Does Nortons Slow Down Internet Access?

[arthurking83]

5Gb?
Have they changed something?
Mine is 15Gb .. have to say zero input from me .. I rarely use it(don't really care for it either) but I do have some 'important' files I like to have multiple copies of.
My account info says 49Mb of 15Gb used.

[ameerat42]

It used to be 25GB. That's what I had. - Hmm, had! I wonder what it is now?
(Might have a look by and by )

[Jaded62]

Norton's paranoia and hearsay. This topic has been doing the rounds for years. Its like Land Rover and Toyota, PC and Mac, etc. Everyone has an opinion and a story of woe to tell.

Yes, no doubt it slows access but any antivirus checking files will have to do this anyway. The question is how slow and whether you can notice the difference. I suspect on a slow PC you would.

I've run Nortons on our family PCs for years with no dramas other than their annual renewal rip-offs. Seldom had virus issues and that with 2 teenagers downloading like mad. I do not run the Nortons browser add-ons, just the app in the tool tray. We also use the password manager which works well.

Currently we run here at home 3 desktops and 1 laptop W10 64 bit on mid to high specs and 2 laptops W10 low specs with no problems.

[ameerat42]

^Then besides just illustrating the same emotion as you decry, shed some hard specs on settings and the like
that might "correct" our wilfully wayward thinking.

Did you see in the posts that I cited an approx X10 difference in performance?

No matter what, a qualitative case for some significant effect on performance by Ns seems to have been made.

Arm-waving to stop arm-waving is not much of a counter-argument, no matter if backed up with testimonials.

[Jaded62]

Arm-waving to stop arm-waving is not much of a couhttp://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1490564nter-argument, no matter if backed up with testimonials.

Yes but arm waving makes me feel both part of the herd and apart from it

What settings would you like to see? With Firefox and Outlook running Nortons is idle with no load on the system.

[arthurking83]

Am, what you could(should!) have done to confirm the slowness, is to sue performance monitor(and or task manager) to see how much PC resources Nortons .. or any other program/service was using at the time of downloading.

At least see where the blockade was originating. Was it disk, or network, or maybe pagefile or whatever.

I've gone back through the thread(again) and didn't see anywhere that you confirmed that Windows Security wasn't running concurrently.
That is, whoever installed Nortons, did they .. or did it automagically .. disable Windows Security suite?

etc. etc.

[ameerat42]

AK.
Actually, apart from my mostly wailing and gnashing of teeth (and squaring!)I did some of that.

I checked the Ookla bandwidth meter (I H8 the term "speed test") and surprisingly found that it
was not so different from the "usual" I had come to suspect. It wasn't 47 down, but about 35.

Task Manager showed WiFi Direct doing "very little" >Ed: during dloads< AND all file downloads were
loathably slow, like about 90-100 Kbits/sec Umm, I don't remember the CPU and Disk figgers,
or if I even look at them.

Apparently Win Sec was not running at the same tome as Ns, because after removing the latter, I had
to attend to those settings. For my benefit, somewhere along the way Avast has slipped into the
installation and was running. For some time before I even put on SuperAntiSpyware I had "some"
protection.

So after all that, WS was back on and SAS, and then I removed Avast. That's all I can say/recall.

- - - Updated - - -

A point that has not been PUBLICLY STATED throughout:

Of course, this machine was straight from the store, and so an Acer installation
of Win and other software.

[Jaded62]

Of course, this machine was straight from the store, and so an Acer installation
of Win and other software.

If Acer are anything like Dell there could be issues there. We use Dell at work so I am stuck with the Dell/W OS foibles but at home I build my own desktops and use (to date) Asus laptops.

[ameerat42]

Same here for Asus and a critical eye for recent Dell laptops.
Their desktops have been good. - Had/used/knew people with
same over the past 2 decades or so. I have found Toshiba
satellites of more expensive build to be both good and fast, the
cheaper ones just being "good" and reliable. Lots of ppl I know
have a swathe of these. This Acer surprised me -antly, even
though it had "only" a late model I Core I5 (4-gotten details).

One thing good about it was - like Asus - not as much in-your-
face firmware apps, unlike Toshiba, which is the only other minus
for them.

[ameerat42]

Yes, Richard. Exactly the same files. I ended up dlding them onto an external drive and connecting that
before uninst. Ns.