Uncomplaining About Startup Slow-Down

I complained about it among other folks, now I am uncomplaining...

From what I can tell, since .95 came out, I have not experienced the startup slow-down any more!

Anyone else?

 

We do have an additional improvement coming in the next round of builds which will make the startup slowdown dramatically less for Essentials and Complete customers using Backup and Sync

 

They also fixed it for me from WR support!

It was painful to see the computer boot in additional 2 minutes moreless. Now with .95 everything is fine!

Also note that I don't use Backup and Sync so that wasn't my problem.

 

Every night I pray in my sanctuary corner of my office that the next test batch shows Webroot on top. Even if they aren't # 1, I want them to be close, because their super light performance will more than make up for that. But hopefully they will be as close to the top as possible.

If they are not near the top though, I will pray in my sanctuary every day and curse them.

Lol I'm kidding, I have no sanctuary corner. Just do your thing Webroot!

 

We will be. We're constantly improving everything - from performance, to detection, to cleanup. In particular, releases above 8.0.1.150 will have a significantly improved cleanup engine, and past 8.0.2.x will have another round of cleanup improvements included. After that, 8.0.4.x will have some dramatic scan engine improvements as well.

There are a lot of exciting things to come, so stay tuned!

 

Awesome.I would expect nothing less from a team of such immense talents.It's great to see the focus on making a product better doesnt stop at product release,but continues.It's also refreshing to see programmers and such that actually listen to the consumer and implement changes based on consumer feedback.So happy i chose WSA-C

 

I LOVE your confidence!

It sounds like you know exactly what went wrong or not as good as could be in the past and have fixed it.

 

STV0726 "Every night I pray in my sanctuary corner of my office that the next test batch shows Webroot on top"
I prefer to go with what's best now, and as a result of that reasoning have recently replaced NIS with the very excellent KIS, and Webroot has been replaced by the welcome return of that old favourite Prevx 3.0. So this years dream team is Kaspersky 2012 and Prevx 3.0, it'll do for me

 

Hi sturgess

Do yourself a favour and swap Prevx3 for WRSA Essentials. KIS & Prevx3 was my combo until WRSA appeared on the scene and since I have run KIS (now 2012) with WRSA E they have gotten along as famously as ever.

I recommend the move if your Prevx3 license is due to expire shortly (as the transition for Prevx3 license holders to WRSA is I believe still some way off). If so then you can probably find a copy of WRSA E for less than the Prevx3 renewal. If however you have a goodly amount of time on your Prevx3 licenses then I would hold fire and wait for the transition.

Either way IMHO WRSA is the way forward if you are a KIS user and want a layered approach.

Regards



Balders

[@all Please not that this post is not meant to start a polemic on which other security apps go best with WRSA, etc. ]

 

Thanks for the tip Balders, already tried a similar combo some months back, unfortunately it did not work well with my favourite bit of banking security Trusteer Rapport. With Prevx I can disable SOL and it and Rapport get on famously, but when I tried Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus , NIS 2012, and Rapport, Rapport was continually blocking Webroot from doing something or other whenever I went banking which was a pity

 

Wow... You must be changing security programs weekly. Does that get expensive? XD

Every test is a snapshot of that moment in time against that specific set of samples. Anybody who has been in the security industry for a long time knows that the fluctuations on detection are a daily if not even hourly thing, and will change based on what set of samples you throw at it.

If you look at security by numbers and ratings, you'll screw yourself badly. "Every day somebody comes in with <insert security package here> and still has an infection that I have to clean for them." Doesn't matter -what- security package they have. Even without infections, phishing and other things will give people headaches.

Security is not supposed to be your Impenetrable Fortress of Light and Power. Security is supposed to be your seatbelt and cleanup crew. Think of it this way. If (think "when", actually, even if it never happens, always think "when") you get infected, will KIS peeps take care of it for free, even up to shipping out offline utilities and connecting to your computer remotely through them to fix it? Webroot does, but I know for example that Norton didn't. Intentionally infected the system with stuff that NIS couldn't remove, then contacted them. I was told I needed to buy malware removal for $99. So I did (Yay for testing funds!). They remoted onto the computer, ran MBAM (No luck), scanned with their installed Norton four times (It was broken by the malware so the scan died immediately), then proceeded to have me get the Windows recovery disk and walked me through wiping out the whole test system and restoring it from scratch. Got me started on the process and then let me go. Of course since there was an MBR infection as part of the rootkit, it was immediately reinfected. Called back and was told that I would have to pay another $99 to get it fixed again.

Anyway, when you think of it like a seatbelt, you can then think of how much you want it to affect you. You can get a good seatbelt that won't get in your way, or you can get something like a five point harness with vital monitors, gyros, motion sensors, impact sensors... that takes five minutes to get in and out of...

Overall though, the end result is really simple.
You change security like you change underwear. I use WSA.
You are currently using KIS, which got a whopping</sarcasm> 43 on Passmark against WSA and five others. At least it beat McAfee's 38.
WSA got first place with 90. The next best were ESET and Norton with 62.

We both haven't gotten infected.
But if we had identical hardware and software other than the security stuff, my computer would run faster than yours, start faster, bug me less about things, and work better overall. And if both of us DID get infected, I know that quick contact with Webroot will get it fixed properly for me.

 

Wow... You must be changing security programs weekly. Does that get expensive? "
The oodles of money saved by being able to bank safely online outweighs the initial cost of excessive security, and being in a position to buy the kind of computing power that would run a jumbo jet makes a nonsense of any slowing down that is argued by folk who may be using inferior machines

 

I dunno... A score of 90 vs 43? That's more than twice better. So obviously you'd have to have twice as much processing power to be not quite as good.

Oh, wait... Jumbo jet computer?

"The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has said an “irregularity” in one of the plane's computers may have caused the dramatic altitude change which hurled passengers around the cabin. A passenger clicking a wireless mouse mid-flight recently sent a Qantas jumbo jet off course on a three-degree bank."

Even WINDOWS doesn't normally crash just because somebody ELSE clicked a wireless mouse. XD

But in all seriousness, I figure the end result is the same, like I said.
We both don't get infected.
We both don't have any money stolen from the bank.

Just your route to get there slows your computer and costs more.

Nah, but whatever makes you feel safe and happy. I've been in the industry 17 years now. I'm happy with WSA.

 

I choose an AV for long-term use (at least 1-2 years) based on the following main criteria:

- 3rd party, independent test results. More emphasis for me is placed on consistency rather than performing excellent but failing to maintain efficacy over time. (I didn't always think this way--I used to think in today's malicious world, we need the top notch protection product always. But this isn't realistic, for several reasons which I won't get into here. The main one is that no AV should be the only part of your defense. There are more absolute technologies available. So, I switched to be a bit more well rounded in how I decide AV efficacy and I'm a little more lenient now.)

- Quality of customer service, technical support, presence of real employees talking with customers, company openness to user issues and feedback. Company response time to false positives. (NEW: Company does not force controversial settings that may cause file loss of false detections)

- Company is rigorously developing their products and is continuously finding innovative ways to incorporate the latest anti-malware technology into their software. Companies that still rely too heavily on signatures are less likely to ever be used by me.

Prevx met two of those main criteria along with other ones, but they were not really widely tested by independent organizations; their performance was good based on PC Mag, some reputable individual testers, and HitManPro utlizing them.

Now, Webroot is beginning to meet all 3 criteria for me!