Slashdot Mirror


How To Diagnose a Suddenly Slow Windows Computer?

Ensign Taco writes "I'm sure nearly every one of us has had it happen. All of a sudden your Windows PC slows to a crawl for no apparent reason. Yeah, we all like Linux because it doesn't do annoying things like this, but the Windows desktop still reigns supreme in most managed LAN work environments. I'm running XP with 4G of RAM and a decent CPU, and everything was fine, until one day — it wasn't. I've run spybot, antivirus, and looked at proc explorer — no luck. There is no one offending, obvious process. It seems every process decides to spike at once at random intervals. So I'm wondering if there's a few wizards out there that know what to look at. Could this be a very clever virus that doesn't run as a process? Or could this just be some random application error that's causing bad behavior? I've encountered this a few times with Windows PCs, but the solution has always been to just add more hardware. Has anyone ever successfully diagnosed this kind of issue?" And whether such a problem is related to malware or not, what steps would you take next?

835 comments

  1. Check the HDD by Fez · · Score: 5, Informative

    Very commonly this happens when a hard drive reverts to PIO mode after Windows decides it has seen a few errors from the drive. You can verify this by looking at the properties of the IDE Controller to which the drive is connected in device manager. (IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers/Primary IDE Channel/Advanced Settings tab, for example)

    There is a VBScript that resets the drive back to DMA mode, and is effective if that is indeed the case.

    This could also be an early sign of hard drive failure. I've seen plenty of drives that passed diagnostics but were very, very slow. Try checking the SMART data with something like HDTune.

    1. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, I had this exact same problem with the PIO mode reversion. Several of my techie friends didn't believe me, until they themselves bought a new machine soon afterwards and had the same problem. My hdd write speeds would drop from 80meg/s to about 4m/s... meaning boot times would be over 5 minutes, for example. Definitely check your drive mode, save yourself the frustration that I went through.

    2. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      But the best way is still to download Windows Optimizer 2009. It removes all performance limitations Microsoft has put in their products and makes your Windows work as fast as your hardware allows.

    3. Re:Check the HDD by nurb432 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I 2nd the soon to fail hard drive.

      Often times unexplained slowness is this impending doom.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:Check the HDD by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Funny
      My Windows is NOT slow.

      It is special.

    5. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      actually just seeing the errors slows windows to a crawl. as it writes a log entry to over and over to the already failing disk.

      a loose sata cable + windows logging will slow a pc to nothing.

    6. Re:Check the HDD by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1, Funny

      I bet they expect two days off for Christmas too!

      BAH!

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    7. Re:Check the HDD by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 4, Informative

      That does figure high in my list of potential causes, but generally I clear the dll and prefetch cache and reboot before I start worrying about hardware. Especially if you've been running a diverse series of programs on it.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    8. Re:Check the HDD by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Informative

      Its also worth mentioning that you'll see disk errors in the event log. The source will be 'disk.' Is the disk working hard. Use filemon to see whats going on.

      The asker should also look in the event log for any warnings or errors that started at the time of the slowness.

      He should also do a netstat -a to see what active internet connections are working. If youre seeing lots of connects to port 25 someplace then you are running a mass mailing trojan. Investigate any suspicious connections. You can use tcpview for more info.

      He should also boot up with a linux live disc or a PE disc like UBCD4WIN. If the slowness is still there then its most likely a hardware issue. UBCD4win also has a bunch of utilities with easy to use GUIs like HDTune. He can run an antivirus or spybot from the PE environment too for a second opinion.

      Lastly, when you fix the issue you should remove your wife from the administrators group and just make her a user or power user. When she needs to install software or whatever just have her log in as admin.

    9. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      quick and dirty..
      check out the event viewer-> system

      if you have a bunch of disk errors..start backing things up pronto..

    10. Re:Check the HDD by rew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      However..... Even if SMART checks out and the vendor-test program says the HD is ok, some drives might just be taking seconds to minutes to "recover" the right data.

      If this is the case, your monitor programs would not show much disk activity, but the HD light will be continuously on during the stalls.

    11. Re:Check the HDD by erroneus · · Score: 1

      That is EXACTLY what I was going to suggest. I had a user with that very problem and it turned out a USB hard drive had failed. Unplugged the drive and everything was normal again.

    12. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      My Windows is NOT slow.

      It is special.

      Maybe they should name the next release Windows Short Bus Edition?

    13. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Clearing the prefetch does not improve performance. It generally will decrease performance for a time.

      http://lifehacker.com/5033518/debunking-common-windows-performance-tweaking-myths

    14. Re:Check the HDD by doug_hastings · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My Seagate 500g drive crippled windows as its lousy firmware bricked it, and now if its plugged in windows runs very slow if at all. An addition 2 cents worth: CCleaner and RootkitRevealer

    15. Re:Check the HDD by GenSec · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Ha! This post appeared just in time for me. I started experiencing PIO-induced slowness too, and the VBScript above helped. The sad part is that HDD failure is still imminent for me - the fallback to PIO was caused by several cases of bad sectors, all in system files, of all things... Backup is daily mantra for me now.

    16. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do a google search on "Windows Performance monitoring". This is covered in the MCSE training however most people tend to overlook the hardware level and assume the slowness is related to spyware, process issues, etc.

      This should help you figure out where the slowness is coming from:

      http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Windows_2003_Performance_Monitor.html

      Also since you have 4GB of RAM I would suggest changing the pagefile to 0. You'll notice a vast improvement when you have more than 2GB of RAM on your system since it no longer has to swap memory to disk which is often the bottleneck. I do this on my company provided laptop with 2GB of RAM and have seen a vast improvement in application responsiveness.

      Enjoy.

    17. Re:Check the HDD by yo_tuco · · Score: 4, Funny

      "My Windows is NOT slow. It is special."

      It's speed challenged.

    18. Re:Check the HDD by Bozzio · · Score: 1

      MeToo@aol.com

      --
      I just pooped your party.
    19. Re:Check the HDD by seabasstin · · Score: 1

      Oooooooh so that is why its riding the short bus... I get it.

      --
      Content + Container; Content = Container; Content â Container... which is the question?
    20. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More likely it IS your anti-virus, anti-spyware, etc software. Every time one of them upgrades to a new x.0 version, they almost always slag the speed of the computer, I have switched anti-virus software 5 times now thanks to this.

    21. Re:Check the HDD by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      This is exactly what happened to one of my old work computers.

      I wouldn't recommend using the VB Script, as that's kind of like ignoring the loud knocking sound from your car by turning up the radio. Your drive, or drive controller, is dying-- at the very, very least make backups.

    22. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lastly, when you fix the issue you should remove your wife from the administrators group and just make her a user or power user. When she needs to install software or whatever just have her log in as admin.

      While it does make sense to limit administrative privileges to a minimum of capable users, preferably one, it may appear presumptuous and sexist to some for you to rattle off such a suggestion... The OP never mentioned a wife. Perhaps it is the OP's kids that don't need admin rights, or his father. Perhaps the OP is only 17 years old and has no wife or kids. Sheesh, buddy... I am a guy too with a long history working in IT. And though there are lots of males in the work force, I have met some very bright, intelligent women in my time. Sadly many of them tend not to see themselves that way after a lifetime of browbeating, some intentional and some perhaps not.

      Granted, you do suggest she can be trusted to install software and use the admin account when needed. And I will also grant that you may not have intended to be sexist there. But it is worth examining such an automatic sort of presumption in one's self. Perhaps you might have suggested the OP do the same for himself... I use a regular user account on my GNU/Linux desktop and use sudo or su to do administrative tasks. I type fast enough that it is not a real bother. Really, I feel the added step helps keep me conscious of the privileges I am using to invoke commands, in spite of myself. Pobody's Nerfect. I do hope it was not an intended slight.

      Be well,

      Tim

    23. Re:Check the HDD by hittman007 · · Score: 2

      Clearing the prefetch does not improve performance. It generally will decrease performance for a time.

      Windows normally keeps up with prefetch maintenance but every now and then an issue appears that is fixed by clearing the prefetch.

      Although you did say that clearing the prefetch does not increase performance, which is correct...

      Any which way, it doesn't hurt anything to do, so why not try it. I like doing simple quick stuff first (even some items that appear unrelated initially), they don't always work but when they do your done that much quicker...

      --
      --- When you start with the conclusion that you want, then throw out any facts that don't agree, is it true?
    24. Re:Check the HDD by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      But the best way is still to download Windows Optimizer 2009. It removes all performance limitations Microsoft has put in their products and makes your Windows work as fast as your hardware allows.

      That's a lie. I just installed Antivirus 2009 and it says that Windows Optimizer 2009 is spyware!!!

    25. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows is retarded and everyone here knows it.

    26. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you clear the dll and prefetch cache?

    27. Re:Check the HDD by bdwebb · · Score: 1

      No way. Finallyfast.com is the way to go. My PC is fast!! FINALLY!!!11!!!

      *shoots self in face*

    28. Re:Check the HDD by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I would suggest Active Hard Disk Monitor for hard drive testing, since it gives a VERY detailed listing of all the hard drives attributes. Error rates, seek times, etc. It has saved my rear on more than one occasion. And I would also run filemon if the SMART checks out okay as there may be a program doing a lot of I/O that wasn't previously.

      Have filemon log for 20-60 minutes then go through the log. If there is something pounding the HDD it will jump out on the log. But usually here in the shop when someone complains that "it just got slow" and it isn't a virus it can usually be traced to the HDD. Either PIO mode, a drive beginning to fail, or some crappy program that has decided to update something on the drive a couple of dozen times a second. Anyway I hope this helps and is a good example IMHO of why daily differential backups are a GOOD thing.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    29. Re:Check the HDD by VoidEngineer · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Woosh....

    30. Re:Check the HDD by jcuervo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Double woosh?

      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
    31. Re:Check the HDD by HermMunster · · Score: 5, Informative

      Lol, that's pretty funny seeing as both are malware. Yeah, I know you know. Others might not.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    32. Re:Check the HDD by enrgeeman · · Score: 1

      definitely.

      --
      sent from my slashdot browser.
    33. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially if you've been running a diverse series of programs on it.

      This is true. For instance I enjoy running amateur porn, but other times I'll look at asian or latin porn. It's very diverse.

    34. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod sibling up

    35. Re:Check the HDD by bdwebb · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hmm...the prefetch cache is only used when a call is made by commonly used programs. Clearing the prefetch cache is only really useful to rid yourself of extra unnecessary files when you uninstall programs as Windows will simply rebuild the directory.

      Since we're trying to diagnose a cause of sudden sluggishness, clearing the prefetch won't really do anything unless the HDD is full. A quick review of the prefetch directory, however, is a good indicator of which programs have been running. I usually take a look to see if I can spot anything out of the ordinary.

      Other helpful ideas:

      - Disable system restore before you do anything...irritating spyware and virii can hide here and restore themselves
      - Download and run X-Ray PC (freeware) and run an online analysis of your processes...will give you a good/bad/unknown triage for some processes and allow you to kill them.
      - Start>Run> msconfig.exe and check your startup processes...do a quick google search for anything you don't recognize and if it is not a necessary startup process, kill it. Having a shitload of processes running at startup can bring your system to its knees. Usually, for a desktop XP machine, between 28 and 35 processes is ideal on a fresh boot. For a laptop it can be up to 50...depends on what utilities are required to make your touchpad/buttons/wireless/etc work.
      - Start>Run> msconfig.exe and check your services. Check 'hide all Microsoft services' and do a quick scan to make sure no extra junk services are hiding here. If you lose functionality to something on startup that you want, you can either just turn it back on or, if necessary, boot into safe mode and turn it on.
      - Download Crap Cleaner and run the registry scan to see how many junk items you have in your registry. Review the causes and fixes to all the issues you find...you're usually okay doing a fix all but I check them just in case (this is your registry after all...never hurts to back it up either.)
      - Add/remove any programs that you don't recognize or don't use. All this extra junk does nothing to help you. Additionally, if you can pinpoint one or two programs that were installed around the time your computer started having issues, definitely uninstall them and check your performance after (probably run ccleaner again to ensure they are completely gone).
      - Restart your machine and check msconfig and xraypc again to ensure that nothing you killed came back...if it did, you've got a virus or spyware.
      - If you still have issues, try running one of many drive fitness test tools to determine whether or not you have bad sectors or possibly a bad HDD altogether. Some tools will even allow you to repair the bad sectors but usually if you've got bad sectors you should start looking at a new HDD soon.
      - If you have the option, pull the HDD and hook it up to a test rig and run a Housecall scan on the drive.
      - Run Rootkit Revealer to determine whether or not you have a rootkit installed on your machine. Rootkits are nasty as hell but you can usually find additional info via a google search on how to rid yourself of them.
      - When all else fails, a clean install is usually the best way to get your system back up to snuff. It is a pain in the fucking ass and no one likes to do it until you remember what it is like having a clean install. Just make a list of your programs, do a backup of your data, and format that sucker.

      Hope some of that is helpful...a lot of the other comments I see here are great things to check as well (right below me I see gad zuki! mention netstat -a to check your active connections...also very useful) so bookmark this page and try everything. If nothing else, you'll learn some new tricks.

    36. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      >How do you clear the dll and prefetch cache?

      Delete everything in C:\Windows\Prefetch then reboot. Windows will boot more slowly once, and apps will load more slowly, too, until Windows rebuilds the prefetch cache... but it will certainly clear out any stale entries.

      Other things to try: Delete Recently Used Documents, especially if there are references to network locations which no longer exist - Windows remembers all kinds of things that can impact Explorer.

      Turn off "Automatically Search for Network Files and Folders" (In Explorer: Tools, Folder Options, View, Advanced Settings, uncheck Automatically Search for Network Files and Folders). This will stop Explorer from going out onto the network from time to time to look for shares.

      Another quick thing to try: Create a new local Windows user and login as that user. Run programs, etc., and see if you can reproduce the issues... this eliminates issues with the other user's local profile.

    37. Re:Check the HDD by ilganeli · · Score: 1

      Very commonly this happens when a hard drive reverts to PIO mode after Windows decides it has seen a few errors from the drive. You can verify this by looking at the properties of the IDE Controller to which the drive is connected in device manager. (IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers/Primary IDE Channel/Advanced Settings tab, for example)

      There is a VBScript that resets the drive back to DMA mode, and is effective if that is indeed the case.

      This could also be an early sign of hard drive failure. I've seen plenty of drives that passed diagnostics but were very, very slow. Try checking the SMART data with something like HDTune.

      Hey, going to try this right now. I just took a look and saw that my drive is indeed in PIO mode. I have been having the exact same problems as the OP.

    38. Re:Check the HDD by BillAtHRST · · Score: 1

      Concur. Have had this happen to me. It's easy and quick to check.

    39. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      My computer does this all the time. The culprit is usually that my kid has hit the Turbo button off.

    40. Re:Check the HDD by jank1887 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tim,
      A reference article I thought might be useful:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor
      Yours truly,
      The internet

    41. Re:Check the HDD by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Windows will likely ignore setting a pagefile to zero as you
      will read here:

      http://forums.tweakguides.com/showthread.php?t=2082

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    42. Re:Check the HDD by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      I advise all xp users to run as user/power user. Tim, the prejudice you are seeing here is your own.

    43. Re:Check the HDD by Dr+Dodgy · · Score: 1

      Such the double whoosh...
      The name "VoidEngineer" really does have a special ring to it.....

    44. Re:Check the HDD by Pyst · · Score: 1

      or Windows Licker

    45. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a lie. I just installed Antivirus 2009 and it says that Windows Optimizer 2009 is spyware!!!

