Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="truefacts" data-source="post: 889320" data-attributes="member: 87912">It is very light. The only ones that complain are those that have folders that contain a huge amount of files (which can be excluded from WD real-time scan) and also those that compile code on their system (which also there are easy workarounds). These are complaints limited to a very small number of users. The complaints are a manipulation or exaggeration of the facts.You do not need to run full system scans. That is a waste of resources. All you need is real-time scanning. The AV industry recommends that you rarely run full system scans.As for the other complaints about older PCs, well here is the truth. Security software publishers do not make any real efforts to be light on older hardware. They just guarantee minimum compatibility. Performance (use of resources) and speed are only guaranteed on the systems that meet the minimum specifications defined for the software.There are a lot of unrealistic expectations about performance. And when it comes to memory, complaints about memory usage are completely wrong as all antivirus are designed to consume as much RAM as possible. It is just that some AV use techniques to circumvent (reduce) reported RAM usage. The fact of the matter is that using as much RAM as possible increases the speed of the software. RAM is meant to be consumed and used; it is not meant to be rationed or conserved. Unused RAM is wasted RAM.Also, complaining about heavy Disk In\Out on HDD just is not a valid. HDD disk I\O causes heavy resource consumption.On SSD WD is quite fast with negligible slow downs for most people.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="truefacts, post: 889320, member: 87912"] It is very light. The only ones that complain are those that have folders that contain a huge amount of files (which can be excluded from WD real-time scan) and also those that compile code on their system (which also there are easy workarounds). These are complaints limited to a very small number of users. The complaints are a manipulation or exaggeration of the facts. You do not need to run full system scans. That is a waste of resources. All you need is real-time scanning. The AV industry recommends that you rarely run full system scans. As for the other complaints about older PCs, well here is the truth. Security software publishers do not make any real efforts to be light on older hardware. They just guarantee minimum compatibility. Performance (use of resources) and speed are only guaranteed on the systems that meet the minimum specifications defined for the software. There are a lot of unrealistic expectations about performance. And when it comes to memory, complaints about memory usage are completely wrong as all antivirus are designed to consume as much RAM as possible. It is just that some AV use techniques to circumvent (reduce) reported RAM usage. The fact of the matter is that using as much RAM as possible increases the speed of the software. RAM is meant to be consumed and used; it is not meant to be rationed or conserved. Unused RAM is wasted RAM. Also, complaining about heavy Disk In\Out on HDD just is not a valid. HDD disk I\O causes heavy resource consumption. On SSD WD is quite fast with negligible slow downs for most people. [/QUOTE]

Verification