Solved norton security pop up high CPU usage plug in container

January 9, 2013 at 16:49:02
Specs: Windows XP
keep getting a pop up message from Norton Security that says "High CPU Usage - Mozilla Firefox Plug in Container.exc. I clicked on "for more details" message showed
"Plug-In container.exc - locate. Clicked on locate and it said CPU 55%usage in red ink. What does this mean? why do I keep getting this message

See More: norton security pop up high CPU usage plug in container

Report •


#1
January 9, 2013 at 16:54:47
✔ Best Answer
It seems to be complaining about a Firefox plugin. Try disabling all Firefox plugins and extensions for starters (from Tools > Add-ons). Take a note of any that are already disabled. If it is then OK you could put them back in one at a time to determine which one is the culprit. It might be a faulty plugin or one that you don't need/want.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#2
January 9, 2013 at 17:03:21
Patricia, I see you are still using XP....great! But Norton is the biggest resource hog for XP. You may want to use the Norton uninstaller from their website and try something alot lighter in Avast Free:
http://www.filehippo.com/download_a...
The choice is up to you....your PC will probably run much better after that....

Some HELP in posting on Computing.net plus free progs and instructions 7 Golds


Report •

#3
January 10, 2013 at 00:17:21
"Norton is the biggest resource hog for XP"

Not so, not any more. Four years ago Symantec got their heads down and really sorted out Norton's resource-usage. As long as you've got at least 3GB RAM installed, Norton runs very nicely and does not slow things down. In fact it's now less resource-hungry than many other AV softwares, including Avast the last time I tried it.

I have Norton installed on all three of the PCs in my house and it does not slow any of them down compared to how they ran before it was installed. Four years ago I couldn't have said that. Well done to Symantec for this (it's also the best security product as it happens, in my opinion).


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
January 10, 2013 at 01:03:45
2010 Norton cleaned up their act in regards to resource demands. However some features can be annoying. I would suggest trying Dereks solution, most cpu's can push nearly 100% opening and closing programs, but it's generally for a short time, so I would be curious to know why Norton red flagged firefox, perhaps there is problem with a pluggin. Do you have many toolbars in the web browers like Ask toolbar or torrents toolbars etc?

Report •

#5
January 10, 2013 at 04:58:09

Report •

#6
January 10, 2013 at 05:28:45
'As long as you've got at least 3GB RAM installed'
This is too funny...unfortunately, not many XP's are running on 3GB ram...it is a pipe dream...

Some HELP in posting on Computing.net plus free progs and instructions 7 Golds


Report •

#7
January 10, 2013 at 10:00:15
I don't think many AV's show high CPU usage. Most likely that feature it is part of Norton's general suite rather than their AV in particular - those who use it can correct me if I'm wrong.

As far as this post is concerned it would seem reasonable to first have a quick stab at checking out the Firefox icons with Norton on-board. After that, if required, the poster can change to an alternative AV.

Always pop back and let us know the outcome - thanks


Report •

#8
January 10, 2013 at 19:07:04
Some people still like Norton... I do not know why.
At work, we still have some P4 machines running XP, some came with 256MB RAM or less, all now have 512MB, 768MB, or 1GB and many of the boards will only handle up to 1GB, some 2GB, 3GB could not happen. These run very well on Avast and like many older systems, will be bogged down by any version of Norton (if someone would want to waste that much money). Norton would also need a core to itself, but most of these still running XP are P4's and other single cores, and even if someone had a core 2, who would want to waste a core and half their memory just for an antivirus program that delivered only reasonably moderate protection? Even if they 'cleaned up their act', they are 2 generations behind the best that is out there. At home I use Webroot Secure Anywhere and it is the least intrusive antivirus program I have ever experienced, uses resources intelligently, and no longer needs continuous updates and scans. Even their old program that I ran for many years on XP systems, ran fine on 512MB RAM (before IE7 and everyone needed more memory) with only minor slow downs.

You have to be a little bit crazy to keep you from going insane.


Report •

#9
January 10, 2013 at 21:40:38
I liked Norton, then I didn't like Norton (resource hog), and then they lightened up on the resources and I think it is ok. Personally, I use Avast, but my feelings on these things is; when a person tells me they just spent $59 on Norton, which "they heard was good", I do not run down the persons purchase. I don't say "well gee what did you waste your money on a resource hog like that for?" No one likes to feel like they made a poor choice. Tact can go a long way. I get viruses off all machines from all vendors, so to me it is most important they atleast have one and keep it up to date. I hope this person was able find a solution.

Report •


Ask Question