Searching \ for '[OT:] Windows XP intermittent performance' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=windows+intermittent
Search entire site for: 'Windows XP intermittent performance'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT:] Windows XP intermittent performance'
2004\01\29@191157 by James Nick Sears

picon face
Hello,

I have a Windows XP desktop that has been driving me crazy lately.  Generally speaking, it runs fine for a few days and then will all at once (normally on a reboot) get into a slow motion state where it takes forever to boot, logon, open a folder, etc, sometimes to the point where it is completely useless.  I then go through a regimen of defragging and running various Norton Systemworks tools, etc which typically will bring it back to life for a few days, in which it performs very well and then the cycle repeats itself.  In this process I have also turned off the fancy display settings, disabled unnecessary services, set my paging file to one large constant file size, etc.

Yesterday I had a major slowdown (couldn't even program a PIC with the damned thing), defragged my system drive and took a nap and all was well.  I used it all evening into the night with no problems and shut it down before bed.  I woke up this morning to work and BAM it's back running slowly again.  Not as bad as sometimes, but very frustrating to use and I can't get it to program a PIC.  I have defragged both partitions (several times actually) but this time the problem continues.

As I said I have Norton Systemworks and run the virus scan and do the updates and everything so I think it's unlikely that a virus is to blame.  I do have some processes running that I can't account for so I may have some spyware or something running, but killing them does no good.  What is a good spyware/adware/etcware removal program (preferably free but I'd be willing to pay if it came with an excellent recommendation) to use.

I'm starting to think it's time for a reinstall and always in the past I would have gone for it by now, but I would really rather not.  Mainly I feel like MS has had sufficient time to get this stuff figured out that I SHOULDn't have to completely wipe my computer clean every few months and that there must be a better solution to keep a windows install going long-term.  I wrote a software package for my full time job that manages their sales, reporting, etc and it is running on 2 XP systems that I built that are much lower end systems (all athlon XPs though) and it has been in place since 7/2002 with none of these problems.  The point is that I use my computer pretty heavily and I'm sure that is largely to blame but what is the sense in having an 1.8GHz machine if you can only do with it what you would with a Pentium 100MHz without having it self-destruct.  
Anyway I am a pretty big fan really of MS stuff *when it works properly* so I hope I'm just missing something or have some adware leeching around.  Any ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Nick

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

.

2004\01\29@193443 by Andrew Warren

flavicon
face
James Nick Sears <spam_OUTPICLISTTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu> wrote:

> What is a good spyware/adware/etcware removal program
> (preferably free but I'd be willing to pay if it came with an
> excellent recommendation) to use.

   "Spybot - Search and Destroy"
   http://www.safer-networking.org/index.php?page=home

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren -- .....aiwKILLspamspam@spam@cypress.com
=== Principal Design Engineer
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

.

2004\01\29@193445 by Liam O'Hagan

flavicon
face
This time with a correct tag...

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

.

2004\01\29@195111 by Liam O'Hagan

flavicon
face
and AdAware

both tools find stuff the other doesn't

AdAware is free, from http://www.lavasoft.de

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

.

2004\01\29@200809 by Jinx

face picon face
> > > What is a good spyware/adware/etcware removal program
> > > (preferably free but I'd be willing to pay if it came with an
> > > excellent recommendation) to use.

http://www.xblock.com/download/xclean_micro.exe

http://www.cexx.org/adware.htm

http://www.spywareremove.com/download/spyhunterS.exe

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

.

