[poorak]

The good:
New inbound port blocking to prevent worm intrusions; faster preinstallation scans; improved interface.

The bad:
Doesn't include a full-fledged firewall; real-time scanner doesn't look for spyware.

What's it for:
Protection from numerous Internet menaces, including viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and spyware.

Who's it for:
PC users who already run a firewall; current Norton AntiVirus 2004 users looking to upgrade.

Business use:
Multiple seat licenses let you protect all of the computers in your office.

Essential extras:
A good firewall.

The bottom line:
Norton AntiVirus 2005 is a tenacious virus fighter that, given its premium price, should also--but doesn't--include a firewall. It's a good bet for Norton users who want to upgrade, though.

[Advertisements]

I have personally userd Norton, not the 2005 version! but what i found out from previous versions that they are resource hungry and take lots of the CPU usage. I was told that the 2005 version is apparently lighter but I haven't tested it.

This is just from my personal experience.

[samiko]

I have personally userd Norton, not the 2005 version! but what i found out from previous versions that they are resource hungry and take lots of the CPU usage. I was told that the 2005 version is apparently lighter but I haven't tested it.

This is just from my personal experience.

[paulcomputerman]

I would not reccomend Norton 2005 for lower-end computers. Look at the rquirements of Norton 2005 and make sure you have all of them. Go to http://www.lavalys.c...p?pid=1&lang=en.

[poorak]

:idea:I hope everyone doesn't uses a mainframe computer and for the world to be securily and smartly protected you can't deny that NAV05 is best. . You ay rely on other netwrk solutions but once you apply NAV05 it got to be better than everyone put there.But the darker side that you might know is tht system becomes sluggish and slightly less fast . But to get onething you have to sacrifice the other thing .........

[Johanna]

I use Norton Intenet Security 2005, which includes the firewall, and I do not have any slowdowns or system resource problems. On a system with a modern (meaning 2Ghz or better) processor, Norton works effectively in the background. I used NIS 03 for a couple of years, though, and I miss my Norton Alert Tracker, affectionately called the "tattletale".

I agree with paulcomputerman that Norton is not a good choice for older computers.

Johanna

Edited by Czarina, 30 June 2005 - 01:41 PM.