eHam

eHam Forums => Computers And Software => Topic started by: KJ6WEV on May 31, 2012, 12:43:05 PM



Title: Computer speed
Post by: KJ6WEV on May 31, 2012, 12:43:05 PM
To start I have a Dell Inspirion 1150 with a Celeron Processor. Upgraded to the max of 1GB ram. After the ram upgrade it ran great but slowly slowed to a crawl after some weeks. Tried Defrag and Disk Cleanup no help. Turned it off one night frustrated at it's pace but the next morning when I turned it on it was running as fast as when it was first upgraded.

I know things just don't fix themselves but it happened. Now it has slowed back down to a crawl. Something made the thing go fast and I would just like to know what. So I could do it again.

Your friend
Glenn
KJ6WEV
 


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: AA4PB on May 31, 2012, 12:47:12 PM
By slow, do you mean it is slow on the Internet or slow in running other programs? I occassionally find the Internet speed really slow (1MB for a 24MB service) and can restore it by resetting the cable modem.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K5UNX on May 31, 2012, 01:23:39 PM
Did you run it a couple weeks without rebooting???


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on May 31, 2012, 03:18:42 PM
To start I have a Dell Inspirion 1150 with a Celeron Processor. Upgraded to the max of 1GB ram. After the ram upgrade it ran great but slowly slowed to a crawl after some weeks. Tried Defrag and Disk Cleanup no help. Turned it off one night frustrated at it's pace but the next morning when I turned it on it was running as fast as when it was first upgraded.

I know things just don't fix themselves but it happened. Now it has slowed back down to a crawl. Something made the thing go fast and I would just like to know what. So I could do it again.

Your friend
Glenn
KJ6WEV
 

Need more info. How old is it and what is actual CPU speed and type (Celeron M or what) I assume it is XP. By default XP will try to automatically make a large swap file and when you add more ram it just makes a bigger swap file. When it swaps code it crawls especially with a old slow HD. You need to change virtual memory setting to disable automatic swap file size and set it to about 512meg or so and reboot and you should see a big difference in performance.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KE4DRN on May 31, 2012, 04:46:30 PM
hi,

you may want to change automatic updates from
automatic download and install to notify only.
Then you can control when to update your system.

another thing to look at is in hard disk properties, uncheck

"Allow indexing service to index the disk for fast file searching"

73 james



Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K5UNX on June 01, 2012, 06:49:13 AM
Also you mentioned running for a few weeks then turning it off . . . You should really reboot Windows every couple days or so. I know some people don't like that but I have never seen a Windows box that would run decently for weeks and weeks without a reboot.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 01, 2012, 06:57:04 AM
You should really reboot Windows every couple days or so. I know some people don't like that but I have never seen a Windows box that would run decently for weeks and weeks without a reboot.

I have several that are only rebooted when updated and can easily go a few months without reboot. I hibernate or sleep them. If you have proper hardware and software configuration it will do fine. What will really slow a old computer down is certain virus software and large swap files. By default adding RAM increases size of swap file and as you increase size of swap file, more of your actually memory is used to track and page it. You really want to manual set swap file size and with enough RAM (depending on OS) you do not even need a swap file.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: AA4PB on June 01, 2012, 08:25:49 AM
I know things just don't fix themselves but it happened.
Your friend
Glenn
KJ6WEV
 
Windows rule #1 - reboot. It often fixes things. I always turn off the computer when I am finished using it for the day. No point in having it run all night while I am sleeping and the daily reboot is good for it.

At work, where the computer is on a network and updates may be pushed during the night, they ask that we restart the computer once a day and let it run. Still it gets rebooted every work day.



Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 01, 2012, 05:21:49 PM
Windows rule #1 - reboot. It often fixes things. I always turn off the computer when I am finished using it for the day. No point in having it run all night while I am sleeping and the daily reboot is good for it.

Bad rule and place unnecessary strain on HD from daily reboots. When you hibernate, raw memory code is copied to HD and it is fully off and when you "boot" it copies code back and it is in same state as it was when you left it open programs/apps and all. Saves a lot of time too.

At work, where the computer is on a network and updates may be pushed during the night, they ask that we restart the computer once a day and let it run. Still it gets rebooted every work day.