2004\01\29@203129 by John Ferrell

face picon face
The indexing goes on hot & heavy for a while and then slows down.
Zone Alarm caused me considerable grief. When I removed it, all did not come
out.
Control-Alt-Del ONE TIME will bring up a panel that shows what processes are
running. There are tabs at the top that bring up more performance related
information. This may not apply if you are not using XP Pro.
John Ferrell
6241 Phillippi Rd
Julian NC 27283
Phone: (336)685-9606
TakeThisOuTjohnferrellEraseMEspamspam_OUTearthlink.net
http://DixieNC.US
NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
"My Competition is Not My Enemy"

{Original Message removed}

2004\01\29@215550 by Liam O'Hagan

flavicon
face
yes, same for XP Pro, it's the task manager which may also be accessed via
right clicking on the taskbar

> {Original Message removed}

2004\01\29@223814 by Hopkins

flavicon
face
Cookie monster II works for me to kill all the cookie's in your system.

http://angrytoddlersoftware.com/freeware.html

Roy


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.573 / Virus Database: 363 - Release Date: 28/01/2004

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

.

2004\01\30@013327 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
I usually use ad aware to find and kill the majority of spy/mal/adware
type programs, and then a good virus program.

Then you should disconnect any network drives you are not actively
using  (often XP will attempt to scan the drive tree when you open any
file explorer window, which happens every time you save/open/etc)

The only other time consumers I've found have been related to the
individual program you're trying to interact with, or in some cases a
driver problem (a scanner, for instance, which isn't connected but the
driver keeps attempting communication with it which times out and blocks)

But in nearly every case where people have payed me to 'fix' their
machines, I've been able to:
Run an up to date virus scan
Run an adware removal tool
Remove all programs not currently used
Remove all drivers/devices not currently used
Reduce number of items on desktop (no more than maybe a dozen)
Run windowsupdate (load all critical patches)
Turn on the built in firewall
Set internet explorer and OExpress to high security settings (no
executable attachments - few home users /need/ them)
* other stuff

In some case, on slower computers, I also reduce display candy, and
remove the desktop background (which consumes an astonishingly huge
amount of processor time to redraw...)

I've yet to see an XP machine that doesn't speed up significantly after
this.

If that doesn't do the trick, then write down all the programs you use
with their license information, backup your data, email, etc (can use
the system transfer wizard to backup up nearly everything to a CD) and
then reload from scratch.

-Adam

* Other stuff:
Tell them to disallow their kids from loading any sort of music sharing
software such as kazaa
If they are somewhat computer savvy, explain to them how using a
different browser, such as Mozilla, would limit their exposure, and then
install it for them - setting it as the default for browsing.

James Nick Sears wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

.

2004\01\30@123536 by James Nick Sears

picon face
Thanks for the advice.  I downloaded search and destroy and ad-aware and as
soon as search and destroy finished its fixes, the computer was as fast as
ever.

Is there any kind of legal line on what is acceptable adware at this point?
I can accept banner ads and even spam as a necessary part of commercial
society, but this stuff seems more like spray painting your company logo on
the side of someone else's car than legitimate advertising (say sticking a
leaflet under the wiper blade).  Writing viruses is illegal right?  It seems
to me that the difference between having the bad adware and a virus is
purely academic.  Most adware seems like a virus but with the responsible
party's name and company info readily available - no need to track down some
hacker hiding in some remote country.  So it seems like there could be
potential lawsuit material there for damages/lost productivity/etc when the
right company with enough affected employees and computers finds it
worthwhile to pursue.

Imagine if TV ads regularly caused your set to stop functioning and need
maintenance unless you had the "ad blocker" chip installed...I would imagine
the FCC would be on that like you wouldn't believe.  So what gives here?  Is
this crap just 100% OK legally???

Nick


{Original Message removed}

2004\01\30@141204 by Andrew Warren

flavicon
face
James Nick Sears <PICLISTEraseMEspam.....mitvma.mit.edu> wrote:

> It seems to me that the difference between having the bad adware
> and a virus is purely academic.

   You almost certainly agreed to the installation of the adware,
   Nick; that's the difference.

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren -- EraseMEaiwspamcypress.com
=== Principal Design Engineer
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservEraseMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

.

2004\01\30@165621 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Andrew,

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:36:19 -0800, Andrew Warren wrote:

> James Nick Sears <RemoveMEPICLISTspam_OUTspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > It seems to me that the difference between having
the bad adware
> > and a virus is purely academic.
>
>     You almost certainly agreed to the installation of
the adware,
>     Nick; that's the difference.

