Avast forum: Avast <vs> Norton Internet Security >> Speed on NetBook?

Well, actually there IS an "Avast 2012" -- its full name is "Avast 2012 for MAC" -- so if somebody tells you "There is no such thing as Avast 2012 from Avast Software", perhaps that somebody is a fake, yes?

The product I was considering is "Avast Free, version 7." And yep, I should have included that info, since a helpful answer from you guys would have required that info. So what I'm asking your opinions about is the system-loading, sluggish-performance-making characteristics of Avast Free v.7" compared to Norton Internet Security 2012. Clearly the Norton product, being a "comprehensive security solution," claims many more "features" than the Avast Free v.7, but careful program design can minimize the negative effects of "many features" to some degree. "More" is often "slower" -- but not always.

Also: most of my computers stay "up" (running) most of the time, so relative boot-up times of the two software packages isn't a big deal for me, within reasonable limits. Sure, my HP-210 netbook is the most portable of my computers, so it does get shut down and rebooted fairly frequently. I typically have other odds and ends I need to do when I "plant" myself somewhere with my netbook (getting coffee, checking voicemail, etc.), so an extra 60 sec. or so added to boot-up time is no biggie for me.

My Netbook system:
HP Mini-210 1032CL
1.66G Atom N450
512KB L2 cache
2G DDR2 system memory
160G 5400rpm HDD
Windows 7 Starter

> I'm not sure what relevance that info has to my question -- except perhaps the Windows version -- since what I'm asking is your opinions regarding the RELATIVE effect on system performance of two different software packages; I am NOT expecting any cross-system comparisons, since such a question would require consideration of so many different variables. A careful re-reading of my original question should clarify that I was asking specifically "HOW DOES AVAST 2012 COMPARE TO NORTON INTERNET SECURITY 2012 in terms of its effect on performance (general-use SPEED) on "small" systems such as the HP-NetBook?"

And poultrygeist -- with all due respect (and with thanks for your choosing to respond), your initial answer baffles me. Your answer to the question
"I can say it is 'light', after all, Win2k users still use it."


OK, you're saying that "it" is "light" -- "it"-what? Do you mean that Avast's effect is "light" compared to the effect of NIS-2012 (which by implication might be assumed to have a relatively "heavy" effect), or what?

I'm also not understanding how the use of a product by "Win2k users" is relevant to my question. "Still use" suggests that they have been using "it" for a long time; I was under the impression the Avast Free! v.7 was a fairly recent iteration of the Avast! Free program. Let's don't forget that many of us are "still using" software that is entirely unsuited to the system(s) and task(s) we have, simply because we happen to already have that software in-hand, paid-for, installed, and we're too cheap or too busy to upgrade to the latest-greatest, If all I'm doing online is using my Win2k computer to send & receive emails, a poorly-matched program's effect on system performance isn't likely to be an issue for me.

If, OTOH, I'm using a current-technology system (hardware and software) with several programs, windows, and tabs open so I can multi-task, the effect of an "umbrella" program (such as an anti-virus program) on the system's overall performance is comparatively huge.

Though I do appreciate your offering your opinion, I remain unconvinced that the use-habits of an indeterminate number of "users" of outdated systems is particularly relevant to my original question -- for that matter, I'd have to wonder if many of those "users" are using the v.7 of Avast! Free, rather than choosing to stay with an earlier version of the program, one that might be better matched to their older systems, eh?

FWIW -- I went ahead and uninstalled NIS-2012 from the NetBook, and installed the Avast! Free v.7.
I can't really say at this point whether or not the system IS less "boggy" without Norton's big product, but it "seems" to be a bit more frisky now. I did query the Avast! folks about the same concerns: though I got a prompt and courteous response, the only straight-up yes/no I got from them was that because of Avast!'s "small footprint" I could expect significantly faster boot-up times with Avast!Free vs. NIS-2012.

No surprise there, and still no strong answers, Anybody here want to give it a shot?