M$ Essentials
777777
drag on their system?
Nicodemus
> I'm wondering
I also wonder about this place
Happy New Year
David H. Lipman
| I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
| drag on their system?
It does.
I strongly suggest replacing it with Avira AntiVir and Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware.
--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
Craig
> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
> drag on their system?
We run two instances of Win7 (one ult & one pro) on a p4 and a core2 duo
culv: both operate w/o perceptible drag. I'm beginning to wonder if it
doesn't depend on the OS.
hth,
--
-Craig
REM
> 777 777 wrote:
>I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>drag on their system?
I disagree with the other response and I'm sure that others will
disagree with me.
I'm one of three guys covering 12 counties of PCs for a non-profit
organization. We went with AVG Commercial and that was the worst
security product that I've ever seen.
Now, We're uninstalling it and installing MSE on every PC on our
domain. What a trip, man.... :)
MSE does not run any slower than Avast! (I use Avast! personally). I
haven't used Avira in years, but I suspect that it's pretty close to
Avast! in realtime scanning. The PCs run much better after
uninstalling AVG and cleaning the malware that made it in, that's for
sure.
These machines range from spanking new quad core to PCs that came with
Win 2000 installed on them (we have upgraded to XP and done what we
can to bump memory up) and have as little as 256 megs of ram. They all
work fine with MSE on them.
YMMV
VanguardLH
> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
> drag on their system?
It is impossible for any security product to not introduce an impact to
system performance. You didn't ask for a comparison to other security
products. Some are worse than others but by how much also depends on how
they are configured and how many of their included components are enabled.
Bear Bottoms
I find that it is lighter than the other top contenders.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware website: http://bearware.info
John Corliss
> 777 777 wrote:
>> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>> drag on their system?
>
> We run two instances of Win7 (one ult & one pro) on a p4 and a core2 duo
> culv: both operate w/o perceptible drag. I'm beginning to wonder if it
> doesn't depend on the OS.
Might also depend on the age of the computer, its ram and processor
speed, etc.
--
John Corliss BS206. Using News Proxy, I block all Google Groups posts
due to Googlespam, and as many posts from anonymous remailers (like
x-privat.org for eg.) as possible due to forgeries posted through them.
No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share, spy, time-limited,
trial or web wares OR warez for me, please.
glorieux
> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
> drag on their system?
I've replaced AVG on all our machines with MSE.
No noticeable drag on any machine whether Win 7, Vista or XP.
In fact, everyone seems to think it's an improvement.
glorieux
777777
wrote:
I'm running XP, CPU and RAM below. Used Avira Free for a long time.
Each time I install M$E, it really puts a drag on the system
performance. Avira does not have any effect on the system
performance. Why is M$E so different?
One Physical Processor / One Core / One Logical Processor / 64 bits
CPU Clock 2205 MHz
CPU Full Name AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+
DRAM - 2 Gig
777777
What? How do you configure an AV app to kill an OS? I install Avira
and forget it. I do not use it for scanning. USe it for it's real
time capabilities. Same thing for M$E. But, M$E puts a noticable
drag on the performance of the system.
777777
I'm glad you agree with me on this - Avira is the TOP contender. I'm
just wondering why M$E puts a drag on my OS, and no other AV app -
Avira, AVG, or Avast puts a noticable drag on my system performance.
777777
wrote:
That is strange since I notice just the opposite. The drag is quite
noticable. I like the fact that M$E is not using signature based
detection, and is the future. But, the drag on the OS is something I
can't live with.
After I formatted the HD, and reinstalled the XP OS a couple months
ago, I installed M$E, and it really slowed the performance quite a
bit. I quickly removed M$E and put Avira back on, and the drag
disappeared. Weird.
POKO
REMbr...@netscape.com says...
her vista laptop and a spare winxp machine I have which "just" meets
minimum requirements. Works a treat! Her Panda needs an upgrade to run
Win7. Totally amazed I finally got something from Microsoft that didn't
cost me something. I've been running this freeware on my work 'puter
(winXP) for some time and it has been fine,
--
Best - POKO
Manitoulin Island, Canada
REM
>I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>drag on their system?
<jbtmj5dmumh3llu3o...@4ax.com>
This might be the problem... I dunno.
VanguardLH
There are lots of "anti-virus" products that are not just the AV component
(few products are just AV anymore). They are bundleware with additional
security features, like web guards/monitors, privacy protection (as to what
sensitive data strings can be sent out), content blocking, parental control
or censorware features, firewalls, HIPS, and so on. The AV component alone
probably has little impact on the systems responsiveness (but it always has
some) but including all the other components in the bundleware can severely
impact a host. Most users when they install this bundle will select to
include EVERYTHING (because they choose the Typical install setup rather
than a Custom setup - mostly because they don't yet know what all the
components actually do).