That would be a difference if it was true - I have
*never* agreed to any adware being installed on any of
my computers.  I have never even been asked for my
permission, in fact!

Under English law, spam and adware are both now illegal,
but as for how you catch the perpetrators (and whether
the law could be applied internationally) I have no
idea...

Cheers,

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservTakeThisOuTspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

.

2004\01\30@180354 by Andrew Warren

flavicon
face
Howard Winter <EraseMEPICLISTspamspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu> wrote:

> I have *never* agreed to any adware being installed on any of my
> computers.  I have never even been asked for my permission, in
> fact!

   Yes, most people with adware on their PCs believe that.

   However... If you ever answered YES to a banner or pop-up ad that
   said, "Your computer clock may be wrong, would you like to keep
   it accurate?" (or any of the other ads that install a free
   utility bundled with adware), and then clicked through the
   often-misleading dialog boxes that appeared afterward while the
   software was downloaded and installed, you actively gave your
   permission.  There are media viewers that contain bundled
   adware, too, so if you've ever agreed to download a program in
   order to view a particular file on the web, you may have agreed
   to install the adware then, too.  Other programs, like Kazaa,
   also install adware.

   The download/installation dialog boxes do say that you're
   installing adware, but of course they don't say so in those
   words; the information is usually written and presented in such
   a way as to hide its real meaning.

   If you've set your web browser's security settings to "Low",
   you've also given your permission, although implicitly.  The
   "low" setting says that you will trust and accept software from
   ANYONE.

   There's very little adware that installs itself without your
   "permission"; I'd bet that you've given it, albeit unknowingly.

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren -- RemoveMEaiwKILLspamspamcypress.com
=== Principal Design Engineer
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservSTOPspamspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

.
Return-Path: <>
Received: from mitvma.mit.edu ([18.92.0.3]) by tomts41-srv.bellnexxia.net
         (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP
         id <spamBeGone20040129214359.KYYN29681.tomts41-srv.bellnexxia.netSTOPspamspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu>>          for <KILLspampiclist_errorsspamBeGonespamSYMPATICO.CA>;
         Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:43:59 -0500
Received:  by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430) via spool with SMTP id 7876 ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:43:55 EST
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 4380; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:43:56 -0500
Date:         Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:43:56 -0500
From:         "L-Soft list server at MITVMA.MIT.EDU (1.8e)"
             <EraseMELISTSERVspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Subject: PICLIST: error report from WANNAFIND.DK
To:           @spam@listsjosh@spam@spamspam_OUT3MTMP.COM,
             "For spamBeGoneBlackholeeclipsespamKILLspamEarthlink.Net" <.....piclist_errorsspam_OUTspamSYMPATICO.CA>
Message-ID:   <LISTSERV%TakeThisOuT2004012916435574.....spamTakeThisOuTMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
X-LSV-ListID: None

The enclosed message has been identified as a delivery error for the PICLIST
list because it was sent to 'TakeThisOuTowner-piclistKILLspamspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU'.

------------------------------ Message in error -------------------------------
Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail
         V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 4378; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:43:56 -0500
Received: from vmail2.wannafind.dk [80.196.101.130] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM
         SMTP Level 430) via TCP with ESMTP ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:43:53 EST
X-Comment: mitvma.mit.edu: Mail was sent by vmail2.wannafind.dk
Received: from [80.196.101.130] by vmail2.wannafind.dk [80.196.101.130] with
         SmartMax MailMax for .....owner-piclistspamRemoveMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU; Thu, 29 Jan 2004
         22:45:29 +0100
Return-Path: <RemoveMEowner-piclistspamspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
From: spamBeGonesvar-ikke@spam@spamspam_OUTwannafind.dk
Date: Thu Jan 29 22:45:29 2004
To: <TakeThisOuTowner-piclistspamspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Returned Mail: Error During Delivery
Message-ID: <1075412729.20371EraseMEspamvmail2.wannafind.dk>

------ Here is your List of Failed Recipients ------
<RemoveMElinuxEraseMEspamspam_OUTJALOKIN.DK>


Mail Server is down or unreachable.

