My PC is a Celeron 1.70 GHz with 112 MB RAM, and I run Windows XP SP1. My antivirus protection is Symantec´s Norton Antivirus 2004 version 10.1.0.13. I use the built-in Firewall from Windows XP, and run Spybot S&D as well as Adaware SE. But I have a bad habit ( :o ) of using P2P programs such as Kazaa Lite and Piolet (in oredr to run Piolet on Windows XP - they require the user to turn off the Windows XP Firewall).
Where am I trying to get at?
I think Norton slows down the PC too much and I still get adware/ malware in my system and Norton won´t remove things like Blazefind or Mybar, or Dealhelp
I heard of a new antivirus which is meant to be very light on the system: NOD32 :!:
What should I do to protect myself and not slow down my PC too much????

Personally i dont like norton i preffer mcafee. norton has too much stuff that doesnt really do anything. Like the internet security i have plenty of internet security becuase i know how to get rid of stuff plus i run kerio professional firewall.

As long as you use P2P programs, you will continue to have problems.

This thread has links to free antivirus and firewall programs:
http://www.daniweb.com/techtalkforums/thread5690.html
The firewall is nearly as good as Norton without using up as much of your systems resources. Most 3rd party firewalls are better then the XP firewall.

Unfortunately, no antivirus/spy/ad ware program will clean up everything -- you need to have several programs, keep them updated, and scan with them regularly. That thread has additional utilities besides the ones you are already using that can help keep your system clean.

You also seem to have a problem with your memory, as 112MB is not a standard size (and barely enough for XP anyway).

Thanks dhl 6213, looks like it´s always you who are helping me out....
I understand my P2P habits are responsible for my getting in trouble with malware.
I also understand my memory is not ideal for Windows XP. The problem is that this PC comes with the emergency restoration disks so if the hardware is changed, then I can´t restore the original setup anymore. Ever. I guess that leaves me with two option: change the whole PC or settle with this one and get used to it being slow. But what about NOD32 - what is your opinion on this antivirus program?
(P.S. as soon as I find some time I want read all the threads you linked me)

HANDS DOWN the best antivirus is Kaspersky (http://kaspersky.com)

I don't think there is another antivirus program out there that can do what it can...it actually works better than the 2 big uns...macaffee and norton...and it does it with LESS resources occupied. It's amazing...I've run it continually now for about 3 yrs and will never go for second best.

That doesn't sound right to me, where did you get that information? You should be able to add RAM without affecting setup.

i installed PC-CILLIN 2000 quite some time ago, i run celeron 1.7 with 256 mb memory, with regular updates and real time scans plus spy bot, adaware 6 and spy blaster i find a smooth running operation and no problems as such.

112Mb is simply a 128Mb module with 16Mb used for onboard graphics. Adding more RAM will NOT mean you can't reinstall the system, the reinstall will work perfectly. 128Mb is not enough to run Windows XP efficiently, and you should definitely add more.

Thanks Catweazle :!:
I heard the same explanation talking to an expert who mounts PCs. I´m thinking of changing to a new computer with 2,4 GHz and 256 MB RAM, and a 40 G HD. It´s funny that the configuration I have 112MB for Windows XP came in a "brand" computer. :evil:

I would not settle for merely 256Mb of RAM either. Windows XP works very efficently with 512Mb of RAM. That's the amount I personally consider necessary. In a system with multiple user accounts, and on which multi-tasking is frequently carried out, I install 1Gb of RAM.

It does not surprise me in the slightest that PCs get sold inadequately confugured by 'Name Brand' manufacturers. Although the quality of support service is generally extremely good with such systems, they are notorious for being considerably more expensive and underpowered in comparison to 'White Box' systems.