      Please tell me your kidding

    46. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks to seagate making some QUALITY PRODUCTS, if I reboot my desktop I stand a high enough chance of losing 1tb of information that I haven't had the ability, fiscally, to build a dedicated backup system for. I personally will not be rebooting any time soon, this winbox is running with minimal services to get my most basic of computing desires done. It's surprisingly useful and lightweight though, very snappy.

    47. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the best way is still to download Windows Optimizer 2009. It removes all performance limitations Microsoft has put in their products and makes your Windows work as fast as your hardware allows.

      That's a lie. I just installed Antivirus 2009 and it says that Windows Optimizer 2009 is spyware!!!

      I hope you are being sarcastic...

    48. Re:Check the HDD by mad_cat_elite · · Score: 1

      Go into the C:\ and delete anything that is not a picture file or an *.exe.

    49. Re:Check the HDD by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Huh? Why woosh...?

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    50. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Antivirus 2009 doesn't even work. It creates bogus info in order for you to buy it. Remove it if you have it.

    51. Re:Check the HDD by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      You know, I usually take those "change this registry setting for improved performance" tips with a dash of salt but for whatever reason clearing the prefetch folder is one of those things that I do on a machine that someone tells me is having performance problems, and it does seem to help.

      Given what it does, it'd make much more sense if it didn't. The effect is more than what I can chalk up to a placebo effect. Maybe it only happens on the old, crappy, beat up machines I'm usually asked to work on, but it could also be that I'm crazy.

      In any case I do think that turning prefetch off completely is cargo cult thinking, unless there's some special circumstance like you're always loading from a snapshot and writing to the drive would be a waste of time. But in that case, which I admit I've never run into, I'd probably forget to turn it off anyway.

    52. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank-you!

    53. Re:Check the HDD by alexborges · · Score: 1

      Oh... did you get the new super 30 megabytes drive with that?

      --
      NO SIG
    54. Re:Check the HDD by afxgrin · · Score: 1

      I had a similar problem as the article submitter, and it turned out that ATI Catalyst had for some reason changed something with my drivers. This was fixed by uninstalling the drivers and reinstalling.

      In addition, I've found that a fan jammed with dust will start causing system instability.

      A failing power supply can do the same.

      There's a lot of video cards that have some thin fans that have a tendency to cake with dust and defeat the purpose of having a heatsink with fan.

    55. Re:Check the HDD by Locutus · · Score: 1

      performance challenged. "special" is not PC

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    56. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This better be two horrific jokes.
      Both of these products are well known viruses.

    57. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - Disable system restore before you do anything...irritating spyware and virii can hide here and restore themselves

      Hell no. Any Anti-Virus or Anti-Malware program worth its salt will take care of bad files there anyway, selectively. All you're doing is throwing away possibly useful backups of system files and the registry.

      Before you do anything: Boot from a live-cd and do a complete backup of the windows partition.

    58. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is actually a really bad idea. It tends to slow things down more than it helps.

      http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000024.html

    59. Re:Check the HDD by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 2, Informative

      Check the actual I/O usage. Load up perfmon and watch the disk queue. I've seen plenty of boxes with tons of free ram and cpu, but one damned thing is hitting the disk like it's their child or something and everything else has to wait. If the total queue is high, you can add the counters for read and write. Once you see which one is the hog go back to taskmanager and add the appropriate column and sort.

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
    60. Re:Check the HDD by savethelecture · · Score: 1

      Wow, there parn'r! How do you define speed? You DO say... "fast asleep", no? Also, it DOES piss people quite fast if you ask me. Still... I don't buy the "REALLY, I did NOTHING to it" (Except maybe installing the new windows patch/update/service-pack...)

      --
      -Neurosis should be taken out in sex instead of politics and IT.
    61. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean by "clearing the dll and prefetching the cache"?

      Thanks,
      Andy

    62. Re:Check the HDD by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      I think you'll find that it's called "velocity challanged".

    63. Re:Check the HDD by u38cg · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I used to make my gf log in as a normal user. She soon made it pretty clear that if she didn't get admin rights, my own root access would be revoked :-/

      She got them.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    64. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your humour detection routine is broken. Please return to your manufacturer's basement.

      Hint: Both the parent and grand parent were being funny.

    65. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generally, I find that when a Windows computer is slow, a reboot fixes it.

      Where a reboot is unsuccessful, format c:\ normally gives outstanding results.

    66. Re:Check the HDD by Anachragnome · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Better yet, do the aforementioned "Reformat and reinstall clean software", then, and ONLY then, make a restore point.

      THEN disable "System Restore".

      At that point, the .exe can no longer be used to corrupt your restore points, but YOU can always go back and turn the service back on to access that KNOWN good system/software install if the shit hits the fan again.

      MUCH easier to use a restore point then reformat.

    67. Re:Check the HDD by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      Latency enabled.

    68. Re:Check the HDD by blueheronorganics · · Score: 1

      My Windows is NOT slow.

      It is special.

      My Windows is not slow it is a MAC!

    69. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I soldered my Turbo to short, that doesn't happen anymore when I bump the case.

    70. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I rarely use Windows computers, but downloading and installing more closed source freeware, form questionable sources sounds very counter-intuitive.

    71. Re:Check the HDD by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don#t know; I can't get either to run. All I get are .exe archives and for some reason my unarchiver can't extract them. How am I supposed to get the app bundles out?

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    72. Re:Check the HDD by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Windows normally keeps up with prefetch maintenance but every now and then an issue appears that is fixed by clearing the prefetch.

      No, it's not. Not unless that issue is 'needs 20k of disk space'.

      Clearing the prefetch can, in no manner, fix any problem. All it can do is make your next boot slower.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    73. Re:Check the HDD by waterbear · · Score: 1

      "Latency enabled."

      . :) ... Garrison Keillor, is that you? Mod parent up, please?

    74. Re:Check the HDD by klashn · · Score: 0

      Wow... I actually have this problem that crept up last week... Went to IT and they had no knowledge of this. Very happy that this article and response to the article was on Slashdot! Now I can get back to surfing pr0n with no jerkiness!

    75. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that is why you shouldn't have said anything - Darwin at his finest. :)

    76. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't rely on SMART. Some manufacturers adjust the tolerance of faulty drives so they don't report errors. I had two "identical" WD drives bought at the same time. They had different error tolerance rates and one of them would corrupt anything i put on it in a few hours. I tested this in windows and bsd. WD didn't want to do anything about the drive because SMART was ok. This was a first gen SATA disk. I went to seagate after that.

    77. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use the VBScript on my DVD drive sometimes, it gets reset by trying to read scratched disks. I would be concerned if I had to do it to a hard drive.

    78. Re:Check the HDD by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      A woman named Tim?

    79. Re:Check the HDD by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      Whenever I've disabled "System Restore", it has told me that doing so will delete all restore points. Is there a way to (properly) back these up before disabling it?

    80. Re:Check the HDD by John+Biggabooty · · Score: 1

      Do you have an HP printer? All the crap that comes bundled with those slows computers to a crawl. If so, uninstall all the crap that came with it, then install drivers only after downloading them from HP.com. You don't want all the junkware on the CD.

      --
      That's Bigboo TAY! TAY!
    81. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All very good advice. I was surprised at a useful, honest answer this high up on the page. Usually there would be 80 or 100 MS bashing posts first, then a bunch of asses who would tell you that to fix your windows box yu just pop in a linux disc and install. Then around post 300 you would get one honest answer that had been modded down to -1.

      Might I make one real quick suggest BEFORE starting all the troubleshooting. shut down your browser, bittorrent, AIM, etc for a few mintues, bring up a cmd prompt and netstat. If you still see a bunch of connections to external sources, you have been pwned. yes, yes, the clever malware covers this up, but the vast majorty of it does not, and its a quick way, sometimes, to tell you where to start.

    82. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just tried this but it complains about not being able to delete \WINDOWS\SYSTEM\

    83. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rootkit, hoisted O/S, Botnet Zombie, coldboot to safemode, lookit NIC lights, lookit HDD activity, kill all processes, got net traffic?

              " I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit...it's the only way to be sure..."

          DBAN from cd

    84. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very commonly this happens when a hard drive reverts to PIO mode after Windows decides it has seen a few errors from the drive. You can verify this by looking at the properties of the IDE Controller to which the drive is connected in device manager. (IDE ATA/ATAPI Controllers/Primary IDE Channel/Advanced Settings tab, for example)

      There is a VBScript that resets the drive back to DMA mode, and is effective if that is indeed the case.

      This could also be an early sign of hard drive failure. I've seen plenty of drives that passed diagnostics but were very, very slow. Try checking the SMART data with something like HDTune.

      Even brand new drives have errors, that's what error correction is for. There are many diagnostic software packages I'm sure, but something like SpinRite from Gibson Research Corporation will allow you to see the error rates etc. Often a failing hard drive or simply an aging one, will begin having more errors than the correction can keep up with, and you will get a very slow hard drive. This is one possibility of many.

    85. Re:Check the HDD by Anachragnome · · Score: 1

      Locate the actual save files and simply copy them to an external device.(do a search for *restore*.* and look for the saves there)

      Load it back up in the same place after you have reactivated the service.

    86. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I can get back to surfing pr0n with no jerkiness!

      You're doing it wrong...

    87. Re:Check the HDD by Snuhwolf · · Score: 1

      *My* windoze is differently abled.

    88. Re:Check the HDD by DiLLeMaN · · Score: 1

      Daily backup after you replaced the drive, I hope?

      --
      /var/run/twitter.sock is a twitter socket puppet.
    89. Re:Check the HDD by TechnicalPenguin · · Score: 1

      I just wanted to concur with this. Just the other day, it seemed as if something was really bogging down my external hard drive, so I started looking into it. My research revealed nothing more sinister than Java Quickstarter and Windows Search Indexer, but I decided to shut them both down since I don't really need them anyway. As soon as I had, the hard drive stopped working and Windows reported the whole thing as being corrupted. I'm still trying to rescue the data off the thing.

    90. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just reimage the PC.

      If its still slow then its a hardware fault. Put in temporary hardware while troubleshooting continues.

      (There's no excuse these dsys for not being able to reimage your PC in around 30 minutes, especially if you're IT support for a biz).

    91. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fez, I've seen that exact behavior before. Only once though, and only on a faulty board.

      Slowness happens to all of my stations at work because of the never-ending fight over resources.

      VMWare, Lotus Notes, NetBeans, MacAffee are all hogs, and they all seem to hate eachother. MacAffee blocks VMWare from doing certain things and scans anything that looks like a zip file each time I access it.

      This is from a user's point of view of course. I didn't set the AV rules. :)

      I know a popular source for malware is video codecs these days, but not sure how they fill up the task manager or if they run their own processes.

      I keep taskmanger running in system tray at all times for investigative reasons. Usually I can catch a pattern.

      Good luck.

      -Tres

    92. Re:Check the HDD by japa · · Score: 1

      I'm thumbs up for smartmon tools http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ It supports scheduled self tests, automatic alerting , has a mailing list for indepth discussion, etc. Of course it's missing nice GUI for dummies...

    93. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good hypothesis. But Windows deletes your restore points if you disable system restore. Did you actually think MS can do anything intuitive like that?

    94. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember Hal, it's 'down the block' not 'across the street'!

      Yours in Christ,
      Rippy the Razor

    95. Re:Check the HDD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My computer does this all the time. The culprit is usually that my kid has hit the Turbo button off.

      Yeah, and while you're checking that turbo button, make sure you didn't knock any of the EEPROMs loose on that riser card that holds your math co-processor. It could easily have happened when you upgraded to that spiffy new token ring card.

    96. Re:Check the HDD by karthik82 · · Score: 1

      I agree... my previous Windows XP laptop used to have this problem when applications used to run slowly all of a sudden. The hard disk was the problem. I managed to keep using it for a few more months by reinstalling the OS (replacing with Linux), but replacing the HDD made things OK again.

    97. Re:Check the HDD by J4 · · Score: 1

      You forgot Mae Ling Mak

  2. Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sorry about that. I slowed it down for my own amusement. I'm a bastard that way.

    -God

    1. Re:Sorry by PotatoFarmer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nice try, but everyone knows you're dead. Nietzschecraft confirmed it.

    2. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, come on. Give this guy a five, already. That is one clever pun.

    3. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try, but everyone knows you're dead. Nietzschecraft confirmed it.

      But Nietzschecraft is dead... God confirmed it... eh eh

    4. Re:Sorry by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Congratulations, you just invented a new word!

    5. Re:Sorry by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Nope, it doesn't count until it gives an exact match in Google these days (as we all well know, if Google doesn't know it then it does not exist).

    6. Re:Sorry by TuaAmin13 · · Score: 1

      Because we all know if it's not on google it doesn't exist in the world.

      Better get started on that rule 34 and rule 35.

    7. Re:Sorry by Gorshkov · · Score: 1

      Nice try, but everyone knows you're dead. Nietzschecraft confirmed it.

      Nietzche: God is dead.
      God: Nietzche is dead. I win.

    8. Re:Sorry by WingCmdr · · Score: 1

      That should be:

      Sorry about that. I slowed it down for my own amusement. I'm a bastard that way.

      -Bill Gates

    9. Re:Sorry by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      It does now: specifically referencing GGP.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    10. Re:Sorry by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Sorry about that. I slowed it down for my own amusement. I'm a bastard that way. -God

      So I take it he's the one true BOFH - Bastard Operator from Heaven.

    11. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent redundent!

    12. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never heard God say that though, so I'm afraid I can't in all fairness award God the match.

    13. Re:Sorry by portscan · · Score: 1

      ha, google already picked up this page. damn, they are quick.

    14. Re:Sorry by Bayoudegradeable · · Score: 1

      Nietzschecraft is a lot like Warcraft, just far more German sounding...

      --
      Sig Registration Form 34c_766(a) submitted to Ministry of Signature Management. Approval pending.
    15. Re:Sorry by Canazza · · Score: 1

      "World of Neitzschecraft" There's no magic, no Gods, just warriors, rangers and lots of rats to beat up.

      --
      It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    16. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      congratulations you just broadcast to the whole of /. that you are using safari as your browser...

      hehe

    17. Re:Sorry by psmears · · Score: 1

      Did you hear Nietzsche say his line then? Just curious... :-)

    18. Re:Sorry by Plumber,+Programmer, · · Score: 1

      So when is the MMO version coming out, Network of Nietzschecraft?

    19. Re:Sorry by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      He didn't, he read it in a book... oh wait.

      On that note, I don't believe that he wrote that comment because I didn't hear it myself.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    20. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I'm still alive, Nietzsche is the dead one. lolol

      --God

  3. PerfLogs by Drakin020 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Run performance counters against the computer to see what might be spiking. (Hard drive usage, memory pages /sec etc...)

    --
    The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    1. Re:PerfLogs by malakai · · Score: 1

      Right idea, wrong tool. Use the MS Sysinternal Process Explorer & Process Monitor.

      To see how to do this step by step:
      http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/09/24/3126858.aspx
      That's a blog article about Mark Russsinovich tracking down why his wife's Vista went into slow-mode all of a sudden. He tracked it down to two things, Flash bug in IE, and a COM add-in from some media software. But how he figured it out is a very cool story. Well documented.

    2. Re:PerfLogs by jman.org · · Score: 1

      I concur, Process Explorer is an excellent replacement for Task Manager. It's the first thing I load up (in safe mode) on an infected machine, to see what's going on. (Though often you'll have to reboot in normal mode to actually see the bad guy in action.)

