SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

[Guest Rich]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

 

1. Have you read the Read Me notes for UPHClean? If not you should. They

are very interesting regarding the problem I had.

 

For example in the 2nd paragraph under WHY DO PROFILES NOT UNLOAD:

 

"This problem in code can be caused by improper coding either in Microsoft

software or 3rd party software (e.g. printer drivers, virus scanner service,

etc)."

 

XP can cause the problems.

 

Running UPHClean solved the slow shutdown problem with SP3! End of

story!

 

I doubt if your computer experience goes far enough back but if you know the

history of XP and it's predecessor NT the original development of NT was

done by some of the crew who did VMS at DEC. VMS had well known problems

with memory leaks. I used VMS on Vaxstations from 1993 until 2006. One of

the problems was memory leaks that required you to reboot the system every

once and a while to free up memory.

 

2. If defrag weren't unimportant then M$ wouldn't have included it. However,

I am using only 20% of a 250GB WD drive so defrag isn't that important.

 

As a matter of history, VMS didn't have a native defragmentation utility.

This was a problem when VMS systems came with 300 MByte SCSI hard drives

that originally cost $1500-$2000 back then. VMS and the scientific data

acquisition/processing software we were using took up almost 100 MB of the

disk. We had a 3rd party defragmentation utility that worked great. That

utility is now what is Diskeeper.

 

 

3. I have several back-up bootable copies of the system. I even have the

original "Virgin" Dell-supplied system drive that came with the system that

you can do Cntl +F11 on. The first thing I did when I got the system in

December 2006 was to make a bootable image on a new WD 250GB. I always keep

two backups besides the original drive as well as the current C: drive. I

make one before any major system change.

 

4. I wouldn't use Norton Ghost if you gave it to me free. It is too buggy.

Look at all the Blogs and other Web discussions of the problems with

Ghost.If I needed something that sophisticated I would use Acronis. use the

free WD Data Lifeguard Tools to make back up images.

 

 

"Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

news:AKGYj.4147$ah4.3581@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...

> If you want evidence, don't defrag or do a disk cleanup for six months.

> Then do them and you will notice a huge difference.

> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

> news:48332BE2.F4860C63@EXAMPLE.COM...

>>

>>

>> Rich wrote:

>>

>>> How many times do you want me to run them?

>>>

>>> I told you it didn't make any difference. I run Diskeeper daily.

>>>

>>> SP3 = 90 second shut down time

>>>

>>> SP2 = 20 second shut down time

>>>

>>

>> There is simply no evidence to suggest that defragging the system and

>> running

>> Windows cleanup utility improves performance of the system.

>>

>> The only thing I can say is that your system has become unstable due to

>> some

>> rogue program or programs. If you have done all your backups and you

>> have all

>> the disks, CDs and serial numbers of all your application programs, then

>> doing a

>> clean install using integrated/slipstreamed OS would definately resolve

>> this

>> almost immediately.

>>

>> Also, this will give you the opportunity to learn something about imaging

>> your HD

>> with Symantec Ghost or similar products so that in future you have a

>> starting

>> point should something go wrong with the system.

>>

>> hth

>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Rich]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

That is why I was reluctant to install SP3. I have learned from over 45

years of using computers that every time there is a new "Improved" something

or another it takes a service pack or hotfix to fix the fixes. And then more

fixes to fix the fixes.

 

 

"Kayman" <kaymanDeleteThis@operamail.com> wrote in message

news:eTEBmhtuIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> On Tue, 20 May 2008 18:31:34 -0400, Rich wrote:

>

>> The Hive Cleanup solved the shutdown problem. I wasnt aware of UHPClean

>> until your post. The read me notes were very interesting.

>>

>> Thank you very much.

>>

> YW, I am glad it workes :)

[Guest Unknown]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

I don't have ANY problems with my system. I had a minor problem after

installing SP3 and solved it by uninstalling it

and reinstalling SP3. I do not need any other defrag program.

You'd be surprised how far back my computer experience goes. Hint: the first

memory I worked on was Electrostatic

Storage.

"Rich" <Rich_NoSpam@ptd_nospam.net> wrote in message

news:eVZJRrtuIHA.672@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>

> 1. Have you read the Read Me notes for UPHClean? If not you should. They

> are very interesting regarding the problem I had.

>

> For example in the 2nd paragraph under WHY DO PROFILES NOT UNLOAD:

>

> "This problem in code can be caused by improper coding either in Microsoft

> software or 3rd party software (e.g. printer drivers, virus scanner

> service,

> etc)."

>

> XP can cause the problems.

