Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 26410 2002-10-26 20:46:00 Fellow SystemWorks users roofus (483) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
93267 2002-10-26 20:46:00 Guys, i've had systemworks (2003)on my computer (WinME) for a few days now, and all i've had is problems.

1. Go-back has caused my computer to stop resoponding during bootups twice. trying to rever the drive to an earlier period makes no difference also. So i have uninstalled that for the time being as i don't want thing stuffing up with only a few weeks of uni left.

2. My system resources seem to be taking a bit of a hit. On startup there is about 80% free which is fine with me, but very easily with opening a few programmes it can drop down to 10% (thats when you get the out of memory message). Can you guys have a watch and see how your computer is reacting. I have reason to believe some hook or dll that systemworks is using is 16Bit and causeing this suckage on system resources. I Have had a look for the 16 bit critter but have yet to find it.

Can you please get back to me if, this sounds familiar, or you have had similar problems.
roofus (483)
93268 2002-10-26 22:02:00 I always thought that Go Back, was similar to the System Restore facility in WinME.

Maybe if you disabled System Restore. They might be working against each other.

BALDY:-)
Baldy (26)
93269 2002-10-26 22:14:00 Hi roofus.I've got SW2002 and didn't install Goback as ME has System Restore,so I thought why install another to do the same job,as I understand it.
Otherwise I have no problem with the pc resources,with 256 RAM.You don't mention yours.While typing this the resource meter is showing system resources 56% free, user res.56% free,GDI res.78% free.That's with IE,OE and Chime Tray player going.
Neil McC (178)
93270 2002-10-27 00:37:00 well exept for the trouble goback/defrag caused, it is running ok. did you have a previous ver of nortons installed before? might need to clean all the old bits out first before installing.

the only thing i hated was the messenger protetion ran messanger in the background. that could cause the performance hit you have got.
tweak'e (174)
93271 2002-10-27 04:01:00 OK Go-back disables System Restore, so that didn't cause my first problem. Also for other people reading system restore and Go-Back are different, Go-back back's up a lot more stuff than System Restore so hence it is better (well in theory)

I did have a previous nortons on (2001) but i uninstalled that before i put 2003 on, so it should not have had a problem there.

For the person who mentioned resources thanks, also for your info the amount resources is not really tied to RAM at all, hence why i didn't mention it, but for future discussion i have 256

Tweake, that messenger protection can be disabled, Personally i don't see a need for it, I could understand why you may use that facility with ICQ where you get random people talking to you, but Messenger is a bit more discreete and i have never had a random person talking to me (holds his breath while checking out the functions of Messenger 5.0)

SO yea, im still stuck between a rock and a hard place
roofus (483)
93272 2002-10-27 04:18:00 >I did have a previous nortons on (2001) but i uninstalled that before i put 2003 on, so it should not have had a problem there.

*cough* yea sure...this is nortons were talking about ;-)

i would suggest a total clean out.
tweak'e (174)
93273 2002-10-27 04:46:00 You might have hit the nail on the head Tweak'e Baldy (26)
93274 2002-10-27 08:23:00 Just another thought,roofus.If you've got Norton's System Doctor enabled,I understand that chews a bit of resources. Neil McC (178)
93275 2002-10-28 09:10:00 Go Back needs to create an 'image' of the C drive in order to do it's job; this happens in the background (causing a performance hit) and takes a long time. Things should get back to normal when it's finished. Try leaving your computer on over night for a few nights; that is if you don't trust ME's system restore, which never worked on my computer. Vince Vince (406)
93276 2002-10-28 20:39:00 Sorry VInce, but that has nothing to do with why system resources are taking a hit. It might explain disk activity, but not low system resources. roofus (483)
1 2