Customer Review

110 of 133 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars NIS2013 needs lots of rework - critical problems, September 14, 2012
This review is from: Norton Internet Security 2013 - 1 User / 3 PC [Old Version] [Download] (Software Download)
Having been a happy Norton Internet Security user for more than 10 years, this time my advice is to wait for more weeks or months till Norton fixes existing problems. NIS 2013 affects your windows 7 login and shutdown processes taking 40 to 50 seconds more than usual. your computer seams sluggish at times. Sometimes after the windows 7 login, the computer freezes due to ccSvcHst.exe problems. Have had some crashes with firefox and chrome because of Norton addin. The new interface is complex when it was so simple in NIS 2012. It makes you feel the product is still on Beta. NIS2013 version 20.1.1.2. My PC config is i7, 6GB RAM and virus free.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 4 customers

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 22 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Sep 25, 2012 12:44:33 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 16, 2012 10:48:52 PM PDT
Dave says:
How do you know you don't have a specific problem with it on your computer? I have none of the issues about which you speak. Works beautifully. The GUI is changed a little bit, for me aesthetically for the better, but that's a matter of personal taste. The changes from 2012 are insignificant. I don't really see much more than cosmetic changes. Maybe it is a little faster, but that might just be placebo effect with an upgrade since I haven't had a chance to use it long enough to make a fair evaluation in that regard. From what I understand, the product will no longer have yearly names, and will just be upgraded as Symantec seems fit with updates, and revisions as appropriate. People will just buy Norton Internet Security and pay for their yearly subscriptions and be able to update to the latest software version as long as their subscription is in good standing. Makes sense!

The crash of Chrome due to incompatibility with Norton has been a long known problem, and it seems that Symantec and Google can't get their respective acts together in that regard. The problem is easily solveable by just removing Norton from the Extensions section of Chrome (Wrench/Tools/Extensions....either disable or delete Norton!) Works like a charm!

Some people have problems with Outlook crashing due the presence of Norton Antispam as an add-in. If that be the case, in Outlook 2010, go File/Options/Addins(left pane)'Manage Addins and uncheck the Norton box which will also eliminate it from your main Menu bar.

Thankfully, I notice that Norton Upgrade does not seem to re-add their extension either in Chrome or Outlook, if you have removed it, but maybe not at all unless you select it as such, but I can't evaluate that since I already had made the exclusion. If you have Antispam activated in IS settings, it will still function in other roles, particularly antiphishing, so it's better to deactivate Norton in the area where it causes trouble, rather than globally disabling it in IS's settings.

One thing that has been reported as a bug is that on some machines, Version 2013 loads slowly into the Sys Tray and you have to wait maybe 30 seconds before you can access it on your desktop. I have one computer where that is the case, whereas, on another, it loads normally, both with the same settings. It doesn't interfere with the computer's function in terms of slowing it down, and really isn't important unless it annoys you just by not being so spiffy loading as 2012. If you have the 2012 version, you can uninstall 2013(use the Programs/Norton/Uninstaller rather than Add/Remove programs), and reinstall your version of 2012 without any problems. You can elect to save or remove all your settings in the process. Type in the corresponding key and your subscription, which is not tied to the version, will be immediately updated as to time remaining. I've heard that Symantec is aware of the problem in 2013 and "is working on a solution"! Truthfully, this minor glitch, in itself is in NO way a deal breaker or worth the loss of a star, at least from my perspective, but I respect that it may be intensely irritating for some people as the forums are full of complaints about this!

Posted on Sep 26, 2012 1:34:34 AM PDT
I received my brand new, high powered laptop yesterday. It was, of course, completely clean with absolutely nothing on it other than what was loaded by HP. It came with the 60 day free trial of Norton Internet Security and IE 9. The computer it replaced is several years old with a smaller hard drive, a slower CPU and exactly half the memory. I plugged it in, went through the network and internet setup and connected. IE 9 took more than a minute to load. I then updated Windows 7 and exited. I expected a lag when the computer shut down to complete the update but it was very long - much longer than with my old machine. Then the machine acted as Joe Brawn described - it became sluggish and froze repeatedly. I have not yet added Chrome and Firefox and won't. But I did load Outlook. After loading it, I imported email, contacts and calendar from my backup file and everything seemed ok. I opened a message and outlook froze solid. I had to use task manager to close it and, when I opened it again I got the message that Outlook had determined the problem to be the Norton add-in and asked if I wanted to disable the add-in. I did and the problem has not repeated itself. I don't have any other direct proof that it is Norton that makes this brand new machine run noticeably slower than the old one but I can't imagine what else it could be. I'll be replacing it with the security suite I've used for the past 6 or 7 years.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 26, 2012 10:26:42 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 26, 2012 10:28:21 AM PDT
Dave says:
That Outlook crash with the Norton Antispam addin activated is well known, and I always make sure that all addins to Outlook are deactivated.

I have not noticed any apparent slowdown of my computer by Internet Security, although, admittedly I have not run a full installation without it. A while back, on a different computer, I did take Norton off and installed Webroot which has a much smaller footprint on the computer, and I didn't notice any difference in computer response when compared to that with Norton installed.

My current build is extremely responsive and nimble, so Norton IS 2013 can't be interfering significantly with its function. To reference your comment on IE9's loading time, my IE9 loads in about 1.5 seconds.

BTW, if you use Chrome for a browser, disable the extension that Norton adds to it, aw it will periodically crash Chrome!(also a well-documented problem). Norton though isn't the only security type software that can interfere with other software on the computer. I had somewhat similar problems with Spyware Doctor and finally abandoned it because of annoying incompatibilities. When you think of all the complexities of software and functions performed on a computer, it's quite amazing that it works as well as it does with relatively few problemmatical interactions, and those have been improved immeasurably over the years from the "good 'ol days"!

