Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    231
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Since this has been going on for more than a full day, and since I lost
    an entire day due to the problem, I'll post an alert here. I really like
    Sunbelt and some of the folks there are exceptional, and I've liked
    VIPRE, but ...
    There has been a problem with 100 percent CPU usage (and some
    email problems as well), as see http://getsatisfaction.com/sunbeltsoftware...cpu_update_5024.
    The problem is still not solved. The workaround for the main (100 CPU) problem
    is to uncheck "check files when opening or copying", at files/settings/active protection.
    So, the choice is to cripple VIPRE or be crippled by it, at present.
    ===============
    EDIT ADDED: Another solution is to revert back to definitions 5022,
    but when support suggested this they didn't mention that
    a) You need to disable the updating, and
    Unless the behavior of VIPRE has changed in the last months,
    you rapidly get to a state of affairs in which VIPRE stops functioning because "your definitions are too old".
    (This might have changed, but the incomplete instructions just leave a person guessing.)
    =================
    ANOTHER EDIT: If you go to <url>http://getsatisfaction.com/sunbeltsoftware</url>
    you'll find various recently active threads, and it sure looks to me as though
    this issue is laced through several of them.

  2. #2
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    St Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    23,571
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 1,056 Times in 925 Posts
    [quote name='yerubal' post='764075' date='07-Mar-2009 11:06'][/quote]

    Vipre seems to have had this happen a couple of times since the recent core update. It looks like you either have to take the suggestion or wait until the next definition update.

    Joe
    Joe

  3. #3
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    231
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Joe yes. Exactly. So far, it hasn't been in the next several definitions updates. It might not require
    a core update. They seem to imply that at some point it'll be included in a definitons update.
    However, there's no hint about when it will happen, and Sunbelt staff have given people
    poor leads a few times by now, on this issue. Anyhow, I thought I'd put out an alert --- so that
    at least the phenomenon would be recognized as a VIPRE problem quickly, and the workaround
    is easily accessible, such as it is. I wish at least the parameters (i.e., whom does it affect) were
    available.

  4. #4
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    231
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Definitions 5029 seems to cure the problem.
    It did on my main computers,
    and Alex Eckelberry (CEO) confirmed that in a posting.
    (So, only the VIPRE email port assignment snafu persists:
    people sending mail by SMTP through port 587 must set VIPRE
    at 25, as if they were using 25, and then 587 isn't filtered
    and mail can be sent.)
    EDIT: There's also a question about doing a deep scan
    in Safe Mode with large files. There seemed to be a hang.
    I know what happened to me, but haven't been able to get
    any more info.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts
    [quote name='yerubal' post='764117' date='07-Mar-2009 16:21'](So, only the VIPRE email port assignment snafu persists:
    people sending mail by SMTP through port 587 must set VIPRE
    at 25, as if they were using 25, and then 587 isn't filtered
    and mail can be sent.)[/quote]
    I think Comcast cable internet subscribers might be the primary users of port 587 for outbound SMTP.

  6. #6
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Hatsukaichi, Hiroshima, Japan
    Posts
    904
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I'm at the point of giving up with Vipre. The last two times I have tried scans it was incredibly slow. But worse my C: drive filled up and the second time this happened no program would run at all. I was forced to use a disk image both times. The other problems I have are annoyances:

    1. Vipre insists on connecting to the internet to update itself before every scan and if no connection is present throws up an error message. It even does this when conducting on-demand scanning. It sohould be possible to conduct a scan without checking for updates.

    2. If a scan is stopped all information about potentially suspicious items is lost. This is very poor in my opinion. It should be possible to stop a scan and immediately deal with any item found.

    3. The scheduling options are poor. It seems impossible to set up a scheduled scan to check particular drives. It's every drive or none at all.

    I was attracted to Vipre when it first came out but for me now I'm sorry to say it feels like just so much snake oil. I'm looking for an alternative.

    Chris (Hunt)

  7. #7
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts
    [quote name='Cah' post='764256' date='08-Mar-2009 17:36']I'm looking for an alternative.[/quote]
    If that's a question, do you have a short list of criteria and can you say which products you've already ruled out?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •