Running VS inside a VM, that would be an insane waste of time, VS already takes more than enough time to load and debug on local machine, leave alone on a VM.
It would probably take longer than running on local machine with WD on.
Why are we even messing with anything other than WD these days?
- Thread starter ncage
- Start date
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
It would probably take longer than running on local machine with WD on.
- Apr 19, 2017
- 237
I prefer to code on a virtual machine to not mess up my daily use system.
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,145
If you do not believe the people because they do not think like you, then why anyone should believe you?
Anyway, one closer look at the AV Labs performance test results is sufficient to see who can feel WD as slow, who can feel it as average, and who can feel it as fast.
If you will take into account all possible performance parameters (including boot time, RAM usage at idle, CPU at idle, etc.) and make them equally important, then WD performance would be average.
- Nov 26, 2016
- 699
If you do not believe the people because they do not think like you, then why anyone should believe you?
Anyway, one closer look at the AV Labs performance test results is sufficient to see who can feel WD as slow, who can feel it as average, and who can feel it as fast.
If you will take into account all possible performance parameters (including boot time, RAM usage at idle, CPU at idle, etc.) and make them equally important, then WD performance would be average.
I have a lot of devices at home ranging from above mentioned desktop to laptop with Ryzen 5 2500U, 8GB RAM and average speed SSD to bottom of the barrel netbook with Atom CPU, 2GB RAM and eMMC storage and WD is universally slow across all of them. Installing avast! or Kaspersky universally restores the performance. I'm not basing this on one system, I'm doing it across many devices of different performance level.
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,145
So do I, and many other people. It is not important because it is well known when WD can be felt as slow, average or fast (except rare events of unknown source).
Please note: I am not saying that your belief is not advantageous for you. Simply, many people do not experience such problems as you do.
Last edited:
I guess those who don't feel any system impact should not believe you either then. Any AV will have some sort of impact regardless. I've seen people say they found Kaspersky and Avast heavy, so I guess by your standards they are wrong. In all honesty everyone will have different experiences and that goes for any AV. You've given some good examples where WD may be slower than others, but I would argue that the vast majority of users probably don't have a downloads folder full of exe's and aren't compiling code, so in many respects WD will be plenty fast for them. I've used WD on and off and to be brutally honest, more often than not, I actually find it faster than most 3rd parties. Keep in mind though, I don't have a folder full of exe's and I don't compile code, so in my instance I don't even notice it. That doesn't mean it will be the same for someone else. At the end of the day, everyone should use what works for them, but I wouldn't be ignoring, or implying that others that have a different experience than you are wrong, lying or making it up.
I have multiple computers also, and my experiences are the same across all my devices. In all fairness though, performance has a much bigger picture than compiling code and opening a folder full of exe's. To me when I hear someone say it has a massive system impact, I'm thinking, booting into Windows, opening programs, surfing, etc... I'm not thinking of a few select tasks that is not typically common place amongst all users. If your compiling code and have a folder full of exe's across all your devices, then yes, your experience will be the same. As I've said above use what works for you and fits they way you use your computer. The same can be said for everyone else, so if someone uses WD and they like it and they don't have any issues with performance, then that's fine, but I wouldn't discount their opinion just because it's different from yours.
The fact that in-built Defender does not obviously impact my machine is the ONLY reason I keep any antivirus on here. At the core, aren't all the major products basically doing the same things (give or take) while occupying considerable space on the drive? If not, can't you supplement with a small software? Why is this discussion always so heavy and fraught with emotions? Selecting a product is sort of like selecting and buying a pair of shoes.
I have no bias whatsoever. Whatever keeps my aging machine safe and in top running order.
I have no bias whatsoever. Whatever keeps my aging machine safe and in top running order.
avstor
Level 1
- Jun 6, 2020
- 17
It isn't an insane waste of time. It's considered a best practice for a lot of reasons and there's more than just a few use cases.