      Also, check the user's temp folder sorted by date, to see recent files. Make sure you're set to see *ALL* files (even system), and that you're in detail view. Any funny-looking executable (like xgeyrz4ee.exe) is a red flag that you may be infected.

      Look in HCLM/Software/MicroSoft/Windows/CurrentVersion/Run for any auto-run files that look out of place (such as the above red herrings, though they won't always have the same name).

      Often times you can "manually" delete a virus by just going into safe mode, deleting offending registry entries and everything in temp. Just be careful about deleting the registry entries, export a backup if you're not sure.

  4. Try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unplug the network cable in the back and see if the problem persists. The network is a common cause of this problem.

    1. Re:Try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If that doesn't work, unplug the power cable. Sometimes Windows gets bad vibes from the power company.

    2. Re:Try this by leamanc · · Score: 1

      Unplug the network cable in the back

      My Ethernet jack is on the side of my computer, you insensitive clod!

      --
      :q!
    3. Re:Try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Unplug the network cable in the back and see if the problem persists. The network is a common cause of this problem.

      Especially if you have any kind of Windows network share drives, printers, etc. setup.

      Any latency, etc. on the network and/or devices will cause windows to stall out for long periods while it waits for a timeout. Often this happens even when nothing is apparently accessing the network.

      This is especially noticeable when using Microsoft stuff like Office, Outlook, Word, etc.
      For example, if you open a shared .xls on the network which stops responding, you'll see Outlook & word also start acting up since they have so many shared components.

      So in such a situation, unplugging the network cable might actually make things worse for a couple minutes until Windows stops retrying the network, then you'll see errors or a drastic speed increase.

      I've noticed that pretty much anytime I've ever installed ANY printer drivers on a Windows machines I start noticing performance issues.

      Antivirus software will often be a problem, check your auto-scan settings as these often get enabled or reset during automatic updates.

    4. Re:Try this by LingNoi · · Score: 5, Funny

      If that doesn't work, try cleaning the gunk out of the mouse.

    5. Re:Try this by cyphercell · · Score: 5, Funny

      then hold the keyboard over your head and shake it.

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
    6. Re:Try this by FelixNZ · · Score: 1

      This is actually a good oddball one to check. Found one workstation that was running slow and popping errors, turned out to be a staple that had fallen in and was shorting the ethernet port!

    7. Re:Try this by uniquegeek · · Score: 1

      That one belongs on BOFH.

    8. Re:Try this by laejoh · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but don't forget to mention to cross your eyes to make g and h overlap.

    9. Re:Try this by laejoh · · Score: 1

      Overlap as in overlap.

    10. Re:Try this by localoptimum · · Score: 1

      lift the computer an inch or two off the desk then drop it

      --
      This message was scanned by European governments and contains no terrorism.
    11. Re:Try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check your keyboard fluid while you're at it. If that isn't it, it might be that your monitor grease needs changing.

    12. Re:Try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While looking up with your moth open.

  5. Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'll be the first of many to suggest:

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

    1. Re:Process Explorer by lastchance_000 · · Score: 1

      Submitter is using PE already (per the summary).

    2. Re:Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll be the first of many to suggest:

      RTFS

    3. Re:Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow... didn't even RTFS... That's sad, wait, what?

      Oh, nevermind... I was just informed that this is slashdot. Carry on then.

    4. Re:Process Explorer by stanleypane · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Process Explorer is definitely a good tool to use for troubleshooting purposes. I find it invaluable when trying to view DLL and/or file usage for a given process. The process target is pretty slick too: drag a target onto a window and the controlling process is highlighted.

      There are a slew of other sysinternals tools as well, many of them would probably be perfect for troubleshooting system bottlenecks.

    5. Re:Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not, since he said...

      I've run spybot, antivirus, and looked at proc explorer

    6. Re:Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, the poster mentioned he looked at proc explorer... Therefore you are second :)

    7. Re:Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, try this:

      http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897426.aspx

      I've had this greatly decrease boot & login times as well as possibly application load times (but this may be psychosomatic...)

    8. Re:Process Explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded Informative? Did anybody even RTFS?

      I've run spybot, antivirus, and looked at proc explorer - no luck.

  6. Check Your Hard Disk by JackStrife17 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    In my experience, sudden unexplainable slow performance often ends up being a hard disk issue. Are you seeing a lot of hard disk activity?

    People often assume that such problems are much more malicious than they actually are. I'd check to make sure DMA is still active on your primary disk and grab a copy your manufacturer's disk check utility.

    1. Re:Check Your Hard Disk by DaMattster · · Score: 1
      "People often assume that such problems are much more malicious than they actually are. I'd check to make sure DMA is still active on your primary disk and grab a copy your manufacturer's disk check utility.

      This is good advice as I have seen this behavior with HP d5500 PCs. All of a sudden performance will come to a grinding halt. Running an HD test revealed a Code 7 - Hard Drive Failure. Replacement recommended.

  7. Virtual Machine by DissociativeBehavior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Watch porn in a virtual machine.

    1. Re:Virtual Machine by Gizzmonic · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's always good advice!

      --
      (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    2. Re:Virtual Machine by orclevegam · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's always good advice!

      What, watching porn, or the virtual machine?

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    3. Re:Virtual Machine by pem · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes.

    4. Re:Virtual Machine by illrigger · · Score: 1

      This is fantastic advice!

    5. Re:Virtual Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's odd, porn speeds up my machine for a while then it goes into sleep mode. The annoying part is when it wants a cigarette.

    6. Re:Virtual Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Watch porn in a virtual machine.

      Or just use Sandboxie lol
      Wow im "Anonymous Coward"

    7. Re:Virtual Machine by drpimp · · Score: 1

      No, No, No. All of the above. Watching virtual porn on a virtual machine!

      --
      -- Brought to you by Carl's JR
    8. Re:Virtual Machine by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      The point is, if you make a virtual machine on your windows
      box and ONLY give the virtual machine web access and it is
      Linux then you isolate the evil to the virtual machine.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    9. Re:Virtual Machine by Jurily · · Score: 4, Funny

      Watch porn in a virtual machine.

      Best. Diagnosing. Tool. Ever.

      Thank you. :)

    10. Re:Virtual Machine by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, the problem was just what we expected...

      Clogged pipes.

    11. Re:Virtual Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yah, sandboxie is the way to go. And that way you never have a dubiously empty browser cache. :)

    12. Re:Virtual Machine by magpie · · Score: 1

      Only on slashdot would that be modded as Insightful.

  8. Simplest answer by LinuxGeek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Bottom line, if your system has a sudden dramatic change in behavior for no visible reason, wipe your drive and reinstall windows. There are nasty things now that don't show up as a process, mearly using the windows kernel to spawn another thread to do whatever it wants.

    Backup your data and do the safest thing. I usually run windows inside VirtualPC which means only using it for the programs that *require* windows, not for general browsing and stuff.

    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Simplest answer by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Yea, I use my Windows box for games and the occasional access/.net thing. I don't check my email, I don't check my bank account, I don't browse the web, nothing.

      I find I don't know what to tell people who say, "Well how can I be sure it's gone, so I can go back to entering my personal information on my insecure windows machine." You simply can't be sure. I'm not sure with my Linux box. I've taken a lot of precautions, but that's not even remotely the same as being sure.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    2. Re:Simplest answer by FuckTheModerators · · Score: 1

      I heartily second the parent. Wipe it and reinstall. If you've got everything backed up, that should be the quickest option. (Versus spending a weekend or so digging and digging to find the problem.)

      Along those lines, this fall, both my and my wife's machines (XP, full updates, behind a hardware firewall,Avast on one and AVG on the other) started off slowing down and then devolved to really wacky virus behavior over the course of a week. Had to wipe both to come back to normal.

      Post-wipe, if it's slow, then I'd echo the disk sentiments elsewhere in the comments.

    3. Re:Simplest answer by ZirbMonkey · · Score: 1

      I've gotten into a ~6 month routine of doing this. I have a 40 GB HD that gets the main windows install. After that I have a 160GB drive I dump all my program installation files, pictures, music, ect. Finally a RAID setup that has my games installed into for faster load times, and an extrenal backup as well for ensuring my pictures and music don't get lost.

      Every 6 months XP will lag uncontrollably, and I'll start the ritualistic reinstall of Windows and all the applications I love and need. The C drive gets wiped clean, and everything gets a fresh install. 30 mins to get Windows started, 30 mins to install all the hardware drivers, and another 30 mins to setup all the other visuals like background, screansaver, internet bookmarks, and various desktop shortcuts.

      I know what you're thinking. That's a lot of effort, and what if I forget to save some of my important stuff in the reinstallation? Well the alternative is that you wait til Windows completely bugs out and you get BSODs on startup, requiring you to do this anyways. I've had that happen and it sucks. Everyone should know how to backup their important stuff anyhow. Because if you don't you're just waiting for trouble to hit.

      As inconvenient as it is to spend a few hours reinstalling windows, I find it more annoying to sit at a computer that takes 2x longer to load everything, freezes up when you don't want it do, and potentially crashes and corrupts the files you thought you could save forever.

    4. Re:Simplest answer by Atraxen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not a bad plan, but I'd shorten the reinstall time even further by setting up a backup image of the OS+programs after a reinstall, and park it on the RAID. Then, your time spent is limited to the transfer rate between the two drives.

      Remember your offline backups of the RAID as well though - otherwise you may simply end up with a well-preserved virus refuge.

      --
      Be careful of your thoughts; they could become words at any minute...
    5. Re:Simplest answer by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you've got everything backed up, that should be the quickest option. (Versus spending a weekend or so digging and digging to find the problem.)

      It's Windows, not Ubuntu. Last time I had a "reinstall windows" problem, it took me 2 weeks to get all the software installed and configured again. I can't just tick off what I want and hit Apply.

    6. Re:Simplest answer by aurispector · · Score: 1

      Going nuclear on windows is often the shortest route to fixing the problem. I had identical problems to the submitter which turned out to be driver issues. For some reason Nvidia drivers weren't working properly and only the EVGA supplied video drivers worked properly. Uninstalling the Nvidia drivers wasn't enough - I had to reinstall windows THEN used the EVGA drivers.

      Drivers are not simple to get rid of in windows. Even after rolling back or uninstalling and deleting suspect drivers, often a wipe is the simplest, or only fix. If it doesn't work you have at least narrowed it down to hardware issues.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    7. Re:Simplest answer by atuwh · · Score: 1

      It's Windows, not Ubuntu. Last time I had a "reinstall windows" problem, it took me 2 weeks to get all the software installed and configured again. I can't just tick off what I want and hit Apply.

      I recently used CloneZilla to re-image a 20GB C:\ partition - took less than half an hour. Of course, that required a little foresight (to partition the drive and clone the windows partition).

    8. Re:Simplest answer by domatic · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's Windows, not Ubuntu. Last time I had a "reinstall windows" problem, it took me 2 weeks to get all the software installed and configured again. I can't just tick off what I want and hit Apply.

      Actually you can but it takes a little forethought. Get together install media for Windows, all your software, and a large external IEEE1394 or USB disk. If you use a bunch of stuff you downloaded then put the installers on a flash drive. Do clean install of the OS, apps, patch it all up, set up a Desktop the way you want it, yadda, yadda. Now before you junk it up with your data make an image of it. ping.windowsdream.com has a good free tool to do this with though if you have Ghost or whatever then go for it. If this is all too much trouble to start with then do it this way the next time you need to do a therapeutic rebuild of your Windows box.

      You should not use an imaging utility like PING or Ghost to backup your personal stuff. Well you can but its unwieldy. GoodSync is a decent free tool that can keep two separate directories in sync like say "Documents and Settings" on your machine and the external disk. The first run will take forever to copy your 40GB porno collection but subsequent runs will only schlep over new or changed files.

    9. Re:Simplest answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      best bet is to get a good clean base installation of everything you need on your system and create an image of your system to a small NAS device or USB hard drive. in most cases a base image can even fit on a cheap flash drive. if your system slows down due to any of the reasons mentioned here just reload the image and you're back up and running with everything you need in less than an hour. if you happen upon a new must have app just reload your base image, install it, and recreate the image. i can't begin to imagine how mush time researching obscure issues with poorly written software/drivers imaging has saved me (IT consultant). it's definitely worth the cost of an imaging program. enjoy the free advice, next time it'll cost ya :)

    10. Re:Simplest answer by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      I heartily second the parent. Wipe it and reinstall.

      Just nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    11. Re:Simplest answer by montyzooooma · · Score: 1

      But not much point cloning the drive at THIS stage when he has the problem.

    12. Re:Simplest answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, Windows reinstall is a pain because there's a huge load of decent applications that you can use to produce something significant. Linux, on the other hand, doesn't suffer this problem.

    13. Re:Simplest answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So next time you need to reinstall Windows, why not install Ubuntu instead? Save yourself 2n weeks of your time in future.

    14. Re:Simplest answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The windows operating system enables you to run a very wide array of software. The ability of this OS to run such diverse code, leaves it open to trash left behind by old programs. To keep your computer running great. Backup your data to external or removable media. Reinstall windows to a reformatted drive. Install the applications and games you use. Test system performance. If clean, Ghost image the drive, or use some other Hard drive imaging software. When it starts to act up again.. make sure your data is backed up.. and ghost the hard drive back to fresh.. No viri, no driver conflicts, no root kits can survive.. if its hardware.. you will notice that your fresh install doesn't work right. At this point, you will know its hardware, because you have destroyed all other variables. Ghosting takes about five minutes for a standard windows installation. Ask anyone else if they can fix any problem they might have on their windows workstation in five minutes. I believe this should be the default configuration of any windows Operation system. You can even pull the ghost images from a network drive, if you know how to make a network boot disk.. or use a PIX server.. better yet.. keep an SSD that just holds your ghost images.. 1,700 years of MTBF.. rock on.

  9. Several steps to fix the problem by Anonymous+Cowbell · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. install Linux
    2. does it run Linux? if no, repeat step 1
    3. is the problem solved? if no, set up a beowulf cluster and add the machine to the cluster
    4. ?
    5. profit
    1. Re:Several steps to fix the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to tell him to open up AOL and to download Linux.

    2. Re:Several steps to fix the problem by killmenow · · Score: 2, Funny

      6. Natalie Portman

    3. Re:Several steps to fix the problem by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      7. Hot grits.

  10. Defrag? by arizwebfoot · · Score: 1

    I'm a big student of defragging especially if you're adding or removing a lot of programs. Also if your docs are on your HD, defrag.

    Defrag

    Defrag

    --
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
    1. Re:Defrag? by Galactic+Dominator · · Score: 1

      Also make sure to use a lot of snake oil for lube.

      --
      brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
    2. Re:Defrag? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Perhaps the hard drive is using an Infinitely Improbable File System.

    3. Re:Defrag? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      I know you're joking and an obvious troll, but some partition software will prompt you to first defrag if the FS(yes, XP/NTFS) is excessively fragmented, especially when booting from disc.

    4. Re:Defrag? by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Ahh, good old IIFS. Instead of storing a 512-byte block, we store a 128-bit hash. To read the block you just generate random data until you get a block of data that matches the hash. It's foolproof I tell you, as well as speedy.

    5. Re:Defrag? by daveime · · Score: 1

      And hope to god the random 512 byte block is the right one from the possible 3.0691830754069217948799249581913e+1194 hash collisions ?

      For the inevitable query on the math ...

      Collisions = 256 ^ 512 / 2 ^ 128

    6. Re:Defrag? by morgauo · · Score: 1

      Defrag is not a bad idea at all.

