Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Expectations for 135 foot dipole
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:14:04 +0000 (UTC), david
wrote: I don't trust anything by Norton. Norton may be trustworthy. I say that in spite of your feelings because for my friends who use it, they do not suffer any attacks. However, they do suffer from its huge resource drain and my friends' most consistent complaint is how SLOW their system is. Norton sucks the air out of performance. Myself, I use Comodo for its firewall (and turn off its virus detection); and I use AVG (free) for virus detection. I also use Process Explorer (a very elaborate Task Manager) to look at the system usage. Even as I write this, my system has 96-98% CPU capacity left as it should. Any AVG process barely demands more than a quarter percent CPU cycles. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Expectations for 135 foot dipole
"Norton sucks the air out of performance"
I agree! I had a family client that I set up with AVG Free. It failed, situation beyond my skills, reload XP Home required... Maybe it would have done the job if I had opted for the pay version. On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:21:03 -0800, Richard Clark wrote: On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:14:04 +0000 (UTC), david wrote: I don't trust anything by Norton. Norton may be trustworthy. I say that in spite of your feelings because for my friends who use it, they do not suffer any attacks. However, they do suffer from its huge resource drain and my friends' most consistent complaint is how SLOW their system is. Norton sucks the air out of performance. Myself, I use Comodo for its firewall (and turn off its virus detection); and I use AVG (free) for virus detection. I also use Process Explorer (a very elaborate Task Manager) to look at the system usage. Even as I write this, my system has 96-98% CPU capacity left as it should. Any AVG process barely demands more than a quarter percent CPU cycles. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC John Ferrell W8CCW |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Expectations for 135 foot dipole
Bull****. I've seen Norton totally fail. I'm an IT guy that repairs this
stuff, and IMHO Norton itself is the same as a virus in many respects. Its not true that 'everyones' suite sucks out performance, but as you say, Norton sure does. All most SUITE software is nothing more than an in-house firewall that is substituted for the stock MS firewall. K On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:21:03 -0800, Richard Clark wrote: On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:14:04 +0000 (UTC), david wrote: I don't trust anything by Norton. Norton may be trustworthy. I say that in spite of your feelings because for my friends who use it, they do not suffer any attacks. However, they do suffer from its huge resource drain and my friends' most consistent complaint is how SLOW their system is. Norton sucks the air out of performance. Norton Security *SUITE* does this. So does everyone else's *SUITE*. Just plain Norton antivirus or whoever's antivirus isn't a significant resource hog. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Expectations for 135 foot dipole
Yes, everything can fail. I cannot forget the time when a Norton
update shut me down. It was a long ways back and I don't remember the details, but it was not pretty. I am an old retired guy who has fallen into the trap of maintaining a few family and church machines. Usually on my funds and always on my time. Since I have a lot of more interesting stuff to do I like to keep things simple as possible for me. Norton has 3-user packages that are available on sale from time to time and I am the only one that notices the performance hit. The background scans seem to be the worst offender for me. I tend to run too many browser windows open at any give time. Saving & restoring Tab groups has helped a lot there. It is a good time for an old geek to be retired. Information is widely available and lots of good guys to communicate with! BTW and even further off topic, my clothes washing machine failed early this week. I found a wealth of service info on YouTube which saved me about $500! I will take me a few days to recover from the physical efforts but it has been a very satisfying week! Hopefully I will get some maintenance done on the tower this coming week and get back to antennas... On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:05:41 -0800, "K" wrote: Bull****. I've seen Norton totally fail. I'm an IT guy that repairs this stuff, and IMHO Norton itself is the same as a virus in many respects. Its not true that 'everyones' suite sucks out performance, but as you say, Norton sure does. All most SUITE software is nothing more than an in-house firewall that is substituted for the stock MS firewall. K John Ferrell W8CCW |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Larry wa8qnn |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I have had center fed 80 meter dipoles operated on all bands fed with ladder line defy the "predicted patterns". Perhaps this was because of the ground in my area, or feed line radiation ? Whatever, who really cares ? The old saying "If it talks good, but models bad, invent a new way to model" applies here. The Bumblebee don't know, nor does it care, that it should not be able to fly. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Interesting 144 foot Dipole | Antenna | |||
10m ground wave expectations | Antenna | |||
Wire Antenna Element s : Five Foot (5') Long -=V=- Fifty Foot (50') Long | Shortwave | |||
FREE Birdview Dish's 9 foot and 10 foot | Boatanchors | |||
Question about AM radio reception, equipment, and expectations | Shortwave |