What the heck is up with 4.2

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by trjam, Apr 28, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    At the start, I could max it out and no issues. Now it makes loading at startup slow, slow at updates, especially when the scan kicks in., this isnt Eset, please get it right. I have disable AH and RP, but I should not have to.

    And it isnt memory because I checked and it is fine.
     
  2. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    you know, I realize I play a lot of antics here, but also, in real life, I do own a 4 user license for Eset that is only 1 month old. So I try to keep my posts about Eset directly related from the consumers side. I asked a real question yesterday, and get nothing. Maybe I created this mess myself with how I act here but Eset, fools like me should get support to.

    Take your license and product and jump off a cliff. I have no faith in you to ever compete as you once did.:thumbd:
     
  3. SmackyTheFrog

    SmackyTheFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    Lansing, Michigan
    This is community forum about the product, not an official support channel and there are no promises of getting an immediate response or even one at all. What you are seeing is atypical and you should be using the proper support channels http://www.eset.com/support/contact#home
     
  4. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    I've eventually got a chance to talk to the guy responsible for advanced heuristics. According to him, no changes have recently been made to advanced heuristics that might suddenly start slowing down the scanning.

    If you've got files that took little time to get scanned with advanced heuristics (AH) and runtime packers (RTP) enabled in the past and the scan time has significantly increased recently, scan those files with AH and RTP disabled, one at a time, to see if it makes a difference and thus narrow it down to AH or RTP. We'd be interested in getting those files for perusal.
     
  5. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    I was getting the same issues (didn't have them with 4.0.424) I'm confident Eset will resolve the issue eventually. If I remember correctly 4.2 was a larger download as well.
     
  6. nanana1

    nanana1 Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    947
    @trjam,

    Understand your frustrations and I have now also accepted the fact ESET support is unresponsive and at times, arrogant.

    Suggest to revert to build 4.0.424 which is what I had recommended in a thread here. :p
     
  7. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,721
    Location:
    Texas
    Let's be fair. There was a response.
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1668711&postcount=4

    It would also be helpful if posters would list their operating systems, and any other security software they use or have used in the past.
     
  8. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    ronjor, I am honestly not trying to be rude and Marcos thank you, but it isnt scanning. It slows everything down on my computers. From opening programs to opening IE8, I can click on the Micosoft button on the bottom left to open programs and it takes forever for the menu to advance. If I remove Eset, all is normal. This is confirmed on 1 HP Desktop, 1 HP laptop with Windows 7, both 64 bit. A Dell 32 bit laptop and a Compaq 32 bit laptop. I dont run any other kind of security.
     
  9. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I do use FD-ISR and make clean snapshots whenever I put something new on. Using Kaspersky right now, not saying I like it or endorse it, but none of these issues.
     
  10. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,721
    Location:
    Texas
    I'm using Win 7 64bit with none of these problems. I would follow the instructions from Marcos.
     
  11. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    If he had read my first post he would have seen I have done that. I relaize it says by checking these features can have adverse effects on your PC, so I did disable them and nothing. But again, it isnt with scanning but more like it just turns my computers into sluggish mode.
     
  12. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,721
    Location:
    Texas
    Perhaps ESET can offer some suggestions here for you.

    One thing I would recommend is allow others to help you before condemning a well respected program.
     
  13. Marcos

    Marcos Eset Staff Account

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    14,374
    In this case, a log from Process Monitor might shed more light. Please create one when you notice the performance has slowed down (it should be enough to leave PM capturing the data for a short moment), upload it somewhere and PM me the link to it.

    If disabling real-time protection helps, check the Statistics window for information about the files being scanned; you might find out that a particular file is being scanned continually and excluding it would resolve the problem. If that's not the case, try setting real-time protection to scan files with default extensions instead of all files and let us know about the result.
     
  14. revlou

    revlou Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Posts:
    1
    trjam:

    "At the start, I could max it out and no issues. Now it makes loading at startup slow, slow at updates, especially when the scan kicks in., this isnt Eset, please get it right. I have disable AH and RP, but I should not have to."

