This is my first mac and I've always had virus protection on my computers. With my comcast internet I get free Norton security. I just noticed they have the option for macs also. Should I put it on my MBP or should I just leave it as it is.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Norton Security
- Thread starter paulh1991
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
NOOOOOOOOOO. Don't ****ing do that. Norton is almost malware itself, and there is no need for AV software on Mac OS X, since no virus exists in public circulation that could affect Mac OS X.
No need for virus protection on a Mac, theres not much to look for.
Mac Virus/Malware Info. Compliments of GGJstudios.
Mac Virus/Malware Info. Compliments of GGJstudios.
Read the link simsaladimbamba posted. Read it all. Then you'll understand why you shouldn't touch your Mac with Norton.
Don't even use it for Windows. Choose something else like Sophos, MSE, or Kaspersky. Symantec is a resource hog. Like I said, Symantec ruined Peter Norton's good name IMHO.
It has gotten better over the years. Still Kapersky or even the one the MS makes is better in my opinion.
I have done the research and I have run the tests (it will literally bring a system running heavy VMs to its knees, and this was a new loaded quad core as well not some stripped down bare bones). We used it at work and got rid of it due to resource intensiveness (although the latest versions are better than the version of years past). MSE is much better in regard to resources as is Kaspresky, and Sophos has one of the lower resource requirements/ usage and is highly regarded in the Corporate world. I have worked for numerous companies (I do consulting for a living) and none of them will use Norton for this exact reason (McAfee is just as bad if not worse).
I have... As I said, it has gotten better over the last few years. Now that they have moved to endpoint it is on par with the rest. That being said, they have a long history to overcome. I still like Kapersky and even the MS (free is good) better.
I respectfully disagree and find what you are saying quite contrary to everything I have read and experienced. It is extremely light on resources.
Like I said, with the exception of my company (we had a site license for 100 seats and dumped it for all 100 due to the resources being consumed), I have not seen one other corporation that uses it (and within the last 2 years I have worked directly on or seen through other employees at my company over 150 Fortune 500 companies) and none, I repeat none, will use it. I am in the QA business doing IT consulting, so I am no stranger to the inner workings of applications and software. I would like to know any big corporations that are using it, as I am interested (since every IT manager I have talked to has the same opinion I and others on here have). Norton has a bad rap and that is probably why people don't use it, but hey fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
I would be interested to read some of the reports you are finding to the contrary (and not just random posting on boards by consumers, but by people that are responsible for corporate accounts and security). I am not saying they aren't out there or challenging you, I would actually like to read them honestly.
I agree with most of this except the endpoint comment. We had endpoint and what an awful, bloated piece of software it was. Boot times were slowed as were most things we needed to do (email, launch VMs, etc). When we got rid of it I thought I had gotten a new computer it was that much of a difference.
If it is, it's been completely redesigned since I used it. I had used it for many years on Windows, but abandoned it for AVG after running benchmarks and determining that Norton was consuming up to 40% of system resources. When I ditched it, it was like buying a new computer. I've never looked back.
NNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Norton is freaking AWFUL and literally is malware itself (seriously on Windows you have to download symnrt, a symantec/norton removal tool even if you uninstalled it from add/remove programs. I have TONS of experience with Norton and Symantec since the places I've worked loved to use them despite the entire IT department (myself included since I am IT) 's cries for something else.
Oh and no offense Applescruff your completely wrong on Norton. Its still terrible. I sat for three hours on the phone with Symantec while they dodged my questions on why their crapware wasn't finding viruses that were infecting machines on our network (or why it would see them, but not remove them). I never did get an answer.
I've dealt with Symantec and Norton for over 10 years and its pure trash. Expensive, resource intensive trash.
And as others have stated you don't need antivirus or antispyware on a Mac, and on your Windows machine, get something better. Norton is literally useless and wont find viruses even if you have them (or it will find them, but only tell you about it and not actually remove them).
I challenge you to prove otherwise. Obviously you are a few years behind in your experience.
No, I'm not wrong at all. Do some research on NIS 2011 and get back to me. You're talking about things a few years in the past.
I was about to type a HUGE SPEAL on heuristics too before I scrolled down LOL. For a while there after one of its stupid updates it was removing a file crucial to outlook 0_0. That was a pain....
- Status