 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows 98 / Performance / January 2006Is it time to buy a new computer?
I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard drive is 13GB with only 2.97 GB used. OS is Windows 98SE My computer is very slow: takes forever to boot up, takes forever to launch apps, sometimes mouse is slow and jerky, sometimes hard drive runs alot. I defrag and run scandisk regularly/empty recycle bin/delete temp file. I've used regclean; deleted stuff from startup; played with virtual memory; scanned for viruses/adware/spyware (have McAfee); changed to network server setting, etc. Tried all the tweaks that I dare relating to Win 98. I've physically cleaned out all the dust in the CPU and tried to blow out all the dust around the exhaust fan. All to no avail. Is it time to buy a new computer? Is the thing just wearing out? It has been hot & humid here - any connection? Thanks for any advice. > I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K > Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. Do a ctrl-alt-del and look at all the programs running at startup. You may be surprised! It shouldn't be slow booting up or run slow unless, perhaps your cpu fan is not running fast enough and the cpu is overheating. >I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K > Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. See my articles on maintenance and security: http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm I like McAfee only slightly more than Norton (and I *hate* Norton.) The older versions of those apps were supposedly built to run on Win9x systems, and even then they were bloatware, always bogging systems down. The newer versions of these apps aren't even really designed for Win9x anymore. I recommend ETrust AV or you can try AVG or AVAST, both free, both with their own problems, but none of them are such huge, bloated monsters like McAfee and Norton. Dirt in the machine will primarily cause overheating, resulting in spontaneous reboots. If you're having any of those, then you need to clean even more. But mostly, it sounds to me like you may have apps in the background (starting with McAfee) causing the problems, and the symptoms also point to possible malware (virus, spyware, adware, etc.) Follow ALL of the advice in my articles, clean up the system as advised, do a cleanboot scandisk and defrag, consider switching AV apps, and then post the list of background apps back here for comment. Here's how you do that: Run MSINFO32 from the Start\Run box. Expand the Software Environment section, click on Startup Programs. Now click anywhere in the right-hand pane. Press Ctrl-A to Select All, then Ctrl-C to copy. Now open a reply to this message and use Ctrl-V to paste in the list and send it off.  SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User Mr. Terhune: I checked for viruses/malware and all was clear. Followed the Clean Boot instructions, then did scandisk & defrag. Didn't dare to change AV apps just yet. Here's the list of background apps: Microsoft Office Startup Group "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office\OSA9.EXE" -b -l Logitech Desktop Messenger Agent Startup Group "C:\Program Files\Desktop Messenger\8876480\Program\LDMConf.exe" /start run Win.ini hpfsched LDM Registry (Per-User Run) C:\Program Files\Desktop Messenger\8876480\Program\BackWeb-8876480.exe Tau Monitor Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRAM FILES\AGNITUM\TAUSCAN 1.6\TAUMON.EXE VsEcomrEXE Registry (Machine Run) C:\Program Files\Network Associates\McAfee VirusScan\vsecomr.exe CriticalUpdate Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\SYSTEM\wucrtupd.exe -startup ScanRegistry Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\scanregw.exe /autorun SystemTray Registry (Machine Run) SysTray.Exe MCAgentExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\AGENT\mcagent.exe files\mcafee.com\agent\mcagent.exe MCUpdateExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\AGENT\MCUPDATE.EXE LoadPowerProfile Registry (Machine Run) Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme VSOCheckTask Registry (Machine Run) "C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\VSO\MCMNHDLR.EXE" /checktask VirusScan Online Registry (Machine Run) "C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\VSO\mcvsshld.exe" MPFExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\PERSON~1\MPFTRAY.EXE EM_EXEC Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\LOGITECH\MOUSEW~1\SYSTEM\EM_EXEC.EXE mdac_runonce Registry (Machine Run) C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\runonce.exe TaskMonitor Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\taskmon.exe SchedulingAgent Registry (Machine Service) mstask.exe McVsRte Registry (Machine Service) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\VSO\mcvsrte.exe /embedding KB891711 Registry (Machine Service) c:\windows\SYSTEM\KB891711\KB891711.EXE LoadPowerProfile Registry (Machine Service) Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme Your material stated that it's not a good solution to disable items in msconfig so I need instruction on how to do it. I had played around with unchecking boxes based on info from sysinfo.org site which may have resulted in the unresponsive mouse problem. Most items on the list relate to McAfee...maybe that's what's slowing things down. As mentioned before I wondered about the computer overheating. I don't live in an air-conditioned house and even though there are not too many really hot days in Maine (2 seasons here: winter & August)it does seem like the computer runs better when it's cold. Thanks, Mary P. S. What is "MS-MVP"? Thanks to all who have responded to my question On simple way to find out if it is McAfee, is to temporarily disable ALL McAfee startup items, and restart. Be sure to stay OFFLINE while you have the A-V disabled (unplug the cable if you have to, for broadband). See if the problems still exist....that may tell you if McAfee is involved. SignatureGlen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+ http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm > Mr. Terhune: I checked for viruses/malware and all was clear. Followed > the Clean Boot instructions, then did scandisk & defrag. Didn't dare [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > Thanks to all who have responded to my question (sent using MIME-Quoted Printable to avoid wrap--I hope...) > Mr. Terhune: I checked for viruses/malware and all was clear. Followed > the Clean Boot instructions, then did scandisk & defrag. Didn't dare > to change AV apps just yet. Here's the list of background apps: I'll comment on your background apps below, but first, some additional comments on your original post. I didn't say anything about some of the other things you mentioned in your original post, like "messing with virtual memory", which is almost always a bad thing to do. Please go back in there and reset it to "Let Windows Manage..." Also, I forget where the setting is that you probably changed where you choose between best performance for Server or Programs, but be sure to change it back to Programs. In fact, any of that tweaking you mentioned, it would be wise to undo whatever you did. Do you notice any difference in performance after doing basic maintenance? I doubt it was much, but we needed a baseline, which is why I started with that. What is almost certainly a major part of the problem is Adware/Spyware. Most of the tools I recommended in my article on Security deal with those kinds of problems, and you need to use *all* of them, since they all look for or protect against slightly different things. Another good resource for issues involving Spyware/Adware is http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm Note: Before uninstalling applications, make sure to reenable any disabled items in the MSCONFIG panels, since the uninstaller won't be able to find these entries if they