Is running daemon tools bad for your pc?

Status
Not open for further replies.

jcee

Posts: 11   +0
is running daemon tools bad for your pc?

its quite a powerful program.. im abit weary about instaling it anyone ever had any problems with it?
 
I have had it running on my system for 2 years now with no problems, but i have seen other people here on TS have big problems with it tho.

I use xp by the way.
 
How would it be bad for your system ? What might happen is some games might not play as their copy protection checks to see if Daemon Tools is running & refuse to launch if such is the case. It shouldn't damage your system whether on hardware or software level.
 
i duuno ive just read a few posts on this forum and others about people having had problems with it and it comes with adware and is hard to uninstall etc..

just making sure
 
It could to certain software incompatibilities & installs "drivers" on your system so it's up to you to see if you really need it.
 
Dude, doing pretty much anything with your computer could be a bad move. Any program you install could be malware that eats your hard drive and any link you click on could drown you in goat porn.

I have used DT for years with absolutely no problems.. Who knows? Maybe the problems you read about were caused by the users themselves having badly broken Windows or just being clueless and doing silly things?
 
jcee said:
doing silly things.. what do you mean

1. Installing software without researching the product or the company.

2. Surfing and connecting to websites that are notorious for infecting computers, i.e. p0rn.

3. Failing to defrag, lack of periodic system scanning, failing to update anti-virus and anti-spam definitions.

4. Clicking on those "You have Won!" pop-ups.

5. Allowing online scans of your system by companies you don't know.

6. There are tons of others like NO ROUTER.

* Yes, there have been those who have had issues here with daemon tools and its drivers. But there are those, as have posted here who haven't any issues at all.
 
not too bad, just ram is at a premium in my syst only got 1 gb of kingston installed need to get another another stick really. ironic thing is ive got another two 1 gb sticks dunno the brand or anythin they came with the mobo when i bought it. thing is either one will work on their own but when you stick em both in there together they wont work together thyre identical sticks too!. yet if you stick 2 sticks of kingston in there works fine on dual chanel. wierd.
 
Why is ram such a problem? I run 512meg of ram on my without a problem (see my system specs for more info).
 
running some pretty hefty music programs . editing, recording, vst intruments etc

man.. doesnt your os and iv take up alot of that 512?
 
Fair enough. If you want more info about that ram, google and get everest home edition. Fit the ram, then run everest. If they are different dpeeds, it will tell you.
 
yeh theyre not diffrent speeds thyre exactly the same! like i say theyre identical sticks. i think maybe if i wanna run em i might need to up the voltages but i dont wanna do that not comfortable at all with mesing about with voltages might as well just spend another 17 quid get myself another kingston vram stick least i know they work together.
 
I've been running DT for as long as I can remember and I've never had any problems with it.
@Didou, isn't it possible to 'trick' a game's copy protection using the Emulation options in DT so that it plays normally?
 
That "trick" is for the game's CD copy protection stuff. The point is that before even trying to validate the CD, the game checks whether you have anything remotely similar to DT on your computer. There is no way to "trick" that unless you go and install the game in a virtual machine.
 
Rage_3K_Moiz said:
@Didou, isn't it possible to 'trick' a game's copy protection using the Emulation options in DT so that it plays normally?
I've seen that in DT, but never used it. But for games that crap themselves if they see DT or some other such program there is: Anti-Blaxx
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back