-------- Here Is Your Returned Mail --------
Received: FROM backup-mx.wannafind.net BY vmail2.wannafind.dk ; Thu Jan 29 22:38:05 2004 +0100
Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109])
       by backup-mx.wannafind.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ADB6218550
       for <@spam@linuxRemoveMEspamEraseMEJALOKIN.DK>; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:36:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <EraseME3.00CC3521spam@spam@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:35:01 -0500
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e)
         with spool id 2409 for @spam@PICLISTspam_OUTspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Thu, 29 Jan 2004
         16:34:56 -0500
Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail
         V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 3996; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:32:48 -0500
Received: from *unknown [202.50.49.3] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430)
         via TCP with ESMTP ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:32:45 EST
X-Warning: mitvma.mit.edu: Could not confirm that host  [202.50.49.3] is
          webmailchr.psd.invensys.com
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.8  June 18, 2001
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Christchurch/NZ/EnergySystems/PSD(Release
            5.07a |May 14, 2001) at 30/01/2004 10:32:44
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID:  <spamBeGoneOF626916A2.4214A72D-ONCC256E2A.0075B483EraseMEspampsd.invensys.com>> Date:         Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:27:20 +1300
Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list <
PICLISTspamBeGonespamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sender: pic microcontroller discussion list <RemoveMEPICLIST@spam@spamspamBeGoneMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
From: .....Richard.Prosser@spam@spamEraseMEPOWERWARE.COM
Subject: Re: [PIC:] Process
To: .....PICLISTRemoveMEspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU
Precedence: list

A cynic may suggest that XP is a way of assisting management to "manage
programmers" without actually having to know anything about programming.
RP




John Plocher <.....PICLISTSTOPspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu> wrote:

> You might want to check out the "XP - Extreme Programming" series
> of books on the topic of development processes.

   ... but only if you really like the idea of having some other
   guy crowding over your shoulder while you try to write code, or
   have so little faith in your code that you want to rewrite
   sections of it over and over, every chance you get.  It's also
   good if you seek justification for jumping right in and coding
   without really knowing what you're doing first, or don't think
   that the widely-publicized failures of XP mean anything.

   My take on XP is that it's a "do the best you can with the crap
   you've got" process... If your programmers are each only
   halfway-capable, put two of them in front of each keyboard;
   maybe you'll make one good programmer out of them. Since they
   don't know how to make their code correct by design, or to plan
   their code before writing it, just tell them that neither of
   those things is required anymore.  Make them write test cases
   concurrently with every line of real code they write, so they
   have at least SOME chance of verifying more-or-less correct
   operation of the project they're bumbling through.

   Most importantly... Since you know that code written this way
   SUCKS, incorporate its inevitable disposal into the process.
   Don't fight wholesale rewriting; embrace it by encouraging your
   programmers to rewrite their code again and again during
   development.

   I'll pass on XP.  Just my opinion, though.

   -Andy

=== Andrew Warren -- aiwEraseMEspam@spam@cypress.com
=== Principal Design Engineer
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation
===
=== Opinions expressed above do not
=== necessarily represent those of
=== Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.


.

2004\01\30@231032 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> That would be a difference if it was true - I have
> *never* agreed to any adware being installed on any of
> my computers.  I have never even been asked for my
> permission, in fact!

For that to be true you must read EVERY EULA that pops up during
installation and understand what it legally says. I read and file a copy
where I have any doubts (not that this stops me getting some adware that has
to be purged occasionally).



       RM

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email RemoveMElistservspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

.

