On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:30:04 -0500, Jeff Thies
wrote:

On 1/17/2011 9:04 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
(Of course it isn't just the *computer* that has low memory these
days...g)

But seriously, could anyone give me a heads-up as to the least
expensive way to deal with this problem?

For the past 'n' weeks, I've been getting a pop-up at the lower r.h.
corner of the screen with HUGE flame-like chart visuals and a message
"High memory usage by Firefox". It used to create more virtual
memory, but that has stopped, so maybe the End Is Nigh? Am I heading
for a crash? First time I have run into this, so not a clue.

I just installed a new app (Norton Ghost - successor to GoBack), and
got the message that my memory was too low to run certain functions of
Ghost.

Yes, I can go out& buy new memory $$$, but I suspect something else
is at play. My modest usage is not a memory hog. What could be
draining virtual memory to this extent?

Would appreciate any input.

The message does NOT come from the operating system, it is a construct of an
application program (possibly Firefox).

Try using Internet Explorer for a while and see if the problem disappears.

That's probably a good idea anyway; Firefox has been known to give your cat
warts. (If you don't have a cat, you'll probably be okay. Except for the
flames, of course.)

The reason given meoriginally NOT to use IE was that it "leaked" more
than others. Is that true? Any test data on that -- not anecdotal?
Any data on that?

IE has a long history of memory leaks on certain javascript DOM calls.
That may, or may not be an issue depending on what is on the web page
you are viewing. Mostly this is mitigated by both MS and the people who
write problematic code, but not entirely.

It does use substantially less memory than FF, that is probably
because it is more tightly integrated in.

I'm a web programmer/developer. I do not like IE, none of us do
(buggy and incomplete implementation of web standards). But on a minimal
system, IE will work where FF will have problems.

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.

wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:30:04 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

On 1/17/2011 9:04 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
(Of course it isn't just the *computer* that has low memory these
days...g)

But seriously, could anyone give me a heads-up as to the least
expensive way to deal with this problem?

For the past 'n' weeks, I've been getting a pop-up at the lower r.h.
corner of the screen with HUGE flame-like chart visuals and a message
"High memory usage by Firefox". It used to create more virtual
memory, but that has stopped, so maybe the End Is Nigh? Am I heading
for a crash? First time I have run into this, so not a clue.

I just installed a new app (Norton Ghost - successor to GoBack), and
got the message that my memory was too low to run certain functions of
Ghost.

Yes, I can go out& buy new memory $$$, but I suspect something else
is at play. My modest usage is not a memory hog. What could be
draining virtual memory to this extent?

Would appreciate any input.

The message does NOT come from the operating system, it is a construct of an
application program (possibly Firefox).

Try using Internet Explorer for a while and see if the problem disappears.

That's probably a good idea anyway; Firefox has been known to give your cat
warts. (If you don't have a cat, you'll probably be okay. Except for the
flames, of course.)

The reason given meoriginally NOT to use IE was that it "leaked" more
than others. Is that true? Any test data on that -- not anecdotal?
Any data on that?

IE has a long history of memory leaks on certain javascript DOM calls.
That may, or may not be an issue depending on what is on the web page
you are viewing. Mostly this is mitigated by both MS and the people who
write problematic code, but not entirely.

It does use substantially less memory than FF, that is probably
because it is more tightly integrated in.

I'm a web programmer/developer. I do not like IE, none of us do
(buggy and incomplete implementation of web standards). But on a minimal
system, IE will work where FF will have problems.

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:24:34 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:



wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:30:04 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

On 1/17/2011 9:04 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
(Of course it isn't just the *computer* that has low memory these
days...g)

But seriously, could anyone give me a heads-up as to the least
expensive way to deal with this problem?

For the past 'n' weeks, I've been getting a pop-up at the lower r.h.
corner of the screen with HUGE flame-like chart visuals and a message
"High memory usage by Firefox". It used to create more virtual
memory, but that has stopped, so maybe the End Is Nigh? Am I heading
for a crash? First time I have run into this, so not a clue.

I just installed a new app (Norton Ghost - successor to GoBack), and
got the message that my memory was too low to run certain functions of
Ghost.

Yes, I can go out& buy new memory $$$, but I suspect something else
is at play. My modest usage is not a memory hog. What could be
draining virtual memory to this extent?

Would appreciate any input.

The message does NOT come from the operating system, it is a construct of an
application program (possibly Firefox).

Try using Internet Explorer for a while and see if the problem disappears.

That's probably a good idea anyway; Firefox has been known to give your cat
warts. (If you don't have a cat, you'll probably be okay. Except for the
flames, of course.)

The reason given meoriginally NOT to use IE was that it "leaked" more
than others. Is that true? Any test data on that -- not anecdotal?
Any data on that?

IE has a long history of memory leaks on certain javascript DOM calls.
That may, or may not be an issue depending on what is on the web page
you are viewing. Mostly this is mitigated by both MS and the people who
write problematic code, but not entirely.

It does use substantially less memory than FF, that is probably
because it is more tightly integrated in.

I'm a web programmer/developer. I do not like IE, none of us do
(buggy and incomplete implementation of web standards). But on a minimal
system, IE will work where FF will have problems.

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.


As usual, Tony, I have no idea if you are agreeing with me or
dissagreeing.

wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:24:34 -0700, Tony
wrote:



wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:30:04 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

On 1/17/2011 9:04 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
(Of course it isn't just the *computer* that has low memory these
days...g)

But seriously, could anyone give me a heads-up as to the least
expensive way to deal with this problem?

For the past 'n' weeks, I've been getting a pop-up at the lower r.h.
corner of the screen with HUGE flame-like chart visuals and a message
"High memory usage by Firefox". It used to create more virtual
memory, but that has stopped, so maybe the End Is Nigh? Am I heading
for a crash? First time I have run into this, so not a clue.

I just installed a new app (Norton Ghost - successor to GoBack), and
got the message that my memory was too low to run certain functions of
Ghost.

Yes, I can go out& buy new memory $$$, but I suspect something else
is at play. My modest usage is not a memory hog. What could be
draining virtual memory to this extent?

Would appreciate any input.

The message does NOT come from the operating system, it is a construct of an
application program (possibly Firefox).

Try using Internet Explorer for a while and see if the problem disappears.

That's probably a good idea anyway; Firefox has been known to give your cat
warts. (If you don't have a cat, you'll probably be okay. Except for the
flames, of course.)

The reason given meoriginally NOT to use IE was that it "leaked" more
than others. Is that true? Any test data on that -- not anecdotal?
Any data on that?

IE has a long history of memory leaks on certain javascript DOM calls.
That may, or may not be an issue depending on what is on the web page
you are viewing. Mostly this is mitigated by both MS and the people who
write problematic code, but not entirely.

It does use substantially less memory than FF, that is probably
because it is more tightly integrated in.

I'm a web programmer/developer. I do not like IE, none of us do
(buggy and incomplete implementation of web standards). But on a minimal
system, IE will work where FF will have problems.

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.


As usual, Tony, I have no idea if you are agreeing with me or
dissagreeing.
Hi,
I am just throwing something so you can further think. Stuff like Norton
will slow down the system and even cause a problem. Best thing to do
with a home PC is just protect it from Virus attack, block all the
garbage coming in and load it with just what you need(applications).
Never upgrade anything if things are doing fine. If you want to upgrade
wait until it is proven well.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:34:08 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:



wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:24:34 -0700, Tony
wrote:



wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:30:04 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

On 1/17/2011 9:04 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
(Of course it isn't just the *computer* that has low memory these
days...g)

But seriously, could anyone give me a heads-up as to the least
expensive way to deal with this problem?

For the past 'n' weeks, I've been getting a pop-up at the lower r.h.
corner of the screen with HUGE flame-like chart visuals and a message
"High memory usage by Firefox". It used to create more virtual
memory, but that has stopped, so maybe the End Is Nigh? Am I heading
for a crash? First time I have run into this, so not a clue.

