On a regular basis I’m studying the latest security tools to see which will offer our clients the best protection in an ever changing security landscape.  I see computer people, professing to be “geeks”, “nerds”, “elite” and everything else under the sun touting Symantec.  All the big box stores are pushing Symantec.  Our suppliers are offering huge profit margins on Symantec products.  Trial versions even come bundled with motherboard driver disks and preinstalled on many new computers.

The reality is, I can make a lot of money lying to people and telling them Symantec is the best thing in the world.  I wouldn’t show them our bench where at any one time half a dozen computers “protected” by Symantec/Norton and Mcafee are undergoing virus removals.  I wouldn’t tell them that Rogers finally dumped Symantec (no surprise considering the number of complaints we ourselves have heard and the disturbingly poor results we’ve seen).

Finally, I wouldn’t tell them that the tests that everybody loves to cite, seemingly ranking Symantec so high, when studied closely tell us a whole different story.  See, they take all elements into consideration when giving a rating, including the interface and how fast it scans.  The question that I have for people is who cares how pretty it is, easy it is to use or how fast it scans when the two following facts remain true:

1. Out of the top 20 products on the market, Norton/Symantec has one of the worst detection rates for new malware.  It lags behind G Data, Panda, Avira, Kaspersky, Sophos, Eset, F-Secure, eScan and our favorite freebie this year, Microsoft Security Essentials.  Considering that new infections surface every HOUR, this is a HUGE problem.
2. In the latest test results, Symantec allowed more machines to be compromised than both F-Secure AND Kaspersky Internet Security COMBINED (in a study of 508 test cases).

PC Mag ranks Symantec 4.5 out of 5, ahead of both F-Secure and Kaspersky, both of which outperform it.  Amusingly, one of the first things in the article states “Beaten in malware blocking and specific malware removal tests.” 

PC Mag goes on to state “Whether you love it or hate it, you know the Norton name. Symantec has been in the business so long it must be tough to come up with a new version each year, right? Well, you wouldn’t know it looking at Norton AntiVirus 2011 ($39.99 direct). The product’s appearance continues to evolve, and it includes some interesting new features. It scored very well in my tests, though not always at the very top.”

There it is in black and white.  Funny thing is that the only time Norton had a good reputation is when Peter Norton owned it.  When Symantec bought it, they pretty much destroyed it like they did most other things they get their hands on (although I still maintain that Ghost is a great program).  Why do “experts” herald Symantec as the holy grail?  Brand recognition = $$$. 

I wonder what they say when it comes time to uninstall it and it leaves 80% of the program behind?  I also wonder what answer they give when Norton self-destructs and all of a sudden takes out your internet connection, demolishes communication with your printer and denies access to any shared folders or other network resources?

I also wonder if these companies that tout Norton as the “best” or “product of choice” guarantee their virus removals for 30 days after installing Symantec as we do when we install Kaspersky? 

Now, in fairness I will say that Norton has gotten much better.  Considering that up until a little over a year ago they were rated the worst of all the major players in the security software field, they’ve come a long way.  Until they are number one, however, they won’t be ending up on our shelves.  For us, second (or third in this case) best isn’t good enough. 

We will always strive to bring you leading edge products, an unparalleled service experience and industry leading warranties and support. And of course we promise to bring you the most relevant facts to help you make your computer decisions.