2004\01\31@030630 by Jinx

face picon face
> For that to be true you must read EVERY EULA that pops up during
> installation and understand what it legally says.

http://www.cexx.org/problem.htm

An extract -

"Software License (dis)Agreement

Some aspects of spyware activity are legally questionable. While
software installing a spyware module should disclose this fact to
the user and offer the option of refusing, any such disclosure is often
buried in a long and densely-worded License Agreement, slipped
in among page after page of mind-numbing legal jargon on such
topics as copyright, distribution, disassembly, reverse-engineering,
government and restricted rights, disclaimer of fitness for a particular
purpose, and similar topics of little relevance to the average user.
Additionally, the actual spyware notice is often written in such a round-
about, flowery and disingenuous manner that a reasonable user would
have no reason to take special interest in it"

>(not that this stops me getting some adware that has to
> be purged occasionally)

Me neither, and I try to be alert and conscientious about adware,
especially knowing the problems and performance degradation
it can cause

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu

.


'[OT:] Windows XP intermittent performance'
2004\02\01@061316 by Howard Winter
face
flavicon
picon face
Andrew,

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:29:25 -0800, Andrew Warren wrote:

> Howard Winter <PICLISTspam_OUTspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > I have *never* agreed to any adware being installed on any of my
> > computers.  I have never even been asked for my permission, in
> > fact!
>
>     Yes, most people with adware on their PCs believe that.

Ah, but I'm not one of "most people", and proud of it!  :-)

>     However... If you ever answered YES to a banner or pop-up ad that
>     said, "Your computer clock may be wrong, would you like to keep
>     it accurate?" (or any of the other ads that install a free
>     utility bundled with adware), and then clicked through the
>     often-misleading dialog boxes that appeared afterward while the
>     software was downloaded and installed, you actively gave your
>     permission.

No of course I haven't - I am nowhere near gullible enough for this sort of thing!  To take the example above,
I already run a clock-synchroniser of known origin which used my ISP's time server.  The same is true of any
banner advert: I completely ignore them.

>  There are media viewers that contain bundled
>     adware, too, so if you've ever agreed to download a program in
>     order to view a particular file on the web, you may have agreed
>     to install the adware then, too.  Other programs, like Kazaa,
>     also install adware.

I only run the major ones such as Flash, and I have never installed any of Kazaa, Napster or any of their ilk.
It's just not the sort of thing I do.

>     The download/installation dialog boxes do say that you're
>     installing adware, but of course they don't say so in those
>     words; the information is usually written and presented in such
>     a way as to hide its real meaning.
>
>     If you've set your web browser's security settings to "Low",
>     you've also given your permission, although implicitly.  The
>     "low" setting says that you will trust and accept software from
>     ANYONE.

I don't use Windows unless I have to, and usually I don't use IE even then.  Mozilla doesn't have the same
settings, so there is no "low" to set.

>     There's very little adware that installs itself without your
>     "permission"; I'd bet that you've given it, albeit unknowingly.

I don't think so!

Cheers,

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

.

2004\02\01@062601 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:05:43 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote:

> > That would be a difference if it was true - I have
> > *never* agreed to any adware being installed on any of
> > my computers.  I have never even been asked for my
> > permission, in fact!
>
> For that to be true you must read EVERY EULA that pops up during
> installation and understand what it legally says.

Oh I do!  That's where I discovered that MS don't want anyone to know about the performance of .NET - you have
to agree not to publish any benchmarks about it to install almost *anything* from MS - even things like
security patches.

>I read and file a copy
> where I have any doubts (not that this stops me getting some adware that has
> to be purged occasionally).

I don't know how much AdAware "cries wolf", but I have found web sites where all you have to do is open them
and you get a couple of tracking cookies - and this is just someone's homepage, without having clicked on
anything within that site.  Do tracking cookies qualify as "adware"?

Cheers,

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

.

