A norton removal tool!!!

The easiest and quickest "Uninstall Tool" is actually an image created by e.g. Norton Ghost prior to installing "the Norton stuff" (or anything else). You would have to reinstall everything that was installed post "the Norton stuff" but that would probably be safer and quicker than using any uninstaller and a reg-tool.

So ...... ...... get Norton to kill Norton ...... ...... and a sound system backup strategy (imaging) which will make any and all uninstallations 100% and no less.

A friend of mine installed Pinnacle Studio 9 (?) which totally messed up his computer. Without a Ghost Image, it would probably have required a re-installation from square one but it took Ghost less than 10 minutes to roll back the system and that included tutoring from Yours Truly over the phone.

Christer

 

James,

Are You referring to Ghost? If so, You have missed a point or two ...... ...... !

savagcl,

The most recent version is Ghost 9 which is PowerQuest Drive Image in disguise (since bought by Symantec). I've never used it and will probably stick with Ghost 2003 (the previous version) for as long as possible. The reason is that I like to do the job booted to DOS simply because, if Windows is working or not, the procedure will always be the same.

BillyBob,

The two of us have discussed this before and as I understand (recall) it, You never tried Ghost.

Christer

 

James

Everyone is entitled to their own views, but it would be interesting/helpful if you would care to expand on that statement

 

PeteC,

Basically, I agree with You that the reason for a statement should be included. Otherwise, the statement is not informative. However, in this case, I don't think that would be necessary. This topic is on how to uninstall the stuff, not why it should be avoided. We've had enough threads on that topic ...... ...... !

Christer

 

The sales numbers speak for themselves. If Norton products were that poor, then their sales would have ceased long ago.

I use Norton AV with never an issue. Of course, I never use auto protect anything of any type, and I keep my NAV manually updated, and never get viruses because I scan everything manually.

I also use Norton Ghost and have images from before NAV was installed.

many people use System Works. I would never use it, but it's a great product for those users who do not wish to learn Windows and other utilities. These people want one-click easy solutions.

As for completely removing Symantec products, it can be done manually but is a lot of work locating all the files to delete and then deleting all references in the registry to Symantec, Norton, Live Reg, NAV, Live Update, etc. Much faster & easier to restore a Ghost image!

 

The key words when it comes to using Ghost Images to uninstall programs (roll back to a previous state) is planning the installation procedure.

I start by installing and fully updating the operating system. (All service packs and updates downloaded prior to the installation, thus avoiding premature connection to the Internet.) Create image #1.

Next, I install programs which are for keeps, such as Office, Acrobat, Photoshop and other applications. (All service packs and updates ...) Create image #2.

Next, I install external hardware and their drivers, such as scanner, printer and other USB devices. (All service packs and updates ...) Create image #3.

Only at this stage, do I install Anti Virus and Firewall software. Create image #4.

Thereafter do I install programs that come in new versions on a regular basis, such as Java, Ad-Aware, Spybot and other applications. When I feel the need, I create images of the current state, enabling me quick recovery in the case of "s*h*i*t hitting the fan ".

If I should buy new "for keeps software ", I install it and after a "shake down period ", will I roll back to image #3, reinstall the new program and take the "punishment" of reinstalling what was lost in the "roll back ".

Another benefit of this strategy is that if something should go wrong during an installation, I will never have to go back to square one!

Christer

 

BillyBob,
my planning is basically listing the installations in the order of probability of a future uninstallation. Programs and applications with the lowest probability go in first, those with the highest probability go in last. I group them according to low, medium and high because creating an image after each installation would be a slight overkill.

That is taken care of by "creating images of the current state, enabling me quick recovery in the case of "s*h*i*t hitting the fan" ".

Christer

 

I agree!

What it lacks, compared to Ghost (and other imaging software), is the ability to "roll back" to any state at which an image has been created. SR can only restore the current configuration ...... ...... if You're lucky, that is.