Bad IT call because it is waste of resources and lot of time wasted booting every day times "X" amount of machine. ONLY reason to reboot is to update if you have good hardware and proper software implementation.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: WA2CWA on June 01, 2012, 06:25:02 PM
The boot, re-boot, turn on computer, turn off computer, debate on whether it creates strain on the HD has been around for years. I turn on my machines in the morning and I turn them off at night. If they're on, and I'm going somewhere for some period of time, I turn them off. Been doing this with all my machines since the 80's. I've never had a hard drive failure due to these actions. I remember talking to several hard drive manufacturers back in the late 90's and asked if daily turn on/turn off or re-booting of the computer adds undo stress to the hard drive. The answer in each case was no.

Pete, wa2cwa


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 01, 2012, 06:36:25 PM
The boot, re-boot, turn on computer, turn off computer, debate on whether it creates strain on the HD has been around for years. I turn on my machines in the morning and I turn them off at night. If they're on, and I'm going somewhere for some period of time, I turn them off. Been doing this with all my machines since the 80's. I've never had a hard drive failure due to these actions. I remember talking to several hard drive manufacturers back in the late 90's and asked if daily turn on/turn off or re-booting of the computer adds undo stress to the hard drive. The answer in each case was no.

Pete, wa2cwa


A hard drive has a finite number of boot cycles and seek cycle. How many it is hard to say but HD will live longest when running nonstop rather than constantly booted. HD's made in last 4 or 5 years actually record start and boot cycles as well as total run time that can be read with software. My wife uses a old recycle P4 computer with com and parallel ports with her sewing machine with XP and a few gig or ram. From a "cold" boot it takes close to 4 to 5 minutes to get every up and running again (virus software, firewall, email client browser and so on) and from a hibernation boot it takes less than one minute and it is where it left off (word processing, surfing web or what have you) Shut down/off into hibernation much quicker too and will be off within about 10 second of hibernation command. When you hibernate you read raw code in form of digital 1's and 0's from memory into a continuous data strip to HD. When you "boot" it out it restores code to memory. You can use this technology and go back to 90's WIN9x mentality of constant reboots. Choice is yours.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: WA2CWA on June 01, 2012, 08:44:38 PM
The boot, re-boot, turn on computer, turn off computer, debate on whether it creates strain on the HD has been around for years. I turn on my machines in the morning and I turn them off at night. If they're on, and I'm going somewhere for some period of time, I turn them off. Been doing this with all my machines since the 80's. I've never had a hard drive failure due to these actions. I remember talking to several hard drive manufacturers back in the late 90's and asked if daily turn on/turn off or re-booting of the computer adds undo stress to the hard drive. The answer in each case was no.

Pete, wa2cwa


A hard drive has a finite number of boot cycles and seek cycle. How many it is hard to say but HD will live longest when running nonstop rather than constantly booted. HD's made in last 4 or 5 years actually record start and boot cycles as well as total run time that can be read with software. My wife uses a old recycle P4 computer with com and parallel ports with her sewing machine with XP and a few gig or ram. From a "cold" boot it takes close to 4 to 5 minutes to get every up and running again (virus software, firewall, email client browser and so on) and from a hibernation boot it takes less than one minute and it is where it left off (word processing, surfing web or what have you) Shut down/off into hibernation much quicker too and will be off within about 10 second of hibernation command. When you hibernate you read raw code in form of digital 1's and 0's from memory into a continuous data strip to HD. When you "boot" it out it restores code to memory. You can use this technology and go back to 90's WIN9x mentality of constant reboots. Choice is yours.

I have an old P3 Dell here with only 1/2 gig of memory that I just tried a cold boot. 53 seconds to be fully up and running including virus software, firewall, and roughly 28 other internal processes. If it takes 4 to 5 minutes to get that machine up and running, it may have other issues. The two quad-cores here; cold boot is roughly about 30 seconds; the two duo-cores, roughly 45 seconds. So applying hibernation, and leaving the machine(s) on for 24/7, really doesn't present any glorious "wow" feature to me. I also don't leave the station equipment on when I'm not in the shack for any length of time, and I always shut the light off, if it's on, when I leave a room and don't plan to return. My mom always told me, many years ago, to conserve energy, cause "money doesn't grow on trees".

