dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
854
Husker71
join:2012-01-11
Belleair Beach, FL

Husker71

Member

[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...

cowboyro
Premium Member
join:2000-10-11
CT

cowboyro

Premium Member

I love it!
It is one of the reasons for which I get support calls... Good for my side business

DC DSL
There's a reason I'm Command.
Premium Member
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC

1 recommendation

DC DSL to Husker71

Premium Member

to Husker71
Industry Wisdom: If it's a CA or Symantec product, get rid of it. Fast.

thegeek
Premium Member
join:2008-02-21
right here

thegeek

Premium Member

said by DC DSL:

Industry Wisdom: If it's a CA or Symantec product, get rid of it. Fast.

this

and replace with eset

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536

Premium Member

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?

Bamafan2277
Premium Member
join:2008-09-20
Jeffersonville, IN

Bamafan2277 to Husker71

Premium Member

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 DSL
There's a reason I'm Command.
Premium Member
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC

DC DSL

Premium Member

For personal or small-site purposes, MS Security Essentials is just fine.

thegeek
Premium Member
join:2008-02-21
right here

thegeek to dvd536

Premium Member

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 DSL
There's a reason I'm Command.
Premium Member
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC
Actiontec GT784WN

DC DSL

Premium Member

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...

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536 to thegeek

Premium Member

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
pablothespic
join:2003-05-04
Winter Park, FL

pablothespic to Husker71

Member

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)