VanguardLH
> I like the fact that M$E is not using signature based detection
Since when? Why do you think it gets updates through the AU service (even
if you configure WU to not automatically download and install)? Updates are
published up to 3 times per day to Microsoft Update.
MSE is not supposed to care about your settings for Windows Update (WU).
Even if you have it configured to "notify only" (so as to NOT automatically
download and install), MSE is still supposed to get its updates through the
Automatic Updates (AU) service (so don't disable it if you want those MSE
updates). When I last trialed MSE, it was still causing problems for many
users in that updates were not getting retrieved automatically. Users might
go for days or weeks without an update. Only if they scheduled a on-demand
scan along with the option to first check for updates would the user get the
updates (on that schedule). So if you wanted to ensure you got updated
every day then you had to schedule an on-demand scan every day along with
enabling the option to check for updates before the scan.
In fact, if you can't manage to get MSE to update itself then you have to
manually download the latest definition file. Read:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/971606
and
http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/mseupdate/thread/0e9a28c3-f513-486a-a811-acf596e29c8b
MSE *does* use signatures!
Craig
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:30:08 -0800, Craig<netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/29/2009 01:22 PM, 777 777 wrote:
>>> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>>> drag on their system?
>>
>> culv: both operate w/o perceptible drag. I'm beginning to wonder if it
>> doesn't depend on the OS.
>>
>
> I'm running XP, CPU and RAM below. Used Avira Free for a long time.
> Each time I install M$E, it really puts a drag on the system
> performance. Avira does not have any effect on the system
> performance. Why is M$E so different?
>
> One Physical Processor / One Core / One Logical Processor / 64 bits
> CPU Clock 2205 MHz
> CPU Full Name AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+
> DRAM - 2 Gig
By any chance, are you running both Avira & MSE? (Reason I ask is that
my response was based on using MSE alone.)
--
-Craig
Craig
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/971606
> and
> http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/mseupdate/thread/0e9a28c3-f513-486a-a811-acf596e29c8b
>
> MSE *does* use signatures!
Thanks for the correction.
--
-Craig
Bear Bottoms
Bear Bottoms
There is no drag on my system at all. MSE works perfectly and is much
lighter than the other top contenders. Right now it is running at 6.5megs
and no CPU activity at all. Show me another of the top contenders that
does this.
David H. Lipman
Hmmmmm
I may be seeing a pattern here ?
MSE doesn't do well on AMD based CPU systems ?
Bear Bottoms
news:hhgmu...@news3.newsguy.com:
> From: <777 777>
>
>| On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:30:08 -0800, Craig
>| <netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>On 12/29/2009 01:22 PM, 777 777 wrote:
>>>> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put
>>>> a drag on their system?
>
>>>We run two instances of Win7 (one ult & one pro) on a p4 and a core2
>>>duo culv: both operate w/o perceptible drag. I'm beginning to wonder
>>>if it doesn't depend on the OS.
>
>
>| I'm running XP, CPU and RAM below. Used Avira Free for a long time.
>| Each time I install M$E, it really puts a drag on the system
>| performance. Avira does not have any effect on the system
>| performance. Why is M$E so different?
>
>| One Physical Processor / One Core / One Logical Processor / 64 bits
>| CPU Clock 2205 MHz
>| CPU Full Name AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+
>| DRAM - 2 Gig
>
> Hmmmmm
>
> I may be seeing a pattern here ?
> MSE doesn't do well on AMD based CPU systems ?
>
>
I suppose that could be. My CPU is Intel and MSE runs lighter than
anything I've used yet. It would be an interesting experiment...if
someone else had an AMD based system and could check it out. My
intuition tells me it is illogical though.
N4469P
> MSE doesn't do well on AMD based CPU systems ?
complete bovine bullshit
777777
wrote:
No. Running two AVs at once is as crazy as using two firewallls at
once. They will self destruct Bad idea.
777777
>From: <777 777>
>
>| On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:30:08 -0800, Craig <netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com>
>| wrote:
>
>>>On 12/29/2009 01:22 PM, 777 777 wrote:
>>>> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>>>> drag on their system?
>
>>>We run two instances of Win7 (one ult & one pro) on a p4 and a core2 duo
>>>culv: both operate w/o perceptible drag. I'm beginning to wonder if it
>>>doesn't depend on the OS.
>
>
>| I'm running XP, CPU and RAM below. Used Avira Free for a long time.
>| Each time I install M$E, it really puts a drag on the system
>| performance. Avira does not have any effect on the system
>| performance. Why is M$E so different?
