NAV 2006 - resource hog

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lil' Abner
  • Start date Start date
L

Lil' Abner

I've installed NAV 2006 on only two computers so far. Both are running XP
Home. One was a 2.0Ghz machine and the other a 550Mhz. Both have 512Mb ram.
It noticeably slows the 2.0Ghz machine, and brings the 550Mhz machine to a
crawl. There are periods of up to 3 minutes at a time when the nav
processes are taking from 55-80% of the processor resources. Then it'll
quit for a bit and everything sails along for a while... until you try to
do something (most anything) and then it kicks back in again.
Two thumbs down as far as I'm concerned.
We uninstalled it on the 2nd machine and put AVG in. The guy is going to
try and get a refund on the NAV.
Maybe two machines aren't enough to draw a reasonable conclusion but
they're enough to convince ME.
Just venting... :-)
 
Lil' Abner said:
I've installed NAV 2006 on only two computers so far. Both are running XP
Home. One was a 2.0Ghz machine and the other a 550Mhz. Both have 512Mb
ram.
It noticeably slows the 2.0Ghz machine, and brings the 550Mhz machine to a
crawl. There are periods of up to 3 minutes at a time when the nav
processes are taking from 55-80% of the processor resources. Then it'll
quit for a bit and everything sails along for a while... until you try to
do something (most anything) and then it kicks back in again.
Two thumbs down as far as I'm concerned.
We uninstalled it on the 2nd machine and put AVG in. The guy is going to
try and get a refund on the NAV.
Maybe two machines aren't enough to draw a reasonable conclusion but
they're enough to convince ME.
Just venting... :-)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the confirmation, I have a very very low opinion of NAV 04/05. I
have only a very limited experieince of 06 and didnt anticipate any
difference.

Soom loon a short time ago was praising 06, saying that because it no longer
supports windows 9x, and is Nt/XP specific, it was a much better and
antivirus.

Gaz
 
Back
Top