Pete, wa2cwa


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K5UNX on June 02, 2012, 07:23:21 AM
Boot times are a useless statistic in my opinion. It depends on so many factors. CPU speed, disk I/O speed and how many programs get started at boot time.

I leave my home desktop machine running 24x7. I like being able to walk in there a do something without having to boot it . . . The only real downside is it collects more dust and I have to clean it out several times a year. I don't buy the HD life thing any longer. It might have held water 15 years ago but I don't think it does any longer. I know it's a mechanical device and has a finite life, but I have seen drive go bad in months and drive last years.

The most important thing that people don't do is backup their data. I does not have to be a whole machine image but should be at least their data.

Windows does need a reboot every so often to "clean" things up. Win 7 less than previous versions in my experience. If you are careful about what you install and keep a pretty basic machine running, it will last longer without rebooting. But Windows Troubleshooting generally means a reboot as a first step.



Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: AA4PB on June 02, 2012, 07:37:26 AM
If an XP machine takes 4 to 5 minutes to boot then there is something wrong with it. I was testing an XP machine just last week for someone who claimed it took too long to boot. I measured 90 seconds from initial power up until everything was loaded and it stopped accessing the hard drive.

I just don't believe that booting a machine once a day (in exchange for having everything resting for about 12 hours out of a 24 hour period) is going to impact the life of the hard drive. Just having the fans on a 50% duty cycle is going to extend their life. Now I wouldn't want to boot it 50 times a day (every time I need to use it) but I maintain that on in the morning and off at bed time is good for it.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 02, 2012, 12:14:55 PM
I have an old P3 Dell here with only 1/2 gig of memory that I just tried a cold boot. 53 seconds to be fully up and running including virus software, firewall, and roughly 28 other internal processes. If it takes 4 to 5 minutes to get that machine up and running, it may have other issues. The two quad-cores here; cold boot is roughly about 30 seconds; the two duo-cores, roughly 45 seconds. So applying hibernation, and leaving the machine(s) on for 24/7, really doesn't present any glorious "wow" feature to me. I also don't leave the station equipment on when I'm not in the shack for any length of time, and I always shut the light off, if it's on, when I leave a room and don't plan to return. My mom always told me, many years ago, to conserve energy, cause "money doesn't grow on trees".


You are booting pretty vanilla because you really cannot load much on a 512K meg with XP. I am being realistic. The 4 to 5 minute fully boots all apps and mounts network devices and share and drivers for her sewing machine. This machine uses about 500 meg when booted and would really struggle on 512meg.

I do not like to wait for a cold boot and relaunch all my apps again. I like all my browser windows where they were and any open apps as they were too. I can come back a day, a week, or a month later and it is exactly were I left off. Again you can live in past WIN9x constant boot plan or embrace a better way.

BTW I consider it a full boot when there is no more HD activity.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: STAYVERTICAL on June 03, 2012, 02:45:42 AM
Hi Glenn,

A lot of things to try have already been mentioned, but here are a few more:

1. The new memory you have installed may have some problems - not likely I know, but it can happen where the timing is not right,
    which may cause recoverable errors.  This is a long-shot, but I mention it for completeness.

2. Do some diagnostics - what is the P.C. running when it slows - remember the operating system basically gives each program
    a bit of CPU time and then moves on to the next slice.
    Normally, programs don't have enough privilege to hog the CPU, but things like drivers may.
    Have you installed any new drivers, and then the system ran slow.

3. When it is running fast - look at the task manager on windows, and see which processes are using the most time.
    Compare this with when the P.C. is running slowly, and you should see if any processes are high CPU usage.
    Then you can try to kill the process (look first to make sure it is not a system level process - although windows should warn you).

4. When a disk writes a data block it grabs it from the free list. Eventually it may have to grab bits from non-contiguous locations.
    Since a disk works fastest when it is reading sequentially (minimum seeks necessary), defragmenting is just taking the various
    bits of file data and trying to put them one after another. This will increase speed of the disk, and any swapping required.

5. If this happens mainly during web browsing, you may need to change your browser to allow it to load images in the background,
    otherwise it may wait for all the pictures to be served from a possibly slow server.
    This makes your system appear slow, when it is really the network.

