Question about using ZoneAlarm Pro

Junkman · Oct 24, 2003

My problem was that it was conflicting with my Norton Anti Virus program with incoming e mail. I use Outlook Express and it was wreaking havoc to the point that I had to either remove the NAV or Zone Patrol.... this was an easy decission... the NAV was more important... I still have the Zone Patrol, but it is turned off.... If I were able to resolve these problems, I would turn it back on......... thanks

PineRidge · Nov 13, 2003

We use two way satellite here at the ranch. Because satellite is always on we have used Zone Alarm Pro from the start. I find it to be a very wortwhile product at keeping the hackers at bay.

CTyler · Nov 13, 2003

I have been running Zone Alarm since it came out and think its great. After setting up my router a couple years ago I continue to use it. The router seems to catch an block all the scans etc.. that used to pile up on the Zone logs. I like the outbound security that ZA provides.

The only trouble I had with ZA and Norton was on the live updates, just had to stop ZA, update, then start ZA again.
There was a problem with Norton that was broadcasting info which was another reason for stop/start on the updates. I did not want info being broadcast.

The GRC site is great, been on his mail list for years.

Trev · Nov 13, 2003

Junkman and CTyler,

My own personal experience has led me to never use anything sold by Symantec. I used to beta test for Peter Norton before Symantec bought them out, and it was a whole different ballgame back then. Now the company just seems intent on profits.

When people discovered the lower quality of Symantec stuff, the company retreated and tried to trade on the previously good name of Peter Norton again.. but it was just show. The quality remained low. Peter was a good programmer.. and hired good programmers.. and deserved his success and name recognition. I wonder if he regrets selling out to these people now.

I don't think I've ever seen a full install of SystemWorks, for example, that hasn't hosed the machine in some way. NAV sometimes updates and sometimes doesn't. Plus, I don't like spending my money on a company that I don't like.

I dunno, some people like NAV.. but if it were me I'd keep ZoneAlarm and dump NAV. Check out AVG 6 which is a free AV that a lot of us use. Works fine, frequent updates, and plays nicely with the other children. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Bob

dieselsmoke1 · Nov 13, 2003

Now it starts to make sense, Trev.

Norton was a first class product a few years ago, small footprint and very effective. However Symantec has morphed this into a bloated concoction that WILL wreak havoc on SOME pc's. I never knew "the rest of the story".

I build a few high end PCs as a hobby, mostly for local gamers, with hot boards, video cards, memory, etc. I don't put Symantec on these, burns too many resources, causes too many problems.

I actually own Systemworks, got it with another purchase, but don't use it. For those using Symantec happily, my blessings.

I've been using PC Cillin, but I'll check out AVG 6.

Bird · Nov 14, 2003

I guess things are a little different for us computer dummies. I don't doubt that there's something better available, but I'm running Norton SystemWorks 2002 and Norton's firewall, had no trouble installing them, and no known problems since, and my daughter just recently installed SystemWorks 2003 on her computer with no problem. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Trev · Nov 14, 2003

( I guess things are a little different for us computer dummies. I don't doubt that there's something better available, but I'm running Norton SystemWorks 2002 and Norton's firewall, had no trouble installing them, and no known problems since, and my daughter just recently installed SystemWorks 2003 on her computer with no problem. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif )

Yeah, Bird.. it works for some folks, and not for others. Shoddy workmanship. Should work the same on all supported platforms.

When I was beta testing for Peter Norton, I'd report a bug and it would be fixed the next day. Or I'd suggest a feature, and they would either add it or explain why they shouldn't the next day. They had me communicating directly with the lead programmer on a given project, etc.

When Symantec took over, I'd report a bug, and it would still be there on the next beta cut. I'd report it again. They'd say yeah, we know. When the final release came out, the bug would still be there. I finally wrote to Symantec and told them I was done beta testing for them.. a complete waste of time.

I dunno.. more power to those who have good luck with them.. and for the rest I suggest prayer. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Bird · Nov 14, 2003

Bob, I certainly don't doubt what you're saying, but I had to spend more time in the waiting room of the cancer clinic this morning than I wanted to (at least they have a pretty good assortment of magazines) so I was reading an article in the latest issue of PC Magazine and they were rating Norton's stuff pretty highly. Of course they were talking about the "2004" versions and of course mine's a little older than that.

dieselsmoke1 · Nov 14, 2003

Bird,

One thing I've learned over the years, don't knock something that works. If it works for you, it's a good solution. Likewise for anyone else for that matter.

If you buy a Dell or Gateway or whatever and run it straight out of the box, odds are in your favor it will work. Factory systems come with very conservative performance settings, more forgiving fault tolerances mean less calls to their tech support.

The thing geeks despise most is software that fiddles with and modifies the Operating System (OS). IMHO most current Symantec products go overboard on this. The result is it will run acceptably on MOST installs, maybe 80-90%.

Geeks tend to tweak their computers to the "ragged edge" for optimal performance, I'm definitly guilty of that. Symantec is not a good option for this type of application.

Long winded explanation, hope it helps.

EW

Bird · Nov 14, 2003

( Long winded explanation, hope it helps )

Thanks. I can understand that. In most (not quite all, but nearly all /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif) cases, I just go with the defaults and hope I don't screw anything up too bad.