Folding Forum

Straight up Norton AV rocks the last couple years. Great AV protection, low resource usage, etc. Always gets top marks in the reivews.

However, in prior years it was a resource hog and couldn't be recommended, so much improved. But now, when you add all the adware and internet protection stuff in the full norton product, you get Franklin'd, and trade security for freedom and get neither. It's actually a strong tool, and can be configured to work well, but it's a pain to figure out how to do that. Other products do it much more easily, and protect as well.

In Windows 7, I'm behind a good DSL modem/router, so I'm satisfied with MSE.

Oh well...

It's good to have some hard documentation support or question the theoretical. I'm glad someone took the time to test this.

bruce wrote:If disk check and disk reorg and virus scans are taking too much time away from FAH, change their schedules to manual and run them when you choose to.

I think the point of 64-bit viruses being rare could be restated. Suppose you're "evil" and you wish to create a virus. Why would you create a 64-bit virus that can only run on 64-bit systems when you can just as easily compile the virus in 32-bit and it can do it's assigned job on EITHER 32-bit or 64-bit systems?

Because a 32bit virus can not do anything to a 64bit system just the same as Stonecold's script may be able to run but it can not do anything to the 64bit OS. Some of the viruses can run on the 32bit apps but they can do no harm to the OS they can not deliver a malicious package to the 64bit OS. At least none that I know of. I would like a link anybody has to a 64bit virus that delivers a malicious package and can compromise the integrity of the OS

Several posts have been deleted since they were in violation of forum policy -- and have nothing whatsoever to do with Folding@home.

Topic locked.