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 26, 2012 10:39:00 AM PDT
I never know who to blame - Microsoft or whoever is providing the add-in. But, you're right - i's all magic. Back when I worked on the CDC 6600 as customer engineer the kinds of things being taken for granted today were utterly unimaginable.

I found other problems with Chrome and have stopped using it entirely. And I didn't see the advantage of Firefox. Netscape is no more o there's no longer a real protest vehicle. As much as I hate to admit it, I've defaulted back to IE.

However - I've been using Kaspersky for years and just ordered it to replace Norton. My bigger question which I guess will never be answered authoritatvely is - "with the advances in security in Windows generally and other software particularly, do we still need a separate "security" suite?

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 26, 2012 11:20:57 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 26, 2012 11:22:44 AM PDT
Dave says:
That's a good question. I think with the payola, and conflicts of interest, it's hard to count on reviews to reassure us that the third parties' security software will not be needed. There are obviously a lot of bucks at stake here, but to distill things down to the least complicated is clearly the best. I have some software required for VPN usage with our hospital's records and when it's active, it makes Photoshop throw a bright white screen as it loads...most annoying. I wondered why it was acting that way, and only serendipitously stumbled on that specific causative interaction. If I disable it in the Startup in MSCONFIG, Photoshop loads normally, but the VPN software is intrusive in the fact that if you launch it to enter the VPN, it automatically re-enables itself in the the Startup Folder, so you have to go back into MSCONFIG each and every time to disable it, after VPN usage, which I do because I use Photoshop so much. No big deal here, but just another example of what we are talking about.

Actually, I love Chrome. I've used IE, Firefox, Safari, and Chrome, and have settled on the latter. I like the Cloud storage of settings and being able reinstall all preferences, bookmarks, not just with reinstallations on this computer, but others that I have. It's synch feature, it that regard has been a little buggy in the past, but they seem to have cleaned up their act on that score, and have had no problems. I guess it's just a matter of personal taste as to which browser's format one is attracted. IE has improved a great deal over the years, I think somewhat related to the competition that exists out there in alternatives. Safari does not run as well on Windows as it does on MAC, no surprise there. Same used to be true with iTUNES, but that has gotten much better lately, and with a fast CPU on a PC, it's now virtually equivalent, at least on my machine.

Posted on Oct 4, 2012 2:27:42 PM PDT
Joe I agree with you 100%. I am a Electronic Engineer and Computer repair service. I also have a web site where I repair computers online and I am now 67 years old and have used Norton for many years. The Norton 2012 done the same thing when it first came out but Norton fixed it in about 3 or 4 months and I am staying with Norton 2012 as long as I can. I tried the 2013 on my computer and it was so messed up it did not even put a desk top icon on my computer. Also it has no side bar icon because it was made for Windows 8 which to me that is another big mess of trouble. I guess MS will fix it later tho. But for not I think I will stay with Norton 2012 and I would hope that everyone does until they fix it. I forgot to say I install Norton on my client's computers but it will not install on a XP at least the XP's I tried to install it on it had problems and it could not fix it's self like Norton is so great for doing. I give Norton 2012 a 5***** and Norton 2013 a 1*

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 4, 2012 4:19:50 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 16, 2012 10:51:05 PM PDT
Dave says:
Mr.Thomas:

With all due respect to your stated credentials, I have had absolutely no problems with Norton 2013. In my experience to date, all I notice is a different GUI which they obviously have to do look periodically to look "new and improved". That, excepting slow initial loading of IS 2013 into the SYS tray on one of my two computers, as I mentioned previously, above, which is a very minor nuisance and doesn't affect the performance of this software, or the computer. How one receives this change is quite obviously personal.

Dave

Posted on Oct 6, 2012 7:33:53 PM PDT
Randomness says:
The "slow initial start-up" is a known issue, it's due to changes of the "boot-up scan" module. From what I've seen in the official forums for this product, Symantec said that they are supposedly working on improving this, but it is unknown when they will actually fix it... So yea, it is a good idea to wait some time until Symantec fixes that (and other issues).

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 7, 2012 11:04:46 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 16, 2012 10:54:10 PM PDT
Dave says:
Strange, on two different computers, one an ultrabook and the other a high end desktop, I have noticed no difference whatsoever since upgrading to the newer IS engine. On my second desktop, I do notice the "slow initial startup", as you say, but, in my view, who cares? It doesn't affect the functioning of the program or the computer at large, and is just a matter of waiting 30 seconds max. on that particular computer.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 7, 2012 12:08:00 PM PDT
You probably paid extra for the handmade edition with the "turbo" option. Others of us opted for the cheapie edition that has the popup that says, "click here to upgrade to the turbo edition for superior performance. Click here if you don't want to be reminded again."

Mine is runnng faster now that I've disabled one of the features that attracted me - email protection. But, Outlook seems to be doing pretty good in that regard. And I never open attachments automatically, I never respond to email from people I don't know and I immediately block junk mail senders. I guess I don't need Norton for that. I also disabled it in all three browsers but they seem to be doing pretty well at protecting me on their own - I've become so used to pop ups that they no longer anger me and I simply pop 'em back down.

Anyway, I'm not sure what Norton's doing for me any more since it has nothing to do with email or surfing. I've still got about a month left on the trial that came with the new laptop. And I see I can buy it pretty cheap here so I may do that. But I really don't see the value - maybe I'll try MSE first. I've heard good things about it and some gurus are wondering why buy an antivirus suite when Microsoft is giving a good one away?
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›

Review Details

Item

Reviewer


Location: Florida

Top Reviewer Ranking: 148,358