tried DW(Dr Web) about two years ago, and had some problems with it

ellison - your error is reported here

Jeff -

1. Open Task Scheduler



2. Click Create Task.



3. The rest of the tabs should be pretty simple for you to do, add arguments /full or /fast depending if you want a complete/express scan scheduled.







the last screenshot is probably the one you needed Jeff.

 

Thanks for confirmation.Im not sure whether its a screen res error?
ellison

 

I'm not sure. My laptop screen resolution is usually set to 1440x900; I changed it to 800x600, and the gui error still shows up. It would be nice if it were something as simple as that, but I don't think it is! Dr. Web will fix it eventually, I'm sure--especially if Chris gets after them!

 

it will be fixed, dont worry.

i posted the bug a few posts above, they fixed the russian text on the splash screen to 'version 4.44' in the same way.

just dont expect an immediate fix, although they might

im sure they have more important things to do right now

 

Re: Virus Weekly Stats....0Day

You use Avira Premium with the http filter? I use Avira free and I can't tell any difference between running with the AV on or off, performance-wise. I only run the avguard.exe as well - no interface of any kind.

 

Chris,

How often do you run a complete scan?

 

Re: Virus Weekly Stats....0Day

I currently am using Dr. Web. As light as Avira is, Dr. Web is lighter on my machine. Avira with or without http scanning is about the same speed in terms of web pages loading.

 

I run a complete scan every week bunk.

I use express only when I'm bored.

 

As you know, a complete scan takes about 2.5X longer than Avira. I agree it is probably more thorough. As you mentioned, perhaps the next version will have faster scanning. I did reinstall Avira on Saturday to see if it slowed things down compared to Dr. Web. It did-enough so that I removed it and reinstalled Dr. Web.

 

express is sufficent enough after you do a full system scan bunk, that should be much quicker or you

complete only takes 50 mind on mine, so I just do them

 

can you write for us how much Dr Web take from the ram (memory)
can you put a pic to let us see the task manager after you install Dr Web

thanks

i love the light antivirus

 

task manager can be misleading regarding how light an antivirus is, but in this case... its not.

without spidermail installed on vista...........

 

wow
its very light on the pc
i will try it today and i will tell you if its good on my pc today or tomorow

 

i just finish try dr.web now
scaning the complete computer not working i dont know why ?
any way i scan the computer by the custom scan and its exellent

the option very nice in dr.web
its very very very very very very light on my computer
i use it now and i think i will never leave it couse its very light and the browsing very fast and every thing in my computer fast

thank you Dr.web

i love it

i use comodo firewall pro with Dr.web antivirus and every thing exellent

 

Ok you guys got me to try drweb you all are correct it sure is lite more like extra lite

 

You got me wanting to try it too. i'll download tue and if it's that lite i'll buy it.

 

I don’t understand why it’s considered an antivirus light by its memory consumption.
The CPU consumption, and more, the throughput will influence the behavior of the PC.
An antivirus which considerably reduces the HD I/O Data Stream can’t be considered light.

I like Doctor Web (and I have the license for months), but at least for me, it generates time access on my PC with programs that are much longer than other antivirus.

I want to see an image with “Irfan View” (a light graphic viewer), it takes more than one second before opening with DrWeb ‘On Access’ enabled.
Without (or with some other antivirus), it is almost ‘instantaneous’.

Testing on a recent Windows XP install- HD Raptor - Core2 Duo.

So for me, it's not so light as that.

 

you dont think drweb is light?

Care to suggest one that betters it?

 

I´m not a DrW user myself (Avast), but I´m very interested of light AV's uses of CPU resources. So please check your I/O data stream as Solaris mentioned by using Process Explorer or some similar tool, and comment your results which would be highly appreciated.

/C.

 

I'm easy ;-) so I may load it up tonight as well & see how light it is, my default has been ESS so it'll have to be pretty light , we'll see...

 

I will do when I get home, trying to earn some pennys at the moment

I know vista shows an average of 0% CPU for each drweb process

 

Its perhaps specific to individuals setup?.Dr web for me to ,is not lighter than avast when opening files ,menus etc on my pc and i experience the delay too..For browsing it is not faster than avast again (also avast has http scanner running),i would say they are equal on my system.Maybe drwebs heuristics would naturally take a bit more cpu/time scanning than avast which doesnt have the same heuristics?.That said Dr web would probably be my choice if i needed anything other than avast at present.I do like its simplicity.For my system though it needs to be fine tuned a little ,so that i dont get those slight delays/pauses when opening stuff.
ellison

 

An antivirus which take 0% CPU when there is no 'On Access' activity on the PC, it seems normal.
On the contrary, it is direct to the garbage for the antivirus in question.


Now I prefer an antivirus take a little more CPU but check programs 'On Access' quickly rather than take virtually nothing in CPU but take more time to check files.
To make a caricature: 0% CPU (for the antivirus) but 2 minutes to open Photoshop or 30-50% of CPU and Photoshop opened in 6 seconds. It is a caricature, of course.

Now, if your PC is old, so with a less powerful CPU and hard discs not really fast, actually, I think that Doctor Web will be certainly the lightest.

In any case, for the update, Doctor Web is the lightest in my opinion.

If I look at the full PDF VB100 Virus Bulletin of June 2007 on Windows XP, DrWeb had one of the most important score for the “File access lag time” (shorter is the better), and the “On demand scanning speed” one of the shorter ( the greatest is the better).

An important “File access lag Time” and a poor throughput: Bad combination for a light antivirus; no ?

 

seriously, i really dont know what you mean.

ive tried all AV programs, yes ... all of them.

and none even come close to drwebs lightness.

this includes all operations, boot times, loading files, transfering files, encoding files, opening pdfs, browsing speed, gui/options speed, etc etc.

 

In my opinion VBA32 with "scan only new files" enabled is lighter than Dr.Web.