2004\02\01@140947 by Jim Korman

flavicon
face
Howard Winter wrote:

> On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:05:43 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote:
>
<snip>
>>For that to be true you must read EVERY EULA that pops up during
>>installation and understand what it legally says.
>>
>
> Oh I do!  That's where I discovered that MS don't want anyone to know about the performance of .NET - you have
> to agree not to publish any benchmarks about it to install almost *anything* from MS - even things like
> security patches.
>
>
<snip>

I read that too, when installing C# on my machine. I wonder
what that means when performance and timing benchmarks are
a contract deliverable!?

Jim

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

.

2004\02\02@175545 by Jinx

face picon face
> >(not that this stops me getting some adware that has to
> > be purged occasionally)
>
> Me neither, and I try to be alert and conscientious about adware,
> especially knowing the problems and performance degradation
> it can cause

Speaking of which, after clicking on a link whilst Googling last night
I got hit with a Home Page changer, probably from a pop-up. Usually
they aren't a bother but this one is a real nuisance. It's more than likely
a paid click-through so it's a little more sophisticated than the normal
one-off changer. This string is made the Home Page after a reboot

http://%74%73%62%6E%71%62%2E%74%2E%6D%75%78%
61%2E%63%63/%68%2E%70%68%70?%61%69%64=35

which is http://tsbnqb.t.muxa.cc/h.php?aid=35

It jumps to http://www.msn.com/  (kind of ironic for an IE user)

My guess is that many people might just accept MSN as an inoffensive
Home Page and not bother to remove this HP changer. I want it gone, I
like Google as my HP

I've gone through Run/MSCONFIG but don't see anything obvious, but
I'm not sure I know exactly what I'm looking for. I've searched for the
string and found it in \WINDOWS user.dat, system.dat and sys.reg. I've
used RegClean, no effect, and cleaned out the cookies (my god have
you seen how many have "ad" in them ?) and temp files but even if
that's where this blasted thing was to start with it's obviously too late
now. I can just make out a bolting horse's tail disappearing over the
horizon

So, what am I looking for ?

TIA

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\02\02@180544 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
coolwebsearch
goto www.spywareinfo.com/~merijn/cwschronicles.html
download their shredder thing
adaware cant wipe the thing, its almost impossible

it also means that you arent keeping your patches up to date
the patch for that was released a looong time ago

http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com

go there and download all the critical updates
if you have to reboot do so then go there again till there are no critical
updates left

it can also be worth your time to browse the reccomended updates or whatever
it is and see if there are any which you like


> {Original Message removed}

2004\02\02@181208 by Daniel Imfeld

flavicon
face
Jinx wrote:
> Speaking of which, after clicking on a link whilst Googling last night
> I got hit with a Home Page changer, probably from a pop-up. Usually
> they aren't a bother but this one is a real nuisance. It's more than
likely
{Quote hidden}

Probably, it's installed a Browser Helper Object that redirects the URL.
You can download a utility that lets you disable BHO's at
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,270,00.asp

In the registry, you can find HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\ Software\ Microsoft\
Windows\ CurrentVersion\ explorer\ Browser Helper Objects, and then look
through the CLSIDs in there to find one that shouldn't be.  Don't just
delete all of them though, as most are legitimate and necessary to the
functioning of IE.

Daniel Imfeld

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\02\02@191925 by Jinx

face picon face
> coolwebsearch
> goto www.spywareinfo.com/~merijn/cwschronicles.html
> download their shredder thing

Thanks, done. Found system files peppered with CWS.Mupdate
and references to http://tsbnqb.t.muxa.cc/h.php?aid=35

Also installed the VM patch. Funny, I did the patches a couple of
months ago, must have missed that one

Google is still Home Page after latest reboot

Daniel, thank you very much for your input. Jake's mail was first in
line and so that's what I tried first. I'll archive yours just in case......

