[Ice4]

I've been having trouble updating Symantec AntiVirus lately. I click on "LiveUpdate", and it goes through all the normal motion of downloading, then installing, but when I look at the control center main window it still says the date of the last update I did.

I know that sometimes Symantec is a little slow to communicate with itself, but it's been 24 hours and nothing has changed. Usually I start over and download again, and it works, but I am concerned about why it's not working, and also whether or not everything that was supposedly downloaded is floating around my computer taking up space needlessly.

Anyone know what's going on here?

Thanx.

[Phantom010]

You could uninstall Norton using the Norton Removal Tool, then reinstall it.

[Ice4]

I inherited the program with my computer, so don't have any way that I know of to reinstall it.

[Phantom010]

So, I'm guessing you don't have a product key either?

[Ice4]

Not that I know of... Unless it's somewhere hidden on this computer.

[Phantom010]

Without it, you won't be able to uninstall or reinstall the program. You'll need to contact Symantec Customer Support.

[Ice4]

I'm not sure if they'll be terribly helpful without some sort of product key either, but I may try that if things get any weirder. Here's a bit of an update on the issue though, which is prompting me to hold off on bothering with their bureaucracy:

I rebooted my computer, and the update finally showed up. I guess rebooting is going to have to be part of the process now... Didn't use to be. It's a drag, but at least it's working.

This is by far the slowest anti-virus program I've ever used...

[TOGG]

In some Norton/Symantec products, Live Update problems often produced an error message with a reference number eg 'LU 1234'.If you had the patience to navigate the Symantec website you would often be advised to update/replace the LU software. It used to be possible to download and install updated versions of the Live Update software in the form of an .exe file which you doubleclicked to install in the usual way.

Now Symantec want you to use a 'tool' to do it. I've never tried this and, because it's not clear that your LU software is at fault, if you decide to try it, it will have to be at your own risk; http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...hm&lg=en&ct=us

Creating a Restore point before you start (or a full image if you've got a full backup system in place) would be a good idea. Alternatively, since older versions of Norton (pre 2009?) are not very highly rated, you could try using the removal tool and then get NOD32, if you're willing to pay, or Avast or Avira if you aren't. If a product key is needed to uninstall, I wonder if something like Belarc Advisor might provide it?

PS. I've just noticed that if you click on 'What if this didn't work?' on the Symantec page you are offerred the manual update option I referred to above..

[Ice4]

I haven't had any error messages, so I hesitate going there, but I've considered switching to another anti-virus program, because I find Symantec to be a huge resource hog. I remember that Symantec wasn't highly rated a couple of years ago, but recently saw that they have much higher marks. I assumed that Symantec would be pretty good now, regardless of the date of the version, since I thought the live update itself is what makes the improvements. But it sounds like the actual version makes a difference in the reliability of the program...?

I just checked the version I have, and it's Program version 10.1.4.4000, and Scan engine 91.2.1.10. In "About" it says copyright 2006. Does this rank a lot lower than I thought then, lower than Avira and Avast?

I had AVG right up until it plummeted in the ratings. I liked the way it functioned, even on my very slow computer (the one I used then had 128 MB RAM, my current has 256 MB). It was simple to set up and use. I remember Avira was one of the most highly rated at the time, and Avast was a bit lower. Are there any qualitative or functional differences between the two I should know about, one more reliable than the other? I know Avira didn't do email protection, but I'm on webmail at the moment anyway.

Guess the topic of my question has now mutated...

[Phantom010]

If you want an antivirus really easy on system resources, yet just about the most effective on the market, try ESET's NOD32. You won't even notice it's there.

[TOGG]

I have to agree with Phantom010 because when I gave up on NAV 2000/01 about six years ago I switched to NOD32 and have been with it ever since. I've never used any of the free AV's and so can't say much about them except that Avira and Avast seem to get high levels of approval here while AVG appears to have declined since they introduced the anti spyware module.

You don't say which OS you have but 256MB of RAM is unlikely to be enough, (even if you are still using Win 98/2000), so some of your problem could be down to inadequate resources.

[Ice4]

Sorry, forgot to give my vitals... I'm on Windows XP.

Unfortunately I'm quite poor, and to be online at all, I rely on free programs, or I'd totally try your recommendation. Same for the extra RAM. My computer, along with the Symantec, was donated to me by a company that was upgrading to new equipment.

The resource issue comes up frequently. I freak out all the techies when I tell them about the mad video art I make on this differently-abled laptop in spite of its limitations. When I confess that I'm on dial-up, everyone usually runs for the hills, or is very impressed.

I guess I'll check into Avast and Avira and consider kicking Symantec to the curb...

Thanx, y'all.