>

> Running UPHClean solved the slow shutdown problem with SP3! End of

> story!

>

> I doubt if your computer experience goes far enough back but if you know

> the history of XP and it's predecessor NT the original development of NT

> was done by some of the crew who did VMS at DEC. VMS had well known

> problems with memory leaks. I used VMS on Vaxstations from 1993 until

> 2006. One of the problems was memory leaks that required you to reboot the

> system every once and a while to free up memory.

>

> 2. If defrag weren't unimportant then M$ wouldn't have included it.

> However, I am using only 20% of a 250GB WD drive so defrag isn't that

> important.

>

> As a matter of history, VMS didn't have a native defragmentation utility.

> This was a problem when VMS systems came with 300 MByte SCSI hard drives

> that originally cost $1500-$2000 back then. VMS and the scientific data

> acquisition/processing software we were using took up almost 100 MB of the

> disk. We had a 3rd party defragmentation utility that worked great. That

> utility is now what is Diskeeper.

>

>

> 3. I have several back-up bootable copies of the system. I even have the

> original "Virgin" Dell-supplied system drive that came with the system

> that you can do Cntl +F11 on. The first thing I did when I got the system

> in December 2006 was to make a bootable image on a new WD 250GB. I always

> keep two backups besides the original drive as well as the current C:

> drive. I make one before any major system change.

>

> 4. I wouldn't use Norton Ghost if you gave it to me free. It is too buggy.

> Look at all the Blogs and other Web discussions of the problems with

> Ghost.If I needed something that sophisticated I would use Acronis. use

> the free WD Data Lifeguard Tools to make back up images.

>

>

> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

> news:AKGYj.4147$ah4.3581@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...

>> If you want evidence, don't defrag or do a disk cleanup for six months.

>> Then do them and you will notice a huge difference.

>> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

>> news:48332BE2.F4860C63@EXAMPLE.COM...

>>>

>>>

>>> Rich wrote:

>>>

>>>> How many times do you want me to run them?

>>>>

>>>> I told you it didn't make any difference. I run Diskeeper daily.

>>>>

>>>> SP3 = 90 second shut down time

>>>>

>>>> SP2 = 20 second shut down time

>>>>

>>>

>>> There is simply no evidence to suggest that defragging the system and

>>> running

>>> Windows cleanup utility improves performance of the system.

>>>

>>> The only thing I can say is that your system has become unstable due to

>>> some

>>> rogue program or programs. If you have done all your backups and you

>>> have all

>>> the disks, CDs and serial numbers of all your application programs, then

>>> doing a

>>> clean install using integrated/slipstreamed OS would definately resolve

>>> this

>>> almost immediately.

>>>

>>> Also, this will give you the opportunity to learn something about

>>> imaging your HD

>>> with Symantec Ghost or similar products so that in future you have a

>>> starting

>>> point should something go wrong with the system.

>>>

>>> hth

>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Rich]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

My first computer was an IBM 1620 with WATFOR compiler.

 

 

"Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

news:sWVYj.1388$co7.1205@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com...

>I don't have ANY problems with my system. I had a minor problem after

>installing SP3 and solved it by uninstalling it

> and reinstalling SP3. I do not need any other defrag program.

> You'd be surprised how far back my computer experience goes. Hint: the

> first memory I worked on was Electrostatic

> Storage.

> "Rich" <Rich_NoSpam@ptd_nospam.net> wrote in message

> news:eVZJRrtuIHA.672@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>

>> 1. Have you read the Read Me notes for UPHClean? If not you should.

>> They are very interesting regarding the problem I had.

>>

>> For example in the 2nd paragraph under WHY DO PROFILES NOT UNLOAD:

>>

>> "This problem in code can be caused by improper coding either in

>> Microsoft

>> software or 3rd party software (e.g. printer drivers, virus scanner

>> service,

>> etc)."

>>

>> XP can cause the problems.

>>

>> Running UPHClean solved the slow shutdown problem with SP3! End of

>> story!

>>

>> I doubt if your computer experience goes far enough back but if you know

>> the history of XP and it's predecessor NT the original development of NT

>> was done by some of the crew who did VMS at DEC. VMS had well known

>> problems with memory leaks. I used VMS on Vaxstations from 1993 until

>> 2006. One of the problems was memory leaks that required you to reboot

>> the system every once and a while to free up memory.

>>

>> 2. If defrag weren't unimportant then M$ wouldn't have included it.

>> However, I am using only 20% of a 250GB WD drive so defrag isn't that

>> important.