6. What I do is use a program to image my hard disk with a mirror image backup.
    Then, rather than try to clean up all the rubbish from failed and incompletely removed programs I have tested,
    I simply restore the P.C. to a known clean state.
    This is not necessary, but it is faster than manually cleaning and only takes 10 minutes and I am back to a good state.

7.  Reboot your windows machine regularly.
     Despite what you may hear, even Linux/UNIX systems will get slower if not rebooted.
     Normally, this does not happen to Linux/UNIX machines due to the level of sysadmin expertise, and the ability to tune it.
     Things like log files will grow unless archived/purged, and there are many settings which are available for the UNIX savvy person.
     Windows is made for Mom and Pop users, so the "under the hood" stuff is less accessible, and what is, mostly is left at default.

If there is one thing I would encourage you to do, it is to do some diagnosis, and see what the conditions are when it slows down.
Perhaps, unknown to you, a union called a go-slow, and you did not get the memo (hi).

73 - Rob

 


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2012, 06:38:36 AM
Everyone thinks they have a silver bullet here. It has to big a swap file as windows increases it if you let it (you would think adding ram would shrink it but it does not) and a old slow HD. It is amazing how many ignore the obvious here.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: AA4PB on June 03, 2012, 11:05:58 AM
Microsoft recommends that the swap file size be increased when more RAM is added. I presume that more RAM reduces the chances of the swap file being needed, but when it is needed it will need more.

One thing you can do is to minimize the number of programs you have open at any given time, as much as possible. I've seen users who never close any program. They just minimized it so it starts faster when needed, but that unnecessarily uses a lot of RAM to store the code for the minimized programs. I'm from the old school where you never leave programs minimized unless you are really working with both of them at the same time.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2012, 12:30:12 PM
Microsoft recommends that the swap file size be increased when more RAM is added. I presume that more RAM reduces the chances of the swap file being needed, but when it is needed it will need more.

Very bad and dated advise and misleading. MS invented swap file to let you be able to run programs on less actual memory but slowly and with page faults. It was born when memory was expensive to sell machine with very little memory to increase sales.  With XP and 2 gig you need no swap file. With one gig and XP 512 meg or so swap file is all that is needed. With Vista 64 bit or Win7 64 bit with 6 gig or more you need no swap file. What you and many do not realize is that given a free hand WinDoze will page code (which slows thing down) and as you increase size of swap file (whether is is in use or not) actual memory is removed from pool to track these pages of HD memory so when you say add 512 meg you may actually only gain 200 to 300meg of useable memory for program code. It is very deceptive. Disabling swap file or shrinking its size actually frees up memory and forces more code to stay in memory too.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KJ6WEV on June 03, 2012, 01:33:56 PM
Hello everyone

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I understand that having an older computer with just a 20GB hard drive things will just poke along at their own pace, like me.
More info. I do turn the computer off when not being used, but I use it daily, many times a day to surf the web. I do have Firefox from Mozilla. The sites I have ready to go on the Firefox menu bar are Facebook, eBay, Yahoo mail, Yahoo sports, You Tube, Wikipedia and Yahoo entertainment.

The speed change is not exclusive to one site. When it runs slow everything is slow. Above the start button on the screen the info goes by in a flash when it is running good, if it's having the slows you can almost read the info word for word.

The one thing I will try is leaving it on during the day and turning it off just at bed time instead of off and on all day.

I still like to know how it can change from one day to the next.

Thanks everybody

Your friend
Glenn
KJ6WEV


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 03, 2012, 02:05:07 PM
Hello everyone

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I understand that having an older computer with just a 20GB hard drive things will just poke along at their own pace, like me.
More info. I do turn the computer off when not being used, but I use it daily, many times a day to surf the web. I do have Firefox from Mozilla. The sites I have ready to go on the Firefox menu bar are Facebook, eBay, Yahoo mail, Yahoo sports, You Tube, Wikipedia and Yahoo entertainment.

The speed change is not exclusive to one site. When it runs slow everything is slow. Above the start button on the screen the info goes by in a flash when it is running good, if it's having the slows you can almost read the info word for word.

The one thing I will try is leaving it on during the day and turning it off just at bed time instead of off and on all day.

I still like to know how it can change from one day to the next.

Thanks everybody

Your friend
Glenn
KJ6WEV


Disable letting Windoze automatically manage swap file size. If you want to use it for a whille yet install a new HD. They are cheap and it will make a big difference in boot time and running/loading apps. Your old 20 gig is very slow.





Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: STAYVERTICAL on June 03, 2012, 02:18:44 PM
One thing which may be happening, is that - if you have a virus protection program, it may periodically run a virus scan in the background.
This will certainly slow down your system.

Of course, if your not using one, or it is set to manual scan only, that's a dead end.

73 - Rob


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: AA4PB on June 04, 2012, 06:12:31 AM
Also, Windows, Adobe, or some other program could be downloading updates and the background and using up Internet bandwidth.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KE4DRN on June 04, 2012, 09:42:30 PM
put your swap file on a thumb drive, get a 2Gb one
and leave it plugged in all the time, will make it better.

take a look at what is loading up at system boot

Autoruns (from Sysinternals, MS bought them out)

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb963902.aspx

You can customize what is loading up to make  your system lean.

you can also scan for 'not found', that can also slow you down,
it tries to look for stuff to load up but it is no longer there,
often from bad uninstalls and  upgrades.

turn off disk indexing, that will make your system run like a snail,
it constantly checks the HD and updates the tables, not necessary for our use.

we've got over 100 desktops that stay on 24/7/365 unless they need a
reboot from windows updates or trendmicro updates,
everything from XP and all flavors of windows and android too.

Then there are the servers and we won't get into that stuff.

keep track of what you change and tweak so you can go back if necessary.



73 james


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 05, 2012, 06:09:28 AM
put your swap file on a thumb drive, get a 2Gb one
and leave it plugged in all the time, will make it better.

Not a option with XP and besides while it looks good on paper a "thumb drive" reads and  writes a lot slower than a HD


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KF7CG on June 05, 2012, 11:03:37 AM
One note fellows: With a single core processor (a lot of Celerons) any one not so well behaved program can effectively bring the system to a crawl. XP does not make good use of pre-emptive multi-tasking, so all the programs running have to cooperate or things come to a crawl.

Given an opportunity a single program can hog most of the machine cycles, not all but most, and will not let others in until it is satisfied.

A look under the Processes tab of Task Manager. Accessed via <ctrl><alt><delete> and the appropriate selection will let you look at who is using how much CPU and how much Memory. Program name and what "user" it is assigned to is also available.

The Performance tab lets you see the loading on each of the machine cores and on the Page File.


David
KF7CG


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KE4DRN on June 05, 2012, 02:30:36 PM
hi,

CNET and I do not agree with you.  It works fine.

Try it and it will work just fine.  I even used older flash memory pcmcia cards
for swap files on older laptops with tiny hd and no problems.

http://cnettv.cnet.com/8301-13415_53-10121584-11.html


Process Explorer even better then task manager, shows you all the stuff running

MS bought them out Sysinternals.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

put your swap file on a thumb drive, get a 2Gb one
and leave it plugged in all the time, will make it better.

Not a option with XP and besides while it looks good on paper a "thumb drive" reads and  writes a lot slower than a HD


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 05, 2012, 05:25:04 PM
CNET and I do not agree with you.  It works fine.

Try it and it will work just fine.  I even used older flash memory pcmcia cards
for swap files on older laptops with tiny hd and no problems.


If this was 10 years ago fine but given that even the cheapest entry level laptop you can buy in 300 dollar range on sale is light years ahead of that old laptop in memory amount, CPU power and HD speed it is kinda silly to invest too much time and energy of old technology. I have a few 6 year old laptops here that are backups but I installed new modern (and much faster) HD's , fastest CPU it would support and 1.5 gigs of ram. HD's have advanced a LOT in last 5 years and even more in last 10.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KE4DRN on June 05, 2012, 05:46:35 PM
Hi,

not 10 years ago, 2008 is when the cnet article was written.

I think you and I can agree that the automatic updates is what is
causing the original posters situation.  Just a few changes in settings
will clear that up so he can control when the system looks for updates and
downloads them.

Not everyone has money to spend on new parts or even a new pc.

IBM has off lease under 3 year old laptops with 3Gb memory Win 7 installed.

http://www-304.ibm.com/shop/americas/content/home/store_IBMPublicUSA/en_US/laptops.html

check daily, inventory changes and you can get a good  used machine that fits the budget.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on June 05, 2012, 06:46:43 PM
not 10 years ago, 2008 is when the cnet article was written.

