IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Windows vX.X Forum / Speaking of Norton crap
Post #192,781
by drewk
Picture of drewk
2/3/05 12:17:35 AM
Reply
New Speaking of Norton crap
I just spent way too long helping a friend of my wife with her WinXP box. She said it's gotten significantly slower the past couple of months. She's had it a couple of years. (Must have gotten it when XP was still fairly new.)

I followed the directions on the [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Know/WinXPLockdown|WinXPLockdown] page, and after downloading everything -- btw next time I download at work and burn a disk, damn but AOL is slow -- I started installing. Norton started popping up every time I ran another scan. Finally got all the rest installed and Norton turned off. The last of the full-system scans was still running when I left, but it still felt really slow -- 15-20 seconds to open a menu the first time, etc.

How do I identify what's making performance suck so much? I already ran all the scans and only found a few things to nuke. Do I just have to go through the process list and google each of them one-by-one to see if they need to be there?
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
Post #192,788
by Andrew Grygus
Picture of Andrew Grygus
2/3/05 1:16:52 AM
Reply
New Well, Norton will make it slow right there . .
. . since it's resident, and its scans are absolutely glacial, and its "fix" stage often makes no sense at all. This is pure crap marketed up the kazoo and the peasants buy it like it was "moral values". When I put better products on, next time I see the machine it's got Norton back on it. I guess the fact that Norton is expensive makes them feel it's better.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
     Windows XP Pro doesn't answer pings even - (Andrew Grygus) - (20) - Feb. 2, 2005, 04:08:20 PM EST
         Have you tried the arp trick? - (jake123) - Feb. 2, 2005, 07:08:46 PM EST
         Post output of "ipconfig /all" -NT - (inthane-chan) - (8) - Feb. 2, 2005, 07:29:08 PM EST
             Don't have that in front of me now, but . . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (7) - Feb. 2, 2005, 10:04:48 PM EST
                 Just tried - (jbrabeck) - Feb. 2, 2005, 10:32:35 PM EST
                 Speaking of Norton crap - (drewk) - (1) - Feb. 3, 2005, 12:17:35 AM EST
                     Well, Norton will make it slow right there . . - (Andrew Grygus) - Feb. 3, 2005, 01:16:52 AM EST
                 Here's a little problem - (Steve Lowe) - (2) - Feb. 3, 2005, 01:36:50 AM EST
                     They don't "wrap around" (so 322 would be = 67) ? -NT - (CRConrad) - Feb. 3, 2005, 02:14:34 AM EST
                     Ooops, type - is .122 - but that part works. -NT - (Andrew Grygus) - Feb. 3, 2005, 06:27:57 AM EST
                 You've probably got the long and the short of it. - (inthane-chan) - Feb. 3, 2005, 10:45:05 AM EST
         SP2? - (andread) - (9) - Feb. 3, 2005, 11:57:55 AM EST
             He specifically stated firewall is disabled. <EOM> -NT - (inthane-chan) - (4) - Feb. 3, 2005, 12:59:04 PM EST
                 Re: He specifically stated firewall is disabled. <EOM> - (andread) - (3) - Feb. 3, 2005, 04:33:57 PM EST
                     Nope. - (pwhysall) - Feb. 3, 2005, 04:35:44 PM EST
                     Well, it claims it isn't running and can't start. - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - Feb. 3, 2005, 05:05:34 PM EST
                         No vpn running? - (Silverlock) - Feb. 4, 2005, 08:30:25 AM EST
             SP2 Yes, but . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (3) - Feb. 3, 2005, 01:00:34 PM EST
                 Just spent a second night with an HP XP box - (drewk) - (2) - Feb. 4, 2005, 12:16:36 AM EST
                     Not typical - universal. - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - Feb. 4, 2005, 12:57:59 PM EST
                         Is a $50 hardware firewall good enough to stop this? (new thread) - (Another Scott) - Feb. 4, 2005, 02:31:31 PM EST

One shall be the number of Mojo Jojos in the world, and the number of Mojo Jojos in the world shall be one. Two Mojo Jojos is too many, and three is right out!
103 ms