All of us are issued new workstations every two years. They're currently the 2020 i9s or Xeons with 64 GB RAM. I rarely turn mine off. So the coding environment is immediately available upon the simple push of a button. The argument that it is a waste of time is not valid. We have very high productivity measured in LPCph. Likewise we also use remote development with containers, Azure, vSphere, Hyper-V, and so on. Even with an i5 the practice of running VS in a virtualized environment is rarely of any consequence timewise. I set up a Linux laptop running Virtual Box on it, then running Visual Studio in VB. It only has 8 GB RAM and it is not a slow machine for pounding out code.
Last edited:
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,788
Security enthusiasts hate the idea you could have a simple secure setup and turn your time and energy to other things.The fact that in-built Defender does not obviously impact my machine is the ONLY reason I keep any antivirus on here. At the core, aren't all the major products basically doing the same things (give or take) while occupying considerable space on the drive? If not, can't you supplement with a small software? Why is this discussion always so heavy and fraught with emotions? It's sort of like selecting and buying a pair of shoes.
I have no bias whatsoever. Whatever keeps my aging machine safe and in top running order.
The fact that in-built Defender does not obviously impact my machine is the ONLY reason I keep any antivirus on here. At the core, aren't all the major products basically doing the same things (give or take) while occupying considerable space on the drive? If not, can't you supplement with a small software? Why is this discussion always so heavy and fraught with emotions? Selecting a product is sort of like selecting and buying a pair of shoes.
I have no bias whatsoever. Whatever keeps my aging machine safe and in top running order.
It's just the nature of things, sadly.
People get emotional some times because they think their way of thinking is the only "right" one. Where I get frustrated is when people go along the lines of well my experience is different, so therefore you must be wrong. Sorry that's not how that works. I always preach that we need to stop this stupidity and just use what works best for you. Take advantage of the trial periods and come to your own conclusions. It doesn't matter what I use, or what someone else uses. All that matters is that I will use what works for me and everyone else should use what works for them.
What also get's me is when blanket statements are made about this or that, but it's only focused on 1 or 2 things, not the whole picture. For example, it's well known that WD isn't the best for compiling and opening a folder full of exe's, it's no secrete. However, because of those things blanket statements are made like "well WD is SOOOO SLOW, it brings my system to a crawl." You start asking what they mean, they give these 2 examples, but it's like, ok, well what about booting into Windows (oh that's fine), ok how about web browsing (oh that's fine too), or what about opening programs/gaming (oh that's fine too), etc... so it's not that WD is bringing your system to a crawl constantly, it's just those 2 things. So in that case just use something else, it doesn't have to be made into a big deal.
avstor
Level 1
- Jun 6, 2020
- 17
That is how the entire internet works, from Facebook to Twitter to forums of all types. It will never change. You either accept it or you don't.
The greatest tragedy is that those sensitive, emotional people use downvote buttons, report buttons, and behind the scenes antics as censorship mechanisms. The internet is a place of eternal conflict, a boiling cauldron of different points of view. That is what makes the internet fundamentally great. What is slowly killing the net are rules designed specifically to quash free exchange in the manner that those making the exchange want to do it. Enforcing the will of the hive on the minority because some people are sensitive, emotional and cannot handle getting their feathers ruffled.
There is absolutely no argument whatsoever that anyone can give to justify censorship of any kind for any reason. Censorship is the worst cringe of all. No matter how much you dislike what the message is or how much the manner in which it is presented offends you, you are wrong if your reaction is to lash out and censor. People believe they have a basic right to lash out and censor. They do not as nowhere is such a right granted. Any psychologist will tell you that your only right is to control your emotions.
Last edited:
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,145
I read many posts about the performance impact of several AVs. People use different hardware, different software, different AV configurations, and are focused on different performance issues. Furthermore, some issues can follow from the simple fact that the AV was installed/activated on the system with many leftovers (due to previous security installations).
So if one had several issues with any AV, then the best solution is not using it. This is true for WD and any other AV.
So if one had several issues with any AV, then the best solution is not using it. This is true for WD and any other AV.
avstor
Level 1
- Jun 6, 2020
- 17
This is also a multi-part problem that is never going to change. First, it is unreasonable to expect people to take the time to fully and clearly explain what it is that they are really saying. Second, it is the fault of the reader who incorrectly interprets and assigns their own meaning to what is posted.
