Computer Problems

[DeskNumber182]

I'm not saying their PCs weren't slowed down. I'm saying they were slowed down for a different reason than they've chosen to believe.

You know this 100%?

shouldn't that sentence finish with "... at compile time"?

No Edited October 2, 2012 by DeskNumber182

[eFestivals]

You know this 100%?

without knowing what's on their systems, of course not.

But there's plenty of things installed on my PC which has a much greater effect on it's speed than any AV software I've ever insatalled.

That aside and as I've already said, the same "Norton is shit" thing has been going around for 20+ years, including when the only major alternative was the exact same product - and so that "Norton is shit" thing's origin is certainly not based in the facts.

No

No

then the bloatware is visual studio.

Get a decent programming tool instead. I don't get any problems with Delphi and 260,000 lines of code.

[DeskNumber182]

then the bloatware is visual studio.

Get a decent programming tool instead. I don't get any problems with Delphi and 260,000 lines of code.

I am afraid it's another "no" from me. Visual Studio is perfect for my needs - it does what I need it to. I don't get any problems with millions lines of code interacting with terabyte DBs.

Just came here to say that my personal experience of Norton vs other major AV vendors is a negative one.

I'd use an emoticon but feel they've been overused somewhat already!

[The Nal]

I'd use an emoticon but feel they've been overused somewhat already!

[eFestivals]

I am afraid it's another "no" from me. Visual Studio is perfect for my needs - it does what I need it to.

That's an entirely different consideration.

I'm amused at Norton being called bloatware when we're all (I presume) using Windows, and some of those who are calling it bloatware are using Visual Studio. When has Microsoft ever released anything which isn't bloatware?

[eFestivals]

No... Wrong again...

Issue only happens with Virus checking enabled... Nothing to do with VS,,,

you're running two programs.

If you switch off the AV then VS runs OK.

If you switch off VS then the AV runs OK.

Which is the bloatware?

All you can accurately say is that the two don't happily co-exist, unless you've specifically looked into where the bottleneck is when both are running.

The bottleneck can be in one of three places:-

- the processor

- the disk read/write

- the bus

What's VS doing to eat up so much of the resources when simply running (rather than compiling)?

[DeskNumber182]

Dare I say Neil is biased when it comes to Microsoft

Sounds very much like it. Visual Studio is ideal for my work. With or without it, Norton has a tendency to ruin any PC I've worked on.

What's VS doing to eat up so much of the resources when simply running (rather than compiling)?

No one says that it is though.

That's an entirely different consideration.

I'm amused at Norton being called bloatware when we're all (I presume) using Windows, and some of those who are calling it bloatware are using Visual Studio. When has Microsoft ever released anything which isn't bloatware?

You're easily amused then. I've not called Norton 'bloatware'. It also depends on your definition of 'bloatware'. I've used Oracle, MySQL and MS SQL and found MS SQL the best for the needs of the companies I've worked at but I fear this is moving drastically away from the original topic but then again, doubt it'll get back anytime soon as people on the internet have differing opinions!

Ok, here you all go

Edited October 2, 2012 by DeskNumber182

[eFestivals]

Sounds very much like it. Visual Studio is ideal for my work. With or without it, Norton has a tendency to ruin any PC I've worked on.

for most people the only reason why VS is 'ideal' is because it's become pretty much an industry standard - but not because it's the best product (it certainly wasn't when it first replaced VB).

Bias doesn't come into it. Microsoft bloat their products and always have done - as proven by just about all of their product range, where almost all started as the products of another company. A simple comparison of the pre-MS and MS products got to make that very plain.

You're easily amused then. I've not called Norton 'bloatware'.

you, nope. Others yep.

Edited October 2, 2012 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

... found MS SQL the best for the needs of the companies I've worked at ...

Ignoring the fact that that's probably because it easily fits with the existing computer installations at those companies...

It's probably so good because it's Borland and not MS at its core.