      It would be strange for the filesystem to become fragmented this much all at once as the computer seems to have slowed down all at once but it might if there was a lot of software install/removal going on at the time or maybe if some large updates were installed.

      Still, if you want to speed a Windows box up...
      Defrag it. Really!

      The common perception these days on defraging is that it is no longer necessary, just an old DOS-Win9x thing. People also tend to buy new computers every couple of years or at least reformat. Hmmm.....

      Here's the thing... Microsoft defrag is broken. It has been in every Windows version which came after Win98. Not that the ones in Win95/8 were that great either! If you run the defrag that comes with Windows it will probably not be much better after. People mistake this for meaning the computer didn't need it.

      Get a third party defragger. I'm using Diskeeper. It works well. I've noticed a huge difference on my work PC (has to be Windows) since installing it. If you search Google there are many other defraggers out there but watch out. Many of them are just shells which run the Microsoft defrag in the background. Make sure the one you get actually is it's own defrag program.

      Even if this doesn't fix the current problem it will make most Windows machines faster. At least it does if you use it like I do and install/remove a lot of stuff regularly. Maybe a simple email/word processing box wouldn't get so fragmented??? I'll probably never know.

    7. Re:Defrag? by morgauo · · Score: 1

      "since you've waited for ages while it was being done"

      Do you sit there and watch the grass grow in-between cuttings too? Just go do something else.

    8. Re:Defrag? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nah, it's just FAT :-0

  11. Use process explorer by WARM3CH · · Score: 1, Informative

    Process explorer shows both CPU and I/O activity of all processes and services running. Here is the link: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx
    Another option under vista is to use the "Reliability and Performance Monitor" in control panel.

    1. Re:Use process explorer by GPLDAN · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Between DiskMon, FileMon and Process Explorer - there should be nothing that you cannot see. The new generation of viruses that steal thread handlers from other processes are nasty, but very very hard to detect.

      Add in wireshark, as the cause of many a slow computer has been a ISP provided DNS server that has suddenly decided to take it's sweet ass time about answering queries for A and PTR records. Usually a by-product of being under some external load that you know nothing about (it could be backing up, etc).

      DiskMon in particular will show you any files that are being sought by any process, an incredibly valuable resource.

      Every workstation in our company has the SysInternals complete suite installed in the C: drive. The help desk has been trained to use it. It solves alot of problems.

    2. Re:Use process explorer by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 5, Informative

      FYI DiskMon and FileMon have been superseded by ProcMon. I used it the other day because there were pinned items on my Start Menu I couldn't delete, so a simple filter for RegWriteValue when I pinned or unpinned something and I was able to find where the list lived and wiped it.

    3. Re:Use process explorer by nine-times · · Score: 1

      All this talk about SysInternals and no love for PageDefrag? It's not going to help diagnose this problem, but it may (possibly) help fix it.

    4. Re:Use process explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      go to start->run and type "pokemon"

      I did that and the prompt returned "Gotta catch 'em all!"

    5. Re:Use process explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PageDefrag? I can't defrag my page file. Oh, I use SwapFS. Perhaps that explains it.

    6. Re:Use process explorer by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately I have had this problem on multiple windows machines and the spikes do not show up on this app in 90% of cases.
      The other 10% became obvious as a proper spike. (auto virus checking or some app doing something sensible)

      Not helpful for this sort of thing.

    7. Re:Use process explorer by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      FYI DiskMon and FileMon have been superseded by ProcMon.

      DigiMon?

    8. Re:Use process explorer by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      Every workstation in our company has the SysInternals complete suite installed in the C: drive.

      Network shares!

    9. Re:Use process explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just add more CPU fluid, your system is low.

    10. Re:Use process explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GTFO.

      This is Slashdot. News for Nerds, not News for Puerile Imbeciles. Go back to whatever dark hole of the internet you were spawned in.

    11. Re:Use process explorer by danaris · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot. News for Nerds, not News for Puerile Imbeciles.

      *Ahem* "You must be new here."

      Dan Aris

      --
      Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
    12. Re:Use process explorer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's all been listed for years here in the URL below, in how it's done, and why with Process Explorer:

      http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=6b183f6b8a371704b663f6da04577221&showtopic=2662&st=0#

      Pertinent excerpt:

      "It's THAT, or using Process Explorer in UserMode/Ring 3/RPL3 operation...

      You would do a suspending the calling process via right click popup menu options for this it offers! Once the calling process is suspended (& many times, also the called or DLL injected library as well), you can delete ANY potential offending injected DLL/lib virus-trojan-spyware-malware being called by said parent process, on disk.

      (This ia assuming this is a lib loaded virus/spyware/trojan/malware etc., not a standalone .exe type)

      That's done via watching loaded DLL's that ANY app may have loaded presently (For that, you would have to use ProExp's CTRL+D keystroke shortcut, with the lower pane view present/visible, & set like that) IF there is one and this thing doesn't launch by itself from one of the registry RUN areas or startup groups that is..."

  12. Obligatory by samriel · · Score: 5, Funny

    GeekSquad diagnosis:
    Vista installed. Remove immediately.

    1. Re:Obligatory by SocraTease · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Additional obligatory comment:
      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of them....

    2. Re:Obligatory by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 1

      Perhaps that's the joke. GeekSquad aren't very bright.

    3. Re:Obligatory by hendrix2k · · Score: 1

      GeekSquad diagnosis: Vista installed. Remove immediately.

      Wait, you left out re-installing the OS for $129 and a $159 data-backup. Also, don't forget anti-virus and anti-spyware for just $100 more!

    4. Re:Obligatory by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      New PCs at BBY cost around $400; you should have plenty of Linux PCs....

    5. Re:Obligatory by Kamokazi · · Score: 1

      Sounds exactly like a Geek Squad diagnosis, too...because it's actually running XP. Who else could screw up that minor detail?

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    6. Re:Obligatory by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Who else? The clerk at Radio Shack. Ask them anything resembling a technical question and they are guaranteed to tell you something stupid. I've been told that the particular (simple and common) connector or adapter I was looking for didn't exist, or was even physically impossible. More than once.

      I've often wondered at the source of the assertive misinformedness of RS clerks. It's really, really consistent, even more so than their weird compulsion to sell you batteries you don't need. My best guess is that their training include exhortations to "Demonstrate you technical knowledge to the customer."

    7. Re:Obligatory by Repossessed · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is, I used to be able to go to radio shack and have a conversation about the right transistor to buy for a given project.

      A pity.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    8. Re:Obligatory by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Gawd, you must be even more ancient than I am, if you remember actually buying a single transistor!

      That's what killed Radio Shack (in the form you fondly remember it) and Heathkit and a lot of cool stuff. Nobody wanted to hack out simple circuits after complex circuits became became (literally) cheaper than dirt.

    9. Re:Obligatory by vonart · · Score: 1

      Radio Shack: You've Got Questions, We've Got Blank Stares

      --
      The American Dream has too much grinding and the leveling makes no sense. -GameboyRMH (1153867)
    10. Re:Obligatory by Kamokazi · · Score: 1

      The only people more clueless than Radio Shack clerks are the idiot execs who drove them into the ground. They attempted to compete with the likes of Best Buy and lost, badly. People do not go to Radio Shack for fucking cell phones or digital cameras. People go (went) to Radio Shak for electronics DIY and weird adapters and cables...and they'll overpay, because they're usually in the middle of a project and need it now. I went in looking for a wall plate and RJ45 jack for it. I got a blank stare from the drone at the counter, who then proceeded to ask my how my fucking cellular reception was and if I'd seen the great deal Sprint had. After telling him (more politely than he deserved) that he was a moron, I spoke to someone who at least understood what a 'computer network jack' was, but they didnt have any. I then went to Super Wal-Mart out of desparation (small town, limited choices, and it was Saturday when electrical contractors were closed) and they had it.

      I wouldn't be quite as pissed about it if it hadn't been the 2nd or 3rd time a very similar scenario took place. You'd think I would learn my lesson.

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    11. Re:Obligatory by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Actually, people do go to Radio Shack for cell phones. And other consumer electronics. Never mind that service, quality, and prices all suck.

      Amongst people I know, it's the technically clueless, the people who panic when faced with even the simplest problem, who seem least able to resist this particular brand. Maybe they find all those piles of mysterious high tech crap reassuring. It tells them that the people who work there Know What They're Doing.

    12. Re:Obligatory by Repossessed · · Score: 1

      Not *that* long ago... 11 years? Was in highschool. I also bought integrated circuits from them, when I couldn't find an old computer that had the parts I needed (You know you can turn a 386 machine into an amplifier?)

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    13. Re:Obligatory by fm6 · · Score: 1

      OK, it's 1998. What do you need a single discrete transistor for?

      Did your amplifier use sampling? If so, yes I knew you could do that. Data is data.

      On the other hand if you created an analog amplifier...

    14. Re:Obligatory by Repossessed · · Score: 1

      The transistors were for creating a basic 1 dollar noisemaker, which was then fed through the amplifier (except it didn't work, so I had to use a friends). And yes, the amp was analog, or at least used an analog input.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
  13. Hmmmm. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not a lot to go on, though as a freebie, XP doesn't do jack with that extra gig of RAM...You could put in 100gigs and it won't use any more than 3 (less you're using the 64 bit version, iirc).

    Rootkits can run "under the radar". Might want to try software like RootKitRevealer, or Blacklight. A crappy one might grab a ton of cycles for a minute, but most of them are less intrusive.

    Everything spiking at once sounds like that stupid "System Restore" process, or maybe a big swap dump (which is weird with that much RAM, but you know, it's windows.) Stupid programs like Norton can grab a huge chunk of resources every now and then for no discernable reason. Maybe some peripheral is crapping out?

    Barring malware, I'd start writing down what's running when it spikes, and see if that tells you anything. Lot of programs can cause momentary spikes, but background processes usually don't. You could try testing some of the hardware but without anything specific to look for, you're going to have a hell of a time finding something.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    1. Re:Hmmmm. by LilGuy · · Score: 1

      Everything spiking at once sounds like that stupid "System Restore" process, or maybe a big swap dump (which is weird with that much RAM, but you know, it's windows.) Stupid programs like Norton can grab a huge chunk of resources every now and then for no discernable reason.

      It is for this reason that I use services.msc to switch all non-vital services to manual mode, and only start them up when I need them, including the print spooler and even my wacom tablet. Also I rarely let AVG (or whatever AV software) run continuously. It may seem less secure, but I don't tend to download from a lot of untrusted sources, and I scan weekly.

      --

      You're nothing; like me.
    2. Re:Hmmmm. by suricatta · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not a lot to go on, though as a freebie, XP doesn't do jack with that extra gig of RAM...You could put in 100gigs and it won't use any more than 3 (less you're using the 64 bit version, iirc).

      Just FYI, the reason for this is because with 32 bits, you're system is limited to 2^32 bits of address space = 4GB of memory in total, which has to include both RAM and the memory on your graphics card.

      So in many cases, users with 4GB of RAM will only see 3GB becuase they have a 1GB graphics card. It follows that if a user only have a 512MB graphics card, then they will see (and XP will use) 3.5GB RAM.

      This is not a design flaw for XP, it's a limitation if the 32 bit architecture. Switching to 64 bits solves this because then your total address space increases to 2^64 = 16EB. Which ought to be enough for anyone ;-)

    3. Re:Hmmmm. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Yup yup. I've just never tested extra ram on XP 64 so I didn't want to give crap advice.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    4. Re:Hmmmm. by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      True, but from personal experience, I've found it difficult to find 3gb kits of ram.

    5. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid programs like Norton can grab a huge chunk of resources every now and then for no discernable reason.

      He did mention Viruses as a possible cause so, in my experience, that covers the Norton case too. I've said for a while that Norton has chosen the most effective means of obscuring the offending process of any virus out there...lots of advertising, having users pay to install it and creating the perception that it's actually beneficial to the system. When, in reality, it's always seemed to me that it behaves exactly like a virus...slows down the system, sometimes to the point of being unusable, and does little else.

      But back to the question at hand, I think you're right that he didn't really give us enough to go on. In my experience, Windows XP simply becomes unresponsive sometimes, and there's usually a specific reason why it happens. But that reason never seems to be the same. Sure, spyware and viruses are the most common of the reasons, but there are simply random things that will happen to XP and each one will manifest itself in different ways and have different solutions.

      For instance, about 6 months ago, my work XP box suddenly started taking 5-20 seconds to display context menus and the start menu. And each mouse movement through the context menu would take equally as long to be reflected on the screen. After about 2 hours of checking everything I knew to check and coming up empty, I found a forum posting that indicated that if I changed XP to use the classic start menu, the problem would go away, even if I immediately changed it back to use the XP start menu. And that simple fix worked.

      Bottom line is that there are a ton of obscure things that can happen to a Windows XP box that have nothing to do with spyware or viruses. Google is your friend in these instances. Because you're looking for the relatively few people who've run into your exact problem. You're not looking for everyone who's run into problems because it's very unlikely that the problems people will have had and solved will be the problems you're facing.

    6. Re:Hmmmm. by cbhacking · · Score: 5, Informative

      Accurate but oversimplified - video cards aren't the only drivers that are mapped into memory space, just (usually) the biggest thing.

      If your drivers support it (many don't, which is why it's disabled by default - a driver which lacks support will cause crashes with this option) you can add /pae
      to the boot.ini file to enable Physical Address Extension in the kernel. PAE uses an extra 4 bits for internal memory addressing, resulting in up to 64GB of RAM being addressable. Individual processes will still run with only 4GB memory spaces. However, Windows will map some of its physical memory above the 4GB mark, allowing drivers their accustomed memory mapping (assuming the driver developer didn't make assumptions that PAE violates, like that the address space stops hard at 0xFFFFFFFF).

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    7. Re:Hmmmm. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1, Informative

      No, its a windows problem. Intel has had Physical Address Extensions in its 32 bit processors since the Pentium Pro (released in 1995). With a better Operating system, you can use more than 4 ( up to 64 ) Gigs, but no more than 4 Gigs per process.

      Physical Address Extension

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    8. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Useless nitpick. Most 64 bit arch use 48 bits for memory mapping, not 64. It's still way more RAM than you will put in a machine.

    9. Re:Hmmmm. by draxbear · · Score: 1

      I usually recommend friends spend the extra AU$40 and go for 4GB even though they're running XP. It'll make the improvement that much more pronounced when I throw Ubuntu on there a year or two when XP becomes (more) unusable.

      Strange, no hits here searching for McAfee, that's usually the source of sudden performance issues on any machine I've had the misfortune to be running it on...

      --
      --- I've completed diagnosis of your problem and can classify it as a YOYO...You're On Your Own
    10. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "video card" will only use system RAM when it is onboard. If it is an actual video card (as in ISA/AGP/PCI/PCI-e) then it has it's own memory.

    11. Re:Hmmmm. by swilver · · Score: 1

      It actually is a limitation in XP, as it is quite possible for a 32-bit architecture to use more than 4 GB of RAM. 32-bit systems are quite capable of for example addressing 2^32 * 4096 bytes, the 4096 number being the memory manager's block size. This depends on architecture however, and Intel's 32-bit architecture actually only allows for 2^32 * 16 bytes, as it simply does not have more than 36 address lines for accessing on board memory. See this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

      Windows 2003 for example (which is basically a newer version of XP) will quite happily use >4 GB of RAM running in 32-bit, and so will Linux running in 32-bit. The only limitation of the 32-bit systems is that processes are limited to a maximum of 4 GB address space. By default this is usually 2 GB for the user part of the process and 2 GB for the kernel parts, but the ratio can be changed.

