Now that Version 9 is out, I now want out. Performance issues like what
is described here is the reason I'm finished with it:
http://www.avgforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=759
So it's now between Avast and AntiVir. Which would be better on a
7-year-old PC? (My guess is they're comparable, but I'd like to hear
from others who have experience -- with both, preferably).
TIA.
I'm currently using Avast! on my Vista laptop - seems to work great.
I'm currently using AntiVir on my older XP Pro SP3 laptop, it is also
working just great, however I had noticed (as others have complained
about) that sometimes (timely) updates were a problem. I hear they have
attempted to address the issue via a change in their virus def file
format or the system by which they are distributed (or both).
...it never really bothered me too much anyway as I'm not addicted to
timely updates.
Sort of off the topic, but I also have Clamwin as an on-demand scanner -
I still wouldn't rely on it as my *only* scanner, but it ain't that bad.
One of the "performance issues" I've noticed with "AVG Internet Security
Suite v.9.0," when installing it, and particularly when upgrading to it from
v.8.5, is the new AVG v.9.0 "optimization" feature that will make
"...future scans faster..." !
i.e. rather than blindly clicking "yes" at every installation prompt,
including when being prompted whether or not to use the new AVG 9.0
"optimization" feature, and instead of thinking to oneself, "Oh my Goodness,
not another application that wants to rattle around in the background for a
small eternity "indexing" an index for its' own exclusive use", and "do I
really want that sort of thing consuming most of my antique single core cpu
processing power ?" (...or in my case, I have a reasonably half decent
dual-core 3ghz cpu and so that sort of thing will not cause too much of an
inconvenience whilst I'm doing other things),
...it would have been much better for the person installing, or upgrading,
to AVG v.9.0 to have paused at that "optimization" yes/no box, pondered
awhile on their hardware specifications, and pondered on the cpu-load /
implications, and perhaps chose NO !!!!!! ...instead of later discovering
that the aforementioned is causing an inconvenience because of earlier
carelessness, and then slagging off a pretty good software application.
regards, Richard
As I installed version 9, I did try to be aware of every step. I made
sure to decline e-mail and link scanning. With regard to the
optimization, it appears I misunderstood. I was under the impression
that it was going to happen sooner or later; I decided to get it over
with. That is, I thought it would perform one initial scan (whether at
first use or at some automatic point in the future) that would make
subsequent scans quicker. The way I read it, it wasn't an option (that
is, the feature would eventually take place, whether at first run or
some automatic point in the future).
Sounds like I read too quickly, and thus incorrectly, eh?
"Daave" <da...@example.com> wrote in message
news:uDp4ts2b...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
You've got me there !
I interpreted the AVG 9.0 installation prompt for its' new "optimization/I
assumed - file indexing" feature as :- Say "yes" now and it'll do it now
and forever, (unless you go into AVG's advanced settings and turn it off),
or say "no" now and it'll never do it, (unless you go into AVG's advanced
settings and turn it on) !!!
Without looking into it in further detail, (and even though I do keep an eye
on installed applications exclusive indexing routines e.g. XP's hard disk
indexing. Nero Scout indexing, Creative Labs indexing, WMP indexing, MS
Office 2000 indexing feature ....list goes on and on ....), I have not
spotted AVG 9.0 doing an "optimization/file indexing routine" since I chose
"No."
Anyhoooo, .....I'll go and have a quick look in AVG's advanced settings,
........whilst rummaging I discovered that AVG had falsely flagged my AMD
dual core optimization program as hostile !, ..... I can't find a setting
for the AVG optimization feature that was prompted for during installation !
...there appears to be no further setting, or control, for the
aforementioned "optimization/indexing" scan, so I'm guessing that it's has
been configured to do its' stuff if I'd said yes, and to not do it if I had
said "no," which I did, and now it appears to be never doing it !
Now I'm wondering if we're talking about the ant-virus module or the old
"web-enabled software" scan related to the firewall module ! ?
regards, Richard