are disabled. As mentioned in my Clean Boot article, you may want to disable the startup groups in MSCONFIG and then restart, in order to get them unloaded, but then go back and re-enable everything, click OK, but DO NOT restart when prompted. Then do your uninstall procedures. I'm going to reorganize this list to group them more appropriately > ScanRegistry Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\scanregw.exe /autorun > SystemTray Registry (Machine Run) SysTray.Exe > TaskMonitor Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\taskmon.exe SchedulingAgent Registry (Machine Service) mstask.exe > LoadPowerProfile Registry (Machine Run) Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme > LoadPowerProfile Registry (Machine Service) Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme The above five items are Windows standard. Except in Cleanboot mode, leave these items enabled. Yes, there are two LoadPowerProfile items, but they load at different times and experience has taught us that if you disable one or both, weird things may happen. Scan Registry checks the Registry's integrity and makes a backup if none already exists for "today". Task Monitor logs the usage of applications and provides this info to Defrag for the purpose of optimizing file placement. System Tray provides a place for a few things like the Volume Control in the system tray. > KB891711 Registry (Machine Service) c:\windows\SYSTEM\KB891711\KB891711.EXE This is part of a recent Windows Update and should be left intact. > CriticalUpdate Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\SYSTEM\wucrtupd.exe -startup A scheduled task that checks for new Updates from Microsoft. Best leave this one intact. > Microsoft Office Startup Group "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office\OSA9.EXE" -b -l This one usually doesn't cause problems, either. It helps Office programs launch more quickly and provides other benefits, and it will get re-enabled when you use Office, anyway. > run Win.ini hpfsched Part of your HP printer installation and no big deal. Leave it alone > Logitech Desktop Messenger Agent Startup Group "C:\Program Files\Desktop Messenger\8876480\Program\LDMConf.exe" /start > LDM Registry (Per-User Run) C:\Program Files\Desktop Messenger\8876480\Program\BackWeb-8876480.exe Both of the above are useless for the most part (see http://tinyurl.com/7z3zo) It also uses the well-known BackWeb, a tool that is often considered Spyware and can be used to distribute adware/spyware. However, many companies use BackWeb to provide similar services as those Logitech is offering and in some few cases it is actually wise to leave it in place, in order to allow tech support access to your system. I never leave anything like this installed, and in this case, it's potentially causing problems for what I think you'll agree is no benefit. I'd uninstall this using Add/Remove Programs. My guess is that the item is titled "Logitech Desktop Messenger. > Tau Monitor Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRAM FILES\AGNITUM\TAUSCAN 1.6\TAUMON.EXE This is a trojan detection/removal tool. Not one that I would use, but if the documentation is correct, it only runs at startup and while it might slow down your startup, if it makes you feel safer, by all means leave it. > EM_EXEC Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\LOGITECH\MOUSEW~1\SYSTEM\EM_EXEC.EXE This program supports special functions for your Logitech mouse (you still have a Logitech mouse, right?) If you actually use those special functions, fine. Otherwise, most machines get along without this application just fine. Uninstallation is optional. > mdac_runonce Registry (Machine Run) C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\runonce.exe This is leftover garbage from the installation of MDAC (Microsoft Data Access Components) You DO NOT want to delete the file Runonce.exe, but you do want to get rid of this startup command. Instruction for that to follow. > VsEcomrEXE Registry (Machine Run) C:\Program Files\Network Associates\McAfee VirusScan\vsecomr.exe > MCAgentExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\AGENT\mcagent.exe [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > MPFExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\PERSON~1\MPFTRAY.EXE > McVsRte Registry (Machine Service) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\VSO\mcvsrte.exe /embedding *All* of the above are part of the McAfee Suite you're using. As Glen notes, you can test to see if it's causing problems by turning it off (after physically disconnecting from the internet), but I personally can't see how it *wouldn't* cause problems at one time or another. But I've already commented on what I think of this stuff. > Your material stated that it's not a good solution to disable items in > msconfig so I need instruction on how to do it. I had played around > with unchecking boxes based on info from sysinfo.org site which may > have resulted in the unresponsive mouse problem. Most items on the > list relate to McAfee...maybe that's what's slowing things down. The proper statement is taht it's not wise to *permanently* disable items using MSCONFIG. It's intended to be used for trouble-shooting, and if you have a mess of permanently disabled items there, it makes life difficult, to say the least. Each of those items above has a notation next to it referring to where the command resides in the system, as follows: "Startup Group" refers to a shortcut in the Start>Programs>Startup folder. To get rid of it, simply right-click and delete the shortcut. "run Win.ini" and another that you don't have, "load Win.ini", refer to lines in the Win.ini file, Example: "Run=hpfsched", and you get rid of them by simply deleting the appropriate line. The rest are Registry commands located in the following Registry keys: "Per-User Run" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run "Per-User Service" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices "Machine Run" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run "Machine Service" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices To permanently get rid of such commands, you need to edit the Registry. That's a potentially dangerous place to play around, and it usually isn't necessary anyway if you properly uninstall the related applications. If you *do* get into the Registry, be sure you have a current Registry backup by running Scanreg /backup from the Start\Run box, and then back up the Key you're editing by opening the appropriate key and then using File>Export to save a copy of that key in a REG file. Unfortunately, you do have one such item that needs to be deleted manually, "mdac_runonce", though it isn't really a big deal if you want to leave it. It will potentially cause some delay during Startup is all. The rest of the items above should disappear if they uninstall properly, but that isn't always a given--sometimes yu have to clean up after these things. > As mentioned before I wondered about the computer overheating. I don't > live in an air-conditioned house and even though there are not too many > really hot days in Maine (2 seasons here: winter & August)it does seem > like the computer runs better when it's cold. It's possible that heat would cause a bit of a slowdown, I suppose, but it's generally assumed that the only time to worry is if the machine starts spontaneously rebooting itself. > Thanks, Mary You're welcome, Mary! Feel free to ask further clarifying questions. Personally, I think that besides the probability that McAfee and that Logitech Desktop thingy are very likey to be causing your system to bog down some, it's also likely that you have other adware/spyware problems. I strongly recommend you follow up with those tools I recommended and the Aumha.org site. No one anti-spyware/adware tool catches all of them. You want to run at least Ad-Aware and Spybot Search & Destroy on a regular basis, and to keep the stuff from getting into your system in the first place use HOSTS Manager and SpywareBlaster. > P. S. What is "MS-MVP"? "Microsoft Most Valuable Professional" is an award given my MS to people in the public sphere who provide support for Microsoft products. http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ Here's my MVP Profile: https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile®162829-c413-4e59-8c6f-9415eeb3201a SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User I find it better to drop OSA9 from the startup group. And, if its running, kill findfast in the control panel under its own icon. The user should run IE for internet address, any safe known website is okay. Then check if mdm.exe is running via ctrl-alt-del. This comes from the Office 2k install. You can prevent mdm.exe from running in IE's internet options/advanced, select disable script debugging. Also check for 0 byte files in the windows folder, there may be a boatload. That will slow the PC to a crawl. . (sent using MIME-Quoted Printable to avoid wrap--I hope...) > Mr. Terhune: I checked for viruses/malware and all was clear. Followed > the Clean Boot instructions, then did scandisk & defrag. Didn't dare > to change AV apps just yet. Here's the list of background apps: I'll comment on your background apps below, but first, some additional comments on your original post. I didn't say anything about some of the other things you mentioned in your original post, like "messing with virtual memory", which is almost always a bad thing to do. Please go back in there and reset it to "Let Windows Manage..." Also, I forget where the setting is that you probably changed where you choose between best performance for Server or Programs, but be sure to change it back to Programs. In fact, any of that tweaking you mentioned, it would be wise to undo whatever you did. Do you notice any difference in performance after doing basic maintenance? I doubt it was much, but we needed a baseline, which is why I started with that. What is almost certainly a major part of the problem is Adware/Spyware. Most of the tools I recommended in my article on Security deal with those kinds of problems, and you need to use *all* of them, since they all look for or protect against slightly different things. Another good resource for issues involving Spyware/Adware is http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm Note: Before uninstalling applications, make sure to reenable any disabled items in the MSCONFIG panels, since the uninstaller won't be able to find these entries if they are disabled. As mentioned in my Clean Boot article, you may want to disable the startup groups in MSCONFIG and then restart, in order to get them unloaded, but then go back and re-enable everything, click OK, but DO NOT restart when prompted. Then do your uninstall procedures. I'm going to reorganize this list to group them more appropriately > ScanRegistry Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\scanregw.exe /autorun > SystemTray Registry (Machine Run) SysTray.Exe > TaskMonitor Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\taskmon.exe SchedulingAgent Registry (Machine Service) mstask.exe > LoadPowerProfile Registry (Machine Run) Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme > LoadPowerProfile Registry (Machine Service) Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme The above five items are Windows standard. Except in Cleanboot mode, leave these items enabled. Yes, there are two LoadPowerProfile items, but they load at different times and experience has taught us that if you disable one or both, weird things may happen. Scan Registry checks the Registry's integrity and makes a backup if none already exists for "today". Task Monitor logs the usage of applications and provides this info to Defrag for the purpose of optimizing file placement. System Tray provides a place for a few things like the Volume Control in the system tray. > KB891711 Registry (Machine Service) c:\windows\SYSTEM\KB891711\KB891711.EXE This is part of a recent Windows Update and should be left intact. > CriticalUpdate Registry (Machine Run) c:\windows\SYSTEM\wucrtupd.exe -startup A scheduled task that checks for new Updates from Microsoft. Best leave this one intact. > Microsoft Office Startup Group "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office\OSA9.EXE" -b -l This one usually doesn't cause problems, either. It helps Office programs launch more quickly and provides other benefits, and it will get re-enabled when you use Office, anyway. > run Win.ini hpfsched Part of your HP printer installation and no big deal. Leave it alone > Logitech Desktop Messenger Agent Startup Group "C:\Program Files\Desktop Messenger\8876480\Program\LDMConf.exe" /start > LDM Registry (Per-User Run) C:\Program Files\Desktop Messenger\8876480\Program\BackWeb-8876480.exe Both of the above are useless for the most part (see http://tinyurl.com/7z3zo) It also uses the well-known BackWeb, a tool that is often considered Spyware and can be used to distribute adware/spyware. However, many companies use BackWeb to provide similar services as those Logitech is offering and in some few cases it is actually wise to leave it in place, in order to allow tech support access to your system. I never leave anything like this installed, and in this case, it's potentially causing problems for what I think you'll agree is no benefit. I'd uninstall this using Add/Remove Programs. My guess is that the item is titled "Logitech Desktop Messenger. > Tau Monitor Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRAM FILES\AGNITUM\TAUSCAN 1.6\TAUMON.EXE This is a trojan detection/removal tool. Not one that I would use, but if the documentation is correct, it only runs at startup and while it might slow down your startup, if it makes you feel safer, by all means leave it. > EM_EXEC Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\LOGITECH\MOUSEW~1\SYSTEM\EM_EXEC.EXE This program supports special functions for your Logitech mouse (you still have a Logitech mouse, right?) If you actually use those special functions, fine. Otherwise, most machines get along without this application just fine. Uninstallation is optional. > mdac_runonce Registry (Machine Run) C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\runonce.exe This is leftover garbage from the installation of MDAC (Microsoft Data Access Components) You DO NOT want to delete the file Runonce.exe, but you do want to get rid of this startup command. Instruction for that to follow. > VsEcomrEXE Registry (Machine Run) C:\Program Files\Network Associates\McAfee VirusScan\vsecomr.exe > MCAgentExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\AGENT\mcagent.exe [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > MPFExe Registry (Machine Run) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\PERSON~1\MPFTRAY.EXE > McVsRte Registry (Machine Service) C:\PROGRA~1\MCAFEE.COM\VSO\mcvsrte.exe /embedding *All* of the above are part of the McAfee Suite you're using. As Glen notes, you can test to see if it's causing problems by turning it off (after physically disconnecting from the internet), but I personally can't see how it *wouldn't* cause problems at one time or another. But I've already commented on what I think of this stuff. > Your material stated that it's not a good solution to disable items in > msconfig so I need instruction on how to do it. I had played around > with unchecking boxes based on info from sysinfo.org site which may > have resulted in the unresponsive mouse problem. Most items on the > list relate to McAfee...maybe that's what's slowing things down. The proper statement is taht it's not wise to *permanently* disable items using MSCONFIG. It's intended to be used for trouble-shooting, and if you have a mess of permanently disabled items there, it makes life difficult, to say the least. Each of those items above has a notation next to it referring to where the command resides in the system, as follows: "Startup Group" refers to a shortcut in the Start>Programs>Startup folder. To get rid of it, simply right-click and delete the shortcut. "run Win.ini" and another that you don't have, "load Win.ini", refer to lines in the Win.ini file, Example: "Run=hpfsched", and you get rid of them by simply deleting the appropriate line. The rest are Registry commands located in the following Registry keys: "Per-User Run" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run "Per-User Service" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices "Machine Run" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run "Machine Service" = HKEY_Current_User\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices To permanently get rid of such commands, you need to edit the Registry. That's a potentially dangerous place to play around, and it usually isn't necessary anyway if you properly uninstall the related applications. If you *do* get into the Registry, be sure you have a current Registry backup by running Scanreg /backup from the Start\Run box, and then back up the Key you're editing by opening the appropriate key and then using File>Export to save a copy of that key in a REG file. Unfortunately, you do have one such item that needs to be deleted manually, "mdac_runonce", though it isn't really a big deal if you want to leave it. It will potentially cause some delay during Startup is all. The rest of the items above should disappear if they uninstall properly, but that isn't always a given--sometimes yu have to clean up after these things. > As mentioned before I wondered about the computer overheating. I don't > live in an air-conditioned house and even though there are not too many > really hot days in Maine (2 seasons here: winter & August)it does seem > like the computer runs better when it's cold. It's possible that heat would cause a bit of a slowdown, I suppose, but it's generally assumed that the only time to worry is if the machine starts spontaneously rebooting itself. > Thanks, Mary You're welcome, Mary! Feel free to ask further clarifying questions. Personally, I think that besides the probability that McAfee and that Logitech Desktop thingy are very likey to be causing your system to bog down some, it's also likely that you have other adware/spyware problems. I strongly recommend you follow up with those tools I recommended and the Aumha.org site. No one anti-spyware/adware tool catches all of them. You want to run at least Ad-Aware and Spybot Search & Destroy on a regular basis, and to keep the stuff from getting into your system in the first place use HOSTS Manager and SpywareBlaster. > P. S. What is "MS-MVP"? "Microsoft Most Valuable Professional" is an award given my MS to people in the public sphere who provide support for Microsoft products. http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ Here's my MVP Profile: https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile=ae162829-c413-4e59-8c6f-9415eeb3201a SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User [snip] >Also, I forget where the setting is > that you probably changed where you choose between best performance for > Server or Programs, but be sure to change it back to Programs. [snip] If what you're talking about is located in the Performance (My Computer,Properties), File System tab and lableled Hard Disks, why would you want "Typical role of computer" set to Desktop rather than Network Server? It used to be highly recommended to set it to Network Server. Has this changed? Thanks "Highly recommended" by whom? For what purpose? Please, if you can, provide some cites. I could probably come up with various reasons for doing so, mostly to deal with hardware limitations or very mission-specific requirements, but not as any kind of "general rule" for desktop users. I realize that sounds like a somewhat belligerent challenge, but it's not meant to be. I really want to discuss this in more depth and it would be easier if we had some existing recommendations and reasoning to work from. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > [snip] >>Also, I forget where the setting is [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > changed? > Thanks This is a very old tip. The reasoning for the Network Server setting is to keep Windows files which are constantly used in memory. Since this tip eats up memory, it is not meant to be used unless your system has lots of memory. Oh but wait, that's a tweak....according to Microsoft MVPs, this can lead to system instabilty as well as other problems...snicker. =o) Signature"All problems have a simple solution! The more complex the solution, the more ludicrous the analogy!" > "Highly recommended" by whom? For what purpose? Please, if you can, provide some > cites. I could probably come up with various reasons for doing so, mostly to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > changed? > > Thanks > "Highly recommended" by whom? For what purpose? Please, if you can, provide some > cites. I could probably come up with various reasons for doing so, mostly to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > want to discuss this in more depth and it would be easier if we had some > existing recommendations and reasoning to work from. I'll research it and post back. I believe then,that 'even' you will start recommending it for Win98. Four or five years ago, MVP Ron Badour posted this info about those settings, in win95.general.discussion: <quote> Under normal circumstances, I don't believe there is any benefit to be gained by using the server setting. I tried it with W95, W95A and W95B on two computers with 16/32 mb in one and 32 mb in the other and I saw no difference. Raymond Chen of MS stated in a newsgroup post that the only time you could expect to see a tiny amount of improved performance was if the computer was actually performing server type tasks. It seems that under normal conditions, the amount of ram required for the additional caching offsets what little advantage that additional caching would give. Since this information was formulated back in the days of SLOW hard drives, little amounts of ram and so on, I don't know if the tip has any relevance for today's machines. </quote> And, from the Win98 Resource Kit: <quote> Configuring the File System for Different Roles Because computers can be optimized for different roles, including network performance, Windows 98 configures certain performance-related file system parameters according to the role the computer is expected to play. You can improve the performance of your computer (and therefore troubleshoot poor system performance) by ensuring that the computer is configured for a role that is consistent with its actual use. You can define the computer's role in the Hard Disk tab of the File System Properties dialog box (refer to Figure 8.17). The three possible configurations available under File System Properties are as follows: Desktop computer Mobile or docking system Network server You'll find Registry settings relevant to file system role in the Registry key HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \Software \Microsoft \Windows \CurrentVersion \FS Templates The following parameters are important to the file system role configuration: PathCache The size of the cache VFAT uses to track most recently accessed folders. This affects performance by limiting the number of times the file system accesses the file allocation table to search for directory paths. The setting is 32 paths for a desktop, 16 for a laptop, and 64 for the server profile. NameCache Stores the most recently accessed filenames. The setting is 8KB (or about 677 filenames) for a desktop, 4KB (or about 337 names) for a mobile system, and 16KB (or about 2,729 names) for a server profile. </quote> SignatureGlen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+ http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm > "Highly recommended" by whom? For what purpose? Please, if you can, provide some > cites. I could probably come up with various reasons for doing so, mostly to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > changed? > > Thanks OK, thanks. I do remember some of those discussions, though not in any detail. Regardless, I can't see this making more than a smidgen of difference, possibly a positive difference, possibly not, in the machine in question. I can also see it leading to problems that the OP doesn't need. Kinda like the bigger, newer hard drive argument. Possible improvement in seek time (provided it was *very* regularly defragged to keep data from being spread over the entire drive, but the potential for the larger drive to actually slow things down is significant, particularly if it wasn't partitioned into several smaller partitions. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > Four or five years ago, MVP Ron Badour posted this info about those settings, > in [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] >> > changed? >> > Thanks > "Highly recommended" by whom? For what purpose? Please, if you can, provide some > cites. I could probably come up with various reasons for doing so, mostly to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > changed? > > Thanks One of the reasons I recall was that it increases the number of files that windows caches and allocates more memory to the windows file cache, thus in most cases increases performance slightly. I even remember putting in a tweak called PowerfulPC (from a member of Virtual Doctor) that increased it even more than the Network Server setting did. I believe that you were to have more than 128MB of ram to use it. I believe the following was from *WhitPhil* "Typical Role Defaults Desktop - 32 Folders, 677 files, uses about 10K memory Mobile - 16 folders, 337 files, uses about 5K Server - 64 folders, 2729 files, uses about 40K PowerfulPC - 128 folders, 4000 files, uses about 60K(extrapolated) PathCache specifies the size of the cache that the virtual file allocation table (VFAT) can use to save the locations of the most recently accessed directory paths. This cache improves performance by reducing the number of times the file system must seek paths by searching the file allocation table. NameCache stores the locations of the most recently accessed file names. The combined use of PathCache and NameCache means that VFAT never searches the disk for the location of cached file names. (VFAT Cache) Both PathCache and NameCache use memory out of the general system heap. NOTE: This is not, and does not have anything to do with VCache." > "Highly recommended" by whom? For what purpose? Please, if you can, provide some > cites. I could probably come up with various reasons for doing so, mostly to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > changed? > > Thanks Taken from http://www.maximumcomputer.com/august02.htm "When Windows 9x was originally designed very few systems had lots of memory. MS assumed the only Windows systems that had 32 MB of RAM would be servers on the network. This is why MS set up the role of server as the only one that utilized a proper cache for the files and directories. The cache is a temporary storage in memory to hold recently accessed data from the hard disk. That way the drive does not have to be read again to obtain that data. Using a bigger cache will allow more data to be held in memory for quicker access. Changing the Typical Role of this machine to Network Server can give you a small but significant increase in speed when accessing information of the hard drive." Well, I reversed all the tweaks that I made to my computer: back to normal startup; selected home computer instead of network server; back to the default re: virtual memory. I also download Ad-aware and SpyBot and ran both and did discover some stuff from both, which I deleted. Based on your comments re: startup list there really wasn't much to delete. I didn't remove the mdac_runonce because I don't want to inadvertantly screw up the Registry and since you said it wasn't any big deal to leave it, I decided to leave it. After scandisk/defrag my computer is still exhibiting the intermittent slowness/hesitation. Mouse goes along then stalls then starts; sometimes I type text and it doesn't appear for a few seconds; sometimes computer won't shut down (gets stuck at "windows is shutting down") - this happens on average about once a week. Could the hard drive be failing? How would I know? Also I've noticed that when I start my computer the system resources are generally between 70-78% and now in IE it's at 64%. Does this mean anything? > Well, I reversed all the tweaks that I made to my computer: back to > normal startup; selected home computer instead of network server; back > to the default re: virtual memory. I also download Ad-aware and SpyBot > and ran both and did discover some stuff from both, which I deleted. Did you also run CWShredder? You should also run HijackThis and post the log to an appropriate forum (NOT here!) to see if anything else shows up. See here for suggestions http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm > Based on your comments re: startup list there really wasn't much to > delete. I didn't remove the mdac_runonce because I don't want to > inadvertantly screw up the Registry and since you said it wasn't any > big deal to leave it, I decided to leave it. Really, what it suggests is that McAfee is a big suspect, simply because so little else remains. But there's that Logitech software to consider, also. Have you tried Glens suggestion to run without AV started? Remember to stay disconected from the interent for this test (pull the phone of LAN cord). > After scandisk/defrag my computer is still exhibiting the intermittent > slowness/hesitation. Mouse goes along then stalls then starts; > sometimes I type text and it doesn't appear for a few seconds; > sometimes computer won't shut down (gets stuck at "windows is shutting > down") - this happens on average about once a week. Could the hard > drive be failing? How would I know? None of that indicates hard drive problems to me. None of wht you describe indicates and problem with hardware at all. > Also I've noticed that when I start my computer the system resources > are generally between 70-78% and now in IE it's at 64%. Does this mean > anything? Just that it's fairly normal--*if* you are looking at the right figures. Where are you getting those figures? The term "System Resources" is unfortunately used to mean different things. You're using Resource Meter to measure this? You phrase "now in IE it's 64%" makes me wonder what you're looking at. Really, Mary, while it *might* be general sludge that would be eliminated by reformatting and reinstalling Windows, I think you need to proceed with the more in-depth trials we've suggested before giving up. I'm assuming you've at least tried a Clean Boot? While everything is disabled, try wandering around Windows Explorer and running a few apps like Word, to see how the system reacts (you don't want to go online without an antivirus, and most AV apps don't play well together, so at least a trial uninstall of McAfee and the use of some other less imposing AV should be considered.. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer ran MUCH better - faster and with no hesitation. Mr. Martel was right - with McAfee running, it's like driving a car with both feet on the brake. Seems like the people at McAfee would be sensitive to the speed issue. I think when my McAfee subscription runs out, I will check out alternate AV software. Although all AV software is going to result in computer slowdown, yes? And yes, Gary, I did do a clean boot and followed the instructions at auhma.org site (lots of info there). I've learned alot of stuff from all of you - thanks. >I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) > and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > alternate AV software. Although all AV software is going to result in > computer slowdown, yes? Thought so! Why would you wait until the McAfee sub runs out? I'd want to cut my losses immediately. No, many other AV solutions do *not* cause this kind of problem, particularly not the ones we've recommended (AVAST, AVG and ETrust). Avoid McAfee, & Norton (worst offenders, though there are others almost as bad.) I'd like to be able to say that the main problem is that you were running a huge modern *suite* of protective apps that was not intended, really, to run very well on obsolete systems like Windows 98, but that's only part of the story--the fact is that these apps from Norton and McAfee have been horrible, whether on Win98 or WinXP, for years. My own favoriate analogy is to a giant, cast-iron chastity belt that covers your entire body--Safe, yes, but how can you possibly get anything done when wearing it? > And yes, Gary, I did do a clean boot and followed the instructions at > auhma.org site (lots of info there). I've learned alot of stuff from > all of you - thanks. You're welcome, Mary. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > >I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) > > and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > You're welcome, Mary. > >I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) > > and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > chastity belt that covers your entire body--Safe, yes, but how can you possibly > get anything done when wearing it? You are really out to lunch my friend! What does a modern suite of anti-virus software on Windows 98 have to do with performance? If that same software was running on Windows XP on the same system, it would most certainly perform just as poorly! Which proves again you don't know what you're talking about. I run NAV on my system without any serious slowdown on my Windows 98 based systems....so tell me, what would be the reasons my systems are slowing down less drastically then Mary's system? If I thought you were anything but a troll, I'd go ahead and answer here. As it is, these topics have been well-discussed over the years and everything I say can be easily documented. I've already slammed you down for another stupid statement in this thread, and you haven't come up with a single technically valid argument in your defense. I doubt it will be any different here. So why bother? You aren't worth the effort. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User >> >I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) >> > and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > systems....so tell me, what would be the reasons my systems are slowing down > less drastically then Mary's system? >You are really out to lunch my friend! > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >systems....so tell me, what would be the reasons my systems are slowing down >less drastically then Mary's system? It is apparent that you are incapable of distinguishing between efficient well designed applications and bloated crapware written by incompetent bungling nicompoops who can't even figure out how to uninstall their own creations, as evidenced by the existence of RNAV2003. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada SignatureMicrosoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP http://aumha.org/alex.htm > >You are really out to lunch my friend! > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada Well, I uninstalled NSW2003Pro and installed Avast! free version and did not notice any increase in performance except that the machine shut down quicker with Avast! than it did with Norton. I uninstalled Avast! and reinstalled NSW2003 again and noticed no slowdown. Running Win98SE , 1.8GHz AMD, and 768MB of ram. Perhaps later versions of Norton are more bloaty and 'would' slow down a system such as mine, but I don't know. Speaking of the 'Uninstall of Norton', when I uninstalled it and installed Avast!, it may be that the Norton uninstall removed some files, possibly dlls, that were shared and caused me many problems. Or, perhaps it was my ZAPro and Avast! that caused me problems. After I reinstalled NSW2003Pro all was back to normal. "Running Win98SE , 1.8GHz AMD, and 768MB of ram." Certainly, Mary's is nothing like that. That says a lot right there. Yours is hardly a "normal" Win98 machine. Then there's the question of whether the lack of change noted after uninstalling NSW2003Pro wasn't mostly due to crap left behind, damage already done--very likely. Did you follow the manual cleaning instructions? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > Well, I uninstalled NSW2003Pro and installed Avast! free version and did not > notice any increase in performance except that the machine shut down quicker [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Avast! that caused me problems. > After I reinstalled NSW2003Pro all was back to normal. > "Running Win98SE , 1.8GHz AMD, and 768MB of ram." Certainly, Mary's is nothing > like that. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > NSW2003Pro wasn't mostly due to crap left behind, damage already done--very > likely. Did you follow the manual cleaning instructions? Yep, I did the uninstall througt Add-Remove Pro, rebooted and then ran Symcln.exe, Rnav2003.exe, and then finally did the manual cleanup.Still had a problem with booting to a blank Desktop. Installed Avast! again and still had that problem. Finally uninstalled Avast! free and installed NSW2003Pro again and the system has run just great since. Something must have changed with Norton uninstall or Avast! and ZAPro caused some problem together that just made things worse as time went on. When I first installed Avast!, my PC ran fine for almost two days. Then AAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHH. I'm thinking you are too prone to messing with your system for us to be able to draw any logical conclusions from your experiences. Just a bit too chaotic for that, <s>. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User >> "Running Win98SE , 1.8GHz AMD, and 768MB of ram." Certainly, Mary's is >> nothing [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > When I first installed Avast!, my PC ran fine for almost two days. Then > AAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHH. > I'm thinking you are too prone to messing with your system for us to be able to > draw any logical conclusions from your experiences. Just a bit too chaotic for > that, <s>. Sadly, but very true about 'chaotic'. :-) Well there you go, Mary. Obviously, your system is just not up to the rather large drag that some A-V suites will put on it. As Gary stated, avoid McAfee and Norton (Symantec) on that machine. AVG would be a much lighter drag, but it is not too good at detecting the newer trojans. I use another free A-V named AVAST, and am happy with its performance. I have it installed on systems as slow as PII and AMD 333MHz, with no problems. You might want to give it a try (www.avast.com). I have also gotten good reports about an A-V app named Anti-Vir. SignatureGlen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+ http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm > I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) > and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > auhma.org site (lots of info there). I've learned alot of stuff from > all of you - thanks. > Well there you go, Mary. Obviously, your system is just not up to the rather large > drag that some A-V suites will put on it. As Gary stated, avoid McAfee and Norton [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 333MHz, with no problems. You might want to give it a try (www.avast.com). I have > also gotten good reports about an A-V app named Anti-Vir. I have used AVAST free (currently v4.6.691) with ZoneAlarm free (currently v6.0.667.000) for three years on a PII Celeron 466MHz with absolutely no conflicts. I have had no problems