Re: McAfee
- From: "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 10:09:06 -0400
Twayne wrote:
"Twayne" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:O$$ljAAxIHA.5892@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Twayne wrote:
"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23Sp%23NCgwIHA.2208@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<shempmcgurk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4874d596-038b-4eec-97a8-0e232e6c51b4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For several years I had the entire Norton secuity system
installed
on my computer and I removed it because it made everything work
slower.
Then I had the free AVG anti-virus program on but was afraid
that it was letting certain things in.
So, recently, I put on the entire McAfee plan which was free
from my high-speed internet provider. But things seem a little
slower with it, but only at times, such as when I have several
Internet Explorer windows open and many tabs open on, as well
as several programs running.
In your experience, is this slowness due to McAfee? It's not
as bad as with Norton...but it is slower than if I didn't have
McAfee
at all.
Any solutions to this slowness?
AVG 8.0 is ok, a better bet than either Norton or McAfee..
I agree. McAfee and Norton are some of the worst products out
there.
Though I also moved over to AVG 8 with no problems...
another good *free* AV program is Avast
True, AVG and AVAST are good alternatives, especially for slower
computers and since they're free. But Norton and McAfee are far
from
"some of the worst products out there." Just the opposite, in
fact. But you cannot beat Norton of McAfee if you bother to learn
what
the
programs do and how to use them. I'm a little upset right now
with AVG because a virus/worm/trojan/whatever did get stopped
here on this
machine by Norton, but then blew right on by me and did not get
stopped at the AVG protected machine just behind me. Up until
recently I was of the opinion that AVG at least kept abreast of
the latest threats and older ones too, but not so for this one as
I just found out a couple hours ago. I heard it beep, but assumed
it was just another one of those constant "updates" from AVG, but
it wasn't as I found out. It was easy to remove and about two
months in the wild per Symantec, so IMO AVG should have caught it!
But that doesn't mean I'm throwing AVG out the window as you and
some of your fellow MVP parrots like to do with Norton and McAfee
for
no valid reasons other than the company line. The other machine
has AVAST on it and doesn't seem to have been bothered since it
was in hibernation at the time. It did wake up for some reason
"wake on lan"? but nothing got into it. It's SO many logs to
check; gotta automate that one!
But you aren't doing anyone any favors when you out of hand
summarily
dismiss any application for no given reasons and no good reason
besides. Closed minds just stagnate so I know what your reponse
will be; don't bother, I don't intend to debate with a closed
mind.
Closed mind? There's plenty of evidence supporting the proposition
that Norton and McAfee are bloated applications that significantly
decrease a PC's performance (just look at the original post of this
thread!). I will grant that the *corporate* versions of these
products are worthwhile, however.
Where? "just look at" is anecdotal and I covered the situation the
OP probably encountered. It's like buying a racing capable car set
up for racing and then complaining it drives terribly in heavy
traffic. Then you have the old cars, not antiques, but missing the
amenities; it's just not going to work as well, but at least it gets
you around and was free. Ignorance isn't bliss in any of these
things. There IS no definitive information that Norton/McAfee do
anthing but what I stated they do. The information I have IS backed
up by studies and definitions. Let's have a look at yours. Then
I'll share more of my experiences AND provide verifiable sources.
For starters:
http://www.thepcspy.com/read/what_really_slows_windows_down/5
Meaningless; I've already commented on most of that. From the
responses I also gleaned that some of the testing was anything but
proper. Never heard of that rag on top of it.
What about:
"Then I'll share more of my experiences AND provide verifiable sources."
You and I have already discussed this topic, and the last we did, you
agreed with me! Then again, I did grant that certain Norton products
running on systems with enough RAM and configured a certain way will not
bog a system down. But in the real world, there are still many people
running XP on PCs with only 256 MB of RAM. And I believe certain Norton
products (360?) can't be configured to minimize/re-allocate resources.
.
- References:
- Re: McAfee
- From: Twayne
- Re: McAfee
- From: Daave
- Re: McAfee
- From: Twayne
- Re: McAfee
- Prev by Date: Re: McAfee
- Next by Date: Re: copy desktop from account to another
- Previous by thread: Re: McAfee
- Next by thread: Re: McAfee
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
