The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    McAfee vs. Norton

    Discussion in 'Security and Anti-Virus Software' started by dforce66, Jul 30, 2008.

  1. dforce66

    dforce66 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    I'm getting a new laptop (Dell 1530) and I'm trying to decide between Norton and McAfee for my virus protection needs. Which is better in terms of being less of a system hog/having a million useless processes running? I know a lot of people here love the freeware but I've had bad experiences with them missing A LOT in the past so I don't really trust them anymore.

    Any guidance or advice would be MUCH appreciated, thanks!
     
  2. Ayle

    Ayle Trailblazer

    Reputations:
    877
    Messages:
    3,707
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    106
    I don't know about the latest version of norton but in the past that thing always has been a memory and cpu cycles hog on my computers, I switched to bitdefender and mcafee(got the enterprise edition trough my school) and never looked back since.
     
  3. danjohnson88

    danjohnson88 Notebook Guru

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    Never get McAfee or Norton, they are both system hogs and only give marginal protection. If you want a superb program that runs in the background, doesn’t hog any system resources and catches everything… get Eset Nod 32.
     
  4. Baserk

    Baserk Notebook user

    Reputations:
    2,503
    Messages:
    1,794
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Norton has taken it's time to build up it's image as a resource hog but to be honest, the newest version NIS2008 can't be named a resource hog anymore.
    I can't comment on McAfee, haven't used it in ages.
    You wrote, you want a program for your virus protection needs, so why not check out test results from independent outfit AV-Comparatives; link.
     
  5. jin07

    jin07 Notebook Deity NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    1,194
    Messages:
    1,889
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    If you're going for a paid program, you might as well get the best ones: NOD 32 or Kasp. I think a saw a free year subscription to NOD 32 somewhere around here.
     
  6. booboo12

    booboo12 Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    4,062
    Messages:
    4,272
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    116
    If you need to choose between Norton and McAfee, get Norton. Ever since NIS 2007 they really have made a turn around, while McAfee has quickly become the "Norton of old." - throwing in features just because they can..
     
  7. Hiker

    Hiker Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    448
    Messages:
    1,715
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    There' really no need to use either. There's excellent free programs that are low on resources. See the free security software thread or my sig.
     
  8. Dook

    Dook Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    318
    Messages:
    2,301
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would also HIGHLY recommend another program, such as NOD32 or Kaspersky.
     
  9. KarenA

    KarenA Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    81
    Messages:
    565
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Past experiences with Norton will still keep most people away from the AV no matter how good the program is now, I think. :( (The same goes for McAfee)

    For pay AV, go with Kaspersky Internet Security. Definitely worth the prince.
     
  10. Garandhero

    Garandhero Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    262
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    nod32 +1

    it = best
     
  11. dforce66

    dforce66 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    How is Kaspersky on system resources? It sounds pretty good though.

    Hiker - I noticed in your sig you have 4 different programs...that's the same experience I had and I got tired of running 4 different scans every time I wanted to check something. As bad as Norton's reputation is, at least it did everything at once for me. But it was certainly a system hog.

    And NOD32 I've never seen in stores... is it only online?

    Thanks for all the feedback!
     
  12. stirfriedsushi

    stirfriedsushi Confuse a Cat LTD

    Reputations:
    60
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    NOD32 is the best, then kaspersky.
    they use the same engine but NOD uses it better.

    check cnet for reviews
     
  13. JCMS

    JCMS Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    455
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Norton 2008-9 aren't ressource hogs anymore, at least on Vista
     
  14. Baserk

    Baserk Notebook user

    Reputations:
    2,503
    Messages:
    1,794
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    No, they don't.
    Otherwise KAV would have the same advanced heuristic engines as Eset's.
    Eset and Kaspersky don't share their engines.
    Kaspersky engines are used by F-Secure, G-Data AVK and E-Scan though.
     
  15. THAANSA3

    THAANSA3 Exit Stage Left

    Reputations:
    171
    Messages:
    1,885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    I would beg to differ. ;)

    Seriously speaking, you really can't go wrong with either Kaspersky or NOD32. They are both really easy on the system and are great at what they do. Norton, contrary to a lot of the "resource-hog" talk it actually pretty decent recently. Apparently, they made a big effort to reduce how much of the system resources the program needs to run properly. Take this with a grain of salt, though, because I've never actually used it myself. I can from experience, however, advise you not to go anywhere near McAfee. I installed it onto my sisters' computer since it's complementary through the cable company, and it is absolutely terrible as far as resource consumption goes. It causes major lag when on. It even causes the startup to take forever. I was never able to use the computer when running a scan (quick or detailed). It's awful.
     
  16. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Mime with Tourette's

    Reputations:
    1,163
    Messages:
    3,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    I personally do not like either. And AV is near the bottom of my security arsenal. I would first choose a router, then a firewall (with program controls), then a browser, then configure my eMail client, .... AV and AS are way down on my list of things to concern myself with.
     
  17. KarenA

    KarenA Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    81
    Messages:
    565
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Kaspersky Internet Security uses little resources for me. And it does have antivirus, antispyware and firewall in one solution.
     
  18. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Lead Moderator Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    22,339
    Messages:
    36,639
    Likes Received:
    5,080
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Seconded. Norton/McAfee are both babysitters - they are bloated and require too much user intervention.

    I have been using NOD32 for years, and I just got their Smart Security suite for my new laptop. NOD32 works wonderfully on all of the computers in my house. It is completely self-managed and consumes a minuscule amount of resources - it adds basically nothing to start-up time and never bothers you for updates, etc. I have used many different AV softwares, and have found NOD32 to be the best. Though it is not free, this level of no maintenance and security do not come free.
     
  19. THAANSA3

    THAANSA3 Exit Stage Left

    Reputations:
    171
    Messages:
    1,885
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Why, if you don't mind me asking?
     
  20. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Mime with Tourette's

    Reputations:
    1,163
    Messages:
    3,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    I don't like to run Norton for a number of reasons. It tries to do too much, more than I want, and little of it as well as I want. It's update and scans slow the machine down. The updates replace enough of the actual product that they either require multiple update passes, reboots, or both.

    I do not like to run McAfee for many of the same reasons, but also because I did not like the interface at all.

    It should also be mentioned that the only viruses that actually got only any machine I was using were when those machines were protected by McAfee or Norton. I do not know if that is a result of the scum who write viruses specifically targeting these products or the negligence of the corporations (the PCs were company-owned) in keeping the products current.

    Again, on my own PC, I do run some AV (ZoneAlarm licensed a version of the Kaspersky engine) and some AS (ZoneAlarm AV has some of this, too, when advanced heuristics are enabled). I also left Windows Defender running. However, none of these ever finds anything. And once in awhile I download and install and run something like SuperAntiSpyWare or GMER and they never find anything, either. Therefore, my conclusion is that my computing habits, choice of browser and browser extensions and settings, firewall, and router are keeping these nasties out.