Norton Internet Security 2003

BB,

I don't know either. I do know that in an upgrade, the core registry files are carried along, which is how settings, etc, are kept. Which is why, the standard advice is to clean install an OS if there are problems with the current one, otherwise there is a good chance probelm(s) get "upgraded" as well.

Regards - Charles

 

The only thing I can say in regards to your thoughts is that my 98SE was and had been running ERROR free ( at least none that showed ) for several Months.

But at the same time I do agree that things do get carried over. Both good and bad.

The only time in quite some time that I have clean installed was when I did have ME. I knew full well better than to upgrade that. So that was a Format and start over NECCESSITY.

BillyBob

 

I would not call using Ghost ( or something similar ) as neither a waste of time or money.

Especially if if does as Christer states and has the capability of being used from DOS ( well at least floppys ).

And the created images are stored on other than the master HD. Which BTW the way is where I store any and ALL of my downloaded stuff.

It all seems like good common sense and good plannig for the day that the WHAT IF hits the fan.

And it is a plan that I am at this time striving to get set up for. But my first item of business is to get a new 3 1/2 inch floppy drive. Right now I can not boot from it. I need to use a backup plan called CDROM. Actaully the CROM is quicker anyway. But if it fails I am SOL. Big Time.

And I am VERY lucky that I did not need such a plan when our power went out.

And further more. Anything that can be done to backup what Windows might or might not do is in my way of thinking GREAT planning.

BillyBob

 

Hey Christer,

"....but the load on system resources is 0 (zero) since it doesn´t need to be installed on the system at all. "

I was thinking that Chost operated the way GoBack does.



BB,

I didn't mean to imply that using Chost was a waste of money or time.

Regards - Charles

 

I didn't mean to imply that using Chost was a waste of money or time.

I do not think you did either. That was just my own thinking as I have actually read and/or heard people say it is.

It may be similiar to Partition Magic.

But you do have to install PM first. But once you do and make the two Floppys you can un-install PM from the HD and do everything from the two floppys.

But from what I read you do not have to install Ghost and cna also make a bootable CDROM.

I gotta read a little more on it.

But I think that Christer will agree that in some ways it is just like SR. It must be kept up to date.

Make major changes. make new image.

BB

 

BillyBob

BillyBob...here is an analogy: Win 98 and ME are like driving a big Ford truck. Very dependable and sturdy, but limited as to how fast you can drive and turn the corners. XP, on the other hand, is a sportscar. You can make XP do an amazing amount of otherwise cumbersome tasks in a few clicks if YOU DO NOT TRY TO DRIVE IT LIKE A TRUCK.

If you hate XP, dump it. Go back to your old OS and sell your cd. No one has to put up with anything that does not work for them. Express your opinion with your wallet, and buy a Mac.

As for Norton, if it is properly installed and configured, it works unobtrusively in the background and does its job. There are many alternatives if you do not like the product. I depend on it, and it has not let me down, so I'm sticking with it. You say it is a resource hog, perhaps you need to upgrade your hardware to handle it. I don't see it slowing anything down- my computer is a point-n-click, no matter what is running, or how much. I am a "power user ", and I don't have the problems you described. What exactly are you trying to do with your system, anyway? Why is it failing so much and you need to depend on SR? Or Ghost? I just burn cd backups periodically "just in case" and I can't remember the last time I needed to use SR except for when I was experimenting with the freeze problem. If it is not making restore points, check your settings. Maybe you have not allowed it enough space or you haven't got the frequency set at the default 24 hour interval. ( Perhaps this is because you didn't do a clean install. I would not even bother putting an "upgrade" on anyone's computer.- I would wipe it and start fresh.) So what intensive things are you trying to do on your comp that is causing it to disappoint you? 5000 posts on the board doesn't seem like a strain on a 98- why don't you just go back if you are unhappy?

I think XP (well, Pro anyway) is reliable and capable. I like the extra features, and I like the networking capabilities. I have been using it since January of 2002, and I am satisfied. But if it doesn't fit in with your style, for heavens' sake, dump it. It's your computer, and you should fix it up your way. BTW, why do you dual boot anyway? XP is backwards compatible- why keep another OS? Perhaps switching back and forth has got you frustrated with XP because you haven't entirely given up the "truck" mentality.
Cheers from Ohio,
Johanna

 

Johanna

I wrote my reply in answer to this from you.

there is no other software other than Symantec's (that I know of- correct me if I am wrong!) that can boss M$.

Not that I think you are wrong. But just to say that there is other software that does the job just as well.

In 98SE When I dumped Norton Products I went from 87 to 91 0r 92 free resources. And NONE of it was on auto other than AV and Firewall.