>
>| One Physical Processor / One Core / One Logical Processor / 64 bits
>| CPU Clock 2205 MHz
>| CPU Full Name AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+
>| DRAM - 2 Gig
>
>Hmmmmm
>
>I may be seeing a pattern here ?
>MSE doesn't do well on AMD based CPU systems ?
What? It is a 64 Bit CPU with a 32 Bit XP OS. The CPU should not be
the limiting factor is this equation. There is plenty of RAM. The
drag should not exist. But, I doubt the AMD processor is the cause of
the drag. I just don't have an answer why M$E slows the system down.
777777
<hummingb�r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>'777 777' wrote thus:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:21:39 -0500, glorieux <orlee...@can.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 29/12/2009 4:22 PM, 777 777 wrote:
>>>> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>>>> drag on their system?
>>>
>>>
>>>I've replaced AVG on all our machines with MSE.
>>>
>>>No noticeable drag on any machine whether Win 7, Vista or XP.
>>>
>>>In fact, everyone seems to think it's an improvement.
>>
>>That is strange since I notice just the opposite. The drag is quite
>>noticable. I like the fact that M$E is not using signature based
>>detection,
>
>If M$E doesn't use signature based detection, what does it use?
I have no idea.
777777
Bear Bottoms says M$E does not use signature based definitions. I
wondered what was downloading when updating. I still use Avira Free.
REM
> "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>MSE doesn't do well on AMD based CPU systems ?
I don't see any differences in the rag tag group of PCs that I work
on.
I have a gut feeling that anyone who is seeing a performance hit is
running another real time scanner and MSE.
Bear Bottoms
> Bear Bottoms says M$E does not use signature based definitions. I
> wondered what was downloading when updating. I still use Avira Free.
>
I never said MSE doesn't use signature definitions.
Martin Clark
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:15:30 -0500, "David H. Lipman"
> <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
>
>>From: <777 777>
>>
>>| On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:30:08 -0800, Craig
>>| <netbu...@REMOVEgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>On 12/29/2009 01:22 PM, 777 777 wrote:
>>>>> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put
>>>>> a drag on their system?
[...]
> I just don't have an answer why M$E slows the system down.
fwiw - M$E slows down my o'l P3 with 512 RAM - gone back to Avira ...
I think it may have something to do with M$E's lack of preferences.
I notice that it wants to monitor all local file/program operations, etc.
If you turn these off, it turns off active guard. Turn guard back on again,
file/program operations are turned back on.
Also results in fetching a whole load of non-essential updates, IE put back
as default browser - the usual M$ antics.
Fuzzy Logic
> I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
> drag on their system?
Not me...recent tests confirm it's one of the best performing out there:
http://lifehacker.com/5433229/microsoft-security-essentials-ranks-as-best+performing-free-antivirus
Zombie Elvis
>I'm wondering how many people find that M$ Security Essentials put a
>drag on their system?
I'm running MSE on two laptops (including one with just 512MB of RAM)
and it runs very well on both. No drag here.
--
Cause, really, nothing says "I'm a counter culture
rebel, fighting the establishment" like an Aibo on
a skateboard.
- Seen on Slashdot
Roberto Castillo
roberto...@ameritech.net
http://mind-grapes.blogspot.com/
http://zombie-gulch.myminicity.com/
Bear Bottoms
news:c0p7k5lejv1gv7jdn...@4ax.com:
If you aren't a Microsoft hater who is running a Microsoft operating
system, you will love it.
Hal Hersh
news:Xns9CF7C71BACD24be...@69.16.185.250:
>
> If you aren't a Microsoft hater who is running a Microsoft operating
> system, you will love it.
>
So, Bear...
Do you recommend MSE over the combination of Avira Free AV and PCTools'
Threatfire, which I currently use?
TIA,
Hal
Bear Bottoms
news:Xns9CF8E4DCAE444h...@news.albasani.net:
Not if you are comfortable with your setup and you are staying free of
malware.
I like MSE over Avira because it is pure freeware and the way it manages
threats with the unbelievably simple but effective interface. Avira,
AVAST and AVG are not pure freeware or as light on resources. I'm
staying free of malware with XP's firewall and MSE. Simple, quite and
effective.
Hal Hersh
>> Do you recommend MSE over the combination of Avira Free AV and
>> PCTools' Threatfire, which I currently use?
>>
> Not if you are comfortable with your setup and you are staying free of
> malware.
>
> I like MSE over Avira because it is pure freeware and the way it manages
> threats with the unbelievably simple but effective interface. Avira,
> AVAST and AVG are not pure freeware or as light on resources. I'm
> staying free of malware with XP's firewall and MSE. Simple, quite and
> effective.
>
Thanks, Bear...
Bear Bottoms
You are welcome.