I just installed a new app (Norton Ghost - successor to GoBack), and
got the message that my memory was too low to run certain functions of
Ghost.

Yes, I can go out& buy new memory $$$, but I suspect something else
is at play. My modest usage is not a memory hog. What could be
draining virtual memory to this extent?

Would appreciate any input.

The message does NOT come from the operating system, it is a construct of an
application program (possibly Firefox).

Try using Internet Explorer for a while and see if the problem disappears.

That's probably a good idea anyway; Firefox has been known to give your cat
warts. (If you don't have a cat, you'll probably be okay. Except for the
flames, of course.)

The reason given meoriginally NOT to use IE was that it "leaked" more
than others. Is that true? Any test data on that -- not anecdotal?
Any data on that?

IE has a long history of memory leaks on certain javascript DOM calls.
That may, or may not be an issue depending on what is on the web page
you are viewing. Mostly this is mitigated by both MS and the people who
write problematic code, but not entirely.

It does use substantially less memory than FF, that is probably
because it is more tightly integrated in.

I'm a web programmer/developer. I do not like IE, none of us do
(buggy and incomplete implementation of web standards). But on a minimal
system, IE will work where FF will have problems.

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.


As usual, Tony, I have no idea if you are agreeing with me or
dissagreeing.
Hi,
I am just throwing something so you can further think. Stuff like Norton
will slow down the system and even cause a problem. Best thing to do
with a home PC is just protect it from Virus attack, block all the
garbage coming in and load it with just what you need(applications).
Never upgrade anything if things are doing fine. If you want to upgrade
wait until it is proven well.
Well, I'll agree to a point, Tony - but if you are connected to the
internet running a Windows system, it is VERY good policy to install
Microsoft's security updates (to "plug" the holes in the system) as
they are made available.
To protect it from a virus attack requires some sort of anti-virus.
Norton is almost a virus itself.
There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

They are, however, totally useless if you do not install the signature
updates in a very timely manner. If you don't, you are susceptible to
first day type attacks.(may as well not have antivirus if it is not up
to date)

I work with this stuff on a daily basis.

Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

On Jan 18, 6:15*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

OMG!!

You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Is it good? I'm suspicious of anything free, or indeed anything from
Microsoft.

Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

Ewwww....I had always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? And instead
install WHAT??!! (Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.

As another poster on this thread hath vouchsafed:

There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

Well...."absolute" maybe not, but....

HB

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:40:11 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Jan 18, 6:15Â*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

OMG!!

You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Is it good? I'm suspicious of anything free, or indeed anything from
Microsoft.

Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

Ewwww....I had always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? And instead
install WHAT??!! (Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.

go to free.avg.com and install the free basic coverage.
As another poster on this thread hath vouchsafed:

There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

Well...."absolute" maybe not, but....

HB

On 1/18/2011 9:50 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:40:11 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Jan 18, 6:15 pm, wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

OMG!!

You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Is it good? I'm suspicious of anything free, or indeed anything from
Microsoft.

Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

Ewwww....I had always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? And instead
install WHAT??!! (Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.

go to free.avg.com and install the free basic coverage.
As another poster on this thread hath vouchsafed:

It doesn't catch everything. Nod32 does:

http://www.eset.com/download/free-trial/nod32-antivirus

My IT buddy had a client into gaming and such (all the places viruses
can be found) and he would have to clean up that machine every few weeks
(tried AVG, Kaspersky...). With Nod32, no trouble at all for going on 2
years. He swears by it.

http://www.eset.com/home/compare-eset-to-competition

The OP may not need it, but it is arguable the best with a lower
overhead. It's also not well known, which is why I mention it.

Jeff



There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

Well...."absolute" maybe not, but....

HB

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:40:11 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Jan 18, 6:15*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

OMG!!

You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Is it good? I'm suspicious of anything free, or indeed anything from
Microsoft.

Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

Ewwww....I had always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? And instead
install WHAT??!! (Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.

As another poster on this thread hath vouchsafed:

There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

Well...."absolute" maybe not, but....

HB




Why don't you just tell us what OS you run?

It has been days already.

I still want to know about your flames in FF.

On Jan 18, 8:40*pm, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:15*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:



Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

OMG!!



You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Is it good? *I'm suspicious of anything free, or indeed anything from
Microsoft.



Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

Ewwww....Ihad always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? *And instead
install WHAT??!! *(Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.

As another poster on this thread hath vouchsafed:

There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

Well...."absolute" maybe not, but....

HB

I run Avast Free with FF sandboxed (XP SP3)...it works for me!

On Jan 19, 4:40*am, Bob Villa wrote:
On Jan 18, 8:40*pm, Higgs Boson wrote:



On Jan 18, 6:15*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Tony Hwang wrote:

Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with
the real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.
Hi,
That is what you are saying.
If you are an expert on low language(machine code) You can do anything
you want. Norton stuff is nothing but memory hogger. It also snoops on
your system.

It's more than that: Norton is the barnacle of the software world!

After "Uninstalling" you have to download Symantec's Sooper-Sekret removal
tool to chip out the stuff the uninstall routine didn't get. Then you have
to manually scan the registry to snip out anything involving "Norton" or
"Symantec."

OMG!!

You're pretty clean at that point and can install the free Microsoft
Security Essentials or the anti-virus of your choice.

Is it good? *I'm suspicious of anything free, or indeed anything from
Microsoft.

Still, there are those who go to all the trouble to purge their system of
Norton, then install McAffee (because it was free from their ISP).

Ewwww....Ihadalways been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? *And instead
install WHAT??!! *(Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.

As another poster on this thread hath vouchsafed:

There are simple virus protection programs out there that DO work and
do not assume, like Norton does, that you are an absolute idiot and
will take no responsibility for your actions on the net or elsewhere.

Well...."absolute" maybe not, but....

HB

I run Avast Free with FF sandboxed (XP SP3)...it works for me!

Somebody on a computer group also recommend Avast, free or paid.

I inquired there whether I need to Uninstall Norton while trying out
Avast.

QUESTION: What is "sandboxing"? I am running XP, but don't know what
"SP3" means.

TIA

HB

Higgs Boson wrote:
Ewwww....I had always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? And instead
install WHAT??!! (Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.


If you value your life and those of your grandchildren, do not renew your
Norton subscription.

Google "anti-virus reviews." There are many well-meaning people and
institutions that have twisted them all assunder. The one I use, Microsoft
Security Essentials (MSE) is always in the top three or four.
http://www.techsupportalert.com/best...s-software.htm
http://www.security-faqs.com/the-top...-programs-2010
http://www.nist.org/news.php?extend.93

I use MSE because I figure MS knows its own internal workings better than
anyone else and their product, MSE, would stand a better chance of being
unobtrusive. I have no proof for this belief, it just makes sense (to me).

Remember, no anti-virus program catches everything. And no, you can't use
two at the same time.

On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 07:05:50 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Higgs Boson wrote:
Ewwww....I had always been told that Norton was a hog, so when my
renewal date comes up pretty soon, does the NG advise me to not
renew? And instead
install WHAT??!! (Not McAfee -- I had trouble with them long ago).

Will I get 3,000 different recommendations, or is there concensus on
one or two outstanding programs that do as good a job while eating
fewer electrons? KISS.


If you value your life and those of your grandchildren, do not renew your
Norton subscription.

Google "anti-virus reviews." There are many well-meaning people and
institutions that have twisted them all assunder. The one I use, Microsoft
Security Essentials (MSE) is always in the top three or four.
http://www.techsupportalert.com/best...s-software.htm
http://www.security-faqs.com/the-top...-programs-2010
http://www.nist.org/news.php?extend.93

I use MSE because I figure MS knows its own internal workings better than
anyone else and their product, MSE, would stand a better chance of being
unobtrusive. I have no proof for this belief, it just makes sense (to me).

