malware is mediocre (Norton easily beats it), but the antivirus component is excellent. NOD32's strong point is its heuristics, but that is less important nowadays. Solutions such as HIPS is more important now because they provide better proactive protection (e.g. whitelisting).
If this year's Norton does not stray from its current direction, it will be one fine antivirus.
Score: 0
|Bloat you say? From 2004-2006, yes. NIS 2007 was better, but 2008 is really the one that struck a good balance of performance and security.
If I were you I would've purchased NOD32 instead of Smart Security. It's firewall is really not that good. As for the antispam, I don't know since I don't get a lot junk mail.
Score: 0
|cooljim713 said:
"And - how long will this test last?" Do some reading. It is there for you to find out.
godzila said:
"aktivation key plss" Again, do some reading. Hint: You can download the demo.
Score: 0
|And - how long will this beta last?
Score: 0
|aktivation key plss
Score: 0
|The beta ends on 9/21 - the software will not function after that. If you enter your email address and download the beta from http://www.symantec.com/norton-beta/welcome.html (go to the NAV or NIS pagest depending on whether you want complete internet security or just malware detection) you will be sent an activation key.
You can post comments about the beta and read what others have to say here;
http://community.norton....category.id=public_beta
Dan Schrader
Symantec
Score: 0
|