Slashdot Mirror


Running Windows With No Services

mattOzan writes "So how many of the almost 4 dozen default-enabled services does Windows XP really need in order to preserve basic functioning, like web surfing and running applications? Zero, as it turns out. Mark Russinovich at Sysinternals demonstrates that if certain steps are followed, Windows XP will still run with only two active processes: System and Csrss.exe. No Smss.exe, Winlogon.exe, Services.exe, Lsass.exe... And, contrary to the expectations of various lead engineers at Microsoft, even Internet Explorer will still work under such conditions."

15 of 619 comments (clear)

  1. No Thanks by fembots · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the friendly article:

    The bottom line is that this stripped-down Windows configuration is not practical, but makes a cool demonstration of just how little of Windows is required for basic functionality.

    • There will be a delay before Explorer redraws the desktop
    • won't be able to logoff
    • Networking is also crippled
    I don't think this stripped-down Windows provides even the most basic functionality expected by many users nowadays.

    It's like patients are treated as long as their hearts are beating, even though everything else has shut down.

    1. Re:No Thanks by ryanov · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That may be, but that means if you don't need ANY in order to run windows in this imperfect state, you probably only need a couple to run it in a perfectly passable state.

    2. Re:No Thanks by Swamii · · Score: 5, Funny

      You will get a system with no networking or GUI and all your drives will be read only and a single root prompt (provided you told it you wanted one).

      Sounds alot like Linux!

      [with all the cheap shots taken at Windows by /.ers, I just had to even things out a bit. If you mod me down, I will come to your house and take away your children -- errr --- Linux boxen]

      --
      Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
    3. Re:No Thanks by toddbu · · Score: 5, Informative
      I've got my own list of stuff that I turn off right after a fresh install. Everything runs just great. Remember, this is a list of stuff to turn OFF:

      Alerter
      Automatic Updates
      COM+ Event System
      Distributed Link Tracking Client
      Error Reporting Service
      Help and Support
      IIS Admin
      Infrared monitor
      IPSEC Services
      Logical Disk Manager
      Machine Debug Manager
      Messenger
      Network Location Awareness (NLA)
      Remote Registry
      Simple Mail Transport Protocol
      System Event Notification
      System Restore Service
      Task Scheduler
      Themes
      Upload Manager
      WebClient
      World Wide Web Publishing

      Because Windows services support dependencies, some stuff will turn itself back on when needed. But at least you don't take the hit at boot time.

      --
      If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
  2. ...even Internet Explorer will still work... by RandoX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hmmm. Define "work"...

  3. Lots of work by nickj6282 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems like an awful lot of work to kill some services. Personally I think starting in runlevel 3 is much easier, maybe Windows should think about going to a CLI-only interface for some of us uber-geeks out there. That'd gain them some respect in my book.

  4. I wonder how this well XP will run on qemu by I.M.Anonymous · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder how this well XP will run on qemu with all of those services turned off? There is very little I need from windows and I wonder if this would help with those final annoying things I need from windows at home.

  5. Re:No Services on Boot? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Well Windows "shutsdown" on its own accord often enough

    Really? Does it? Isn't this just an old joke with not much fact to back it up anymore?

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  6. You can even close explorer.exe... by brxndxn · · Score: 5, Funny

    For running games, if you really care about it, you can CTRL ALT DEL and close explorer.exe. Then, run the game from the 'run' menu in Task Manager.

    You probby won't notice any speed difference.. But your penis will be larger.

    --
    --- We need more Ron Paul!
  7. I think... by JonN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the majority of people reading this will not wonder even Internet Explorer will still work under such conditions but if Firefox will still work under such conditions

    --
    do.what.promptcmds
  8. For services you actually should disable... by rdwald · · Score: 5, Informative
  9. MOD PARENT DOWN!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    UNTRUE! I just tried his suggestion and it didn't work AT ALL!

  10. Give me BSOD or give me ... by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Funny

    As long as we can get BSODs, windows basic funtionality is assured.

    In Windows Vista it's a Transparent Ice Blue Screen Of Death, and it's tabbed.

    You're still hosed, but it looks nicer.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  11. Re:Feel "teh diference" by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well I doubt Russonivich has anything to worry about, he's one of the people that wrote the "Windows Internals" book from the Microsoft press.

    Now that aside Windows integration is considered a GOOD thing by most normal users. That's one of the frustrating thing about Linux/UNIX form their perspective. There's a million options, and they have no idea what they need or want. What's more, if they make the wrong choice something might not work, since it depends on something else.

    That's why Windows, and OS-X ship with so much integrated. They are targeted at users that want to be told how it is. They don't want a choice of 10 window managers, they want to have one that just comes up by default.

    Now if you like the BSD way of doing thigns, that's cool, but don't assume that it applies to everyone.

    Building from source is another great example. Linux people tend to see this as the best feature of Linux, that you custom compile things, and you don't have to worry about binary compatiblity. Newbies tend to see this is one of the worst features. Compiling is highly intimidating, as they don't understand what's going on. What''s worse, if something happens, they can't fix it, they don't know how to edit make files, or update headers, etc.

    The Windows method is more targeted at the masses, have an enriched OS that isn't just defined as it's kernel, but it's APIs, GUI, media layer, and basic apps. Linux is a minimal approach that defines only the kernel, leaving everything else up to the option of the user.

    Both are valid, and don't assume yours is the superior way.

  12. This is great! by dynoman7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is great! Love the screenshots too, but WTF is that system idle process running at 99% !!!???!!! Jesus H that thing is a hog! Does anyone know how to kill it? I don't want to burn out my CPU...

    --
    Blarf.