>>

>> As a matter of history, VMS didn't have a native defragmentation utility.

>> This was a problem when VMS systems came with 300 MByte SCSI hard drives

>> that originally cost $1500-$2000 back then. VMS and the scientific data

>> acquisition/processing software we were using took up almost 100 MB of

>> the disk. We had a 3rd party defragmentation utility that worked great.

>> That utility is now what is Diskeeper.

>>

>>

>> 3. I have several back-up bootable copies of the system. I even have the

>> original "Virgin" Dell-supplied system drive that came with the system

>> that you can do Cntl +F11 on. The first thing I did when I got the system

>> in December 2006 was to make a bootable image on a new WD 250GB. I always

>> keep two backups besides the original drive as well as the current C:

>> drive. I make one before any major system change.

>>

>> 4. I wouldn't use Norton Ghost if you gave it to me free. It is too

>> buggy. Look at all the Blogs and other Web discussions of the problems

>> with Ghost.If I needed something that sophisticated I would use Acronis.

>> use the free WD Data Lifeguard Tools to make back up images.

>>

>>

>> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

>> news:AKGYj.4147$ah4.3581@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...

>>> If you want evidence, don't defrag or do a disk cleanup for six months.

>>> Then do them and you will notice a huge difference.

>>> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

>>> news:48332BE2.F4860C63@EXAMPLE.COM...

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Rich wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> How many times do you want me to run them?

>>>>>

>>>>> I told you it didn't make any difference. I run Diskeeper daily.

>>>>>

>>>>> SP3 = 90 second shut down time

>>>>>

>>>>> SP2 = 20 second shut down time

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> There is simply no evidence to suggest that defragging the system and

>>>> running

>>>> Windows cleanup utility improves performance of the system.

>>>>

>>>> The only thing I can say is that your system has become unstable due to

>>>> some

>>>> rogue program or programs. If you have done all your backups and you

>>>> have all

>>>> the disks, CDs and serial numbers of all your application programs,

>>>> then doing a

>>>> clean install using integrated/slipstreamed OS would definately resolve

>>>> this

>>>> almost immediately.

>>>>

>>>> Also, this will give you the opportunity to learn something about

>>>> imaging your HD

>>>> with Symantec Ghost or similar products so that in future you have a

>>>> starting

>>>> point should something go wrong with the system.

>>>>

>>>> hth

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Unknown]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

Remember the IBM 602, 602A, 650, and 702?

"Rich" <Rich_NoSpam@ptd_nospam.net> wrote in message

news:eF3IuM6uIHA.4260@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> My first computer was an IBM 1620 with WATFOR compiler.

>

>

> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

> news:sWVYj.1388$co7.1205@nlpi066.nbdc.sbc.com...

>>I don't have ANY problems with my system. I had a minor problem after

>>installing SP3 and solved it by uninstalling it

>> and reinstalling SP3. I do not need any other defrag program.

>> You'd be surprised how far back my computer experience goes. Hint: the

>> first memory I worked on was Electrostatic

>> Storage.

>> "Rich" <Rich_NoSpam@ptd_nospam.net> wrote in message

>> news:eVZJRrtuIHA.672@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>>

>>> 1. Have you read the Read Me notes for UPHClean? If not you should.

>>> They are very interesting regarding the problem I had.

>>>

>>> For example in the 2nd paragraph under WHY DO PROFILES NOT UNLOAD:

>>>

>>> "This problem in code can be caused by improper coding either in

>>> Microsoft

>>> software or 3rd party software (e.g. printer drivers, virus scanner

>>> service,

>>> etc)."

>>>

>>> XP can cause the problems.

>>>

>>> Running UPHClean solved the slow shutdown problem with SP3! End of

>>> story!

>>>

>>> I doubt if your computer experience goes far enough back but if you know

>>> the history of XP and it's predecessor NT the original development of NT

>>> was done by some of the crew who did VMS at DEC. VMS had well known

>>> problems with memory leaks. I used VMS on Vaxstations from 1993 until

>>> 2006. One of the problems was memory leaks that required you to reboot

>>> the system every once and a while to free up memory.

>>>

>>> 2. If defrag weren't unimportant then M$ wouldn't have included it.

>>> However, I am using only 20% of a 250GB WD drive so defrag isn't that

>>> important.

>>>

>>> As a matter of history, VMS didn't have a native defragmentation

>>> utility. This was a problem when VMS systems came with 300 MByte SCSI

>>> hard drives that originally cost $1500-$2000 back then. VMS and the

>>> scientific data acquisition/processing software we were using took up

>>> almost 100 MB of the disk. We had a 3rd party defragmentation utility

>>> that worked great. That utility is now what is Diskeeper.

>>>

>>>

>>> 3. I have several back-up bootable copies of the system. I even have the

>>> original "Virgin" Dell-supplied system drive that came with the system

>>> that you can do Cntl +F11 on. The first thing I did when I got the

>>> system in December 2006 was to make a bootable image on a new WD 250GB.

>>> I always keep two backups besides the original drive as well as the

>>> current C: drive. I make one before any major system change.

>>>

>>> 4. I wouldn't use Norton Ghost if you gave it to me free. It is too

>>> buggy. Look at all the Blogs and other Web discussions of the problems

>>> with Ghost.If I needed something that sophisticated I would use Acronis.

>>> use the free WD Data Lifeguard Tools to make back up images.

>>>

>>>

>>> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

>>> news:AKGYj.4147$ah4.3581@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...

>>>> If you want evidence, don't defrag or do a disk cleanup for six months.

>>>> Then do them and you will notice a huge difference.

>>>> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

>>>> news:48332BE2.F4860C63@EXAMPLE.COM...

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Rich wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> How many times do you want me to run them?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I told you it didn't make any difference. I run Diskeeper daily.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> SP3 = 90 second shut down time

>>>>>>

>>>>>> SP2 = 20 second shut down time

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> There is simply no evidence to suggest that defragging the system and

>>>>> running

>>>>> Windows cleanup utility improves performance of the system.

>>>>>

>>>>> The only thing I can say is that your system has become unstable due

>>>>> to some

>>>>> rogue program or programs. If you have done all your backups and you

>>>>> have all

>>>>> the disks, CDs and serial numbers of all your application programs,

>>>>> then doing a

>>>>> clean install using integrated/slipstreamed OS would definately

>>>>> resolve this

>>>>> almost immediately.

>>>>>

>>>>> Also, this will give you the opportunity to learn something about

>>>>> imaging your HD

>>>>> with Symantec Ghost or similar products so that in future you have a

>>>>> starting

>>>>> point should something go wrong with the system.

>>>>>

>>>>> hth

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Unknown]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

In reality it isn't SP3 that made your system much slower, it is some other

garbage on your system. Think about that.

"ship" <shiphen@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:b41d9ba9-15d3-485a-84a9-c0c7639aa123@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> WindowsXP Pro (on Network using roaming profiles)

>

>

> Hi

>

> I just installed SP3 for WindowsXP Professional.

>

> My PC is now running MUCH slower.

>

> - Anyone else had the same problems?

>

> I havent timed it but certain interface actions (like clicking on

> "Browse" buttons) see to take twice or three times longer to on up. So

> much so that I thought might have a virus!

>

> I am now regretting installing SP3. But am not sure how easy/safe it

> is to uninstal SP3.

>

> - Any thoughts?

>

>

> Ship

> Shiperton Henethe

>

> P.S. Software used

> - msOutlook2003

> - Photoshop 6

> - Macromedia Dreamweaver MX4

> - Xara Xtreme Professional

> - TextPad

> etc, but EVERYTHING seems to be *substantially* slower!

>

>

>

[Guest Citizen Jimserac]

Re: SP3 has made my WindowsXP *much* slower

 

On May 19, 9:14 am, ship <ship...@gmail.com> wrote:

> WindowsXP Pro (on Network using roaming profiles)

>

> Hi

>

> I just installed SP3 for WindowsXP Professional.

>

> My PC is now running MUCH slower.

>

> - Anyone else had the same problems?

>

> I havent timed it but certain interface actions (like clicking on

> "Browse" buttons) see to take twice or three times longer to on up. So

> much so that I thought might have a virus!

>

> I am now regretting installing SP3. But am not sure how easy/safe it

> is to uninstal SP3.

>

> - Any thoughts?

>

> Ship

> Shiperton Henethe

>

> P.S. Software used

> - msOutlook2003

> - Photoshop 6

> - Macromedia Dreamweaver MX4

> - Xara Xtreme Professional

> - TextPad

> etc, but EVERYTHING seems to be *substantially* slower!

 

You might want to try registry mechanics

and get that cleaned out, it helps sometimes.

 

I got fed up with Mucrosoft nonsense about

a year ago and made the leap to Linux so I have

only one old computer which rarely gets turned

on using XP.

 

P.S. I saw your 2006 posts abour Homeopathy.

Good stuff, I'm encountering the same hysterical opposition right now

(and from some of the same people)

over on misc.health.alternative.

 

Thanks

Citizen Jimserac