Most Valued Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


SCR last won the day on December 16 2017

SCR had the most liked content!


About SCR

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,395 profile views
  1. I wasn't looking for "irony." This and the post I responded to does not seem to be on topic, which is not about Fords, airbags or irony.
  2. I don't drive Fords, never owned one. So with no real world experience I'm not qualified to respond to your question.
  3. My personal real world test of Eset products has been running for many years now. I've never been infected with anything. I've had a few warnings over the years but never an infection nor even a false positive. So my findings based on my real world experience is that Eset has been 100% effective in my real world test. That's all that matters to me. However, I do practice secure computing methods along with Eset's protection. My Real World testing of Eset products continues.
  4. I think you're giving these types of test results to much credit at a grain of salt.
  5. I never disable EIS for anything. If it doesn't like it there has to be a reason as far as I'm concerned, unless it's a FP which is very rare. I trust EIS to be smarter then me about such things. To be safe I'd suggest that you do an "In-Depth" scan of your computer.
  6. If your logs contain any private information I recommend that you edit your post to remove the link and send it to Marcos in a PM (Private Message) as he suggested .
  7. The effort to get an accurate scan time, pretty difficult considering all the variables of each computer, would in fact increase the amount of time it will take to scan them. I would rather have the program doing what is supposed to be doing rather then constantly trying to figure out how long it's going to take to do it. I appreciate the non static screen in Eset telling me it's working. From previous scans, which do tell me, accurately, how long it took to do it, I can pretty much figure out how long the next scan will take. It does require a minimal amount of human calculation. From this basic information I can decide how to best fit the scan time needed in to my schedule. This also requires a bit of human calculation. Generally this revolves around when I'm not going to be using the computer. This gives it the most resources to accomplish it's task, including shutting the system off. I really don't think there is any fool proof method for a program to compute how long it will take to accomplish it's task in a ever changing environment. For example the Imaging program I use will start out telling me it's going to take 20 minutes to image my drive. 5 minutes later it's still telling me it's going to take 18 minutes, 3 minutes later it tells me there are 10 minutes left. Therefore I pay no attention to it or the little bar going across the screen. I know it's going to take 15 minutes more or less from experience and a bit of human calculation. It's close enough for me to plan accordingly.
  8. I would like the AV testing labs to publish their income sources. I think it might shed some light on their testing methodologies. But I could be wrong. Just another month and another AV test with the same non real world predictable results.
  9. I think it could be very useful if you had an infection screw up your system files. Otherwise not so much. But that's it's purpose and I'm sure it would do it well.
  10. Thanks foneil. It would be nice to know what the settings are currently and what Eset would reset it to. More detail would be very helpful. Perhaps I'm missing something.
  11. I think "System Cleaner" is primarily to restore system files that may have been damaged by a virus or malware. I don't think it's meant to be a "Cleaner" for any other purpose such as temp files, cookies, web history, etc. If you are not having any issues I wouldn't reset anything.
  12. Yes, the reason for the warning was a server issue, now resolved. No, it was not caused by version