[DeskNumber182]

for most people the only reason why VS is 'ideal' is because it's become pretty much an industry standard - but not because it's the best product (it certainly wasn't when it first replaced VB).

I won't go into my CV right now but at the moment, there's nothing better, especially when you take into consideration the majority can get away with using the free express versions. Then again, that is my opinion based on 20+ years contracting.

So slow computer eh? It's probably to do with your mouse

Ignoring the fact that that's probably because it easily fits with the existing computer installations at those companies...

It's probably so good because it's Borland and not MS at its core.

Unfortunately for you, it's not "fact" because it's wrong and you can't really ignore it when you've brought it up. Baffling.

2008 R2 and 2012 have moved a very very long way from the days of 2000. Regardless, it's still a MS product.

**********************************

Is there a slim chance we can get back to the topic at hand or is that a dream?

Edited October 2, 2012 by DeskNumber182

[eFestivals]

Visual Studio is an amazing product... Its a dream compared to XCODE!

I'm not entirely sure if I've looked at it since its first release, but it was no less dreadful than VB at v1.

[eFestivals]

OMG

so c'mon then - answer my question.

Or is this another case of vacuous Barry?

[eFestivals]

Going off most this thread you seem to be very out of touch with the current world... yet making big statements like VS is not a good product...

if it's using all your computer resources when doing little more than being a text editor - which is much what you've said it does - then it can't be a good product.

[eFestivals]

Its me not really being all that arsed.... There is no convincing you of anything... You are always right and the rest of the world is wrong... Got bugs to fix....

so the same vacuous Barry then. Glad we've cleared that up.

[DeskNumber182]

if it's using all your computer resources when doing little more than being a text editor - which is much what you've said it does - then it can't be a good product.

He has?

[Ed209]

[eFestivals]

You clearly haven't developed for a VERY long time... Or with decent tools...

We have moved on a bit since the days where we all developed with fancy text editors which changed keywords different colours...

really? I wonder why I've not noticed.

Delphi Embarcadero does nothing less than VS. It also doesn't destroy the computer's usefulness when AV software is also running.

Edited October 2, 2012 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

He has?

outside of compiling, there's no need for any development tool to use all of a system's resources.

[DeskNumber182]

Delphi does nothing less than VS. It also doesn't destroy the computer's usefulness when AV software is also running.

It did last time I used it.

VS also doesn't destroy the computer's usefulness when AV software is running. Guess that's something they have in common.

outside of compiling, there's no need for any development tool to use all of a system's resources.

That's a bit random. No one said that it does (or have they, sorry if I missed it) Edited October 2, 2012 by DeskNumber182

[eFestivals]

VS also doesn't destroy the computer's usefulness when AV software is running. Guess that's something they have in common.

That's a bit random. No one said that it does (or have they, sorry if I missed it)

two people have said (I'm paraphrasing) that VS is almost unusable when AV software is running.

[eFestivals]

You just said you haven't used VS since version 1....

And as far as I can be sure, I haven't (tho I have a feeling that I might have once very briefly checked out v3).

That doesn't mean I blindly keep on buying what I buy.

[eFestivals]

Ok it seems to have flown over your head how you just made a bullshit comment but hey ho...

I'm guessing this is another of your empty grenades?

[eFestivals]

You just compared two products... The admitted you haven't used one of the products for very many years...

BOOM!

you've never come across a feature list for a product? :lol:

[DeskNumber182]

two people have said (I'm paraphrasing) that VS is almost unusable when AV software is running.

So no mention at all of VS being the culprit but indeed the victim

[eFestivals]

I don't buy for a second you even did that much research.... (You really think thats enough ? )

I've looked at it in a limited way, yup.

Because I don't want the learning curve - or the re-write of old code - in moving to something else, I'm not looking at what would be the best product if buying today nor from the viewpoint of getting work.

I look at it to see if there's a reason why I shouldn't continue with what I know and what i have existing resources for.

If you'd been programming for more than 5 minutes or with more than 5 lines of code you'd recognise the scenario.