Antivirus, Defrag, Norton SystemWorks 2004

Hello Joel!

I have used Norton SystemWorks since the 2001 version, skipped 2002 and am currently on 2003.

If we focus on Speed Disk, then it works differently on a NTFS drive compared to a FAT32 drive. Its freedom to move things around is limited on NTFS. One example is the swapfile optimization which is available on systems running on FAT32 but there is no pagefile optimization on systems running on NTFS.

Speed Disk does a decent job but not much better than the XP defragger, it only does the job differently. What differs is their respective opinion on which file positioning is the optimum. This consists a problem since as soon as Speed Disk has finished its job, the XP defragger starts moving things back. The XP defragger works in the background and I haven't found a way to stop it.

My conclusion has been to quit using Speed Disk and stay with the native XP defragger. It too does a decent job. To prevent Speed Disk to work in the background, set the Speed Disk Service to manual. This will enable the use of its analyze function but it doesn't work in the background.

However, the XP defragger is designed by Diskeeper and is kind of a Diskeeper Lite Lite. There is a freeware, Diskeeper Lite and the XP defragger is one step Liter. If You install Diskeeper Lite, it replaces the XP defragger, it doesn't get installed in parallel so they can't fight. I use Diskeeper Lite and its graphical disk presentation is better than the XP defragger but if it does a better job, I don't know. It seems faster, though.

When You install Norton SystemWorks (including Speed Disk), a new service is created: Speed Disk Service which is set to automatic to work in the background. (I have already mentioned that one.)

When You install Diskkeeper, a new service is created: Speeddisk which is set to automatic to work in the background. (I actually don't think that the Lite version does work in the background. It would require the full version for all the "finesse ".)

If I'm wrong, it means that if the respective service setting isn't changed, they may fight. So, better safe than sorry, I have set both to manual which means that neither works in the background. I use both to analyze but I stick to Diskeeper for defragmentation but I could stick to Speed Disk for defragmentation if I thought that was better ...... ...... but I don't.

The important thing is to stick with one of them for defragmentation and not mix in the other.

Diskeeper Lite has the same defrag engine as the full version of Diskeeper. The Lite version is 7.? something but the full version is currently at 8.? something. I can't say anything about the current full version but try out the Lite version, You won't be disappointed ...... ...... it's freeware!

Christer

 

Yes, I do since there is no way to stop the XP defragger from fighting Speed Disk.

I use it for One Button Checkup, which I find convenient as a simple system check and WinDoctor which is a more comprehensive "variant" of OBC.

I can vouch for Diskeeper Lite and others have and can vouch for AVG. There are other freeware (system tools / registry cleaners) that would be a good substitute for OBC and WD and some of the regcleaners are more thourough but also a bit more "dangerous" to use.

Which FireWall do You use?

Im not using 2004 but 2003 and have nothing running in the background, except Norton AntiVirus. NAV has yet to let me down and I also have the FireWall of Norton Internet Security 2003 running.

There is no major impact on my system performance but then ...... ...... I don't use NSW to its full potential since only the vital components are running.

If NSW and NIS hadn't been given to me as a present, then I would probably not buy NSW. I would settle for NIS and use some of the freeware (system tools / registry cleaners).

Christer

 

Neal,

I had to buy Norton Ghost 2003 separately since NSW2003 wasn't PRO. Ghost is actually the single one utility that I wouldn't sacrifice. I installed SP2 several times, after having rolled back the system to a certain condition and then creating a new image. I have probably "jumped" between installations tens of times to find things out ...... ...... !

Under normal computer usage, the Ghost Images are the final security layer and if I am first in line to get hit by a new virus or any other malware, I'm only five minutes and a cup of coffee away from a running system.

I had a quick look at it and my first impression is that it seems quite complete. The question is if I would use much of it. I have noticed that the more You learn about things the less You find these packages useful and would rather "pick and choose ".

About the FireWalls You mention, I have used ZoneAlarm 3.something (if I remember correctly) and it was good. I know nothing about any other but I understand that Kerio is an alternative too.

I have been lucky enough to escape all malware but tracking cookies. This is possibly due to the fact that NAV and the FireWall in NIS actually do work! If malware should sneak in, then I wouldn't be without the applications You mention to find and get rid of it.

Christer

 

Joel,
it seems like You missed the link at the bottom of my first post. Here it is again but with a more obvious name:

Diskeeper Lite

There are several download sources in there, among others from Executive Software.

Christer

 

Joel,
I reread Your first post and noticed Your system specs:

I have a BOAC (homebuilt Box Of Assembled Components) with a 1GHz Athlon Thunderbird and initially 256MB RAM. When I added another stick of 256MB RAM, the difference was quite noticable.

I don't know if Your RAM is 192MB or if it is 256 MB with 64MB shared with internal graphics but whichever it is, You wouldn't regret adding 256MB.

As a side note, since we have been discussing Norton and system performance impact, all the Norton stuff that is running on my system occupies 34MB RAM. Total RAM utilization is 141MB with Outlook Express and Internet Explorer running. That leaves 371MB on my system to "work with" but it would leave only 51MB on Your system.

Christer

 

I was wrong ...... ...... again ...... ...... !

I set the Diskeeper Service to automatic and it actually does do some work in the background. It "keeps an eye" on the fragmentation level and notifies when You need to defragment. I think it is overdoing it a bit but they provide themselves with an opportunity to recommend the full version to automate the process.

I have the TIF folder (size limited to a few MB) on the system drive and that will increase fragmentation from a cleaned state up to a certain level and then stay there. No "important" files are fragmented ...... ...... I think.

I have set Diskeeper Service back to manual ...... ...... !

Christer

 

I am extremely ...... ...... about making a mess of the services. I didn't even notice my mistake when I quoted myself ...... ...... !

Diskeeper creates the service Diskeeper and nothing else. Norton is responsible for the other one but You probably figured that one out long before I did.

Christer