I don't now if Symantec ever listens to its customers. Well, since they offer generous rebates, and we customers jump on them, I guess they don't have to listen to us.

Anyway, Norton Antivirus 2004 finally came out. It, at long last, has one feature that I had been writing Symantec about for years: the ability to scan for key loggers and other snoopware. I set up a few of such programs on a virtual machine via Virtual PC, and NAV 2004 was able to identify all of them. To someone like me who does a lot of online banking, this feature alone is worth the (after-rebate) upgrade price.

Otherwise, you get the same features from the previous version, such as the ability to scan compressed files and to monitor IM chat sessions. One new feature that'll sure irk some people is the Microsoft-like product activation feature; you must type in a product code and then use the Internet or phone to activate NAV 2004 if you want to use it for more than 15 days.

Installation was easy as I upgraded from NAV 2003. Everything went smoothly. The only negative I've noticed is NAV 2004 seems to take longer to load at start-up than previous versions. (I have a P4 system running XP.) Not a big deal, but perhaps a sign of Symantec's diehard inability to write Peter Norton-quality software?

In summary, if you are concerned about snoopware such as keystroke loggers, or if you haven't upgraded in two years, get this. Shop around and you'll find rebates to help you upgrade.

36 of 40 found the following review helpful:

No problems here  Oct 27, 2003
By Christopher Bishop
I have been using Norton 2004 for a few weeks now. I'm running a P4 with only 256RAM. Yet I've not seen one single problem with it that some people are mentioning. Plus I have 2 family members running it on slower machines w/o problems. I did see one person have major problems with their machine after installing Norton 2004, but the reason for it was because they had a worm on their system. Norton didn't create the problem, because they were already having trouble before that, it just found the problem (but couldn't correct it because the worm had been on for a long period of time). Try keeping your windows updates current, and you shouldn't have any trouble with Norton 2004.

25 of 27 found the following review helpful:

A 'DOWNGRADE' FROM NAV2003!  Oct 29, 2003

Like others, I have been frustrated by the problems that Norton Antivirus 2004 creates on my system (dual P4 1.7 Ghz CPUs, 1 GB RDRAM, so speed shouldn't be a problem). It conflicts with several other programs, causes the system to hang, requiring a reboot, and is generally a pain. I'vbe tried turning off some of the new scans it does for adware, etc., but that doesn't fully fix the problems. NAV 2003 worked great. It's bad enough having to activate the product. I wish I had stayed with NAV2003 and bought another year of virus definition updates, as I may end up uninstalling this piece of junk.

27 of 30 found the following review helpful:

Norton Fails the Test  Aug 03, 2004
By Zelig "God of all small and unnecessary things"
Time was you always upgraded your Norton Anti-Virus each year. It was a bit of a ritual but I'm here to tell you that times have changed. I used the latest Norton Anti-Virus 2004 for a month and returned it to the good and very cooperative folks at Office Depot. Then, for some odd reason, Symantec sent me an e-mail and asked me to beta test their next generation program, Norton Anti-Virus 2005. I did so and have no erased all traces of each of them off of my PC.

Here's the thing - it's not that Norton doesn't provide excellent protection - it does, no doubt about it, however at what cost? I'll tell you the cost - it's your system resources. The 2004 version would routinely bring my fairly current system to its virtual knees. Now, this is because the program is trying to do the right thing. It now scans within compressed files AS they are being downloaded instead of waiting until they've nestled into the confines of your file system. Great idea but lousy execution.

Oh - virtually everything I writing about 2004 is true of 2005. The differences are minor and I'll briefly detail the new bits in 2005 at the end.

A good example of very silly coding is how the program handled a large number of JPEG files, after they have been viewed. Using ACDSee to view a large group of pictures was fine; until I closed the program...only then did Norton proceed to freeze the entire system as it laboriously scanned each and every picture. If you open a folder with say 1,000 photos in it, you best be prepared to go get a cup of tea or coffee and learn macramé from a local community center as you wait for the machine to complete its AFTER THE FACT scan.

Oh my - the horror. the horror.

Anyway, the program does a top notch job of protecting your system from bad nastiness but you see, that's the thing...you can use other programs...one that is free...that does as good a job. I am now using Avast (available at www.avast.com) and it uses virtually no system resources, updates itself every day and scans all compressed files, e-mail as well as messaging programs, such as Yahoo Instant Messenger, MSN Messenger and AOL AIM. (It will also handle Trillian if you use that to combine all of these IM programs into one neat package.) Best of all, Avast is free to non-commercial users.

What's new in 2005? Well, it adds some Anti-Spyware capabilities and also bugs you to use your firewall...or rather the Norton Firewall product. There isn't a lot different in the 2005 iteration but it is just as slow and resource hogging.

And another warning. I had Norton SystemWorks 2003 on my machine when I upgraded to 2004 and then to 2005. Well, 2004 and 2005 forced me to uninstall SystemWorks. That wasn't a deal killer as I had recently found a MUCH better disk defragger; PerfectDisk and the Norton Utilities were frankly a bit long in the tooth for WinXP. The problem was the SystemWorks did not completely uninstall. When I finally decided to rid myself of all things Norton, I found that it was almost impossible to pry bits and services out of my machine. Luckily I know my way around the registry and was able to root it all out manually but for the average user what this would mean is that even if you uninstalled the silly program or programs, it leaves certain services still running...and consequently using system resources. You can see this if you peruse Windows XP System Services viewer in the System Administrator section.

So that's it. Norton is bloated as a poor dead pooch on a Texas highway in August, and trust me that's not a pretty sight. And here's a bonus observation...McAfee is worse! I tried McAfee due to a rebate that corrupted my normally innocent self but found that McAfee and Microsoft Outlook don't play well together. This is especially true if you have to e-mail a large file. I had to send several large PDF's and a couple of AutoCAD drawings and McAfee froze my system and wouldn't ever let them go. Even worse, I had to reboot to unfreeze the system and the files were deleted. Bad McAfee...and I've heard this from several folks I correspond with. It might not affect a large number of you but once again...why pay for bloated, poorly coded monstrosities when you can use a really sharp program like Avast?

Good luck friends.

20 of 22 found the following review helpful:

Stay Away from Symantec 2004 products  Oct 05, 2003

Let me join the chorus. After years of being a satisfied Symantec customer I am thoroughly disgusted by this "upgrade". It will not install on a brand new HP running XP Home. The help is useless and confusing, the most likely result is trashing other applications that previously ran. After several remove and install attempts I am left without any antivirus protection since the pre-installed NAV that ran before the "upgrade" no longer runs. This product should be pulled off the shelves until it is safe to use.

See all 169 customer reviews on Amazon.com