Bit Defender Total Security 2009 or Norton Internet Security 2009

[LCaveman]

Yhea, if it wasn't for NIS 2009 being incompatible with something else in my computer, i'm thinking with spysweeper, i would still be using norton, but kaspersky has been running flawlesly since i installed it.

[hellnoire]

Personal taste and past experience has me leaning towards BitDefender, but that's because Norton never discovered Eicar while I used it. If it detects it now, that's fine. I also found their suites bloated, even the basic A/V bloated. But that's me.

[ginzon]

If u want to try Bit Defender u should go ahead but be responsible wen surfing not that Bit D. is bad but bcoz no AV's r perfect detection of one can take time for other it may not....
Even i like to try different AV's i do but see that i accidently run any threat unless Sandboxed....

[larliya]

I have used NIS 2009 and BIS/BTS 2009, personal I think NIS 2009 is much better than BIS, and NIS 2009 is the best so far I have ever seen, it is light, fast, high rate detection, perfect firewall. If you have a genuine key, you should not waste your money for BIS.

[detailer]

I've run Norton in the past-my first security ever-I keep the disk on the wall as a reminder.The only thing tuff about it is that the darts I throw won't stick to it.I was so infected in two weeks I reinstalled the OS.Next was Kaspersky-not one thing got by it. I found it a bit overbearing until I got it set up right.So about six months ago I run a Beta test on the "new and improved" Norton 360-lighter,faster,better detection,blah blah blah.Just that-it's still a resource hog with a mind of it's own no matter how you configure it.Only a bit lighter than it's former self-a freight train bound for Chicago.In terms of detection,Norton still can't identify an infection if it comes marching through your Ethernet cable banging a big drum and wearing a sign on it's chest.Then Symantec professes to have the wisdom to adjust my PC for its best performance-please! They can't get security right,and now this? I just don't get the mystique of Norton and why people keep buying into it.It's "living on an old name",its junk and has been for years.If it's working for some of you,great stick with it-but there's much better software to be had.My point,before I went on a rant,was that no matter what you run for security,you should seriously consider additional protection by utilizing applications such as Sandboxie and Returnil.My apologies for the rant-Norton really torques me off.

[LCaveman]

That's a pretty strong statement for a good product.-Raymond

[LunarWolf]

Norton still can't identify an infection if it comes marching through your Ethernet cable banging a big drum and wearing a sign on it's chest.Then Symantec professes to have the wisdom to adjust my PC for its best performance-please! They can't get security right,and now this?

Wow is it really that bad?

[claudyu31]

I have Norton Internet Security 2009 and hes OK but I want to install Bit Defender Total Security 2009 . Is that good idea ? here on this site Bit Defender Internet Security is on First place , Norton Internet Security on 9... http://internet-security-suite-revie...enreviews.com/
so Bit Defender Total Security is as I think better than Bit Defender Internet Security. Delete Norton and install Bit ??? yes or no ??

You should try ,i'm using it and it's not that resource eater.I will continue using it coz so far I never had any probs.

[diddo09]

I actually have both subscriptions for Norton IS 2009 [installed on my laptop] and Bit Defender TS 2009 [Desktop]. Both have excellent performances for on demand scan as well as real time protections. I installed Norton IS 2009 on my laptop because it does not slow down my computer performance rather than having Bit Defender TS 2009.