XPost: microsoft.public.win95.general.discussion, alt.windows95
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:35:02 GMT, Ron Martell wrote:
>MikeJones@nomail.edu wrote:
>
>>I was using version 6, recommended by people here. They stopped making new
virus
>>definitions for version 6 and require version 7 to get updated virus lists.
I tried Google
>>Groups and found little discussion, one post, about the new version and it
wasn't
>>positive.
>>
>>Are people using it. Does it wreck your computer? Does it work?
>>
>>There was an ominous message at the grisoft site about the System Failure
problem being
>>fixed. ;-) I'm always cautious about installing new software because you
don't really know
>>what it's going to do especially on Windows 95 which few people still use.
>>
>>I'm using Windows 95b on a Dell Dimension 300 MHz Pentium 2.
>>
>>Thank you.
>
>It is not listed as being Windows 95 compatible and it has been
>problematic for at least some of the Windows 95 users who have tried
>it.
Actually it says in the FAQ under system requirements that Windows 95 is
supported.
Well if it's been a problem for others maybe I should think about not trying
the new
version.
>
>Avast is a another free antivirus that is Windows 95 compatible
>(www.avast.com) but it does have a pretty heavy impact on the
>performance of a computer, although on a 300 mhz PII it might be okay
>if you have at least 64 mb of RAM.
>
>Good luck
Does the program always run in the background or can you turn it off and just
run it when
you want to scan files? Do you use this program on an Windows 95 computer
yourself and if
so what processor are you using? Thanks for the information.
>
>
>Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