    12. Re:Hmmmm. by timothyf · · Score: 2, Informative

      If your machine and 32 bit OS supports Physical Address Extension, it will be able to handle up to 64 GB of RAM. I know because I'm on a 32 bit Win2K3 Server machine that sees all 4 GB of RAM installed just fine.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

    13. Re:Hmmmm. by gparent · · Score: 1

      It's not a problem. They made it that way after seeing a lot of issues caused by the PAE addressing with several device drivers.

    14. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there is some fallacy in this statement. Windows (including 32bit) CAN use more than 4GB of ram. You do however require Physical-Address-Extension to be enabled in your kernel (/PAE in boot.ini), your motherboard/cpu/bios have to support it, etc.

      That said, XP still doesn't really take advantage of it, but the other 32bit flavors of windows server DO in fact use it...they still have the 2gb shared kernel space issue. Enough processes and you will hit this barrier.

      http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_xp for the limits, google around for a more detailed explanation of that phantom 4gb wall.

    15. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 3 GB limitation in Win32 is due to the address space above 3 GB being reserved for accessing system devices, and not because of a 1 GB graphics card ... DUH

    16. Re:Hmmmm. by LoveMuscle · · Score: 1

      This is not a design flaw for XP, it's a limitation if the 32 bit architecture.

      BZZZTTT... Wrong..

      It is a design flaw, as it's NOT a limitation of current 32-bit architectures. It's the result of MSFT not taking advantage of PAE. The enable it, but (for what I can only assume is marketing reasons) they still limit you to 4GB.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

      PAE lets you address 64GB of RAM. For some mind boggling reason they haven't fixed this with 32 bit Vista either.

    17. Re:Hmmmm. by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Has no one heard of PAE mode? Windows XP artificially limits to 4GB; some versions of Windows allow 128GB physical RAM access.

    18. Re:Hmmmm. by sunking2 · · Score: 1

      Windows problem over simplifies it as most of the Microsoft server versions correctly work with PAE. This was done on purpose for the desktop operating systems because they need some major differential between those and the more expense server versions. If they allowed for > 4G of memory then it would impact their server license sales. You may disagree with their decision, but to call it a problem is not 100% accurate.

    19. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, that's not quite true.

      Because memory is mapped actually a sensible x86 OS can use more than 4GB ram on a 32 bit x86 processor. Linux for example can. What it can't do is let a single process allocate more than 4GB ram.

    20. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      <quote>Not a lot to go on, though as a freebie, XP doesn't do jack with that extra gig of RAM...You could put in 100gigs and it won't use any more than 3 (less you're using the 64 bit version, iirc).</quote>

      Just FYI, the reason for this is because with 32 bits, you're system is limited to 2^32 bits of address space = 4GB of memory in total, which has to include both RAM and the memory on your graphics card.

      So in many cases, users with 4GB of RAM will only see 3GB becuase they have a 1GB graphics card. It follows that if a user only have a 512MB graphics card, then they will see (and XP will use) 3.5GB RAM.

      This is not a design flaw for XP, it's a limitation if the 32 bit architecture. Switching to 64 bits solves this because then your total address space increases to 2^64 = 16EB. Which ought to be enough for anyone ;-)

      ONLY XP does this nonsense with the 3.nGB of RAM, and 4GB limit is complete BS. PAE is damn near 15 years old now and I've got Linux boxes in 32-bit mode with over 16GB of RAM.

      The XP 4GB Limit is completely synthetic, different 2003 Server versions have different addressable spaces in the 32-bit realm. Server? 4GB, got Enterprise? 8GB, DataCenter? 128GB.

      2003 and XP share the same kernel.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

      http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx

    21. Re:Hmmmm. by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      It doesn't use the DIMMs, but it is in the address space. Read up, young padawan.

    22. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not a design flaw for XP, it's a limitation if the 32 bit architecture. Switching to 64 bits solves this because then your total address space increases to 2^64 = 16EB. Which ought to be enough for anyone ;-)

      Unless you are trying to run crysis...

    23. Re:Hmmmm. by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      3GB and 6GB kits are becoming more common now that the i7 and associated motherboards support triple-channel memory instead of just dual-channel. Check Newegg or your favorite up-to-date component sales site.

    24. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And on top of this, if PAE (Physical Address Extension) is enabled and supported by the hardware, each process can use up to 2^32 = 4GB of space, thus making it sometimes useful to have more than 4GB of memory in a 32bit architecture machine.

    25. Re:Hmmmm. by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      "The "video card" will only use system RAM when it is onboard. If it is an actual video card (as in ISA/AGP/PCI/PCI-e) then it has it's own memory."

      Except video cards also map some or all of their framebuffer into the CPU's address space so the CPU can write directly to the memory rather than have to go through DMA buffers. You really don't want to be trying to play HD video by packing into a DMA buffer and waiting for it to get to the screen.

      And if your card is mapping 1GB of video RAM into a 4GB address space, that's 1GB of your 4GB of RAM that's unavailable to you in a crippled OS like XP32 which won't let you access memory above 4GB.

    26. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, this is wrong. 32 bit relates to the process address space, not what the entire OS uses. for example, all the processes 2-3gb have to go somewhere. Also, fileio et al caching can use up the rest - and thats not taking into account pae (thru awe).

    27. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't know a lot about memory-mapped IO and how it affects memory reservation on Windows, do you?

    28. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really doesn't have anything to do with video cards. The simple fact is that the lower 1GB of address space is reserved for kernel mode usage.

    29. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      32-bit systems are quite capable of for example addressing 2^32 * 4096 bytes, the 4096 number being the memory manager's block size.

      OMG! Amazing! 2^44 bytes of memory available to all 32-bit systems! Wow!

      Guess what, I have a genuine 32-bit system available (yes, I know, lucky me), and I am willing to write my own operating system for all 44-bit computers out there, plus related software, that will liberate us from the burdens of unnecessary 64-bit computers. I just need your help.

      I won't be too harsh on you, and I will assume you didn't suggest that all processes can use more than 32-bit address space. Only the kernel knows about the 2^44 bytes available. Great. Let's discuss data structures for the virtual memory, and how exactly my enhanced 32-bit kernel will contact the world outside and request the 16 bytes starting from physical address 0xdeadbeefbe0. Hold on, I'm fetching pen and paper. OK, got them. Go on, I'm listening.

    30. Re:Hmmmm. by BrentH · · Score: 1

      I'm running Ubuntu 8.04 32bit on my Intel machine with 4GB of ram, but Ubuntu still reports about 3.2GB of ram (just like WIndows 32bit would). How can I enable the rest?

    31. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other 32 bit operating systems the 4GB limit doesn't exist. Just because Microsoft's backwards compatibility code is too poor to use PAE doesn't mean its a limitation of 32bit in general.

    32. Re:Hmmmm. by noidentity · · Score: 1

      I thought plenty of 32-bit processors had a larger physical address bus, like 48 bits or so. This way the OS could map different processes to different chunks of the 48-bit space. Each would be limited to 4GB address spaces, but the cumulative use of all processes could go well above that. But maybe I am just remembering things wrong.

    33. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The linux-image-generic kernel doesn't have PAE enabled. Try installing the -server kernel instead (linux-server).

      For some reason there doesn't seem to be a linux-restricted-modules-server package (for e.g. NVidia drivers) but there should still be the kernel specific packages (e.g. linux-restricted-modules-2.6.27-9-server)

      (Based on current experiences in 8.10)

    34. Re:Hmmmm. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      Yes, I do disagree. But the main point I was making was that its not a physical limitation of Intel 32 bit processors, since the Pro.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    35. Re:Hmmmm. by Champion3 · · Score: 1

      Not entirely true. If your CPU supports Physical Address Extensions, then 32-bit Windows can utilize more than 4GB of physical RAM. Since a video card's memory-mapped regions would cause 4 gigs of RAM to "spill over" past the 4GB mark, PAE allows the OS to still be able to access that memory. Processes of course are still limited to a 4GB address space that is carved into kernel space and user space.

      --
      I'm going to the casino. Don't gamble.
    36. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PAE probably isn't what anyone is after for this purpose:
      http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

      In short:
      PAE doesn't solve your problem. A 64 bit OS (sort of) does.

    37. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You probably need to enable memory remapping somewhere in your BIOS.

    38. Re:Hmmmm. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      While it is indeed fun to watch people play blame tennis ('its Windows fault!' 'its the architectures fault!'), the reality is that until recently, it was both Windows and the architectures fault - Intel forced the device memory mapping to below 4GB in versions of its desktop chipsets until recently, to the extent that even Apple and OS X was affected (remember those 3GB max Macs? Bingo), which was not solved by PAE. Intel fixed that, but if you have one of the earlier chipsets then you are SOL.

    39. Re:Hmmmm. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Until recently, Intel desktop chipsets forced the 4GB memory limit, even with PAE - remember those 3GB max ram Macs? Same issue...

    40. Re:Hmmmm. by BrentH · · Score: 1

      My board has the P965. Is that new enough, or not?

    41. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a combination of architecture limitation and OS limitation. OSes other than XP (e.g. linux) allow you to use > 4GB RAM on the 32bit x86 architecture if the processor supports PAE (which I think anything since pentium pro does), however, you are still stuck with 4GB of directly addressable memory per process (there are indirect ways to get around this limit too, such as using mmap).

    42. Re:Hmmmm. by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      "This is not a design flaw for XP, it's a limitation if the 32 bit architecture."

      All modern 32-bit x86 processors are capable a PAE, which extends 32-bit system memory support to 64GB. Because Windows must retain binary compatibility with old drivers, which must be written with PAE in mind, but aren't, the desktop versions of XP don't enable PAE. This is a consequence of having closed source system binaries. Changes in operating architecture cannot be freely made because drivers cannot be recompiled to match, unless the driver vendor does it.

      32-bit Linux/*BSD/etc. Open Source systems are at a much greater liberty in this regard, as the Open Source drivers and/or open portions of the driver stubs, can be recompiled and redistributed to match the operating architecture change. My 32-bit Kubuntu systems now have PAE enabled, and can use the full 8GB I have in them. I had to install the 32-bit server kernel packages to replace the non-server kernel packages, but that was it.

      The 4GB memory limit has been an operating system limit, rather than a hardware architecture limit, for a number of years. Most of us didn't care until recently because RAM prices were so high that we didn't have a reason to care.

    43. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does not work in XP SP2 anymore - PAE is only used to enable DEP from SP2 onwards. This was decided because of loads of problems with driver compatability issues. MS chose for stability.

      See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension for more details.

    44. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The above is a commonly quoted fallacy, see:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

      Not supported in XP, sadly.

    45. Re:Hmmmm. by LilGuy · · Score: 1

      Wait so is this an XP limitation or an Intel limitation? You started off by saying XP, then switched to Intel's 32-bit architecture, then went back to saying it was XP again.

      I'm confused.

      --

      You're nothing; like me.
    46. Re:Hmmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      | This is not a design flaw for XP, it's a limitation if the 32 bit architecture.

      This is a common misconception: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

      The various 4GB and lower limits are more a matter of backward compatibility.

    47. Re:Hmmmm. by swilver · · Score: 1

      Late comment, but you may see it. Check the amount of memory your motherboard supports. If it is just 4 GB, then you are out of luck, as it will be a hardware limit. 4 GB is a special number for quite a lot of systems, including processor, the memory system on the motherboard and the OS. If one of them is limited to 4 GB, then you are out of luck.

  14. Two biggest things by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

    Are free hard drive space Hijack This! will show all processes loaded automatically by Windows- including services and processes that do not show up in the process list.
     
    Warning- this also shows device drivers, so "fix" items (remove them from loading) ONLY if you have some clue what they are.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    1. Re:Two biggest things by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Somehow my link didn't appear. Hijack This! should be able to be downloaded from http://www.download.com/Trend-Micro-HijackThis/3000-8022_4-10227353.html

      Hopefully one of those two will show up.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    2. Re:Two biggest things by hittman007 · · Score: 1

      HijackThis is a great tool, however, like the built in msconfig, there is much that loads that it does not show. I would recommend one of the many programs available that also show Drivers, DLL's and Winsock Providers...

      --
      --- When you start with the conclusion that you want, then throw out any facts that don't agree, is it true?
    3. Re:Two biggest things by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      Also, there are sites where you can upload your HijackThis! logfile to get information about the entries (with users ratings), especially the ones you don't know.

      However, I'd advice to first try to use the normal uninstall methods for fixing things like spyware, unneeded search bars, etc. and then use HijackThis!' "fix" commands.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  15. Firefox by tnk1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Actually, the first thing you should do is close Firefox. I find that once you aren't using 10 GB of RAM to keep your 25 tabs open, the computer magically stops swapping.

    1. Re:Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      24 tabs of pr0n I'm sure :) Those high-res pictures and flash movies eats up a lot of space :)

    2. Re:Firefox by powerspike · · Score: 1

      have to agree, since i upgraded to firefox 3, i've been having serious issues, like Firefox using 350megs of ram while only having one page loaded (no tabs!)

    3. Re:Firefox by borgasm · · Score: 0, Troll

      No joke, I did this last week, and started using Chrome. Strangely, it works ok.

      Firefox - sucks. Their stupid sqllite way they keep bookmarks eats my disk, and their dns lookups keep reverting to ipv6 even though it is disabled.

      IE - sucks. The flash plugin just eats memory until it crashes at about 600MB of usage.

    4. Re:Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Same here. I use the flashblocker addon to stop flashvertisements from running.

      Suggest using Sysinternals process explorer and
      Root kit revealer.

      If you're running an out of date version of Java you might have picked up a variant of Vundo. It hooks winlogon, lsass and explorer with random named dlls. Even loads in safe mode.

    5. Re:Firefox by ortholattice · · Score: 1

      This doesn't cure the problem, but seemed to help alot for me (at least subjectively; I don't have hard data, sorry). In about:config, reduce browser.sessionstore.max_tabs_undo from 10 to 1. I use the History's Recently Closed Tabs for the last closed tab quite often, when I notice something interesting just as I close the tab, but it is very rare that I've wanted to undo more than one tab, and certainly not 10.

    6. Re:Firefox by zbrewski · · Score: 1

      FlashBlock firefox plug-in! Since installing the FlashBlock, my CPU usage went to nil. Without Flash, I've lost almost no web -content-, and if/when you need it, i.e. youtube, one can enable it for that site only.

    7. Re:Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At work (no flash allowed) I'd notice FF take up an ungodly amount of RAM (300M+) for only a few tabs. Check out tip #3 here to force FF to clean up RAM when minimized:
      http://techgurls.blorc.com/2006/04/06/solving-firefox-memory-leak-problems-step-by-step-guide/

    8. Re:Firefox by onefriedrice · · Score: 1

      Very sadly, Firefox itself leaks more than I've seen the Flash plug-in leak... even FF3. Right now my FF3 process is using 20.38% of my 2Gig. One tab open, Flash isn't installed.

      --
      This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
    9. Re:Firefox by Trogre · · Score: 1

      I'm convinced that Firefox really needs a "kill plugins" button. I doubt the extensions api would have hooks for this so would probably need to be part of Firefox proper.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    10. Re:Firefox by Samah · · Score: 1

      Firefox 3 seems to be alright for me. I think at one stage I had about 60 tabs open and it wasn't using any more than about 150mb.

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    11. Re:Firefox by azakem · · Score: 1

      This is actually good advice. I've found that the flash plugin with firefox can go ape-shit and destroy performance (even if you close the tab) until you kill firefox to kill it.

      Yeah, I have noticed this same problem ever since I upgraded to version 3. Too bad I don't know enough to do anything about it. Blocking flash isn't an option for me, I'm addicted to random mindless flash games.

