The Norton products, including Norton 360, Norton Antivirus, and Norton Security, are consumer antivirus and privacy protection products. Features include password management, VPN, dark web and credit monitoring for individuals, and cloud backup for PCs.
The biggest advantage that MSF and SCEP provide over Norton is: One: Far less client overhead required. Both Norton and McAfee are highly intensive client side when in use. Two: We've had far better luck using the Microsoft system with its detection capabilities, versus the …
Password manager is great and it is a life saver as I hardly remember passwords. Symantex Endpoint protection was used by my organization and it was silent, great except that system used to halt when the scan was happening
Updates are better in Norton. Support is always greater with Norton. The interfaces are totally different and it is so easy to use Norton. Th cost of renewal is also better in Norton compared to McAfee data center security suite.
I actually have been victimized avast at no cost and it slowed down my entire laptop and it hangs every time I scan the system for threats. This frustration created Pine Tree State to switch to Norton.
I have found Norton doesn’t slow down a computer as Avast antivirus has done. Avast is also not so much pocket-friendly as compared to the Norton, which is available at a very reasonable price which is highly affordable for me. The basic reason to Choose Norton on any other …
It is the most recommended antivirus because it is the most virus detected and eliminated with a very reliable heuristic, great protection guaranteed, great spindle facility, real-time protection against viruses, eliminates everything easily, is easy to install and easy to …
Using a hosted model, we know we are always getting the best core cybersecurity, but for the endpoints, we don't need something as complex as FireEye, and we wanted more than Lookout was able to provide. Lookout was terrific, and it came already installed with many of our …
We liked the pricing of Norton better. Also, it was more reliable in finding suspicious attachments and phishing emails than Avast was. Lastly, it ran better on our machines. The feedback we got from our pilot testing batch was very positive and that is what made us take the …
I prefer Norton but I dont think there is a huge difference in quality between the two. Kaspersky has some extra features that are nice (but not must haves) and the price difference is negligible.
User-friendly interface (it's not just AV and users who were interacting with the product), performance, resource usage (most of the computers were not very fresh and that factor was very critical), efficiency, it shouldn't be just sitting on a PC - it should protect it, what …
Our go to product is Webroot. Unlike Norton Internet Security it is built for MSP's that need multi-tenancy options. Webroot also does not need to be installed on a server (like NIS) and it uses much fewer resources on the endpoints. Norton is licensed annually, Webroot is …
Other security products have their own strengths and weaknesses but Norton Internet Security does very well in terms of performance and working with Android OS devices. While past versions were known to be performance hogs, today's incarnation of the security program is well …
Norton 360 has a better detection rate as well as remediation rate than the others I have used. It also does not affect the computer resources if configured properly. It provides an all in one solution that is easy to configure for the novice user and provides easy to review …
In large deployments, I have found Microsoft Forefront to be very effective at combating the majority of threats faced by our users. It provides the base platform for catching threats that would otherwise threaten our users and their data. If you have an environment that is under constant malware threat, then a secondary program may be needed as required.
For a stand-alone business this should do the trick, but if using across multiple clients (multi-tenancy not an option). Default settings within the program will cause performance issues if not tweaked, meaning someone with networking experience may be necessary. Not ideal for MSP's unless they only have a few clients, as the manageability must be done within "the walls" of each company.
I did renew it before because support is great and cost is great. I believe that Norton has a very long experience in what they do and they are doing a great job with all the updates they provide and the work they are doing. Moreover Norton is going in the right direction for sure.
User interface is excellent. The green tickmark in the tray ensuring everything is undercontrol is so satisfying. I have turned on Auto updates so, I am not bothered about unnecessary download updates popup
The biggest advantage that MSF and SCEP provide over Norton is: One: Far less client overhead required. Both Norton and McAfee are highly intensive client side when in use. Two: We've had far better luck using the Microsoft system with its detection capabilities, versus the others. Three: It is tied right into the Microsoft updating system, which provides central updating capabilities of av/mal/windows updates.
User-friendly interface (it's not just AV and users who were interacting with the product), performance, resource usage (most of the computers were not very fresh and that factor was very critical), efficiency, it shouldn't be just sitting on a PC - it should protect it, what was perfectly done with that product.
Poor performance against Spyware and other threats despite claiming to act against them (recognizes very few and eliminates less) It is limited to viruses.
Regular blocking of incoming scripts (in front of other antivirus)
Little or almost no compatibility with the Windows XP Firewall, but they are involved.
