I did some tests on my own system and found that the system was unable to go into standby or hibernation if the time frame was set above four hours; this is do to the fact that some Windows processes become active and thereby preventing the power controls to work as they should. Microsoft is aware of this problem and is currently working on a fix for it. At this time the problem is not documented on Microsoft's site.
Update: After changing my Windows setting to enable standby after 25 minutes, it works. Apparently, then, one or more of NIS 2010’s idle tasks interfere with standby mode (at least on my XP system) if it’s set to kick in after about half an hour or more.
I think you're correct. Setting it to 25 minutes on a XP machine means always works, 30 minutes will usually work, 45 minutes or more (for me) and it never goes into standby. I tried an hour on Vista and it works fine so the problem does seem to be specific to XP with NIS 2010.
So for anyone using XP and NIS 2010 having this problem the workaround is to set standby to 25 minutes otherwise you'll waste more energy and your computer will be less secure since the standby account lockout won't happen, at least not reliably.
If you consider that your problem has been solved, would you please mark the post which solved your problem so that others will know it has been solved. Thanks.
I think NerdBird is correct: we figured out a workaround. The problem itself – Norton prevents XP systems from entering sleep mode unless the setting for doing so is changed to be earlier than we might like – has not been solved.
BlebNevus wrote: I think NerdBird is correct: we figured out a workaround. The problem itself -- Norton prevents XP systems from entering sleep mode unless the setting for doing so is changed to be earlier than we might like -- has not been solved.
How about marking it solved in the sense that the question has been answered? In other words, you now know what is going on and there is nothing left for you to do on your end. That way the link will point at whatever post makes that clear.
If that’s the protocol here, fine. But I hope any Symantechs who are following the conversation will note this as an issue that needs to be resolved in a future release.
BlebNevus wrote: If that's the protocol here, fine. But I hope any Symantechs who are following the conversation will note this as an issue that needs to be resolved in a future release.
It was merely a suggestion.
And, yes, I think they will. In fact, I am fairly certain of it.
But I don't see how this last post of yours is in any way a summary of the conclusions that were arrived at. If you are going to mark a solution/conclusion, at least let it be one that summarizes what you know in terms of working time lengths and time lengths that don't work and systems that have no problems and systems that do. I have seen posts that put this all together and it would be a courtesy for a visitor that hasn't seen this information yet and doesn't want to read every single post to find it (surely at some time in your computer career, you've been there yourself).
Sorry – I just clicked on the nearest “Solved” button, not realizing the point is to click on the one corresponding to the particular message that helped. If there’s a way of undoing that and checking a different message, I’d be glad to do so. Didn’t see how.
BlebNevus wrote: Sorry -- I just clicked on the nearest "Solved" button, not realizing the point is to click on the one corresponding to the particular message that helped. If there's a way of undoing that and checking a different message, I'd be glad to do so. Didn't see how.
Go to the post in question and click on Options. There should be a choice to undo the Solution. If not, try clicking on "solution" itself. I know the option is available.
BTW, I hope your choice of screennames was ONLY because you liked the sound of that. Otherwise: