I know this isn't the right forum for this (do I ever!), but you-all know so much about everything I thought I'd ask.
About two months ago I resurrected my daughter's Compaq laptop (cracked screen - replaced it) and ran an update on it. It's running Windows XP, SP1 (I think), but since the update it has run about 1/3 as fast as it used to.
Does anyone know if there was a WXP update that killed performance on laptops? None of my other XP installs, SP1 or SP2, suffers from this.
(Actually, I should say "their other" 'cuz I don't use Windows unless I can't avoid it, and then I try to do it on my WXP VM where it's still relatively safe.)
Thanks.
mhr
My old IBM T21 suffered almost the same issues, tried to roll back the updates and even tried to install XP SP3 without any good performance change. I had to reinstall Windows XP...
I believe it's a waste of time trying to troubleshoot performance stuff under a multipatched old install windows if you just can reinstall and get a fresh registry.
saludos.
Victor Padro wrote:
My old IBM T21 suffered almost the same issues, tried to roll back the updates and even tried to install XP SP3 without any good performance change. I had to reinstall Windows XP...
I believe it's a waste of time trying to troubleshoot performance stuff under a multipatched old install windows if you just can reinstall and get a fresh registry.
saludos.
-- "It is human nature to think wisely and act in an absurd fashion."
"Todo el desorden del mundo proviene de las profesiones mal o mediocremente servidas"
This isn't the right place, but a bit of help is always welcome :)
Windows XP, as with most other Windows' has the irritating habit of pilling up junk in the registry, and other places. My first check is always to check for viruses - update the virus definitions, and scan the PC thoroughly, do a scan disk & defrag, and then try a registry repair tool. Other than that, a re installation is your best bet.
Good luck
Rudi Ahlers schrieb:
This isn't the right place, but a bit of help is always welcome :)
Windows XP, as with most other Windows' has the irritating habit of pilling up junk in the registry, and other places. My first check is always to check for viruses - update the virus definitions, and scan the PC thoroughly, do a scan disk & defrag, and then try a registry repair tool. Other than that, a re installation is your best bet.
Anything that takes longer than 30 minutes is better solved with a re-install (with Windows). Too bad that you have to re-install all the shiny applications, too (which takes ages, usually). But then, CentOS throws most of its stuff in /usr/bin and /bin, too, so you can't differentiate between "OS" and applications, either.
I'd rather have a "base" install and a separate directory with "all the rest". And of course, two different RPM-dbs, too.
cu, Rainer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Rainer Duffner wrote: | But then, CentOS throws most of its stuff in /usr/bin and /bin, too, so | you can't differentiate between "OS" and applications, either. | | I'd rather have a "base" install and a separate directory with "all the | rest". And of course, two different RPM-dbs, too. |
That's what rpm is for.
- -- Milton Calnek BSc, A/Slt(Ret.) milton@calnek.com 306-717-8737
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 02:03:26 MHR wrote:
I know this isn't the right forum for this (do I ever!), but you-all know so much about everything I thought I'd ask.
About two months ago I resurrected my daughter's Compaq laptop (cracked screen - replaced it) and ran an update on it. It's running Windows XP, SP1 (I think), but since the update it has run about 1/3 as fast as it used to.
Does anyone know if there was a WXP update that killed performance on laptops? None of my other XP installs, SP1 or SP2, suffers from this.
(Actually, I should say "their other" 'cuz I don't use Windows unless I can't avoid it, and then I try to do it on my WXP VM where it's still relatively safe.)
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be lost, so I can't go back to before it.
Anne
Anne Wilson wrote:
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be lost, so I can't go back to before it.
I've installed SP3 on dozens of systems and seen no slowdowns.
this is WAY off topic for this list.
John R Pierce wrote:
Anne Wilson wrote:
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be lost, so I can't go back to before it.
I've installed SP3 on dozens of systems and seen no slowdowns.
this is WAY off topic for this list.
It seems Service Pack 3 has been hell for a lot of people, including businesses. Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs is incompatible with SP3 yet Microsoft lists it on Microsoft Update for that XP variant for example.
Here is my advice for XP users wanting SP3, this advice applies to any service pack install...
* _NEVER_ use Microsoft [Windows] Update to install service packs (Use the "IT Professionals" multiple installation bundles) * Don't waste space on uninstallation backups (there are command-line switches to prevent this) * Clean out and turn off System Restore before you do it * Make a slipstreamed XP CD to run a Repair installation should something go badly wrong...
This is so barely on topic it's just plain _wrong_, but it's the only thing I can give useful input on based on [bad] experience. That said it's not _that_ offtopic given Xen can run Windows and CentOS includes Xen technology ;-)
Martyn Hare wrote:
This is so barely on topic it's just plain _wrong_, but it's the only thing I can give useful input on based on [bad] experience. That said it's not _that_ offtopic given Xen can run Windows and CentOS includes Xen technology ;-)
Then this list could become the list of about anything, providing that Xen can run many other OS!
I'd say that for Winblows / Xen problems, you could just submit to Xen list then.
A discussion about slowliness or not of Winblows SP3 is *SURELY* off topic in the CentOS list! I still don't know how the original poster came with all this in the CentOS list. I mean, for Winblows stuff, i'd post to a Winblows list first!
So thanks for your help but next time, please DNFTT!
Guy Boisvert, ing. IngTegration inc.
Guy Boisvert schrieb:
A discussion about slowliness or not of Winblows SP3 is *SURELY* off topic in the CentOS list! I still don't know how the original poster came with all this in the CentOS list. I mean, for Winblows stuff, i'd post to a Winblows list first!
Because the idiot-density is usually lower on a non-Windoze-list. This happens everywhere. On "good" lists, people come-up with all sorts of questions for all sorts of problems after they realize that a bunch of people who actually know their stuff hang around.
This list is not too busy - it's still a bearable volume. But I admit I don't read everything.
Rainer
Rainer Duffner wrote:
Guy Boisvert schrieb:
A discussion about slowliness or not of Winblows SP3 is *SURELY* off topic in the CentOS list! I still don't know how the original poster came with all this in the CentOS list. I mean, for Winblows stuff, i'd post to a Winblows list first!
Because the idiot-density is usually lower on a non-Windoze-list. This happens everywhere. On "good" lists, people come-up with all sorts of questions for all sorts of problems after they realize that a bunch of people who actually know their stuff hang around.
This list is not too busy - it's still a bearable volume. But I admit I don't read everything.
Rainer _______________________________________________
I actually got kicked off a local Linux list for asking something similar, had some issues with a MS Exchange server (which is more an STMP / IP transport problem than MS specific) and some ppl on the list decided I should be kicked off for it.
On the other side of the coin, MS wanted to charge me close to $100 /hour for support. Go figure.
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 17:19 +0200, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Rainer Duffner wrote:
Guy Boisvert schrieb:
<snip>
This list is not too busy - it's still a bearable volume. But I admit I don't read everything.
<snip empty lines and sig stuff>
I actually got kicked off a local Linux list for asking something similar, had some issues with a MS Exchange server (which is more an STMP / IP transport problem than MS specific) and some ppl on the list decided I should be kicked off for it.
On the other side of the coin, MS wanted to charge me close to $100 /hour for support. Go figure.
Well, I guess it shows that the "capital" of personal time, attention and expertise is also valuable to those who have it. And they don't want to waste it on severely OT stuff. So they naturally have negative reactions of varying strength that depends on many things.
I would suggest, without casting any stones at specific folks, that those who habitually waste this "capital" (by ignoring requested courtesies like staying sort of on-topic) are just plain inconsiderate. If you pay $, that is different.
MHO
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Rainer Duffner wrote:
Guy Boisvert wrote:
A discussion about slowliness or not of Winblows SP3 is *SURELY* off topic in the CentOS list! I still don't know how the original poster came with all this in the CentOS list. I mean, for Winblows stuff, i'd post to a Winblows list first!
Because the idiot-density is usually lower on a non-Windoze-list. This happens everywhere. On "good" lists, people come-up with all sorts of questions for all sorts of problems after they realize that a bunch of people who actually know their stuff hang around.
This list is not too busy - it's still a bearable volume. But I admit I don't read everything.
Rainer _______________________________________________
I actually got kicked off a local Linux list for asking something similar, had some issues with a MS Exchange server (which is more an STMP / IP transport problem than MS specific) and some ppl on the list decided I should be kicked off for it.
On the other side of the coin, MS wanted to charge me close to $100 /hour for support. Go figure.
I can imagine that the knowledge level can effectively be lower in Winblows lists. It's as simple as to who is headed Winblow$ in general. (There are idiots everywhere and even if sometimes they know a lot about something but that's another subject!)
Macroshaft focus on sucking money out of the mass and Linux is aiming to something else.
This list is about CentOS, we focus on that, it's clear. Sure there are probably a lot of people with high knowledge in Winblows here but let's just say again that there are probably many other lists for Redmond's "Let's Go Captive and Mess Around Standards" OS. If i have knowledge in Winblows and want to help, i can just subscribe to those lists and "Voilà" !
As for M$ wanting to charge for support, people have to realize that sometimes you have to take many parameters into account before choosing a server platform. I'm a consultant and when i speak about TCO and ROI to my clients, i often have to fight the misconception that it's always easy with Winblows... Redmond funded some research companies to say that Linux TCO was higher than Winblows', let's just say that money can buy many things...
Majority of little companies choose Winblows by "default" thinking that you just put a server into a closet and forget about it. They think that the receptionist can just click "update" from time to time and everything will be ok! And VARs companies very often pre-install Redmond's crap on their hardware (again, buy out by Redmond)...
Then one could probably say that if you get support for Linux, it could be as expansive as Winblows (hourly based) and that's true. But i always return to the root of the difference and illustrate the "techniques" used by Redmond to modify standards, to get clients captive, etc. I still have to live with "the M$ Office mess" everyday, good illustration of Redmond's "low blow" tactics (specifically in this case, the horror story about their closed source data file format that they use to push you to the latest version). Or even, think about their prohibitive license fees (Win2003 CALs are now in excess of 100$ per seat)!
Ok, enough for evidences about Redmond...
Guy Boisvert, ing. IngTegration inc.
On Friday 18 July 2008 17:57:13 Guy Boisvert wrote:
Majority of little companies choose Winblows by "default" thinking that you just put a server into a closet and forget about it.
The majority of little companies don't even know that there is an option.
The one good thing that has come out of the present SP3 mess is that my daughter has agreed today that 98% of her work is done in Mozilla and OpenOffice. She is seriously on the point of giving in. This weekend I'll loan her an old laptop with Linux installed, and convince her that life's better in our camp :-)
Anne
<snip>
Then one could probably say that if you get support for Linux, it could be as expansive as Winblows (hourly based) and that's true. But i always return to the root of the difference and illustrate the "techniques" used by Redmond to modify standards, to get clients captive, etc. I still have to live with "the M$ Office mess" everyday, good illustration of Redmond's "low blow" tactics (specifically in this case, the horror story about their closed source data file format that they use to push you to the latest version). Or even, think about their prohibitive license fees (Win2003 CALs are now in excess of 100$ per seat)!
Ok, enough for evidences about Redmond...
That is why Bill Gates is a billionaire, and Linus Torvalds isn't.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Scott Silva ssilva@sgvwater.com wrote:
That is why Bill Gates is a billionaire, and Linus Torvalds isn't.
I would argue that BG is a billionaire because he is a salesman, whereas Linus is a dedicated professional software engineer.
Which is also why most of Window$ is bloviated hype and most (if not all) of Linux is quality.
mhr
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Martyn Hare wrote:
Yes but Linus could be guest speaker at LinuxChix, Bill has to pay for his women ;-)
hey now -- she worked in tech too -- a product manager for MSFT's 'Bob' product (clippy on steroids) ... oh, hmmm, so he _did_ indirectly pay for ...
Never mind -- an Emily Litella moment.
-- Russ herrold
on 7-18-2008 8:11 AM Rainer Duffner spake the following:
Guy Boisvert schrieb:
A discussion about slowliness or not of Winblows SP3 is *SURELY* off topic in the CentOS list! I still don't know how the original poster came with all this in the CentOS list. I mean, for Winblows stuff, i'd post to a Winblows list first!
Because the idiot-density is usually lower on a non-Windoze-list. This happens everywhere. On "good" lists, people come-up with all sorts of questions for all sorts of problems after they realize that a bunch of people who actually know their stuff hang around.
This list is not too busy - it's still a bearable volume. But I admit I don't read everything.
I'm glad you feel that way because I have been having this pain in my shoulder.... ;-P
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Scott Silva ssilva@sgvwater.com wrote:
I'm glad you feel that way because I have been having this pain in my shoulder.... ;-P
Scott, I thought you /were/ that pain in the shoulder....
;^)
mhr
on 7-18-2008 3:55 PM MHR spake the following:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Scott Silva ssilva-m4n3GYAQT2lWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org wrote:
I'm glad you feel that way because I have been having this pain in my shoulder.... ;-P
Scott, I thought you /were/ that pain in the shoulder....
;^)
mhr
Nope... I am usually a pain in a somewhat lower body region! ;-D
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Anne Wilson Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:11 AM To: CentOS mailing list Subject: Re: [CentOS] OT - Windows slowdown?
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 02:03:26 MHR wrote:
I know this isn't the right forum for this (do I ever!), but you-all know so much about everything I thought I'd ask.
About two months ago I resurrected my daughter's Compaq laptop (cracked screen - replaced it) and ran an update on it. It's running Windows XP, SP1 (I think), but since the update it has run about 1/3 as fast as it used to.
Does anyone know if there was a WXP update that killed performance on laptops? None of my other XP installs, SP1 or SP2, suffers from this.
(Actually, I should say "their other" 'cuz I don't use Windows unless I can't avoid it, and then I try to do it on my WXP VM where it's still relatively safe.)
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be lost, so I can't go back to before it.
Anne -------- Depending on how SP3 was installed you can Uninstall it. From Add Remove Programs.
JohnStanley
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be lost, so I can't go back to before it.
Anne
Anne
Sp3 doesn't kill performance if applied to a fresh install before any "other" updates or apps are applied / installed
Installing sp3 on top of sp2 "just because" is realistically not a good thing...
- rh
I've installed it on a half dozen machines here as part of a test. No issues that I can see. All are XP Pro with SP2 and some IE6, some IE7. All upgraded to IE7 after, if they were IE6. I DID take images (Clonezilla!) of those machines before I installed........ Just a habit I got into years ago. (Taking images before major changes, not Clonezilla. I used to use Imagecast...)
Dennis
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Robert - elists Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 7:59 AM To: 'CentOS mailing list' Subject: RE: [CentOS] OT - Windows slowdown?
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be
lost, so I
can't go back to before it.
Anne
Anne
Sp3 doesn't kill performance if applied to a fresh install before any "other" updates or apps are applied / installed
Installing sp3 on top of sp2 "just because" is realistically not a good thing...
- rh
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Dennis McLeod wrote:
I've installed it on a half dozen machines here as part of a test. No issues that I can see. All are XP Pro with SP2 and some IE6, some IE7. All upgraded to IE7 after, if they were IE6. I DID take images (Clonezilla!) of those machines before I installed........ Just a habit I got into years ago. (Taking images before major changes, not Clonezilla. I used to use Imagecast...)
Dennis
-----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of Robert - elists Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 7:59 AM To: 'CentOS mailing list' Subject: RE: [CentOS] OT - Windows slowdown?
Applying SP3 to my daughter's laptop has killed performance to the point of being almost unusable. Restore Points seem to be
lost, so I
can't go back to before it.
Anne
Anne
Sp3 doesn't kill performance if applied to a fresh install before any "other" updates or apps are applied / installed
Installing sp3 on top of sp2 "just because" is realistically not a good thing...
- rh
Hey guys, could you please move this thread where it should be: In a Winblows mailing list... I don't think that the CentOS mailing list is the right place to discuss about Winblows...
On top of that, top posting is irritating at best.
http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=16 (item 2, "Guidelines for CentOS Mailing List posts")
Thanks for your understanding and have a great day.
Guy Boisvert, ing. IngTegration inc.
-
Anne Wilson -
Dennis McLeod -
Guy Boisvert -
John -
John R Pierce -
Martyn Hare -
MHR -
Milton Calnek -
R P Herrold -
Rainer Duffner -
Robert - elists -
Rudi Ahlers -
Scott Silva -
Steve Thompson -
Victor Padro -
William L. Maltby