Maybe but old XP laptops lack CPU power and have very SLOW HD's

I think you and I can agree that the automatic updates is what is
causing the original posters situation.  Just a few changes in settings
will clear that up so he can control when the system looks for updates and
downloads them.

The problem is not the automatic updated directly but rather what they do to code. Even XP is bloated compared to when it shipped in 2001 so its hardware requirements have increased a lot. If it was a machine that was never on Internet you could just do a fresh reload with no updates.

Not everyone has money to spend on new parts or even a new pc.

New entry level hardware is very cheap today.

IBM has off lease under 3 year old laptops with 3Gb memory Win 7 installed.

For the price of it you can get a new entry level laptop. A LOT has changed in hardware in even 3 years.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K4KRW on June 22, 2012, 03:10:30 AM
I still have one PC that runs XP.  It has plenty of resources (speed, memory, hard drive space, ...).  I never reboot unless I have to.  And it runs very fast and gives me no trouble. 

On the other hand, old PC's with too little resources just won't run XP well.  Service pack 3 for XP was the final nail in the coffin.  The speed difference between SP2 and SP3 on an under resourced PC is simply astounding.

I agree with W8JX.  It is time to move on to something newer.  If you can't go above 1GB of memory, that is a problem.  We have field devices at work that have the same limitation.  They run terribly slow.  Again, service pack 3 really made things worse. 

This doesn't mean you shouldn't run service pack 3.  You should.  You can't even get new Windows updates if you don't run it.

I will add two other things to look into.

1.  I still believe in defragmenting your hard drive.  Also, if you have had your swap file set to auto size, it is almost certainly very fragmented.  Defrag your hard drive.  Eliminate the swap file.  Then remake it a fixed size.  Make it the maximum size XP recommends.  It will never get fragmented again.

2. Do you have browser plugins.  We had someone at work that was always complaining about speed.  Our PCs at work are blazingly fast.  I never could understand why they were having problems when no-one else was.  I took time to look at the PC.  They had about 15 browser plugins/addons running.  Checking weather, news who knows.  I removed them all.  They could not believe how much faster their 'PC' ran.  It wasn't the PC, it was the browser.  The difference was truly night and day.

You can find info about both of these topics with a Google search.  I don't want to write a book here.

Finally, used PC hardware is pretty cheap.  I'd try to find something that would let you have at least 3GB of memory.  I think the real problem is your hardware.  It is just too old.

Also, realize that Windows 7 is much more secure than XP.  I really wish I didn't run XP at all.  I do still have some ham software that wants XP.  But, I am working to get out of that situation.  I finally found logging software that I like that is made to run on Win7 (log4om).  So, I am getting closer to my goal.

73,
Richard - K4KRW


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: KE5JPP on June 23, 2012, 06:14:38 AM
GOOD LORD!  :-[ :-[ :-[  Just get yourself a reasonably priced modern computer and be done with it.  Stop screwing around with that old junk and spending money on upgrades.

Remove all the unnecessary junk that comes pre-installed, load Microsoft Security Essentials, and don't download a bunch of useless junk.  Trying to run with an old anemic Celeron level processor or mobile M processor will try your patience or sure.  The new modern multicore processors, such as the i3, i5, or i7, are so much more powerful and are the way to go.  Forget XP and 32 bit versions of Win 7 too.

Gene


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: IW3HMH on July 31, 2012, 09:26:29 AM
Also, realize that Windows 7 is much more secure than XP.  I really wish I didn't run XP at all.  I do still have some ham software that wants XP.  But, I am working to get out of that situation.  I finally found logging software that I like that is made to run on Win7 (log4om).  So, I am getting closer to my goal.

Hi Richard. Log4om is made, tested and compiled on a virtual machine using Windows XP. My ham station runs on Windows 7 64 bit.
You can stay on XP as long as you want, if it's good enough for you.

73
Daniele IW3HMH


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K4KRW on July 31, 2012, 04:35:53 PM
Re:  "Hi Richard. Log4om is made, tested and compiled on a virtual machine using Windows XP. My ham station runs on Windows 7 64 bit.  You can stay on XP as long as you want, if it's good enough for you."

