Real-time Protection(scan Accessed Files)

Model

I installed BitDefender Internet Security 2009 and found the system to be extremely slow compared with IS 2008. Was wondering if it's due to enabling "scan accessed files" under "Real-time protection". If so should I uncheck scan accessed files? Will my system be unprotected if I unchecked it? In the 2008 version, I only enabled scanning when writing but not reading but I can't find this option in 2009. Is scan accessed files sames as scan when reading? If so I think that's the problem causing the slow-down. Also if I unchecked it the monitor would recognize that as a problem which requires fixing. Is it safe to turn off monitoring for real-time protection? Any comments would be greatly appreciated. If I can't fix this I might go back to 2008 instead cos it's simply too sluggish for my daily work.

alexcrist

Hello,

As far as I remember, BD2008 didn't have any options to set realtime scanning to read-only/write-only/both.

However, BD2009 does have this option, and it's called Scan only new and changed files (Antivirus -> Custom level). Enable that option, disable the option Scan inside archives, check Do not scan network shares and see how it works. Basically, set BitDefender to Default (not to Aggressive), because it offers as much protection as you need.

Cris.

vinmohan

Hello,

As far as I remember, BD2008 didn't have any options to set realtime scanning to read-only/write-only/both.

However, BD2009 does have this option, and it's called Scan only new and changed files (Antivirus -> Custom level). Enable that option, disable the option Scan inside archives, check Do not scan network shares and see how it works. Basically, set BitDefender to Default (not to Aggressive), because it offers as much protection as you need.

Cris.

Cris,

I am having a bit defender antivirus 2009 on a Vista system. Installation and initial updation went smooth but just within 2 days i find that my real time scan is disabled. I tried checking out all possible ways but it just wont let me. I guess it has something to do with vsserv.exe, checked it out in the services console but i cant start., stop or do anything with it. Even that process is not running in task manager. Please help me out to get the RTS running again

BXS

Cris,

I am having a bit defender antivirus 2009 on a Vista system. Installation and initial updation went smooth but just within 2 days i find that my real time scan is disabled. I tried checking out all possible ways but it just wont let me. I guess it has something to do with vsserv.exe, checked it out in the services console but i cant start., stop or do anything with it. Even that process is not running in task manager. Please help me out to get the RTS running again

All the problems can be solved. Just give it a bit of time, some of the users " /> don't care much for waiting for the devs to fix or point out the problem. So, hopefully soon there will be an answer to this. Also consider the fact that Vista is way to buggy at the moment, so this may not be BD's fault. I personally will not get Vista untill 2 years from now, when they end support for XP (hopefully by then 50% of the bugs would be worked out). I just went to 2009 from 2008, and believe me BD did a good job with their software, unfortunatly, it's MicroSoft that's causing the headache, you just need to tweak the OS... Unfortunately past Windows 3.1, MS has been putting out half-arsed products, making you pay to experience top of the line bugs... But everything is fixable, and doable even with their screw ups... Just unfortunate that a huge corp like MS makes everyone else do their work for them. Though there is no other way around it, if you want something done right you need to do it yourself... Fortunately some people are gracious enough to share their knowledge(as was in my case).

I can tell you how to get BD to work(as intended) in WinXP pro SP3. As far as Vista goes, albeit i cant help, but i don't think it would be much different from XP. So you may want to experiment. I can say this... BD setup is not user friendly, but once it IS set up, I doubt there is a better and more flexible AV out there, at least for more experienced user(those of us who do more than just check e-mail).

Hopefully in a couple of days, there will be something you can play with.

Sm3K3R

I personally will not get Vista untill 2 years from now, when they end support for XP (hopefully by then 50% of the bugs would be worked out).

You will not need Vista ,next year in summer,maybe, will have Windows 7 which is Vista as it should have been .The prebeta seems as light as XP and it seems it works quite well with Vista drivers.

BD 2008 is still better than BD 2009 ,which is still buggy and in some configuration will generate lots of strange bugs.

BD 2009 works better on multiprocessor computers from what i observed .Disableing the vulnerability check (BD 2009-advanced settiongs) may speed up the boot up of your computer as well as the settings recommended by Cris.

BXS

BD 2008 is still better than BD 2009 ,which is still buggy and in some configuration will generate lots of strange bugs.

BD 2009 works better on multiprocessor computers from what i observed .Disableing the vulnerability check (BD 2009-advanced settiongs) may speed up the boot up of your computer as well as the settings recommended by Cris.

Sm3K3R check your PM, there is a little explanation to this. I do have vuln check off, it just scans things and reminds you to update. And i have gotten no bugs, with the way I have it now, then again i don't use outlook, seems like that causes problems. I am not saying the software is perfect, but i find it to be way more stable than BD2008. I have WinXP Pro SP3, Intel P4 3Ghz(single processor), 2 GiGs of Ram. Yes, the boot up is about 3-5 seconds longer now, but as far as everything else, I dont even have to make the scan a background/low priority process. Compared to 2008, 2009 is a huge improvement with resource management. I can run bittorent, full screen game, and BD2009 at the same time without any slowdowns. The ONLY "configuration", that has to be worked out, is the OS configuration. And that's not too hard, just time consuming.

Sm3K3R

Sm3K3R check your PM, there is a little explanation to this. I do have vuln check off, it just scans things and reminds you to update. And i have gotten no bugs, with the way I have it now, then again i don't use outlook, seems like that causes problems. I am not saying the software is perfect, but i find it to be way more stable than BD2008. I have WinXP Pro SP3, Intel P4 3Ghz(single processor), 2 GiGs of Ram. Yes, the boot up is about 3-5 seconds longer now, but as far as everything else, I dont even have to make the scan a background/low priority process. Compared to 2008, 2009 is a huge improvement with resource management. I can run bittorent, full screen game, and BD2009 at the same time without any slowdowns. The ONLY "configuration", that has to be worked out, is the OS configuration. And that's not too hard, just time consuming.

On my AMD 6400+X2+2Gigs ,BD 2009 Antivirus was indeed lighter that BD 2008 in XP.The boot was slower but once you are in desktop you can feel the OS reacting faster.On the other hand on my AMD 2600+(1,9Ghz)+1GRAM, it seemed slow at boot and in desktop.So maybe BD 2009 reacts better to faster processors and not necesarelly multicore.

With BD 2008 and BD 2009,under XP ,reinstalling Microsoft Windows Installer and Micrososft Visual C++ Redistributable prior to reinstalling always helped and im glad you find that too.A list with the services that are needed by BD 2009 to run properly would be also usefull because a lot of users disable some services on their machines to make the OS faster and then, when they install BD find that is not working propelly.On this list Terminal Services service needs to be present.

A FAQ with all this things,like an installation guide,in a sticky ,on this forum would be nice and helpfull for all users that need help.

Anyway im sure that very soon BD 2009 will get rid of bugs.

Personally i wouldnt recommend BD 2009 for computers that have a single core processor running at a 2 Ghz core speed and under 1 Gig of RAM. " />

Sorry if there is something offtopic in my reply.