using Outlook Express, I.E.6 sp1, Avant Browser shell for I.E., and Mozilla suite. Buffalo may have had a conflict with an older version of Avast and ZoneAlarm Pro, but the free versions have never bothered me. There was an issue of upgrades versus clean installs of ZoneAlarm Pro causing problems in the past, but I have always done simple upgrades of the free versions of ZA and AVAST. Dennis [snip] > Buffalo may have had a conflict with an older version of Avast and > ZoneAlarm Pro, but the free versions have never bothered me. There was [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Dennis I was using the latest version of Avast and I did do a clean install of ZAPro when the version changed. It may have been due to the fact that I, when I originally tried Avast! free, only uninstalled the anti-virus portion of NSW2003Pro and then installed Avast. It worked fine for aprox two days (this was about a week or so ago). Thanks for your information. > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > It worked fine for aprox two days (this was about a week or so ago). > Thanks for your information. I was using NSW2001 (not PRO) for Win98 SE and uninstalled only the NAV as well. Maybe the difference in versions makes the difference in results. You might have had better results with a complete uninstall of NSW, install of Avast, and then a clean install of NSW without the NAV. Then again, maybe not. Avast had a lower footprint on my resources and has separately configurable components for Outlook/Exchange, IM and P2P as well as the regular Web, Resident, and other E-mail programs. If I was given the budget, I would probably go with the pro version, or possibly NOD32. Dennis This slowdown is less of an issue in a more recent, faster, more RAM, PC. McAfee is probably the worst in the slowdowns as far as AV packages. NAV is a strong 2nd. The more recent versions do more, and has consequential overhead. They look for more than viruses. Some up to date AV versions, will not perform all their capabilities in 98, requires XP for that. If you're running a slower PC, its probably best to go with lighter weight AV, a firewall, and some careful web browsing, careful attachment opening habits. > I followed Glen's suggestion and disabled McAfee (and stayed offline!) > and ran Word, Excel and some other programs. Lo and behold my computer [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > auhma.org site (lots of info there). I've learned alot of stuff from > all of you - thanks. > Well, I reversed all the tweaks that I made to my computer: back to > normal startup; selected home computer instead of network server; back [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > are generally between 70-78% and now in IE it's at 64%. Does this mean > anything? Mary, if you have a lot of folders in My Computer, move them to another folder (make one) and see if it helps. If it doesn't, then you can always move them back. Sometimes when there are too many folders (usually around +100) the system slows down. > > Well, I reversed all the tweaks that I made to my computer: back to > > normal startup; selected home computer instead of network server; back [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > back. Sometimes when there are too many folders (usually around +100) the system > slows down. My mistake, I meant My Documents, not My Computer. > I find it better to drop OSA9 from the startup group. And, if its running, > kill findfast in the control panel under its own icon. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Also check for 0 byte files in the windows folder, there may be a boatload. > That will slow the PC to a crawl. There may be a lot of 0 byte files in the windows folder, but you shouldn't tell anyone to simply delete them! You should be more specific as to the file names which are safe to be deleted. There may be some applications which create 0 byte files in the windows folder which may cause problems if they are simply deleted. So, unless you are sure that any 0 byte file is no longer required by windows or any other application, I wouldn't delete any of them! >I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K >Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Thanks for any advice. A 450 mhz Pentium III with 224 mb of RAM should be pretty snappy when running Windows 98 SE. Common causes of your slow startup and lack of response are: 1. Viruses. Make sure your antivirus software is completely up to date with the virus definitions not less that a week old and do a complete virus scan of the computer. Then get a "second opinion" by using one of the free online virus scanners such as: http://housecall.trendmicro.com http://www.pandasoftware.com/activescan/ http://www.ravantivirus.com/scan/ 2. Spyware. See MVP Jim Eshelman's Spyware Quick Fix page at http://www.aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm and follow the procedures he recommends there. 3. Too many background "tools and toys" (a.k.a. crap and corruption) being loaded when your computer starts up. Use Start - Run - MSCONFIG and go to the Startup tab. Compare the list of items that are loading at startup with the following checklist web sites to see what can be safely dispensed with: http://www2.whidbey.com/djdenham/Uncheck.htm http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_content.php http://www.3feetunder.com/krick/startup/list.html - has trojan related items listed Note: Please ensure that you fully understand the purpose of a startup item, how and why it was put into the startup, and the consequences (if any) of removing it before you make any changes. Some items are very important for the proper and safe functioning of your computer, including at least one item that is listed twice. Disabling an item by unchecking it in MSCONFIG should only be done for testing purposes or as a "last resort" when no other way of getting rid of the unwanted item can be found. 4. Running "Computer Killer" applications. Many of the commercial antivirus, antispyware, and/or Internet security applications out there are designed to run on today's new computers, with much faster CPUs and scads of RAM. Running these apps on an older machine can often have what I call the "who dropped the anchor?" effect on computer performance. Norton/Symantec products have a well-deserved reputation for having this type of impact, and I have often likened McAfee products to driving a car with both feet on the brake pedal. I am reluctant to recommend specific alternatives but I have found that products from eTrust and/or Trend Micro tend to have a lesser impact on the performance of an older computer. Hope this is of some assistance. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada SignatureMicrosoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP http://aumha.org/alex.htm Yes, heat plays a factor. But, the PC has to be exposed to that heat for it to be so. Pentium's have a built in safeguard to slow down when a critical internal temp is attained. Then, stop period after that. Then, meltdown. Every year or so, I backup all my critical personal files off disk. Then, do a clean install of 98SE. Lately, I've been doing a image restoration instead w/no drivers on that install. There's nothing to clean or find, just tweak after that. It can be prudent to buy a new PC. Just depends how much your PC habits and use have changed. > I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K > Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. Hello Mary: Without knowing what type of applications you're running on your system, it would be kind of hard to say if you require a new system or not. One thing I do recommend before buying a new system, is to buy a new 40 or 80 GB HDD. Mirror or reinstall Windows to the new drive...if you're still not happy with the performance, you're best to buy a new system .... Chris. Signature"All problems have a simple solution! The more complex the solution, the more ludicrous the analogy!" > I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K > Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. Why? She has plenty of HD free space already (10+ GB). A bigger drive will not affect performance (except in a negative manner) unless it has insufficient free space. Not the case here. