Hi :) I tend to take the view that some users will always manage to infect Windows without even seeming to try. Others will find their system gets infected despite elaborate precautions that no other sane person would bother with.
It's more a case of setting things up so that after it does get infected you have some way of dealing with it. Sometimes it's a simple little infection other times it might need a complete reinstall. Taking reasonable precautions makes sense but too much serious hampers productivity and becomes more of a problem than an actual infection would be. Just my 2 cents Regards from Tom :) >________________________________ > From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster <webmas...@krackedpress.com> >To: users@global.libreoffice.org >Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 16:16 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed > > > >Well, I have had a number of system in where I could not install or run >anti-virus the installed. I wonder about the portable versions of >anti-virus would work? What I usually do it remove the drive and plus >it into a USB adapter and use my most secured Windows PC and scan that >drive. I use Comodo [like the dragon] since it is free and it has a >full Internet Security suite available for the free download. I add a >bunch of other security packages to that and scan the "heck" out of the >drive to clean any "nasties" that might be lurking. > >So with all that security running on my Win7 laptops [dual boot with >Ubuntu 12.04LTS] they tend to run slower than other Windows systems >others may have, but slower and safer is better than getting it infected. > >So, between the Win7 and Ubuntu installs, Ubuntu 64-bit runs the fastest >for using LO. Less need of all those security packages running in the >background is one reason. I do do a anti-virus scan nightly on my >Ubuntu desktop though, just to make sure my downloaded files are clean >so I will not pass on infected files to others. > >I like the fact than AVG has a free Android version and it scans any >files that are downloaded and/or installed on my NOOK tablet. The same >goes with Comodo on my Win7 systems. > >So, LO is a fast loading package, even with security packages running in >the background, no matter which ones you choose for your Windows >systems. LO runs faster on Linux, since there are less a need for all >of those security packages running in the background. PLUS, unlike >Windows, Linux has both a 32-bit and a 64-bit install so it matched your >system a bit better. Of course one day we may have other installs >specific to ARM, AMD, Intel, and other CPU types so it is tweaked for >the processors. Raspberry Pi has "ported" LO to their version of Debian >to run more efficiently on that processor and OS that has been tweaked >to run the RPi. I wonder how many "ported tweaks" have been made for >specific systems out there world wide. > >So LO is fast loading to the point you are able to use it. The last MSO >I used loaded up to the page view window but took several minutes till >you were able to edit your document. I assume MS has sped that up a >bit, but I have not bough any MSO since 2003 and have not tested MSO >2010 or 2013 [yet]. Did use the trial 2007 a few times, though, but do >not remember it being much better than 2003. > > >On 08/06/2013 10:30 AM, Tom Davies wrote: >> Hi :) >> Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual >> other windows open. >> >> On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. >> 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto >> your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it >> 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a >> different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok >> to me. >> >> On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or >> the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. >> >> The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the >> anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising >> any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way >> from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any >> confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more >> likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more >> of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to >> structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is >> going to be best in the next years or so. >> >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster <webmas...@krackedpress.com> >>> To: users@global.libreoffice.org >>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 14:56 >>> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed >>> >>> >>> >>> Actually my 3 second test, as stated in a past post, was with 3 >>> utilities open on the screen and 2 or 3 Firefox browser windows open. >>> The utilities are always loaded at boot by my choice. I have several FF >>> windows open with many tabs involved. That is part of my "normal" >>> desktop use so I do not have to keep opening those pages every day or >>> so, and sometimes 3 or 6 times a day. >>> >>> So with all that background packages, 3 seconds is not bad at all for a >>> Ubuntu 12.04LTS system. >>> >>> Now on my Win7 laptops, well that is a different story, or similar >>> maybe. I have a "ton" of security packages loaded up at boot time. >>> Also there are some utilities and other options loaded, like printer >>> management and other "stuff" like that. So there is much more packages >>> running in the background with the Win7 laptops - both dual core but >>> different power - so click to splash to ready for work will take >>> longer. To be honest, I am one of those people that believes that >>> Windows is a OS that can be easily infected with "nasties" so you must >>> have a lot of security utilities running to keep that from happening. I >>> know some fools that do not even run anti-virus packages. They say "why >>> bother", "I am safe", "I never go to sites that will infect me", or my >>> favorite "It will never happen to me. You are just paranoid". >>> >>> So, the key is that fact that LO is faster loading to a usable state, >>> now, than it was last year. Also, it is not the speed to the splash >>> screen, but the speed of how long it will take till you are able to use >>> the package. >>> >>> So if you run all of the security package, like I do, on Windows it >>> will take longer to load up completely than with less security. The >>> same with Linux and how much is running in the background. The same >>> system, down to the exact same CPU, RAM, drive, OS, etc., will take >>> different times depending on what is installed and running. Even a >>> fragmented drive will reduce the load and usage speeds. >>> >>> So let us just say LO is loading faster than before and if a person >>> cannot wait for a few seconds for load time, then they will not be happy >>> with most packages out there that does similar "work". Tablets can be >>> worse load times for their packages and I know of no one locally who has >>> complained about that. ><snip> > >-- >To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > > > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