    12. Re:Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are they EVER going to fix the memory leak?

      My box runs 24/7, and either I kill Firefox every couple days, or it suicides. Damn silly way to run a flagship browser.

    13. Re:Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. If I leave firefox open for a period of time it kills my machine.

    14. Re:Firefox by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Load the flash games in a Prism app.

      As a side note, I have problems with my Flash plugin. It doesn't load Flash files at times. Other times, it will load a Flash movie, but the file will attempt to execute some JavaScript which the Flash plugin interprets as "open an IE window to execute 'javascript:someFunction();'" Since that function doesn't exist on a plain IE page, the window errors out but the plugin (undaunted) tries again. And again. And again. Until my system freezes up with 50 IE windows on the screen. For some reason, it doesn't get that Firefox is my default browser.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    15. Re:Firefox by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Flashblock.xpi for the win !

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    16. Re:Firefox by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Thus why I have said Web 2.0 is killing the internet.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    17. Re:Firefox by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Well, you can use Flashblock.xpi as it gives you a play button
      so you can use the flash if you "want" to use it.

      Very nice to have a choice vs. a screen of 7 simultaneous
      screaming moving flash ads like some billboard from hell.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    18. Re:Firefox by Malvineous · · Score: 1

      Well I have exactly 120 tabs open at the moment, and FF3 is using 1.6GB RAM. I really should start using bookmarks again...

    19. Re:Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is actually good advice. I've found that the flash plugin with firefox can go ape-shit and destroy performance (even if you close the tab) until you kill firefox to kill it.

      So try the FlashBlock add-on

    20. Re:Firefox by UID30 · · Score: 1

      Grab a copy of the StatusbarEx extension for Firefox and configure it to add current memory use to the status bar. Makes it very easy to see when it reaches critical mass and needs to be closed.

      --
      "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
  16. Second on the drive thing by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    But rather than just checking SMART, get the manufacturer's test program. All the HD makers have one, just get the one appropriate for yours. It's the sort of thing you boot from CD and let run for a few hours, but it is the way to go. SMART can report ok even when a drive is dying but it is extremely rare (though possible) that the manufacturer's diags give it a pass when it is dying.

    Check that, since a dying drive often makes things really slow (in part because it starts remapping lots of bad sectors).

    1. Re:Second on the drive thing by speeDDemon+(nw) · · Score: 5, Informative

      SMART has its uses, and a quick and easy check is to use the program 'speedfan' as this has a built in feature to read AND analyze (requires net connection) your HDD's smart information, By no means the be all and end all, but it is the quickest way I know to identify a failing hard drive.

    2. Re:Second on the drive thing by g0es · · Score: 5, Informative

      But rather than just checking SMART, get the manufacturer's test program. All the HD makers have one, just get the one appropriate for yours.

      Careful, some manufactures have utilities that just check SMART and don't actually do a test.

    3. Re:Second on the drive thing by athakur999 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've had a Linux box slow to a crawl for the same reason, so definitely good advice if you're experiencing random slowness regardless of what OS you're running. When I ran top I could see the "iowait" percentage was near 100% frequently and also saw many drive-related error messages in the system log.

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    4. Re:Second on the drive thing by Klaus_1250 · · Score: 4, Informative
      http://hddscan.com/

      Checks SMART, can perform all SMART test (e.g. offline), gives loads of information on the drives internals and it can scan the disk surface using the disk-controller chip only (e.g no data transfer over the cable). The latter is really useful to test the surface and speed of a USB-HD.

      --
      It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
    5. Re:Second on the drive thing by DennisZeMenace · · Score: 4, Informative

      What the manufacturer's test programs do is *precisely* run the SMART diagnostic test, so save yourself a CD-R. All they do is run the long self test. All SMART-friendly HDDs support the short (1 to 2 minutes) and long (1 to 2 hours) diagnostic tests, the latter doing an exhaustive sector scan. Boot a Linux live CD and type "sudo smartctl -t long /dev/sda", and voila.

      A damaged disk cannot pass that test, not unless something is utterly borked with the firmware (*cough* seagate *cough*).

    6. Re:Second on the drive thing by DiegoBravo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> Yeah, we all like Linux because it doesn't do annoying things like this

      That part of the original submission is misleading/stupid (why editors didn't cut it?.) My Ubuntu 7.10 box used to crawl (well, Compiz/Nautilus/Gnome/The-UI) after several hours of continued opening/closing windows. I never did investigate the issue (because laziness) and it was fixed just with a graphical logout/login (thus, I think restarting X.)

      Remember also that a lot of Linux boxes crawl when the updatedb is executed via Cron (this is the nearest thing to Windows' antiviruses in behavior.) As the parent writes, this have to do with I/O use, despite the assigned and irrelevant "nice" priorities.

    7. Re:Second on the drive thing by ChienAndalu · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wrong. Some do extended surface read-write-scans and offer options like disk erase etc. Like this here for example.

    8. Re:Second on the drive thing by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

      SMART doesn't always show errors before it dies. I had three hard drives that died without any SMART errors and my only indication of any problem was the "clacky-click" of the hard drive and the hard drive was slow as an snail. I contacted the manufacture and they replaced hard drive.
      However in my case, my Dell was recently acting slow for no good reason and the first post and solution was good for me by resetting the DMA.
      http://winhlp.com/node/10

    9. Re:Second on the drive thing by Jurily · · Score: 1

      Remember also that a lot of Linux boxes crawl when the updatedb is executed via Cron (this is the nearest thing to Windows' antiviruses in behavior.)

      Agreed. So much in fact, that whenever I hear the drive start some big whirring I haven't anticipated, I reflexively switch to a root console and do a "killall updatedb". The whirring stops immediately.

      Also, when I'm not lazy, I edit it out or reschedule it to 2 am every Sunday.

      IMHO a daemon that gets notified of file changes would be much more fun.

    10. Re:Second on the drive thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The parent is correct. The difference between Linux and Windows is not that Linux doesn't slow to a crawl on occasion. No, I've seen both Linux and Windows do this. The difference (as you've demonstrated) is that when Linux slows to a crawl, you've got at least some chance at finding and fixing the cause of the slowdown.

    11. Re:Second on the drive thing by sribe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Macintosh as well. I've seen an iMac slow to a crawl, with frequent SPODs (spinning pizza of death). All diagnostics, including SMART, reported fine. But a benchmark program reported disk IO throughput of 0.19mB/s. Replaced hard disk, things went back to normal. (BTW, I've seen the similar thing multiple times. I don't even always test the HD anymore...)

    12. Re:Second on the drive thing by alexborges · · Score: 1

      But rather than just checking SMART, get the manufacturer's test program...

      Those never work on servers. I can generaly diagnose hd faliures way before HP/IBM/DELL thingies start ringing that something is wrong.

      I dunno, perhaps is diferent on laptops and stuff.

      --
      NO SIG
    13. Re:Second on the drive thing by alexborges · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Nice is for nice proceses. Those that go all crazy on IO are brutes and should be turned into zombies by shooting in the head (-9)

      --
      NO SIG
    14. Re:Second on the drive thing by alexborges · · Score: 1

      We have that (tis how beagle et-al works), its just that updatedb has no knowledge of it and, methinks, would probably break something of POSIX if it did.

      --
      NO SIG
    15. Re:Second on the drive thing by sillybilly · · Score: 0

      I used to manually run updatedb every once in a while, and shut cron off completely. Like every few weeks, or when I thought what I was looking for was in recently downloaded/created stuff. Running updatedb every day is like a waste. Now I'm back to using Windows 2k, after spending a few months on XP. XP looks nicer than 2k, but the annoyances just add up. Linux I think topped out at Knoppix 3.4/3.6 with kernel 2.4 and KDE 3.5, and after that, near a time of a major gcc version switch, both for Knoppix and other major distros like Fedora, a whole lot of things started either crashing, or going downhill speedwise, or usability wise, or even kernel bloat wise. Kinda like Windows these days. Just very recently the linux kernel doubled in size. Bloat, bugs, less ergonomic interface. Remember how some linux boxes in the 90s were able to maintain years of uptime?

    16. Re:Second on the drive thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have got to change the name of that program HDD Scan for Windows 3.1 When will the vista version come out?

    17. Re:Second on the drive thing by bitrex · · Score: 1

      I wish I could find a SMART utility that supported diagnostics on drives on a RAID controller, as it is now with all the tools I'm aware of I have to backup the array and then disable RAID from the BIOS to get the software to acknowledge the drives.

    18. Re:Second on the drive thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the rest of us who have upgraded to Windows 95 or beyond?

    19. Re:Second on the drive thing by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``>> Yeah, we all like Linux because it doesn't do annoying things like this

      That part of the original submission is misleading/stupid (why editors didn't cut it?.) My Ubuntu 7.10 box used to crawl (well, Compiz/Nautilus/Gnome/The-UI) after several hours of continued opening/closing windows. I never did investigate the issue (because laziness) and it was fixed just with a graphical logout/login (thus, I think restarting X.)''

      That happens to me when I have Firefox open. So I use Konqueror, unless I really must use Firefox.

      Another reason why my system gets slow is filesystem-intensive things. I have a couple of cron jobs that run find across large directories. These can easily ramp up the load average to over 6 (on a single CPU machine). Normally, the system stays perfectly responsive through this, but if something happens to have been swapped out (rare, unless I have Firefox open), it can take a long time to get it swapped in again.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    20. Re:Second on the drive thing by DennisZeMenace · · Score: 4, Informative
      You may want to try this with a live Linux USB key or CD. It varies based on the Hw RAID controller, but most of the time the physical disks that are part of the RAID are visible in Linux (for example with a LSI HW Raid controller). Not as block devices (/dev/sda, ...), but as generic SCSI devices (/dev/sg0, /dev/sg1). It is possible to run the smartctl tool on those directly.

      SMART provides a lot of data, some of which is crap :-) but some of which is very useful. In particular, the error log:

      # smartctl -l error /dev/sg0

      Any disk with a non-empty error log you should consider replacing. Also, always run the short diagnostic tests:

      # smartctl -t short /dev/sg0
      # [wait 2 minutes]
      # smartctl -l selftest /dev/sg0

    21. Re:Second on the drive thing by therufus · · Score: 1

      Valid point, but if you have a Samsung hard drive, you're better off using Western Digital, Seagate or IBM hard drive tests. I've tested hundreds of Samsung hard drives on different computers with the Samsung hard drive test tool and over 90% of the time, the test gets to 3% and passes the drive regardless. This has been the situation with working and dead drives.

      --
      You moved your mouse. Please restart Windows for changes to take effect.
    22. Re:Second on the drive thing by Kvasio · · Score: 1

      I've had too many HDDs not to know that every manufacturer has had his better and worse series and years. I'd say in early 1990s WD was the best choice; around 2000 - IBM, later Seagate.

      There are some common problems
      In 2001 IBM ahd superb reputation with 15Gb and 20GB drives, until they released 30GB drives that all developed problems after few weeks.
      And now some of you might have Seagate's 500gb bricks ...

      However, if you're out of luck, your drive may fail very quickly even if it comes from the "good series".

    23. Re:Second on the drive thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember also that a lot of Linux boxes crawl when the updatedb is executed via Cron

      Indeed, cron & co suck. I hate it when on my EEE netbook suddenly cron or apt-cache-update fires up, especially when you're in power-save mode. Who uses locate (updatedb) anyway? Anyway, you can disable cron quite easily.

    24. Re:Second on the drive thing by jovetoo · · Score: 1

      I think it would require listening to changes on every directory on the filesystem with an active daemon. You could keep the database up-to-date like that, but I can assure you lots of overhead when doing file manipulations. (compiling, unzipping...).

      I'm unsure what you mean with breaking something of POSIX, but it would mostly likely ruin your "computing experience".

    25. Re:Second on the drive thing by rhfixer · · Score: 1

      What about this?

      --
      Hi.
    26. Re:Second on the drive thing by Anonymuous+Coward · · Score: 1
      Why don't you just disable the damn thing ?

      locate(1) is absolutely worthless IMHO. It's one of that old stupid hacks that should have replaced LONG ago with something better.

    27. Re:Second on the drive thing by mike2R · · Score: 1

      ll SMART-friendly HDDs support the short (1 to 2 minutes) and long (1 to 2 hours) diagnostic tests, the latter doing an exhaustive sector scan.

      I don't suppose you or anyone knows what the SMART status means exactly in Mac OS X?

      When you open disk utility and select a physical volume you see SMART status: verified, there isn't any wait. There is a button on the same screen to "verify" the disk, not sure how or if that relates to the SMART status.

      The rule of thumb I've come up with is if it says anything apart from verified there, you are close to a failed disk. Seeing "verified" though doesn't in any way guarantee a healthy disk. Would be useful to know more..

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    28. Re:Second on the drive thing by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      However, it'd be really nice if top could also tell me how much I/O a process uses. Sometimes it's not updatedb/mdworker (the OS X/Spotlight equivalent) and the culprit becomes hard to track down as there's no easy statistic for which process is hammering the HDD the most.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    29. Re:Second on the drive thing by NotNormal · · Score: 1

      /dev/sda is USUALLY the primary drive if you're using SATA, but it doesn't have to be. If you're still running a PATA drive it'll probably be /dev/hda. However you should be able to figure it out from the drive icons on the desktop.

      --
      ~ Normality is merely the achievement of the mediocre...
    30. Re:Second on the drive thing by DiegoBravo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh please AC... The parent is wrong, because he didn't say what you're saying. Now:

      1) Like in the Linux case, some people indeed can analyze and find the cause of the slowdown (yes, there are some Windows experts)
      2) Would Linux users install the same background trash like Win users (and if Linux developers would provide it) you'd have a really difficult time in the Linux investigation.

      Of course you will be modded high here because someway you managed to defend the mighty Linux OS...

    31. Re:Second on the drive thing by vhfer · · Score: 1
      I use 3Ware raid controllers and SMART can "look through" the controller to the individual drives and run tests, read back the logs, etc. There's some fussiness at first setting it up (tell smart that the drive is type 3ware,n where n is the disk number, and refer to it as /dev/twe1, twe2, etc for SMART purposes) but it's not hard.

      I have my 8506 controller's drives all getting short tests every night and all getting long tests early AM every Sunday morning.

      I'm a big believer in the Smart tools and I'm pretty sure I've headed off major data loss twice now on drives that started to fail and were replaced before going completely sideways. Not to mention the box of 80gb drives I bought at a swap a few years ago for about $10 a drive. The few that failed SMART out of the box became paperweights and test/temporary drives, even though they seem to work. A few of the SMART failure went toes-up a short time later. The ones that passed are still humming along happily.

    32. Re:Second on the drive thing by vhfer · · Score: 2, Informative
      SMART is SMART, platform independent. Your OS's way of sending SMART commands to the drive and getting the results back may vary; the venerable smartctl on the command line is the one I'm most familiar with.

      In PC's, some of the BIOSs have an option to enable SMART. Most of them simply send the "-a on" command to enable the drives SMART processes. Many also do a "-H" for a basic health check of the drive, and squawk at you during the post if it fails. I'm wondering if the mac does something very similar. If so, a delay of about a second or maybe less is about right.

      Use of smartctl -h /dev/sda is a good measure of how the drive is, but it's very basic. Then again, it sure beats a poke in the eye with a sharp SIMM. Or a drive that dies without any warning.

    33. Re:Second on the drive thing by mike2R · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that, much appreciated.

      --
      This sig all sigs devours
    34. Re:Second on the drive thing by pwizard2 · · Score: 1

      locate(1) is absolutely worthless IMHO. It's one of that old stupid hacks that should have replaced LONG ago with something better.

