thanks for the advice, rich.
all the same, i have to go with what worked for me. if you knew how long i battled the continual scanning problem and how many remedies were suggested and attempted, to no avail, perhaps you'd appreciate like i do the renaming solution. my plan all along was that if it didn't work i'd put it back the way it was. perhaps that's naive?
additionally, i did advise duff to go with what others had suggested, after reading their suggestions and comparing them to mine. but i consider this thread to be a place where i can both ask for help and also offer to others those solutions that have worked for me. and if we limited ourselves here to posting only those suggestions that have never in any way created any problems with anyone on any system, well, you see where i'm going. point is, what works like absolute magic for me may create chaos for someone else.
similar to posting a trade in real time and being subjected to scrutiny after the fact, i find that contributing here in this venue is always a double-edged sword. i always wonder if what i offer to someone will cause them grief. consequently, i never post without first weighing the potential for error. i have confidence in the suggestion i passed along, both because it worked flawlessly for me and because it was taken from symantec's knowledge base.
i want to post for you an article that asks the question, "Do I still need CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT?", and responds, in part, by answering, "This means, quite simply, that you can throw away most of the contents of your CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files".
i'll put that up on a subsequent post, as this one is running on a bit. <g3> and as for your statement, "To be honest with you...", i say, by all means! it shouldn't be any other way, right? and i feel compelled to respond to you in the same manner.
bottom line, why not tell me if you think renaming the two files without causing "severe Windows problems that took quite awhile to solve" was simply a matter of luck, or are the instances you mention few in number and likelihood?
i sure would hate to be making bad suggestions.
:)
mark
|
