Husker71
join:2012-01-11
Belleair Beach, FL | [complaint] CA Security Suite This application is garbage! It took me 2 hours to install it and my Outlook mail and IE9 were both inoperative. The RR support guys don't know much about this and couldn't fix it. I de-installed it and went back to MS apps... |
|
|
|
| I love it!
It is one of the reasons for which I get support calls... Good for my side business  |
|
 DC DSLThere's a reason I'm Command.Premium
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC
kudos:2 | reply to Husker71
Industry Wisdom: If it's a CA or Symantec product, get rid of it. Fast. |
|
 thegeekPremium
join:2008-02-21
united state
kudos:1
 ·Suddenlink
·NPG Cable
| said by DC DSL:Industry Wisdom: If it's a CA or Symantec product, get rid of it. Fast.
this
and replace with eset |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by thegeek:said by DC DSL:Industry Wisdom: If it's a CA or Symantec product, get rid of it. Fast.
this and replace with eset What makes eset so much better than norton?
--
Oh YES! let me drop everything i'm doing regardless of who it affects to deal with your petty little problem! |
|
| reply to Husker71
I have been running Panda for several years now and love it. CA, Norton & McAfee are more resource hogs than the protection they offer. |
|
DC DSLThere's a reason I'm Command.Premium
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC
kudos:2 | For personal or small-site purposes, MS Security Essentials is just fine. |
|
thegeekPremium
join:2008-02-21
united state
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Suddenlink
·NPG Cable
| reply to dvd536
said by dvd536:What makes eset so much better than norton?
norton is designed for the average person. it is a resource hog, partly because it has to have a big glorious gui for the average user. the average user sees a plain and simple gui and thinks it's an inferior product.
eset is simple, uses little resources, and just works. the setup can be too much for the average user, but considering this is a tech sight i automatically assume people here can handle the simple setup on the plain gui eset uses.
thank being said, i have noticed over the past few years that eset has started to evolve into having a big glorious gui (not any where near that of norton however).
this is all based on personal preference. i have not performed my own studies on the efficacy of either product. i have seen several studies that put each product in front of the other. i've used eset for several years and i like it therefore i recommend it to others. |
|
DC DSLThere's a reason I'm Command.Premium
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Covad Communicat..
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by thegeek:norton is designed for the average person. it is a resource hog, partly because it has to have a big glorious gui for the average user. the average user sees a plain and simple gui and thinks it's an inferior product.
A glorious, pretty GUI does not in and of itself mean a product is a resource hog...it's whether the programmers have the ingenuity and competence to figure out how to code it efficiently.
I have seen far, far too many contemporary apps that do less than some of the stuff I developed in the '70s and '80s for microscopic memory and disk space environments...yet require like 500mb on disk and have runtime working sets north of 300mb. Modern programmers could care less about memory or disk, and even less about whether they are actually writing efficient code. Lots of excuses for why it's not possible to use less...and then outright denial when I can show them working examples of stuff that does what theirs does far more economically and efficiently. Seriously...there is no excuse for a simple data entry form needing a gig of memory and a CD's worth of space. If only we could force programmers to have to make incredible stuff happen with all of 64K working memory...
--
"Dance like the photo isn't being tagged; love like you've never been unfriended; and tweet like nobody is following." |
|
dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | reply to thegeek
said by thegeek:norton is designed for the average person. it is a resource hog, partly because it has to have a big glorious gui for the average user. the average user sees a plain and simple gui and thinks it's an inferior product.
eset is simple, uses little resources, and just works. the setup can be too much for the average user, but considering this is a tech sight i automatically assume people here can handle the simple setup on the plain gui eset uses.
thank being said, i have noticed over the past few years that eset has started to evolve into having a big glorious gui (not any where near that of norton however).
this is all based on personal preference. i have not performed my own studies on the efficacy of either product. i have seen several studies that put each product in front of the other. i've used eset for several years and i like it therefore i recommend it to others.
Have you tried norton lately? its not bloaty and slow like it was in the mid 2000s
--
Oh YES! let me drop everything i'm doing regardless of who it affects to deal with your petty little problem! |
|
| reply to Husker71
I had to deal with CA enterprise for the past 2 years until we ditched them thank God. They are horrible. There support people are incompetant (every single one). I had to call multiple times due to their software screwing up and quaranteening important bloomberg dll files and their software has also hosed some of our production servers. Do yourself a huge favor and dump them. Go with a free solution if you have as there are soooo many better products (like comodo or malwarebytes) |
|