Christer

 

I'm certainly not a PRO but have a genuine interest in learning and making things as easy as possible. Some people say that I'm lazy ...... ...... but I don't think that's the same thing.

Things aren't as bad as that article might lead You to believe. When I started using Ghost 2001, I new only the basics about DOS and command lines but I got it right by using the manual which makes it OK for me. You actually don't have to know anything about command lines since the Norton Ghost Boot Wizard ads the command line switches for You when You have it create the boot disks.

I can not but agree, that Symantec Support could be improved but I have only used the web based support on one occasion, never the phone support.

You can make the use of Ghost as complicated or as easy as You like. I only use two command line switches: "-split=650" which spans the images for subsequent transfer to CDs (if the need should arise) and "-auto" to tell Ghost to autoname the spans.

Apart from that, the only thing You need to know is that the name of the image file(s) is according to the DOS convention 8+3 characters > abcdefgh.gho for the first span and abcdefgh.ghs for the subsequent spans. You can use the first 5 characters (abcde) to name the file(s) but the last three (fgh) is used by Ghost for autonaming. An image in three spans will be named abcde.gho, abcde001.ghs and abcde002.ghs. Not being aware of that could lead to trouble, I could explain what might happen but will refrain from that.

I have the target partition on a second local harddisk in a mobile rack which can be powered off. That's a good thing since a backup drive should be powered off when not in actual use.

People using a second harddisk in an USB enclosure have experienced some trouble with drivers but they have been overcome. It is also possible to store the images over a network on a shared server. I have no experience of neither.

If I have learnt to use Ghost ...... ...... then anyone can and if any problem should arise, then the links in my sig come handy!

Christer

 

savagcl,

I have successfully created and restored images, using Ghost 2003, on a system based on Athlon64 running 32-bit Windows XP pro. I don't know how it would work on a 64-bit OS but Ghost 2003 should do OK. In the future, when VISTA hits us, there may be a new file system which Ghost 2003 can not read. Ghost has to be able to read the MFT (Master File Table or whichever name the future equivalent will have) to be able to copy used sectors only. That will probably be the time when I get forced to "upgrade" to a more recent version of Ghost.

You'll have to take that question to the respective market department ...... ...... !

I don't know. My steam driven computer doesn't even have a DVD-burner.

I never create images directly to CD. On the few occasions that I have burnt to CD, I have used NERO to copy my split image files, previously created to a dedicated partition on a second HDD. (I use a dedicated partition with Ghost images only. The reason is a recommendation to never defragment an image file due to the risk of corruption.)

There is no Ghost 2005. Ghost 2003, which I use, is the previous version. Ghost 9 is PowerQuest Drive Image in disguise, since Symantec bought PowerQuest. I have never used Ghost 9 but have read some of the discussions on RADIFIED.

Ghost 2003 can be run from within Windows. It can be configured via a GUI but when it actually does the deed, it reboots the computer to DOS. When completed, it restarts Windows. I prefer to use the Ghost Boot Disks, created from the GUI > Norton Boot Disk Wizard, to both create and restore images. That way, I will be confident with the procedure when Windows doesn't start and as a consequence, no Ghost GUI. Ghost 2003 will find Your image files on HDDs and optical devices.

As far as I know, Ghost 9 does not run from GBDs. There is a recovery console on the Ghost 9 CD. A bootable CD/DVD can also be created.

Ghost 9 is a totally different critter. It can do incremental backups of the running system and it can also be scheduled. I've heard rumours about a Symantec article, describing how a running system can be imaged but I haven't seen it yet. Until I have been convinced that it is fool proof, I feel more comfortable with the basic procedure of Ghost 2003.

Well, I believe that one has been answered. I recommend a visit to the site and forum in my sig. A lot of knowledgeable people there who have "done it and have the T-shirt "!

Christer

By the way,

Introduction to Norton Ghost 2003

Norton Ghost 2003 Reviewer's Guide

Norton Ghost 2003 User's Guide

Norton Ghost 2003 Getting Started Guide

Norton Ghost 9.0 User's Guide