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\02\02@192305 by billfinkle

flavicon
face
               Hi Jinx
                               Try searching 'Ctrl F' in Regedit for msn.com then changing the key to
http://www.google.com
               Just tried it, works. may be more than one instance though.
Bill

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\02\02@192718 by Jinx

face picon face
>                 Hi Jinx
>Try searching 'Ctrl F' in Regedit for msn.com then changing the key
> to http://www.google.com Just tried it, works. may be more than one
> instance though
>  Bill

Thanks, a little academic as I've just given the PC a dose of fix-it

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\02\02@220036 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
windows update should be a weekly affair.
or let the automated stuff do its doings


{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\02\02@225751 by Robert Rolf

picon face
Jake Anderson wrote:
>
> windows update should be a weekly affair.
> or let the automated stuff do its doings

Yeah, right. So that they can push a broken patch onto your
machine that prevents you from accessing the internet to get
the fix once they discover they screwed up the patch. It's already
happened once. It's only a matter of time before it happens
again. Do NOT use automatic updates. Do it manually do that you
have time for others to be the test case.

R

> > {Original Message removed}

2004\02\02@230620 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
which is just fine
provided you actually do it
most people dont
i'd rather fix 1 person in 100s computer that gets screwed up by that than
the 70 in 100 that get screwed by not patching then getting infested.


> {Original Message removed}

2004\02\03@002227 by Robert Rolf

picon face
But if their update is broken (as several have been) then you have
700 out of 700 broken computers, each one which has to be individually
repaired.
We have many many teaching labs. Been there. Been thoroughly burned. Not going to
let it happen again. Just a word to the wise. Thank Symantec for Ghost...

R

Jake Anderson wrote:
>
> which is just fine
> provided you actually do it
> most people dont
> i'd rather fix 1 person in 100s computer that gets screwed up by that than
> the 70 in 100 that get screwed by not patching then getting infested.
>
> > {Original Message removed}

2004\02\04@204658 by James Nick Sears

picon face
Well everybody, it's back again.  Last night while doing some late night
programming my Windows XP system ground to a useless halt.  I ran defrag on
both partitions and ran Ad-aware and Spybot.  Defrag didn't have much to do
and no adware was found.  This morning I decided the hell with it and bought
a new HD and installed XP on it.  I'm going to leave the big data partition
on my other HD alone and format my old ~10GB Windows partition and give it
to this install for it's own undisturbed swap space to do with what it
likes.

I'm still not 100% convinced that things are OK, which obviously tends
toward a hardware problem.  Performance is good right now but it seemed slow
to boot and the system setup animated character ran painfully slowly on the
first boot.

I got good recommendations here the other day on spyware removal software so
does anyone have a favorite benchmarking software that may be useful in
diagnosing my problem, should it return.

Also any general tips or a good website with tips a la keeping Windows sane
(settings, utilities, etc.) would be welcome.

If this is too much Windows for this list, just say so.
ALRIGHT!!!

ENOUGH ALREADY!

Thanks,
Nick

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spamBeGonelistservspam_OUTspamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\02\04@210605 by Jinx

face picon face
> Also any general tips or a good website with tips a la keeping
> Windows sane (settings, utilities, etc.) would be welcome

http://www.annoyances.org/

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservspamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\02\04@222300 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
Both the Windows XP Annoyances book, advertised on this website, and the
Windows XP Hacks book, also an O'Reilly book, are good resources.

I have similar symptoms on one of my XP machines, but whenever I actually
explore to see what the problem is (fairly uncommon since mostly I just
swear) it tends to be a remnant of some program I had run long ago that
never really quit.  Generally killing the task brings back the system.  I
have yet to unearth some piece of spyware, although I always look.  The
system in question doesn't have email on it, so it is probably less exposed
to that, though.

But, I still suspect that XP is annoyed that it is connected to a Linux file
server.  I wonder whether Nick has anything like that going on.

