Norton Internet Security - dont renew online

asininity

jizzler wrote: »

would hate to see what is lurking on your computer then :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Actually nothing and I only ever use free security @rse speak out of???? yes!!

jizzler wrote: »

check out all the post`s from people on here with problems & see 9/10 what anti-virus they are running !!!!!!!! free = 0 same company between £25- 45 ? what product do you think would work`s best ?

Wrong! 9/10 these people have norton or mcafee followed closely by AVG (which really is rubbish). If you look closely the AV part is the same as the paid version they're only offering extras. Oh and if you look at avast the paid for version only have things home users wont use, wouldn't bother using, wont need.

Silly silly jizz.

anro15

The detection rates of all of them very between the years and months, so it is mostly down to personal preference. I keep going for the paid for version as it means only one app running rather than several (my laptop is a bit low powered and I hate more task bar buttons).

However, I do balance it by buying the serial code from ebay (1000+ feedback sellers only) and plugging it in to the download from the manufacturers site. I have the whole package (2 year, 3 licence) for around £12-14, feeling both smug and comprehensively protected.

asininity

You really should try MSE is resources are few!

Marty_J

jbreckmckye wrote: »

Currently, AV companies are already having to compete with free alternatives.

What free alternatives do they compete with?

Almost all of the free AVs are made by companies that produce a paid-for version too.

At any rate, I have no guarantee that others will pay for their AV products, nor can I be sure that, the internet being what it is, that information won't circulate if it turns out the paid-for product isn't all it's cracked up to be. I can either pay £30 and watch free use grow (assuming you're right), or pay nothing and watch free use grow. In the first case, I'm thirty quid better off. Game theory says I'm better off not trying to subsidize Avira.

If the paid-for versions aren't up to much and everyone stops using them, how exactly are they going to make a free version?

I'm puzzled, though, that we don't see you on the grocery board, complaining that the only reason 'own brand' items are cheap is that they're offering a less expensive alternative to the premium offers, and so, buy shifting business away from the market leaders, we're only promising ourselves more expensive jaffa cakes and gravy powder in the long run.

Your analogy might hold some weight if McVitie's made paid for Jaffa Cakes and free ones without the smashing orangey bit.

I'm also a bit puzzled that you've offered such a wide range of nebulous objections to free AV software. It looks to me as though your response isn't sincere, that you've instead made your mind up prematurely. I might be wrong, and I'm sorry if I am, but it certainly looks it to me.

I haven't offered any objections to free AV software. I use it on my Windows machines, and I believe I've said as much in this thread. I'm comfortable with the level of protection it provides, and I do recommend it to others. If I did decide I wanted more features, better performance, or a higher level of protection, I would pay for something that offered it.

What I am objecting to is the idea that (a) paid-for AV software is a total waste of time and (b) anyone who uses it is a sucker.

jbreckmckye

Marty_J wrote: »

What free alternatives do they compete with?

Sorry, I meant their competitors' free products

Your analogy might hold some weight if McVitie's made paid for Jaffa Cakes and free ones without the smashing orangey bit.

It's not a radically different principle. If we, as consumers, moved away from Smashing Jaffa Cakes towards Quite Good Jaffa Cakes, we'd put McVities out of business, clearing the way for Tesco to bump up their prices.

For a better analogy, see Procter & Gamble / Allbright & Wilson and their washing powders.

What I am objecting to is the idea that (a) paid-for AV software is a total waste of time and (b) anyone who uses it is a sucker.

Well, say that then. Paid-for AV software does have some features that might well be useful for certain people. But if someone buys an expensive product without shopping around, or really considering how a product does or does not suit their needs, they're a mug.

Marty_J

jbreckmckye wrote: »

Well, say that then. Paid-for AV software does have some features that might well be useful for certain people. But if someone buys an expensive product without shopping around, or really considering how a product does or does not suit their needs, they're a mug.

I don't think I'd put it in quite so unkind terms, but I agree with you in principle.

jbreckmckye

Yeah, maybe 'mug' is a bit unkind.

At any rate, I wonder: just how many people *need* anti-virus software? How many people couldn't move to Linux for anything that involved working on the internet / browsing, and just leave an 'offline' Windows partition for those instances where WINE won't cut it? It wouldn't work for everyone, but it's a thought...