After running a 'smart scan' on Norton, it says that the PC is safe but needs optimizing and there's loads of files slowing it down which it can. Norton has a good block rate on fsecom.ru in the real-world tests. It is pretty consistent. Regarding the credit card and automatic. EDIT: if you do happen to be one of us who might download the occasional cracked game to try it out before buying, then yes, Norton is probably. Also, Norton's behavioural protection is just not as good as Kaspersky or Bitdefender. Not to mention the whole scandal with the crypto miner. It's very good in my opinion. According to AV-Test, it's a top product and in my view there's no reason to believe it isn't.
The best anti virus is common sense. If you have that, microsoft defender is good enough. Many recommend Norton Antivirus for its strong protection against malware, viruses, and other internet threats. They like its simple UI. Yet it seems to be rated high by 3rd party tests. I've never had an issue with it. In fact, if you go Google it, it's rated pretty positive. Norton is not good anymore and is commonly not recommended. If you are looking for a good at home antivirus look at Malwarebytes. Upvote 6. No, Norton isn't brilliant. Very heavy on system recourses (About mb of ram idle in my tests) and employ predatory marketing tactics. Norton is good as real time protection and it shows what's going on with computer. Plus it has great customer support with professional help. Norton is great, but I would always prefer Kaspersky or Bitdefender as main options. Yes, Microsoft Defender is enough if you don't browse sketchy websites. It's good if you want to pay $/year to have your PC less secure than normal windows defender, and have it lag a lot more since Norton is. I use Norton on my everyday laptop. Works perfectly alright. The older versions may be poorly designed, but I can assure you the newer versions. Crap protection, slows PC down, made to be extremely hard to remove from your PC, Pay for their reviews and #1 rating in review sites, predatory.
Norton is just awful. It misses a lot compared to other AV and have plenty of false positives on top of that. Microsoft Defender is good but not. Norton is actually good: it's lightweight, it does not scan intercept HTTPS scanning badly (MITM method with certificate) as most vendors do, it. Norton has been out a while and has been decent but has a lot of bloat that if you don't know how to set it up properly can slow down your system. Windows Defender and common sense are the best anti-virus, Norton is actually a virus. An antivirus is only as good as its "definitions", i.e. I would argue it's the most light weight, easy to use UI/UX design and most reliable antivirus. It literally protects your systems from inside. I have been using Norton since forever and while it's good, I seriously hate lately how it's constantly trying to get me to buy more and. The problem with Norton, and some other antivirus programs like McAfee is they suck down a lot of system resources and actively hurt performance. Norton is okay and provides good protection against malware, but Windows Defender is fine just fine for most users. Kaspersky and Bitdefender free or paid versions are way to go. ESET is also quite good however I don't have good experience with them so I never.
Can somebody suggest me a very good antivirus for my pc/phone? I'm currently using norton but i've read that it's not good at all. Do you have any good. It can definitely be pricey staying on with Norton, however, in terms of protection, it's been scoring high on AV tests. If not, Avira. I keep hearing people telling me that Norton isn't worth its weight in pixels. Personally, i believe that the best antivirus is common sense. Norton AntiVirus. I've scanned the computer and Norton says no threats found Is it any good? Upvote 0. Downvote 2 comments. For windows you already have an AV program. Windows has its own antivirus. Its just fine. Theres absolutely NO need to pay for norton. Its quite.
Norton 360 Review - Could it be the best antivirus?