72/73 de WB8RCR    http://www.qsl.net/wb8rcr
didileydadidah     QRP-L #1446 Code Warriors #35


{Original Message removed}

2004\02\04@230118 by Richard.Prosser

flavicon
face
I also have been having hard drive problems with XP . The hard drive is a
bit flakey but seems OK if I avoid cold starts. However, in the process of
trying to isolate the problem, I have done some benchmarks of transfer
speed. The other day I was getting a burst transfer sped of 19MBytes/sec
(or bits??) per second & running 31 processes. I did a reboot (without
letting the disk get cold!) and immediately got back up to 59 MByte/sec
transfers - with 30 processes running.
I now have to figure out which process was the extra one.
At times transfer rates drop to less than 10MBits/sec  & I have found that
a reboot will fix the problem -  hopefully will identify it this (long)
weekend.

I also keep a pretty close eye on adware etc.

Richard P



Well everybody, it's back again.  Last night while doing some late night
programming my Windows XP system ground to a useless halt.  I ran defrag on
both partitions and ran Ad-aware and Spybot.  Defrag didn't have much to do
and no adware was found.  This morning I decided the hell with it and
bought
a new HD and installed XP on it.  I'm going to leave the big data partition
on my other HD alone and format my old ~10GB Windows partition and give it
to this install for it's own undisturbed swap space to do with what it
likes.

I'm still not 100% convinced that things are OK, which obviously tends
toward a hardware problem.  Performance is good right now but it seemed
slow
to boot and the system setup animated character ran painfully slowly on the
first boot.

I got good recommendations here the other day on spyware removal software
so
does anyone have a favorite benchmarking software that may be useful in
diagnosing my problem, should it return.

Also any general tips or a good website with tips a la keeping Windows sane
(settings, utilities, etc.) would be welcome.

If this is too much Windows for this list, just say so.
ALRIGHT!!!

ENOUGH ALREADY!

Thanks,
Nick

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservRemoveMEspamSTOPspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\02\05@041054 by James Nick Sears

picon face
----- Original Message -----
From: "John J. McDonough" <RemoveMEwb8rcrKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTARRL.NET>
To: <spamBeGonePICLISTspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [PICLIST] [OT:] Windows XP intermittent performance


> Both the Windows XP Annoyances book, advertised on this website, and the
> Windows XP Hacks book, also an O'Reilly book, are good resources.
>
> I have similar symptoms on one of my XP machines, but whenever I actually
> explore to see what the problem is (fairly uncommon since mostly I just
> swear) it tends to be a remnant of some program I had run long ago that
> never really quit.  Generally killing the task brings back the system.  I
> have yet to unearth some piece of spyware, although I always look.  The
> system in question doesn't have email on it, so it is probably less
exposed
> to that, though.
>
> But, I still suspect that XP is annoyed that it is connected to a Linux
file
> server.  I wonder whether Nick has anything like that going on.

No Linux around here.

I think it was a HD problem.  After disconnecting my old HD, the system
worked fine.  With it on secondary with a CD-R on the slave (sorry if anyone
is offended) it didn't work right again.  Alone on the secondary master with
the HD back in the right place (I suspect that heat might have been a
problem) everything is working fine with no CD-R/DVD so I ordered a PCI ATA
controller for the CD-R and DVD drives and more better fans and hopefully
everything will be ok..

Nick

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu

2004\02\05@103904 by Ken Pergola

flavicon
face
Hi Nick,

Who is the manufacturer of the 'faulty' hard drive you took out?

Most hard drive manufacturers have utilities on their web sites to
thoroughly check the hard drive for problems (factory qualification tests).

Usually this is done to prevent customers from sending in a good hard drive
for warranty replacement.

At least it might give you some closure to the problem.


Best regards,

Ken Pergola

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2004\02\05@104528 by James Nick Sears

picon face
> Who is the manufacturer of the 'faulty' hard drive you took out?

Both drives are Western Digital.

> Most hard drive manufacturers have utilities on their web sites to
> thoroughly check the hard drive for problems (factory qualification
tests).

Good idea - I'll check this out.

Thanks,
Nick

>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
> KILLspampiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam.....mitvma.mit.edu
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spam_OUTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2004 , 2005 only
- Today
- New search...