Norton Security Premium Review
Uses resources efficiently during scanning


What is our primary use case?

It's for protecting laptop computers. So far we have no issues. It's good.

How has it helped my organization?

It's easily available off the shelf, whereas for Symantec products you have to go through a vendor. It's not easily available.

What is most valuable?

It does not take many resources during scanning.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good. We haven't experienced any downtime.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is good.

How is customer service and technical support?

We have not needed to use technical support. That's how good it is so far.

Which solutions did we use previously?

We tried a few: Kaspersky, Trend Micro, we used McAfee, we used Norton. We tried them all on our entire fleet of computers. So we were able to see which was most suitable for us. We realized that in terms of ease of use, in terms of resource consumption, Norton is something that is acceptable to us.

For me, the important criterion when selecting a vendor is reputation.

How was the initial setup?

I was involved in the initial setup, and it's not complex at all. It's not complex to manage thereafter, as well. It's very straightforward and easy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If they could come down in price that would be good. It's not exactly the lowest.

What other advice do I have?

Look at reviews from reputable sources before you decide which endpoint protection solution to procure.

I rate Norton Security Premium at eight out of 10 for the good reviews, for the reputation, and for the way the resources are being consumed during a scan. And because it's easily available off the shelf.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.

Add a Comment

Guest
Why do you like it?

Sign Up with Email