Conflict with Webroot's Spy Sweeper

[awgardnerau]

Have recently installed Spysweeper. Performance of Access has
deteriorated. Example. I use a function to swap from one of our
companies to another by delinking and relinking to a different set of
backend tables. With Spysweeper not running process takes 1+ seconds.
With Spysweeper running process takes 6 seconds. The difference is very
visible as the linking process has a progressbar attached to it.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
(Running A97 on XP Professional)

[Bruce Rusk]

Not with Access specifically, but I've noticed other slowdowns with
Spysweeper. I use it to run sweeps, but never leave it active (in the system
tray). It just messed up too many other things (slow startup, etc).
<aw*********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

Have recently installed Spysweeper. Performance of Access has
deteriorated. Example. I use a function to swap from one of our
companies to another by delinking and relinking to a different set of
backend tables. With Spysweeper not running process takes 1+ seconds.
With Spysweeper running process takes 6 seconds. The difference is very
visible as the linking process has a progressbar attached to it.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
(Running A97 on XP Professional)

[Bruce Rusk]

Not with Access specifically, but I've noticed other slowdowns with
Spysweeper. I use it to run sweeps, but never leave it active (in the system
tray). It just messed up too many other things (slow startup, etc).
<aw*********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

Have recently installed Spysweeper. Performance of Access has
deteriorated. Example. I use a function to swap from one of our
companies to another by delinking and relinking to a different set of
backend tables. With Spysweeper not running process takes 1+ seconds.
With Spysweeper running process takes 6 seconds. The difference is very
visible as the linking process has a progressbar attached to it.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
(Running A97 on XP Professional)

[David W. Fenton]

aw*********@yahoo.com wrote in
news:11**********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

Have recently installed Spysweeper. Performance of Access has
deteriorated. Example. I use a function to swap from one of our
companies to another by delinking and relinking to a different set
of backend tables. With Spysweeper not running process takes 1+
seconds. With Spysweeper running process takes 6 seconds. The
difference is very visible as the linking process has a
progressbar attached to it. Has anyone had a similar experience?
(Running A97 on XP Professional)

If you'd avoid Microsoft email clients and Microsoft browsers, you
wouldn't need to run spyware detection software at all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Bruce Rusk]

Not strictly true.

Among other things, Spysweeper can remove certain tracking cookies, and can
detect spyware that comes along with downloaded software, as well as
keyloggers and the like.

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xn**********************************@216.196. 97.142...

aw*********@yahoo.com wrote in
news:11**********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

Have recently installed Spysweeper. Performance of Access has
deteriorated. Example. I use a function to swap from one of our
companies to another by delinking and relinking to a different set
of backend tables. With Spysweeper not running process takes 1+
seconds. With Spysweeper running process takes 6 seconds. The
difference is very visible as the linking process has a
progressbar attached to it. Has anyone had a similar experience?
(Running A97 on XP Professional)

If you'd avoid Microsoft email clients and Microsoft browsers, you
wouldn't need to run spyware detection software at all.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

"Bruce Rusk" <br***************@stanford.edoo> wrote in
news:uY********************@comcast.com:

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bway.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xn**********************************@216.196. 97.142...

aw*********@yahoo.com wrote in
news:11**********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

Have recently installed Spysweeper. Performance of Access has
deteriorated. Example. I use a function to swap from one of our
companies to another by delinking and relinking to a different
set of backend tables. With Spysweeper not running process takes
1+ seconds. With Spysweeper running process takes 6 seconds. The
difference is very visible as the linking process has a
progressbar attached to it. Has anyone had a similar experience?
(Running A97 on XP Professional)
If you'd avoid Microsoft email clients and Microsoft browsers,
you wouldn't need to run spyware detection software at all.

Not strictly true.

Among other things, Spysweeper can remove certain tracking
cookies, . . .

Get a browser that allows you to manage your cookies (that is, one
*not* made by Microsoft) and you don't have any issues. I have
Mozilla (my default browser) set to save cookies only for the
current session. My cookie files has ZERO entries in it. No spyware
detection software can do better than that!
. . . and can detect spyware that comes along with downloaded
software, as well as keyloggers and the like.

You can easily run the software after installing downloaded software
to clean up.

And if you don't download freeware/shareware, you don't need even
that.

And if you avoid Microsoft Internet-related products, you don't need
to run any kind of spyware detection software full-time (which is
actually waht I meant, though I wasn't explicit about that) -- you
only need it to occasionally scan your system, after installing
software, or when you notice something suspeicious.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc