[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Speed Is of Essence for Next-generation Symantec Products here

[RNR19952]

I have used Symantec Corporate products for years, but with the release of version 11 bloatware we switched to NOD32. Ironically I received a call from a customer yesterday who claims his NOD32 protected machine was infected! We had just switched him from Norton 360 to NOD32 at the renewal period. On the same day Symantec sent me an email claiming their version 2 of 11 was faster and required less memory than the original release. Who know's? In my lab NOD32 continuously outperformed Symantec version 10.1.6.6000, both in speed and threat PREVENTION, sure SAV would detect mostly the same things but usually after damage had occurred. Now I am eager to see this infected NOD32 PC, and what infections were actually found. I am also glad to see Symantec is finally listening to their customers, unlike most large corporations.

[Patronus]

It's funny that you swtich from a reliable product, to an inferior one. I will admit in the old days, NAV only found what was already infected. Now, it's just not the case anymore. Very few rare instances make it through the barrier. Realtime performance places a demand on the system, no doubt about that. However, you should've done your research and found that Norton 360 places a terrible burden on your system. PCWORLD reviews such programs. And as a matter of fact, NIS 2008 is better than 360. #1 next to Kasperky according to the tests by PCWorld Test Center. ESET NODD32 wasn't on the list. Anyways, you shouldn't upgrade your Internet Security software unless you have a computer that can "comfortably" handle it. Keep it at the current version. Symantec will continue support until it no longer sees a need to. Which is about 3-4 years. Whatever the minimum requirements are double it. If your system meets the above standard spec, then buy it.

[Patronus]

I also want to say, don't force a company to cut corners on something that is not broken. Symantec made references to quite a few aspects, instead of focusing on the amount of system resources it draws in realtime. Consumers should be wary of what they are asking. We're not talking about a new intel processor versus and older one.

Why on earth would you want to perform a turbo scan as they suggest skipping over trusted files. That's an invitation to trouble. I truly don't mind the install time. Like I said above if you've got the power, time is not your enemy. That to me is a sad complaint, as is the size of the program. With 320gb and 500gb now be the norm hard drives, who cares about space?

If anything, Symantec should allow for an option to shutdown the pc if nothing is found in the full system scan. Now that would be innovation.

I know I won't be purchasing NIS 2009 if and when I feel the need to upgrade. PCworld will test that theory.