AVG6 and Kerio never dropped free resources at all.

Plus that the BOSS of M$ ( on my machine anyway ) is sitting here writing this reply.

Win 98 and ME are like driving a big Ford truck. Very dependable and sturdy, but limited as to how fast you can drive and turn the corners. XP, on the other hand, is a sportscar. You can make XP do an amazing amount of otherwise cumbersome tasks in a few clicks if YOU DO NOT TRY TO DRIVE IT LIKE A TRUCK.

I am absolutely NOT interested in speed. I will settle for the Ford Truck. And I have never found SE to be limited in speed. Yes on the other machine it is not as fast because it is on a 500mhz CPU with only 128meg of RAM. While this machine is a 1.2 CPU with 256 meg of RAM. Those things make more of a difference ( a lot more ) in speed than SE itself does.

As to Norton. Whether that works well or not has a LOT to do with the individual user and/or the individual system. Norton System Works NAV and NIS ( not in together of course ) did nothing but cause me problems. Norton left. Problems left. Norton is not, never has been and never will be suitable for all systems/users. Neither will AVG7 or Kerio. But for me they work fine.

As to SR I am thinking along the same lines of an overtop install. But SR is no problem anyway. I can do without it. I can make my own RP anytime. And like yourself I have only needed it when a software install went wrong. I think other than for test purposes I have only really had to use it once.

And I would not think of a clean install unless problems were present that I could not fix. The only one I did format and start over was when I had ME. I would have been a complete Jacka** to put anything over it as it was loaded with problems.

Plus by putting XP over SE I think I held on to some older DOS/Win3.1 or Win95 programs that I may not have been able to re-install after a clean install of XP. I do not know there.

So there are advantages and sis-advantages ot and overtop install.

I also think XP Pro is relable and capable. But so is SE. Win98 SE also has good Networking capabilities. Before I got XP we used to play Golf with a Friend Canada. He had XP Pro. We had 98SE, and NO Problems playing. In fact most of the time my machine was waiting for him. But at that time it was his machine in general not XP. Now that he has a new machine things are much better. This past week he did not know it ( and I never told him ) I was using 98SE. HE saw no difference in play and neither did we. It was just as fast and solid as if I were using XP.

The Games that my Wife and I play via the LAN worked just as well in SE as they do in XP.

The BIGGEST improvement was when I went from a 8 meg video card to a 64meg. NOW THERE was a HUGH jump in preformance. I did that while I still used SE. The hardware involved makes as much difference as anything in how and OS behaves. Poor hardware poor preformance. Good hardware better preformace.

So it may not always be the OS that is to blame for poor preformance.

BTW. I am not Dual Booting. I thought about it then scrapped the idea completely. You are Right I do not need it.

If anything serious does go wrong I still have my 98SE HD to use. Which is plugged in at least once a week and kept updated. Just in case. And both systems are setup to use the same slave drive.

As to going back. If I did not have $199 invested. XP activated. and may well need it for newer software and hardware in the near future, plus the work that I do have in it I very possibley would.

And for those that are interested I do not hate XP. It is just that I do not find it any better than 98SE. All of the Extra Video, Audio and other stuff that it may be capable of doing I do not need.

Cheers From New York
BillyBob

 

Hi all.

A friend of mine had Norton installed. I suggested he go with avast!. Here's what he replied.

Quote.

By the way - Avast! seems to have solved three problems for me:

1.) After I uninstalled Norton, my computer ran noticeably faster; I haven't checked my hard drive read speed, but I bet it is now what is should be.
2.) Avast! scanned my computer and found a virus attached to one of my Canon printer drivers - when it deleted it and I rebooted - presto! - my parallel port was back
3.) My email connection doesn't seem to be timing out after an hour or so - everything is running smoothly

Thanks much!!

Unquote.

He updated Norton often and it missed the virus.

Giles

 

Hey Chiles,

The problem with the underlying premise is that the reverse can be true, NAV finds something Avast didn't. I'm not defending NAV. There just isn't a perfect AV.

The way to handle this is to every once in a while go to a on-line virus check such a Trendmicro - Panda and so forth.

Or have a secondary AV to just do on-demand scanning and have another as the primary real time scanner.

I dual boot so have two brands checking the other OS's drive every once in a while.

BTW, the reason NAV was slow because it checked every read, write, open, etc on the drive, besides checking email, all of which is optional. Wonder what Avast is doing?

Regards - Charles

 

My ISP subscribes to "Postini ", which has a horrible privacy policy, but filters SPAM and catches suspicious email, then lets you delete it from their server. Because of that, Norton has never identified a virus on my system. You could say it's the equivalent of locking the screen door, and then latching the deadbolt. I like having two levels of protection.
Johanna