Daniele,

I really want to get rid of XP.  Windows 7 is so much more secure.  Old ham software that does not follow best practices has been holding up my transition (ACLog, for example).  Log4om does indeed run fine on XP.  But, more importantly, it will also run fine on Windows 7.  That is where I want to go.  Thankfully, logging software is no longer a problem.  Thanks for a fine product!  Very nice.

Thanks - Richard - K4KRW



Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on July 31, 2012, 05:07:59 PM
The "problem" is that XP still supports old chopped 16/32 bit code in some poorly written apps. Vista and 7 DO NOT support this type of code. If app was properly compiled for WIN 32 it will run on Vista or 7.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K4KRW on August 05, 2012, 07:21:06 AM
The other problem is non standard placement of data files.  Applications should not write data to their location in the program files folder.  In the case of Vista and Windows 7 you end up with the altered files being in 'VirtualStore'.  I have found VirtualStore to be very inconsistent with its treatment of files. 

My initial exposure to VirtualStore was with Orbitron.  The Keplerian files are in the program folder.  So my Keplerian files were being written to VirtualStore when they were updated.  Windows should have then read from there as well.  But instead, when Oribitron ran, it read the copies in the actual program files folder.  To make things really confusing, when I went into explorer, I saw the updated keplerian files in my program folder. 

In summary:  The original configuration files were in the program folder.  Updates to those files happened in the VirtualStore folder.  But, sometimes when reading those updated files you would instead be reading the original files in the program folder.

Only later after some serious head scratching did I discover VirtualStore.  I actually ended up deleting the original files and Orbitron worked because the operating system had no choice but to hand it the files in VirtualStore.

With these non-standard programs, you can sometimes get them to work by configuring them to run in some backward compatibility mode.  But, you are compromising the security of your system.

This kind of problem is really pretty easy to fix.  Put files being updated under the user's profile or the public profile.  Or even better, let the user decide where to put them when they install your application (this is how Log4OM works).

I don't understand why people won't make this simple change.

73,  Richard


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: K1CJS on August 24, 2012, 04:02:44 AM
What is happening is that Windows actually maps the memory for the different processes and programs, meaning that it reserves certain section of memory--which then can't be used for other things until the memory runs out.  The extra time is caused by Windows accessing the memory and relegating what it needs for the programs and then using it in small blocks.

A good analogy is pouring an amount of water into a container that can hold it all--versus pouring it into several small containers that can hold it.  It takes you longer to pour the water into the smaller containers than it does to pour it into one large container--it's the same with the computer memory.

If you don't want to shut down the computer--which cleans out the reserved memory--then just restart it once a day.  You'll accomplish the same thing, and keep it running quicker than if you just left it to run all the time.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: AB1OQ on September 03, 2012, 04:37:45 PM
As your hard drive fills up with data, it takes longer for it to seek to find free space for data that needs to be written to the drive.  Also it takes longer for it to read out the data because it has to go through all that data already written out to the drive to find what it is looking for.  I once tried to update a windows box by using the in place upgrade function.  Wrong move...it slowed to a crawl.  Besides it left behind a windows.old file on it where everything from the old install was kept and took up a huge amount of space.  I ended up backing everything up and reinstalling windows.


Title: RE: Computer speed
Post by: W8JX on September 03, 2012, 06:13:56 PM
As your hard drive fills up with data, it takes longer for it to seek to find free space for data that needs to be written to the drive. 

Not really. If you de-frag hard it will find space and write to HD quickly.

Also it takes longer for it to read out the data because it has to go through all that data already written out to the drive to find what it is looking for. 

Not at all it is called indexing.  Because of it, it can find files quickly. If drive is fragmented it can take more time to read file from multiple locations.

I once tried to update a windows box by using the in place upgrade function.  Wrong move...it slowed to a crawl.  Besides it left behind a windows.old file on it where everything from the old install was kept and took up a huge amount of space.  I ended up backing everything up and reinstalling windows.

There was a time when HD space was at a premium but today HD space is dirt cheap. If you have a old system that is running out of space, do not waste time (or strain on old HD) on a reload. Get a new bigger drive and install it and clone old data to it. You will gain space and system will run/boot/load quicker because new HD's a lot faster than old one made 3 to 5 year ago and much faster still than even older ones.