Posts on the internet are highly inefficient and defective in terms of human communication as they are devoid of all the in-person ques such as body language, voice tone, facial expressions and so on.
- Dec 23, 2014
- 8,145
Preventing people from breaking the forum rules is not censorship. Anyone who wants full freedom can create an appropriate forum for that. Anyway, I still regret that some MT members were banned, even if other members felt hurt in some way by them. Generally, I can remember only a few events when people were very unkind to others. Usually, there is no problem with that, even if some posts are irritating (not posts from this thread).
Last edited:
avstor
Level 1
- Jun 6, 2020
- 17
Rules created with the intent and enforced in a manner to quash messages and push people off of a platform is censorship. One cannot hide behind the argument that a forum is "private property" with its own rules. That is the same tactic that governments, institutions and organizations use to justify suppressing points of view for a whole range of invalid reasons. Censorship is censorship.
Today, "curated content" is the basic mechanism to keep differing points of view, different personalities, different message types, that which differs out. "Curated content" is meant to block others' voices. That is complete cringe. It is both morally and ethically wrong, regardless of legality.
If I created a forum or online platform and kept everyone off of it via rules and enforcement except those who posted stuff that I agree with or find acceptable, then that is censorship. This kind of "content management" is the the truly horrific plague of the internet today.
Last edited:
- Apr 1, 2019
- 2,788
No, censorship is removing the ability of someone to speak freely at large. Not having rules in a specific place. You choose to speak here, where there are rules, but you are free to go elsewhere where those rules do not exist. You chose to create an account here where the rules were laid out ahead of time.
There no rules here that prevent you from formulating your own opinion, offending others while doing it that is a problem and will get you kicked out of most places, even outside the Internet (in more severe cases even cops can be called).
Rules to keep discussions civil, are not censorship whatsoever, a Staff Member banning cause he doesn't like a specific opinion would be abuse of power.
- Nov 26, 2016
- 699
Waiting for EXE to execute literally in SECONDS longer is not considered a "bigger" impact? What planet are you living on dude? But with other AV's it's instantaneous with pretty much zero delay. Executing apps is not a select uncommon scenario. Basically it's a problem with any EXE. Which is like the most encountered type of file after JPEG and MP3...
Or I'm suspecting now it's the other way around. My system is so fast that any change becomes noticeable as hell. Where people running crap mechanical HDD (haven't had one for years) wait for everything to load so long they don't even notice any difference with either AV. It all works equally (very) slow. Though that wouldn't explain why my crappy netbook with garbage eMMC storage still sees massive lag on program executions compared between WD and other AV's.
avstor
Level 1
- Jun 6, 2020
- 17
No, it's not. Look up the definition of censorship. There are many recognized forms and types of censorship. Just because various forms of censorhsip might be legal doesn't make it right.
That's fair, but to be totally honest, it goes the other way as well. Someone with a strong opinion one way or another, sometimes will cry foul and say your censoring me when they are told to be nice. There's a big difference between censorship (not being able to speak freely) and being utterly rude and condescending. Rules are in place to allow free speech, but they are also there to guide discussions to be civil and respectful. Everyone has differing opinions on this or that . Not everyone will agree with everything and that's totally fine. It's all about conduct, it doesn't matter if you agree, or disagree, as long as it's done respectfully. That's what the rules are for, about creating a respectful environment. More often than not people are banned because of their conduct, not because they are not being allowed to share their opinion. IMHO the internet has created more problems than good in this regard. It's great that it allows free speech, but on the flipside, it also allows them to conduct themselves in a way that they never would if they were talking face to face. Mostly because they can hide behind a persona. You can express yourself freely, just do it in a respectful manner.
That's fine, but again that's your experience, mine is different. I can tell you that on all of my systems, they vast majority of programs load instantly with WD enabled. I cannot explain why mine is like this and yours isn't, but like you I am going by my experiences. I don't care if you don't like WD, that's fine, it isn't for everyone, but please show a little more respect when someone experiences and says otherwise. Just because you have your experiences, it doesn't mean everyone else will, nor does it mean they are lying and making it up.
Similar threads