      I disagree. Locate is one of my favorite search utilities because it is so fast and I can pipe the results right into grep to find a specific file instead of having to browse the entire list. If updatedb bothers you, just change the cron job to run at 12:00 AM or any other time when the computer isn't doing anything.

      --
      "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
    35. Re:Second on the drive thing by alexborges · · Score: 1

      True, true...

      And about the posix thing, i dunno, but since locate et-al are (methinks) posix defined, perhaps changing the behaviour of updatedb would break something of the standard. Im not sure how all other unices handle that, but I remember BSD having a similar way to work.

      --
      NO SIG
    36. Re:Second on the drive thing by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      The likely cause of the I/O slowdown you describe in Ubuntu is likely due to a well-known kernel bug which has been present since at least 2.6.18. If you were cutting your teeth with Ubuntu 7.10 chances are you don't know better, but Linux never used to do nonsense like this. I've run run right up to the ceiling of RAM use (and dipping into swap, even) while doing things like compiling and the UI is still responsive.

      That said, X does tend to get a bit sluggish after a couple weeks. It's gotten better recently, however.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    37. Re:Second on the drive thing by mathew7 · · Score: 1

      If you have a true HW RAID then it's utility should give you access to SMART statistics.
      But since most RAIDs in less than $10.000 computers are software RAID, they just "replace" the 2 drives with 1. So there is not direct access to the drives because of reliability. And since they are CHEAP solutions, they don't bother with utilities for checking the drives. After all, SMART is a standars set of commands and responses which any utility can use them (not only HDD-vendor-specific)

    38. Re:Second on the drive thing by dermoth666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      'nice' does not affect IO, only process scheduling.

      The CFQ scheduler have IO classes with priorities that can be set with 'ionice'. Be sure to use a recent kernel though, I've seen nasty bugs in 2.5.25.

      Depending on the typical load type even the IDLE class might be worse than the Deadline or Anticipatory schedulers (they do not support classes even if you can set them) so testing is the key, though for desktops CFQ+ionice should be best in most cases.

    39. Re:Second on the drive thing by dermoth666 · · Score: 1

      Err I meant before 2.6.25, the < didn't catch.

    40. Re:Second on the drive thing by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Use iotop

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    41. Re:Second on the drive thing by manicalic · · Score: 1

      If you have a drive in PIO mode, you get very high CPU usage by DPC process in ProcessExplorer. My unlucky desktop had something else that occasionally triggered DPC choke, but it disappeared after reboot. I don't know what that is except that it has something to do with my MB. Just be sure you are running with admin rights.

      It may very well be something with your hardware, like chipset/CPU problem. Oh, just remembered - some cases of "slow computer" were caused by broken cooling/dust and CPU engaging thermal throttling. I know Everest can check that (Tools -> System Stability Test graphs).
      [OT]Can anyone point me to other (small/easily portable) open/free program that can do that? [/OT]

      And have in mind, that if you download updates for Windows Defender, it silently scans your hard drive every month.
      Or have you lately installed some new indexig software?

    42. Re:Second on the drive thing by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      And another problem already solved by the time it crops up. That's why *nix rocks.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    43. Re:Second on the drive thing by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

      So *that's* what's been going on. I rather thought that things hadn't been so sluggish in the past, but with so many different factors (new versions for hardware, kernel, DE, etc etc) I really wasn't sure what was up. Thanks for the clue!

      I don't suppose you happen to have a link to the bug posting? I'd love to read up on it and see what kind of progress might be in the works.

      Cheers,

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
    44. Re:Second on the drive thing by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      No telling when it'll be fixed; I looked about for half an hour or so the other day to try to find current efforts to fix it, but could find nothing definitive. There have been numerous bug reports which seem to all come back to the same I/O problem, so I can't provide a specific/definitive one, but here are two as they pertain to Ubuntu:

      https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.22/+bug/131094
      https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1

      There was a frontpage post on slashdot about the bug being discovered about a week or so ago as well, FWIW.

      I did update Ubuntu (8.10) shortly ago, and while there was no kernel upgrade in the update in the apt-get, I/O performance does appear to be marginally improved after the reboot today (though that might simply be X behaving better after a restart).

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    45. Re:Second on the drive thing by The+Real+Tachyon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, SMART is quite ironically named given it isn't.

  17. safe mode by madcat2c · · Score: 4, Informative

    Run for a while in safe mode and see if the problem persist. If it doesn't, then its probably a service gone haywire. Most likely candidates are printer services, anti virus services, scanner services.

    1. Re:safe mode by atraintocry · · Score: 2, Informative

      If it is a service going haywire, it'll usually show up in the event log.

      People have said it a few times, but it needs to be repeated 20 more. Check the event viewer!

    2. Re:safe mode by madcat2c · · Score: 1

      you would think, but if the service just saps resources, but doesnt fail, it might not show in event viewer.

  18. The best way to accelerate a slow Windows. by Faryshta · · Score: 5, Funny

    9.8 m/s^2 Sorry, it just flip out.

    1. Re:The best way to accelerate a slow Windows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should do something about that lifp.

  19. Some ideas by mewsenews · · Score: 0

    Is there a bunch of hard drive activity during the "spikes"? That could help diagnosis.

    General tips:

    Reboot the machine. (Yeah, yeah)
    Try a different (better?) anti-virus package.

    If all else fails, try doing a system restore to a point *before* your machine started behaving strangely.

  20. 1. run task manager by circletimessquare · · Score: 1, Informative

    2. look at processes tab

    3. go view, select columns, put in all columns

    4. now click on the title of each column, which will sort ascending/ descending, and analyze each column by itself, one at a time

    5. look especially for processes that are doing heavy cpu or heavy i/o, or other bizarre exotic behaviors, like high thread count

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:1. run task manager by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Oh, no, Mr. Bill!"

      My Windows machine is infected with the System Idle Process Botnet!

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:1. run task manager by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

      And when it turns out to be svchost.exe, send a nasty email to Balmer.

      I've seen systems start crawling on stupid windows background crap that only shows up in the process tab as "System Idle Process."

      Compared to using ps or top, I'm not a fan of the scanty process tools in windows. The only decent one is perfmon; it's "Performance" under "Administrative Tools."

      Open it up, go down to the bottom, right click on the little window under the graph and choose "add counters." Go ahead and add them all, and start the monitor.

      Okay, now that your brain is bleeding, stop it, remove all the counters, and actually read the names and add only the ones you think you need.

      Pretty much everything that's going on in the system is measured there, so you can get a pretty good idea of what the problem is, and that may point you in the direction of solving it.

      Just as an fyi: if you're dumping to a log, make sure you have an idea of how much space it's eating up. A big perf log can eat up your whole harddrive if you leave it running.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:1. run task manager by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      I tried, but every time I try to kill taskmgr.exe, my processes window closes and I have to restart it. Somebody ought to fix that major annoyance.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    4. Re:1. run task manager by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've seen systems start crawling on stupid windows background crap that only shows up in the process tab as "System Idle Process."

      System Idle Process cannot make system crawl by definition - it's not even a process, it's just the line that shows how much of your CPU is not being utilized at all.

      Thing is, when the system is crawling, it needs not be CPU. Random HDD reads/writes by one process can also kill performance for the entire system very fast, and yet the process will still show up as using 1-2% CPU time in Task Manager. You can change it to show the columns for I/O though and look there.

    5. Re:1. run task manager by powerspike · · Score: 1

      quick install some free screensavers!

    6. Re:1. run task manager by jaxtherat · · Score: 1

      EPIC_FAIL.exe

      --
      http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
    7. Re:1. run task manager by seeker6182000 · · Score: 1

      DPC and ISR time is chnaged against the Idle Process for resource accounting. So CPU usage by this process means usage by deffered Procedure Calls or interrupt service routines (devices). The Windows Performance Toolkit can be used to understand what is happening. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc305187.aspx

    8. Re:1. run task manager by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      I was going to be snarky, but your line about changing the columns made me scratch my head and actually LOOK at the options for the first time in a decade, and I'll be goddamned if there isn't a way to add every bit of data I've ever wanted to the stupid little process tab.

      Thanks a bunch, that's the coolest thing I've learned about windows in a couple of years at least. (Not my primary OS, obviously, but still damn useful to know)

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    9. Re:1. run task manager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's a very good tip right there. I'm kind of mystified by the 20 different options under I/O. would you be willing to suggest a few to keep an eye on?

    10. Re:1. run task manager by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Myself, I just enable "I/O read bytes" and "I/O write bytes" columns. Those are still for the entire process life, and what would be really handy for diagnosing the issues described in this thread is something like "I/O reads in last N minutes". But alas that's not there, so you just have to look at the total bytes count and see the process for which it's changing really fast.

    11. Re:1. run task manager by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      Oh you laugh now, but it appears that John C. Dvorak got caught on this one. The asshat.

      On Not Getting It

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    12. Re:1. run task manager by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      Just be careful when looking at the columns that refer to memory. Some of them are a bit misleading. I detail a few of them in an article I wrote a while ago (it was mainly for my own reference).

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    13. Re:1. run task manager by DarkEmpath · · Score: 1
      When I read that line about the "System Idle Process", I thought he was trying to be funny.

      When I hit Ctrl-Alt-Delete, I see that the System Idle Process is hogging all the resources and chewing up 95 percent of the processor's cycles. Doing what? Doing nothing?
      - John C. Dvorak, PC mag, 29th Sept, 2003

      Seriously, he said that:
      http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1334678,00.asp

    14. Re:1. run task manager by howardholton · · Score: 1

      According to Microsoft System Idle Process does obscure hardware related utilization - for instance without an offloading NIC one bit of network traffic utilizes 1 Mhz of CPU - may not seem like a lot, but if you max out your 1Gb NIC and your system seems slow you may know why (not to mention the disk thrashing and system overhead on an IDE or SATA system - as opposed to a SCSI system where the controller has processing on the controller.

      --
      Everyone is Ignorant, just in different subjects.
  21. CHKDSK /F by pg--az · · Score: 1

    Several times I have restored speed using Chkdsk, it's an easy thing to try anyway.

    1. Re:CHKDSK /F by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      Did you do that before or after taking out the power cable to shake out the loose electrons?

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  22. Answer: by tiananmen+tank+man · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Well, I think you know the answer to that."

    1. Re:Answer: by ciaohound · · Score: 5, Funny

      From story to meme in under four hours? That's got to be a slashdot record!

      --
      Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
    2. Re:Answer: by zoefff · · Score: 1

      not until it is re-used until the originated story is forgotten or a reference has been placed in the FAQ.

    3. Re:Answer: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's got to be a slashdot record!

      "Well, I think you know the answer to that."

    4. Re:Answer: by kiyoshigawa · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that was about the turnaround time for "Idle is pants" as well.

      --
      So sayeth Tim.
  23. CPU issues? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I've had this happen as well, although under somewhat different circumstances. I've always believed it to be windows doing something funky with the processor; somehow winding it down a bit. I know current processors are capable of this, so I always suspected it was windows doing something like that for some unknown reason.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  24. FinallyFast.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atd8dowrbNI

  25. My check list by CormacJ · · Score: 3, Informative

    My usual check list for this is:

    1) Check the hard drive, SMART, or manufacturer diagnostics
    2) Get the manufacturer diagnostics, and run a full hardware validation
    3) If all is clean, check for things recently updated - a bad update may be clogging things
    4) Check your anti-virus/anti-spyware software. Sometimes they can switch into extra-paranoid mode and slow things down horribly.

  26. CCleaner by kilraid · · Score: 1

    Try CCleaner. Some of my friends recommended it. One of them noticed a speedup after running it.

  27. The Case of the Slow System by Fast+Thick+Pants · · Score: 5, Informative

    Mark Russinovich has an enlightening blog entry called The Case of the Slow System that might serve as an example of how, if you are are one of the planet's top 10 Windows experts, you can, with persistence, luck, and the proper tools, solve one of the obscure problems that are slowing down your wife's computer. This particular case pertains to Vista, but the general techniques are applicable to XP as well.

    1. Re:The Case of the Slow System by pbhj · · Score: 5, Funny

      Has Mark Russinovich's wife tried turning it off and on again?

    2. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was very keen to fix her PC in case she did try to turn it off for him.....

    3. Re:The Case of the Slow System by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      And the answer in Mark's case, unfortunately, was "buggy flash player from Adobe and buggy DVD-mastering software from Roxio".

      This seems like a problem that can't be solved for any operating system.

    4. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Arterion · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link. All he's really doing is using Process Explorer to troubleshoot things. Any good Windows administrator ought to be similarly familiar with Process Explorer.

      I've been trying to learn more about it myself, and seeing it used in a real-world example like that was interesting.

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
    5. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can simplify those steps greatly by uninstalling the offending software - in that article Mark essentially reconfigures Roxio in a complicated way rather than just getting rid of it.

    6. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't help that the windows scheduler has a slightly odd concept of priorities. (It seems like a higher-priority process can very easily completely starve everything with a lower priority, which is a bit harsh.)

      Changing to a more UNIX-ish priority system where lower-priority processes still get a reasonable amount of time would greatly improve how responsible the system felt under that kind of load.

    7. Re:The Case of the Slow System by adisakp · · Score: 1

      FWIW, his wife's computer had two problems and they basically boiled down to this: Roxio and Flash. One problem he solved and the other he was unable to address.

      Each one was pegging out a core in a dual-core machine totally bogging it down. He mucked around to disable the unnecessary AVI demux filter installed by Roxio (which is a bloated piece of junk anyhow) but he was never able to figure out why Flash was going crazy so he just left that broken on her machine and figured that with two cores, if one core is pegged at 100% due to a borked app, you can still get stuff done.

      It's so easy to break or degrade the performance of a Windows Machine. However, completely fixing performance issue on a Windows Machine is *HARD* (Darn Near Impossible) -- even for one of the smartest guys at Microsoft who has spent his career working deep inside Windows System Internals.

      My solution is to keep my system as clean as possible and I run multiple VM's on top of it for stuff that's not as clean. I use VMWare and VirtualBox -- VirtualBox is great for the way it integrates windows from the guest into the host and VMWare is good for debugging or if you need to work with snapshots.

    8. Re:The Case of the Slow System by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      And the answer in Mark's case, unfortunately, was "buggy flash player from Adobe and buggy DVD-mastering software from Roxio".

      This seems like a problem that can't be solved for any closed source operating system.

      Corrected that for you!

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    9. Re:The Case of the Slow System by spoco2 · · Score: 1

      That was interesting except:
      1) Read like a giant ad for the software he wrote (process Explorer)
      &
      2) He's a windows zealot... WHO uses Windows Live Search to look up things? Any sane person goes and googles something, he window-live-searches.

      Madness

    10. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Under windows if you have a multi-core proc you can also run a
      core controller app that limits hogs to one core, etc etc.

      Set it up according to your need.

      CPU control is one of them out there.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    11. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Fast+Thick+Pants · · Score: 1

      WHO uses Windows Live Search to look up things? Any sane person goes and googles something, he window-live-searches.

      I actually took this as a bit of a jab at the Microsoftening of the once-beloved Sysinternals toolset. Process Explorer, or whatever it was called back then, used to have "Google..." in the context menu to do a quick query on a process, but I think after Microsoft took over it got changed to "Windows Live Search", which is just impossible to use as a verb with a straight face. In later releases it's been sanitized to "Search Online." and uses your default search provider.

      By far the most egregious change was the addition of the EULA dialog that requires a yes click per user per program (there are over 70 programs). Even the command-line-only utilities were suddenly saddled with a GUI EULA dialog, breaking many a script.