Remember, no anti-virus program catches everything. And no, you can't use
two at the same time.



Not TOTALLY true. If, for instance, Rogers is your ISP they have
antivirus protection you can enable online - and you can STILL use an
installed anti-virus. It's called "belt and suspenders" when you use 2
different products end to end.

On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 07:05:50 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Google "anti-virus reviews." There are many well-meaning people and
institutions that have twisted them all assunder. The one I use, Microsoft
Security Essentials (MSE) is always in the top three or four.
http://www.techsupportalert.com/best...s-software.htm
http://www.security-faqs.com/the-top...-programs-2010
http://www.nist.org/news.php?extend.93

I use MSE because I figure MS knows its own internal workings better than
anyone else and their product, MSE, would stand a better chance of being
unobtrusive. I have no proof for this belief, it just makes sense (to me).

Remember, no anti-virus program catches everything. And no, you can't use
two at the same time.



I use MSE on two machines.

My bride visits coupon sites (some loaded with dangerous software I
found out).

She clicked... MSE told me something like the file had XYZ number of
viruses (more than dozens).

MSE stopped it dead in it it's tracks.

Manually run this on your system. Point to the file:

C:\Windows\System32\MRT.exe

By default it is supposed to run once a month. Users can run it...

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:13:29 -0500, wrote:

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???
Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"
Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.

The OP is using Ghost. He has to store those huge images somewhere.

Removing Norton would be high on my list of repairs G

On 1/18/2011 3:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:30:04 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

On 1/17/2011 9:04 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
(Of course it isn't just the *computer* that has low memory these
days...g)

But seriously, could anyone give me a heads-up as to the least
expensive way to deal with this problem?

For the past 'n' weeks, I've been getting a pop-up at the lower r.h.
corner of the screen with HUGE flame-like chart visuals and a message
"High memory usage by Firefox". It used to create more virtual
memory, but that has stopped, so maybe the End Is Nigh? Am I heading
for a crash? First time I have run into this, so not a clue.

I just installed a new app (Norton Ghost - successor to GoBack), and
got the message that my memory was too low to run certain functions of
Ghost.

Yes, I can go out& buy new memory $$$, but I suspect something else
is at play. My modest usage is not a memory hog. What could be
draining virtual memory to this extent?

Would appreciate any input.

The message does NOT come from the operating system, it is a construct of an
application program (possibly Firefox).

Try using Internet Explorer for a while and see if the problem disappears.

That's probably a good idea anyway; Firefox has been known to give your cat
warts. (If you don't have a cat, you'll probably be okay. Except for the
flames, of course.)

The reason given meoriginally NOT to use IE was that it "leaked" more
than others. Is that true? Any test data on that -- not anecdotal?
Any data on that?

IE has a long history of memory leaks on certain javascript DOM calls.
That may, or may not be an issue depending on what is on the web page
you are viewing. Mostly this is mitigated by both MS and the people who
write problematic code, but not entirely.

It does use substantially less memory than FF, that is probably
because it is more tightly integrated in.

I'm a web programmer/developer. I do not like IE, none of us do
(buggy and incomplete implementation of web standards). But on a minimal
system, IE will work where FF will have problems.

With all that said, it really is Norton causing the trouble, not FF.

Jeff




TIA

HB


Hey!!! A kindred spirit???

Works for me!

Norton USED to be the best you could get. Norton Utilities was the
best disk editor, back when Peter Norton WAS Norton.The early Norton
AntiVirus was precedent setting.
But today there are so many products that are SO MUCH better than
Norton's offering - particularly in how little they interfere with the
real business of "computing"

My IT buddy hates Norton and it sure didn't used to be that way. As far
as anti virus, he says NOD32. Myself, I run a firewall and that is it.

Norton products today just get in the way of everything, consuming
resources in prodigious ammounts.

Agreed.

Jeff