Re: (Off-Topic) Windows XP SP2 ...

From: andylevy@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Oct 29 2004 - 09:27:42 EDT


In article <cltf69$okg$1@bent.twistedbits.net>, josh@omg-stfu.com ("Josh
Battles") writes:
>
>
> "andy levy" <andy-dml@levyclan.us> wrote in message
> news:clsc5u$33v$4@bent.twistedbits.net...
> >
> > McAfee is horrible IMO. We have it at work and it does nothing but bog
> > my system down. I end up disabling it half the time just so I can get
> > work done.
>
> Really? I've run it on all my personal PCs for 3 or 4 years now, and we
> have a subscription to it here at work. I use both my home and work PCs
> pretty hard and I've never had McAfaa cause any sorts of problems. You sure
> it's not user error?

There's nothing I can do "with" it, I have almost no control over it. Here's
what happens.

We have the on-access scanner running on every PC, at normal priority (which is
the default). Anytime I touch a file, ANY file, it goes crazy and uses at
least 50% of my CPU. Launching Java apps takes FOREVER because it's scanning
every JAR file. When I use one of my monitoring/reporting tools which does
heavy I/O, my machine basically becomes unusable. Same with doing any large
file copy or even access over the network. Launching Firefox/Netscape/Mozilla
is slow for the same reasons. Once I'm into using my swapfile (which happens
regularly), it's all over.

I usually pre-emptively disable the on-access scanner when I know I'm about to
get into heavy activity. It turns itself back on after 5 minutes, but that's
usually enough time for me to get my work done.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 01 2004 - 10:47:44 EST