    "It slows everything down on my computers. From opening programs to opening IE8, I can click on the Micosoft button on the bottom left to open programs and it takes forever for the menu to advance."

    I'm having (or had) exactly the same problem.

    I'm running Vista on a 3 year old notebook with 1GB RAM.

    I originally got NOD32 (3 years ago) as it used very little RAM, now version 4 seems to be another MacAfee!

    Yesterday I removed version 4 and installed version 3 and everything is running smoothly. I will stick with this version for the time being - I hope Eset carry on making it available.
     
  15. SolidState

    SolidState Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Posts:
    92
    I seriously wonder if this forum isn't the victim of astroturfing and meat puppetry
     
  16. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    well I dont know, maybe. But if your words of wisdom are directed at me, dont. There isnt a member here that doesnt care more for Eset then me. I dont have to prove why. I am going back to 4.0 in about 10 minutes to see what it does for my issues. But please, dont ever,ever, question my loyality or posts about Eset in a negative way. I mean that bub.
     
  17. SolidState

    SolidState Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Posts:
    92
    I wonder if the realtime protection doesn't have issues with SearchIndexer.exe and SearchProtocolHost.exe etc.

    These slowdowns so many experience I do to some extent, though PC being the crazy fast beasts they are today it hardly affects productivity for me and it's never "sluggish" as you describe.

    Perhaps disabling activity of these might help? or their xp equivalent if you have the search bar in XP?
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2010
  18. SolidState

    SolidState Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Posts:
    92
    hey bro...

    Your post count is a testament to your will to rid the world of malware and your nature to help/share such knowledge with others... hats off

    I sure wish you'd share more technical info regarding the issues you've had with the 4.x builds as also being a loyal Eset user for almost a decade I'm shocked to hear a 6k poster here be so upset with eset and me... bub! I also use the same OSs etc and haven't had the level of problems so many others also have posted about. 4.x hasn't been bad for me but just today I went to build 4.2.40 from 4.2.35 My experience has been better with 4.2 from 4.0 and this would only make sense considering IT'S A LATER BUILD LOL
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2010
  19. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    no problem. Eset has fought back in the last 15 months to have some of the best detection out there. They deserve the heat, to keep the embers burning, but I still think to me, they are untouchable with a light, effective program that doesnt require 9 layers of cake icing to help it.
     
  20. SolidState

    SolidState Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Posts:
    92
    I can't help but notice any files SearchIndexer.exe and SearchProtocolHost.exe access the 4.2 "AMON" or what ever you guys call it now scans every file searchindexer.exe accesses...

    Is this a good idea from a performance standpoint? I mean it's just indexing the files it's not running them.

    I bet an exclusion for both would have a large benefit for performance. While the machine is indexing anyway...

    Perhaps the problems people have is it's indexing large media libraries (video/audio) etc... and with "AMON" or what ever it's called now scanning each file as well...

    Eset do you think this boxed behavior is a good idea !?!

    Hey wait didn't you guys change the way exclusions work and it's only for ondemand scanning not the realtime element? Man if this is so what a LAME THING!!!

    Older versions had exclusions for BOTH the realtime and ondemand modules...
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2010
  21. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    reinstalled 4.2 with default settings and all is cool, for now. I refuse to use Panda after today and if this doesnt work, well, Jerry, Avast will do it for me.
     
  22. SolidState

    SolidState Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Posts:
    92
    does all cool mean your not experiencing the slow downs?

    Read last comment before this one...

    I wonder...
     
  23. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ok Marcos, it happens on 32 bit and 64 bit when runtime packers and advanced heuristics are checked. Also in processes for 64 bit why does it show ekrn.exe *32 and it doesnt show this on my 32 bit systems.

    With RP and AH checked system processes goes up to 60 percent, even opening a simple program like Disk Cleaner.
     
  24. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
  25. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ok it only involves run time packers and advance hueristics under real time file system and advance setup. Having both checked in antivirus and antispyware dont seem to impact the system.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.