I've tried just about everything out there and people get by fine with a
variety of setups. I've also tweaked and tweaked and tweaked, gone
through menus galore...set filters and rules and monitored ins and outs
and finally have come to the conclusion I don't want to do any of that.
I want to install security software and get by with as little
interaction as possible and not hear any noise and only want alerts when
something happens that is not a false positive and still stay safe. That
is a tall order.
Safe hex is an individual production. If you have a setup that you are
happy with and you are not getting infected, then who cares what
particular program(s) you use.
The least intrusive and effective setup I've used is MSE and XP's
firewall. Prior to that was RISING antivirus and XP's firewall which
also worked well...it's just that MSE is less complex and I like the
functionality of it better. Any other setup that I've used required more
tweaking and additional software to cover the gaps.
glorieux
glorieux
M.L.
>> The least intrusive and effective setup I've used is MSE and XP's
>> firewall. Prior to that was RISING antivirus and XP's firewall which
>> also worked well...it's just that MSE is less complex and I like the
>> functionality of it better. Any other setup that I've used required more
>> tweaking and additional software to cover the gaps.
>couldn't agree more!
+2
Nomen Nescio
> I've tried just about everything out there and people get by fine with a
> variety of setups. I've also tweaked and tweaked and tweaked, gone
> through menus galore...set filters and rules and monitored ins and outs
> and finally have come to the conclusion I don't want to do any of that.
So basically you're saying your "expert opinion" is based on how
aesthetically pleasing a programs menus are, and you're one lazy
fucker.
Nothing new to see here folks. This same "logic" is what lead you
to ripoff software like Rising, and making a fool of yourself by
claiming encryption software stored passwords in encrypted files.
Among your uncountable other foibles. It's what embarrassed you
into tucking tail and taking a hiatus. It's also the button that
was pushed to get your dumb ass to crawl back out from underneath
the rock you were using as a hiding place. ;)
Bear Bottoms
nob...@dizum.com says...
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>
> > I've tried just about everything out there and people get by fine
> > with a variety of setups. I've also tweaked and tweaked and tweaked,
> > gone through menus galore...set filters and rules and monitored ins
> > and outs and finally have come to the conclusion I don't want to do
> > any of that.
>
> So basically you're saying your "expert opinion" is based on how
> aesthetically pleasing a programs menus are, and you're one lazy
> fucker.
Ok smartypants if you're so clever what's are best colors for fire? The
answer, if you want to know, is red and yellow. That takes proper
research. I know the answer and that's why I am a freeware researcher
and you're not.
> Nothing new to see here folks. This same "logic" is what lead you to
> ripoff software like Rising,
What's wrong with Rising? It's top quality Chinese software. One billion
people can't be wrong. lol. You're a fool if you think it is possible
to be bad.
> and making a fool of yourself by claiming encryption software stored
> passwords in encrypted files.
The password is not hidden inside the encrypted file? It must be.
> Among your uncountable other foibles. It's what embarrassed you into
> tucking tail and taking a hiatus. It's also the button that was pushed
> to get your dumb ass to crawl back out from underneath the rock you
> were using as a hiding place.
I told you I became obsessed with Evony when I was jailed in October and
relentlessly pursued my development of the game. Good grief it is an
intense game. On Dec 24th the alliance I was in took the number one
position.
I was so obsessed and the game required so much time to develop and I
had to maintain (feed) troops, that I neglected virtually everything
else I had been doing in my life...including researching freeware.
I had conquered the game and was neglecting acf which I missed
greatly...so I stopped playing on the 24th when they let me out of
prison for Christmas and returned to sanity somewhat.
stuoppppid
<REMOVEbea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <aff4df682efa1afb...@dizum.com>,
>nob...@dizum.com says...
>>
>> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>
>> > I've tried just about everything out there and people get by fine
>> > with a variety of setups. I've also tweaked and tweaked and tweaked,
>> > gone through menus galore...set filters and rules and monitored ins
>> > and outs and finally have come to the conclusion I don't want to do
>> > any of that.
>>
>> So basically you're saying your "expert opinion" is based on how
>> aesthetically pleasing a programs menus are, and you're one lazy
>> fucker.
>
>Ok smartypants if you're so clever what's are best colors for fire? The
>answer, if you want to know, is red and yellow. That takes proper
>research. I know the answer and that's why I am a freeware researcher
>and you're not.
>
>> Nothing new to see here folks. This same "logic" is what lead you to
>> ripoff software like Rising,
>
>What's wrong with Rising? It's top quality Chinese software. One billion
>people can't be wrong. lol. You're a fool if you think it is possible
>to be bad.
>
Hey Stupid, RAV is from China, ie, untrustworthy.
N4469P
> Ok smartypants if you're so clever what's are best colors for fire?
I don't give a shit as long as it burns bear ass.