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > Hello Mary: > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> >> Thanks for any advice. Does becoming MS-MVP require the knowledge of computer hardware? With a statement like that, I seriously doubt it! Signature"All problems have a simple solution! The more complex the solution, the more ludicrous the analogy!" > Why? She has plenty of HD free space already (10+ GB). A bigger drive will > not affect performance (except in a negative manner) unless it has [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > >> > >> Thanks for any advice. What I said was entirely correct. Would you care to support your contention that it isn't? How does a giant hard drive help performance? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > Does becoming MS-MVP require the knowledge of computer hardware? With a > statement like that, I seriously doubt it! [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >> >> >> >> Thanks for any advice. It's not the number of questions which eventually brings us to the solution that we're looking for but rather asking the right questions.... Stick to what you know best...which seems to be software. Chris. P.S. A "Jack of all trades" ... is a "Master of none"! Signature"All problems have a simple solution! The more complex the solution, the more ludicrous the analogy!" > What I said was entirely correct. Would you care to support your contention > that it isn't? How does a giant hard drive help performance? [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > >> >> > >> >> Thanks for any advice. Whatever... The fact remains that you're WRONG. If you don't think so, then for the benefit of everyone else, you should explain why you think you're right. Otherwise, you're a dirty, disgusting little troll and you should go crawl back into your cave. Why do I think you're one of those people who confuses a hard drive with Memory? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User > It's not the number of questions which eventually brings us to the solution > that we're looking for but rather asking the right questions.... [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks for any advice. Gary knows his s00t in MS stuff. And he is familiar with hardware in terms of hard drives etc. I don't believe that he's assuming, nor I, that the user intends to quickly consume any remaining HD space. If that's your basis, then indicate so. We'll disagree, but don't say he's wrong with no reason indicating why. However, moving to a larger hard drive will not fix the slowness the user is indicating. > Does becoming MS-MVP require the knowledge of computer hardware? With a > statement like that, I seriously doubt it! [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > >> > > >> Thanks for any advice. > Hello Mary: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Chris. Mary is only using less than 25% of her HDD, so why do you suggest that a newer,bigger HDD will help? Are you guessing lower seek times??? or ???. I hope you are not working as a PC tech. > Hello Mary: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > > > Thanks for any advice. I would copy any data that is important off to floppies or CD. This system should have a type of restoration CD. Unplug all usb printers, scanners, and simply restore the system by rebooting with it in the cd player. Thanks, Jan Fetzer > I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K > Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. I followed this entire thread with great interest. Just by fortunate chance, I have a bunch of Dell XPS T PCs, of various speeds. [Please see my Dell support threads for various intriguing things about this model.] Not that these issues are make or model specific. Anyhow, this bunch of PCs is running into the "user resources low" problem. It's not quite as severe as Mary's problems, but many of the remedies and suggestions put forth here seem applicable, and all are very interesting. In trying to assess what to do, I'm wondering which remedies might be most effective, aside from checking for viruses and adware. For instance, would one get a big win by getting rid of Fast find? For that app in particular, there seems to be a general consensus that it's a resource-hog and not particularly worth having, but what I don't see is some measure of the resources it takes up. It would be nice--well, more than nice--to have some idea of which apps take up the most resources. It is my understanding that McAfee and Norton are major resource users. But what about some of the other apps? > I have a Dell Dimension XPS T450MHz computer with a Pentium III (512K > Cache, whatever that means) I added RAM for a total of 224MB. The hard [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks for any advice. There are only two cures for the low resources problem: upgrade to XP or do not run too many programs when using W98. If you have programs running in the background that you do not use during every computing session, remove them from start up and start them manually when you need to use them. You can easily check on the amount of resources: Windows Explorer, Help, About. To cut back on the number of programs starting at boot, check the programs themselves for an option not to load. You might have to double click an icon in the tray (others might require a right click) and then look for preferences or options. If you cannot find an option, look for the program in the following start up points and remove the reference to it: Start up folder on the start menu, the load= and run= lines in the win.ini and these registry run keys (use regedit.exe): 1. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run 2. HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run 3. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce 4. HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce 5. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\ RunServices 6. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\ RunServicesOnce 7. HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\ RunOnce\Setup There is a freeware program that makes this process a lot easier to manage: Startup Manager, http://home.ptd.net/~don5408/toolbox/startupcpl/ You can use msconfig.exe, startup tab, to disable programs; however, by doing so, you may lessen its value as a troubleshooting tool. There might be some double entries in msconfig--leave those for your AntiVirus program and load power profile alone as they are required. If you disable an entry in msconfig or remove it from the start up point and the program loads again after a reboot, that is an indication that you missed an option on the program itself. If you don't know what an entry is, check here: http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_index.htm SignatureRegards Ron Badour, MS MVP for W98 Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour Knowledge Base Info: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo >I followed this entire thread with great interest. Just by fortunate >chance, [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >> >> Thanks for any advice. Or buy Windows 2000 on ebay ;-) John > There are only two cures for the low resources problem: upgrade to XP or do > not run too many programs when using W98. If you have programs running in [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > missed an option on the program itself. If you don't know what an entry > is, check here: http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_index.htm |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.