View Full Version : About hardware breakpoints
thomasantony
February 14th, 2005, 05:48
Hi,
I can't set hardware breakpoints. There is no such option. The menuitem is disabled. Whats wrong. I have version 1.10
Thomas Antony
hosiminh
February 14th, 2005, 05:58
Hardware breakpoints works only on Win nt/2000/xp .
thomasantony
February 15th, 2005, 01:44
Oh,
Then is it ok to use Memory breakpoints while unpacking. You know they put hardware break point on the edi value in stack so that we know when a popad is executed.
Thomas Antony
Ricardo Narvaja
February 15th, 2005, 04:04
if you think use ollydbg change to NT/2000 and XP in 98 OLLYDBG have serious limitations, you cannot trace system dlls,puy bpx in the apis directly, put bpx in the stack.
change to nt/2000 or XP and if you continue using 98 use softice or trw2000 not ollydbg.
Ricardo Narvaja
thomasantony
February 15th, 2005, 21:43
All right,
I have XP but I hate it. It runs slow on my poor PIII 850 MHz with 128 mB. I guess I will have to get 2k.
Thomas Antony
TechLord
February 16th, 2005, 02:04
No Thomasantony...We use the same type of PIII in our institute. Recently I loaded XP on them and they run fine without being slow etc.
You can go to control panel>Advanced and disable all the bells and whistles of XP by choosing "Optimize for Best Performance" or some such option.
You may please note that we DIDN'T have to do that.
Try and experiment as some settings may be wrong on your machine leading to the slowness as otherwise XP itself was not making our systems slow with a similar configuration.
Also Norton Antivirus hogged the resources on such a machine. So we use McAfee v7 and are quite happy with it.
TechLord
February 16th, 2005, 04:12
One more thing I want to add is that sometimes the UPGRADE option to upgrade from Win 98 to Win XP or Win 2000 give some strange problems.These probs may manifest in the form of your comp running slow.
To avoid this please do a FRES install of the XP.
I have further personally confirmed from friend who is using XP on a P3 (600 MHz) system with 128MB SD RAM (266 MHz RAM Freq) that his comp runs pretty fast.
Therefore you may like to investigate in more detail what you are doing wrong.
The way we procced in the institute for the 90 odd computers we have of the config stated above is to backup all the data, then do a full format of the hard disk and then install win XP SP1 from the bootable CD.
This helps avoid a lot of probs...
Ricardo Narvaja
February 16th, 2005, 05:16
upgrade to windows 2000 fresh install ,or i tell you i have a P2 300 Mhz 128 M RAM and have WXP sp1 and run fine.(fresh install)
If you stay in 98 use softice or trw2000 not OLLYDBG.
Ricardo Narvaja
TechLord
February 16th, 2005, 10:35
I agree with Ricardo... Even PII runs fine if all your settings are right and it is a fresh install.
By the way, you'll not notice better results much in terms of speed if you use Win 2000 instead of Win XP since WinXP mainly has more bells and whistles than Win 2000 and these can be disabled if necessary...
Ricardo Narvaja
February 17th, 2005, 03:59
and for norton antivirus slowing machines:
This is real, but the new version 2005 was improved and iīm using in my old machine fine and fast, when the version 2004,2003 freeze this computer completely.
Other antivirus also freeze olds machines kaspersky, panda, etc aonly nod32 is falst in all versions in all machines.
Ricardo
TechLord
February 17th, 2005, 11:50
I do agree with ricardo that Norton 2005 is improved, but we have practically found out that there are still a LOT of internal conflicts which can be improved by using some antivirus less taxing on the machine like McAfee 7.03 which has EQUAL efficacy to that of Norton with MUCH LESS problems.
Ricardo Narvaja
February 17th, 2005, 16:36
is possible, only i comment the point of norton and slow machines and the 2005 was improved in speed.
I donīt try mc afee maybe i try in a moment thanks
Ricardo
thomasantony
February 17th, 2005, 23:34
Hi,
I have tried Norton and dumped it long ago. I went without an AV for about 2 years. Now I use AVG Free edition. It has never let me down.
Thomas Antony
thomasantony
February 17th, 2005, 23:35
Hi,
I have tried Norton and dumped it long ago. I went without an AV for about 2 years. Now I use AVG Free edition. It has never let me down.
Thomas Antony
TechLord
February 18th, 2005, 05:07
No Thomas Antony... Unfortunately, we had tried to use the AVG free edition a few months ago and found out ONLY WHEN COMPARED with Norton or McAfee that it couldn't find out most of the worms. If it finds them, it is not reliable all the time, even for the same worm...
Also it is seriously lacking in the area of Heuristic search for viruses. You probably were lucky or maybe even got infected already !!!!
There are several known worms and trojans which the Free Version does not even RECOGNISE let alone clean them. Unfortunately, the examples are far too many for me to doubt, and this made us to take the decision of shifting to McAfee though we had to pay for it.
Ricardo Narvaja
February 18th, 2005, 06:50
i agrre with TechLord i quit the avg free version when i infect with all types of virus trojans, worms, and AVG donīt detect at all.
Ricardo Narvaja
littlecode
February 18th, 2005, 12:16
That's true indeed.
since norton do improve their AV and keep the bells as much as they can.
but in real state, pay more attention is a good practice ~
Littlecode
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2018 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.