Resolved Software Implementation of Cable Modem Standby

$25 for a year. I think Ill do it if I like the 14 day trial. I am about fed up w/ Norton's obtrusiveness
And run Norton once a week as a backup.
Thanks, Bill

 

I don't know that you can use Norton as an on-demand scanner. I suspect not.

I use MSE on my W7 systems and WD on W8, with MBAM as my supplemental scanner. One thing nice about the real-time version of MBAM is that is plays well with other scanners.

 

Yes. It appears quite versatile. For example, I just ran a full scan of drive c: (292,348 items, about 15 min., 48 sec.), a quick scan of "commonly infected areas and startup files" (4,327 items, about 1:40) and a scan of h:\prog\e708 (27 items, about 2 sec.). I do a full scan (more than 2,000,000 items, about 2.5 hrs.) every so often.

 

No, that is not what I am saying. You can manually start a scan with any security program. What I am saying is, Norton loads up and runs in "real-time" when you start your computer. Therefore, Norton is running (and watching for malicious activity memory) all the time in the background, updating itself and conducting periodic scans of your drives, etc. So even if you are in a daze starring at a blank screen, Norton is running, consuming RAM and CPU cycles, and a lot of disk space too - even when not actively conducting a scan at that moment.

MBAM (Free) does not start with your computer. It is not running in the background. It only runs when you manually start the program, and then only scans your computer when you manually tell it to scan. That is, you call up the program "on-demand ".

MBAM Premium (the paid version) has a real-time component that watches all the time, runs periodic scans automatically, but also allows you to manually do a scan.

I am pretty sure you cannot start a Norton scan of drives without starting the full application with the real-time component too. So basically, what I think will happen with your plan of running Norton once a week is you will basically have to install it every week, run your scans and then uninstall it (and Norton does not like to be uninstalled) or else it (or some of its services - components that run with Windows) will still be running, consuming resources, and otherwise potentially be intrusive.

Now to be fair, I am not experienced with "ISP supplied" Norton so they may have a special agreement with your ISP to provide a truly "on demand" component that exits totally once the user closes the scan results windows, but I doubt it.

So, if you are tired of Norton, you need to totally uninstall the program and find a suitable alternative.

If you decide to remove Norton, I recommend you do so through traditional methods first - through the Uninstall Norton shortcut in your Start Menu, or via the Remove Programs applet in Control Panel. Doing so in Safe Mode will increase your odds for a successful and complete uninstall.

But if uninstalling those ways fail (and with Norton's history, it likely will fail or not be complete) then run the Norton Removal Tool to complete the process.

And once again, to be fair, in terms of security, Norton does a great job at protecting computers. It has lots of extra features like Parental Controls and such. But for many, the impact on performance and system resources is just not worth the hassle - not when there are many free and less expensive, but fully capable alternatives out there.

 

I understand all that. I uninstall and reinstall up to 5 times a week with no problems - except it's a pain to do. I use Revo for a complete uninstall. The whole process takes maybe 40 minutes, but requires only 3 or 4 minutes of my active attention.

 

Huh? Why? Even if requires just a few minutes of your attention, that seems like a waste of time to me, especially since it likely means your computer busy during those times.

 

Norton adds a 30+ sec. delay to the start of my debugger., Windbg, which I typically run dozens of times during the course of a programming session, for one thing. So I uninstall before starting and reinstall before going online. It is intrusive in oher ways.

 

Well, if it works for you, then who am I to say otherwise? But I might suggest you create an image disk so when you want a "clean slate" you just reinstall the image instead of uninstalling and reinstalling. You will have to re-create the image regularly or else you will get too far behind in security updates, but I still think that would be easier, or at least a more efficient use of your time.

 

Image of what? Please pardon my ignorance. but I don't understand this at all.Do you mean a bootable disk containing a minimal system with just the programs I want to work with?

 

Sorry. An "image disk" refers to a backup scheme where the image program basically creates an "image" of your entire disk (and all the data on it), saved in a single file. So when you restore, the exact image is put back on the disk. This is unlike other backup programs that backup separate files and folders.

See Disk Image for more information.

One of the most popular image backup programs is Acronis True Image.

NO! I will not! It is not necessary. We are all ignorant about everything at one point or another. In fact, I applaud you for admitting it, and asking questions to educate yourself.

 

My "entire disk" would take more than 30 4.7g dvds. I Must still not be understanding you.

 

Why would you use DVD's? An external HD would be a lot better choice and they are pretty cheap now.

 

They use compression techniques so the resulting image is smaller than the disk. But you would still be talking a lot of DVDs. If I had to use opticals, I would sure use BluRay, which can store about 25Gb per disk. But backing up to a big hard disk would be better.

The point I was trying to make was if me, I would use a backup program to restore back to where I was instead of constantly uninstalling and reinstalling. It does not have to be an "image" backup.

 

Out of the question. It would take at least 10 times as long to restore an image as to do the whole reinstall.

 

Depends on the system of course but here, it takes 10-15 minutes to do an image restore.

 

Not even. Much closer to SpywareDr's 10-15 minutes than your 10 hours. And also, much less user intervention.