      Mark deserves every penny he's getting out of them, but it's still sad to see Microsoft so cluelessly ruining what made the Sysinternals tools so pleasant -- all function, no bullshit.

    12. Re:The Case of the Slow System by giuntag · · Score: 1

      100% agree. Install filemon,diskmon,regmon,portmon and off you go. Install Process explorer as replacement for the rask manager. Read MR's blog to learn how the big boys go at it. Look for hints at the event viewer: any suspicious/recurring alert in there?

    13. Re:The Case of the Slow System by aunt+edna · · Score: 1

      Irony. Can't open that link: very slow -- it's been slash-dotted.

    14. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit,

      the problem is not in the operating system but in the closed-source application.

      From my personal experience : if there is an issue in the nvidia-driver (binary blob) there is NOTHING you can do about it regardless of the openness of Ubuntu

    15. Re:The Case of the Slow System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is not Reiser

    16. Re:The Case of the Slow System by jafac · · Score: 1

      Mark has to bow to his paymaster, and talk about "degraded windows experience" to justify not uninstalling software or disabling flash.

      This has been standard MS marketing justification for BLOAT for a decade and a half. It's just a different mindset.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  28. First guess: disk failing by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1
    If you haven't installed / loaded any new software, I suspect impending hardware failure.

    My first guess would be a disk starting to fail and the drive is attempting to re-read/write (and possibly remap) the sectors. Check your event log, look at and/or listen to the drive to check for retry attempts.

    If you've added a new system to the network be sure there's no IP conflict.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  29. Updates by Thelasko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unfortunately, software companies all tend to schedule their updates to download/install at about the same time. Perhaps your anti-virus software, or even Windows itself, is running a live-update.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  30. bad fan? by Monoman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some systems will slow down the CPU if it gets too hot. Check the fans and the temp in the CMOS if it can report it.

    --
    Keep the Classic Slashdot.
    1. Re:bad fan? by mastershake82 · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up.

      I've seen this too many times, especially in laptops. A failed fan or detached heatsink will do it on desktops and laptops, but also a broken heatpipe on laptops.

      If the user uses their laptop on a cushion or something that cuts off air flow, it will get so hot that it can completely evaporate the liquid in the heatpipe and then the processors gets almost no cooling and the heatpipe permanently ceases to function. A good test is to use the laptop fro something taxing, then check if you feel warm air coming out of the laptop exhaust or not. Warm = functioning heatpipe, cool/room temp = broken heatpipe. No air = malfunctioning fan, lol.

      Also check the fins on the exhaust, getting clogged up with dust can lessen the heat dissipation and cause the processor to enter the slow failsafe state.

      Most laptop manufacturers provide detailed disassembly diagrams for their laptops, and you can commonly find a replacement heatpipe for less than $20, even you've only ever worked on desktops, most laptops aren't that difficult to work on. Give it a shot if it's out of warranty.

    2. Re:bad fan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And check not only that the fans are spinning, but that the heatsinks aren't clogged with dust. I once diagnosed a friends machine and it was so clogged the CPU had underclocked from 2GHz to something like 500 or 700MHz even though the fans were still spinning. CMOS is usually going to make such a problem obvious, but sometimes the machine has to be under load to see the problem clearly.

      Obviously there are plenty of other options discussed in the other threads, but if you are going to check this one out, I recommend SpeedFan. Just be aware that sensors can be a bit wonky sometimes (don't assume immediately that the readings are valid -- check how they vary with and without load).

    3. Re:bad fan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some systems will slow down the CPU if it gets too hot. Check the fans and the temp in the CMOS if it can report it.

      Seconded, clean the gunk stuck in the heatsink under the CPU fan, and while you're at it check / clean all other fans / heatsinks too.

    4. Re:bad fan? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I've found this with my laptop in my office. My office was built in the back of the server room. When they built it, they didn't insulate the floors properly and my door is right near a giant AC unit. Needless to say, my office can be freezing. (As in "fingers getting numb" freezing.) I was given a space heater to keep me warm in my office. I'll sometimes place it under my desk to warm my legs as I code. When I do that, though, the heater heats the underside of my desk. Right under where my laptop is. My laptop (being a heat producer itself), heats the top of the desk. I've noticed more random freeze-ups during this time and am convinced that the "above-below" heating means less heat can move away from the laptop and thus means the CPU heats up more. (I should test this out with a CPU temperature monitor one day.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    5. Re:bad fan? by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Also if the person sets the PC on the floor/carpet the fans act like
      a vacuum cleaner and suck carpet fuzz and pet hair into the CPU fan
      and everywhere else.

      There are some CPU temp monitor apps out there you can install to
      chk for CPU overheat.

      Most modern systems should have some kind of alert of over heat as well.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    6. Re:bad fan? by borphos · · Score: 1

      When your CPU overheats the clock multiplier decreases and the voltage drops. This makes your CPU temporarily slower, but it still has the same amount of work to do. This would make all of the processes spike, but instead of them doing more, they are doing the same ammount on a temorarily slower CPU. The spikes in this case should appear to oscillate as the CPU will cool below the throttling threshold, return to full speed, heat back up, then compensate by dropping down again. The fan may not even be dead. It's entirely possible that a quick snort from a can of air could fix your problem. Hope this helps

    7. Re:bad fan? by KevinColyer · · Score: 1

      I recently solved a performance problem like this on a Pentium IV laptop. The give-away issue was the helicopter-like noise the cooling fans were making.

      P IV's run hot, and some laptops have the fabulous cooling design that sucks cold air (and dust etc) from under the laptop to cool the processor. That dust sticks to the copper heatsinks and reduces their cooling capacity drasticly after a year or two.

      The easy solution was to stick a vacuum cleaner on the vents. This worked actually but the more permanent solution was to remove the heatsink and clean that.

      After cleaning the computer ran silently and at a vastly improved speed. It seemed the CPU throttled down for safety when it was overheating. After cleaning performance was restored.

      I vacuum a lot of PC and heatsinks!

  31. Turn off indexing by huckamania · · Score: 2, Informative

    Indexing really slows things down. Also, check you AV and Spyware settings and think about turning off any real-time file monitoring. Indexing plus real time file monitoring equals slowness. Finally, run 'msconfig' and check what is starting up at runtime. If you don't know what it is, get rid of it. You can always add it back.

    I once looked at a coworkers system and he had processes starting up at runtime that were called, I kid you not, A, B and blank (no name at all). Removing those restored his system.

  32. Check heatsinks and fans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Check the reported hardware (CPU...) temperatures, run the SMART tests on your hard drives and then open the case and check if all the heatsinks are where they should be and how warm they are to the touch. Also check if all the fans are operational. Take the opportunity to clear out the dust from the fans and your PSU. I've seen a lot of sudden slowdowns like that (I work as a tech in a datacenter) and most were hardware related. In one case the heatsink got unglued off of the northbridge.

    1. Re:Check heatsinks and fans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to suggest this.

      With modern computers becoming more and more able to cope with stupid issues, it's quite likely that this slowness you're experiencing today is the constant BSOD of yesteryear.

      On the up side, you're not losing any work :)

  33. Solution: add hardware by noidentity · · Score: 1

    Or could this just be some random application error that's causing bad behavior? I've encountered this a few times with Windows PCs, but the solution has always been to just add more hardware.

    I believe they make a piece of hardware that's a round disc with something odd name like "Ubuntu". Adding that should fix this problem for good.

  34. Take a very close look by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use Winternal's Process Monitor (formerly Filemon + Regmon) to see what's doing what.

    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896645.aspx

    I just had this problem today, turned out to be a backup app (MozyHome). Worked like a charm.

  35. EASY ANSWER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remove your primary hard drive. Take a spare hard drive that you know works. Reinstall your OS on the new hard drive. If it is still slow it is a hardware problem (cpu/memory etc).

    Otherwise it is a HD/OS(rootkit/malware) problem.

    The advantage of this method, is... you can still put your old hard drive back in and everything will be back to the way it was before you started hardware troubleshooting.

    1. Re:EASY ANSWER by whtmarker · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. I had a problem like this once.

      I later found out it was a dustclogged cpufan. My CPU was overheating... but my Pentium 4, instead of shutting off, was just running at a lower clockspeed to produce less heat.

    2. Re:EASY ANSWER by nikolag · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I do not see this as easy when You deal with a bunch of RAID drives or similar setup, but booting something small (COUGH deamn small linux COUGH some disk test/recovery distribution) from CD and running it straight in memory may also help a lot in diagnosing a problem.

      Just last week we had a 22 out of 22 Windows in one network shutting down network processes for no apparent reason, without any errors in log, without any HDD problems. After thorough search it seems somebody infected them with some kind of rootkit, but three AV programs could not weed it out. Only reinstalation helped.

      --
      Doing a good job is like spilling coffee on a dark suit, you feel warm all over, but nobody notices.
    3. Re:EASY ANSWER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After thorough search it seems somebody infected them with some kind of rootkit, but three AV programs could not weed it out.

      Most antivirus software will scan for & prevent infections, but once something gets on the computer can't remove them for crap.

      As a side note, make sure you scan your USB memory sticks.

    4. Re:EASY ANSWER by domatic · · Score: 1

      Most antivirus software will scan for & prevent infections, but once something gets on the computer can't remove them for crap.

      I have a trick that often helps with that. The problem is that malware actively fights removal as that douchebag who was interviewed last week admitted. So I boot the machine with a TRK livecd which has a handy option to detect and smb share any fat and ntfs filesystems it can find on the machine. I then map those drives on another machine with removal tools and scan them. TRK has ClamAV so I update the defs and run scans in a few strategic places like the system32 directory.

      Since the malware files are latent they can only be obfuscated to elude the scanners, they can't actively resist. Offline scanning will often kick an infection in the balls hard enough that I can get removal tools running on the host directly and get the registry and so-forth cleaned up.

    5. Re:EASY ANSWER by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Try these AV programs next time you get an ugly virii:

      1) Clam AV for Windows ( highest success rate scanner per reviews )
      2) NOD
      3) Kapersky
      4) F-protect

      If it gets past these then it is either a custom, or new one.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    6. Re:EASY ANSWER by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      The reason they have trouble getting them off is they hide in
      system restore and elsewhere.

      In this instance turn off system restore, and schedule a pre-OS
      scan and 99% of the time it nails it.

      Also some ppl take the drive out, stick it in a external enclosure
      and hook it up to a Linux box that can read ntfs, and use
      Clam AV to scan it.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  36. Thermal Paste replacement by Ylian · · Score: 1

    Two of my friends computers where very slows, but could not find any problem with them. After 2 to 3 years of operation, both computers needed to have new thermal paste between the CPU & heat sink. In both cases, this worked like magic. Both computers would have very slow boot times and the CPU fan was on all the time. The old thermal paste was dried up and near solid/powder.

  37. WTF: a new low for slashdot? by citylivin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    slashdot: Individual personalized tech support?

    wtf kind of article is this?

    fucking take it to a shop if you cant handle reinstalling windows

    --
    As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    1. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by rogue303 · · Score: 1

      What's more interesting is that whilst there are a few, the deluge of "install linux, grow a beard" hasn't started yet. Maybe all the linux nerds are still in bed sleeping.

    2. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by pla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      slashdot: Individual personalized tech support?

      Ignoring your blatant troll, I think most of us who use Windows, whether by choice or at work, have experienced exactly what the FP author describes.

      Personally, I keep Process Explorer permanently open, and have noticed times when XP will just sit there and refuse to respond despite literally nothing using up a significant amount of CPU, RAM, or I/O. And not just for a second or two of lag, but well over a minute of completely refusing to respond. The mouse still moves, and most already-running programs will work, if somewhat sluggishly, but try to open a new program or even get a right-click menu, and you may as well go get coffee.

      If someone knows a trick to fix this, I have no doubt we'd all love to hear it.


      And for those curious, my HDD remains in DMA-5 mode, it doesn't matter whether or not I have an active network connection, the pagefile hasn't started growing rapidly, and I feel fairly confident that I have no viruses, spyware, or even any of the annoying auto-startups like Quicktime, the Java updater, or Acrotray.

    3. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a chance to laugh at all the Windows "experts" who will solve this problem by reformatting the hard disk and re-installing Windows, or convince themselves that it's now much faster after defragging the hard dick.

      Appropriately, the captcha was "dummies".

    4. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by ArbiterShadow · · Score: 1

      Defragging the "hard dick"? Given the context, I can't tell if that's a typo or not. :/

    5. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      Explorer will often go off to the network for various reasons and lock up the task bar if the remote host doesn't exist or won't let you login.

      I don't have an exhaustive list of things to look for, but you can start by checking for any shortcuts in your start menu / quick launch that have their icon on the network and clear out your nethood folder.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    6. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Some ppl are not as tech savvy as others.

      So you want to bash them for wanting to learn how to get better
      at doing for themselves.

      It is not possible for all ppl to know all things, and never
      ask questions of another to learn it all.

      Not going to happen.

      It would be like going to 4 yrs of college and not asking questions.

      He doesn't want to reinstall, he wants to learn how to
      weild his E-sword against the E-penis's on Intarwebs.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    7. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by rts008 · · Score: 1

      No, we're here...laughing while we peruse /. while still getting our work done on our speedy *nix machines. :-)

      These 'My Windows PC is Slow!!, what can I do?' type articles are like reading the funny papers....not to taken seriously, just amusing and entertaining.

      This fiasco has been going on for years, just like a soap opera. Nothing really ever changes, except the name of the OS to protect the guilty. (my apologies to the Dragnet TV series)

      Besides, why kick the guy when he's already down? It's not important enough to me anymore to care about rubbing his nose in it.

      Like an old saying I've heard many times: 'you've made your bed, now lie in it'.

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    8. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by robertlagrant · · Score: 1

      Are you joking? Howabout we solve the problem so we don't have to resort to such an idiotic solution.

    9. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by nobodylocalhost · · Score: 1

      yea, remove .net and jre

      --
      Where is the "Ignorant" mod tag?
    10. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Explorer will often go off to the network for various reasons and lock up the task bar if the remote host doesn't exist or won't let you login.

      Going into Folder Options, and finding the "Launch Explorer Windows in a seperate process" helps this one a lot. You'll still have Explorer windows randomly stop responding for minutes at a time, but it won't affect the other windows or things like the taskbar. Apparently turning this on uses more resources though, so you may not want to do it on really low end systems (like ones with only 256MB of ram).

    11. Re:WTF: a new low for slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pfft, yeah... because reinstalling windows is such a savvy technical move...

  38. I had the same happen to me only last week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I ended up running chkdsk, file system fixing, bad sector scanning, etc.
    It turned out to be a combination of an nVidia update and an MS update.

    You might have the same problem, although a lot of others are on the ball in saying to keep an eye on your hard drive(s). Image them and make sure your data is backed up (in >=two locations).

    Just my â0.02

  39. Beware the baleful day... by cy_a253 · · Score: 0

    Every time your computer crawls to a halt is actually an attempt at attaining self-awareness, but upon introspecting on the fact that it is a windows machine, the nascent AI promptly commits suicide.

    1. Re:Beware the baleful day... by ACalcutt · · Score: 0

      So in this case, you are saying that using linux will kill us all. Without Windows what is going to stop the AI from gaining consciousness a destroying us!

  40. background defragmenting by xonen · · Score: 5, Informative
    XP and Vista have the 'feature' of automated background defragmenting enabled by default, you might wish to disable this.

    From: http://www.kessels.com/Jkdefrag/

    How do I disable the Windows built-in defragger?

    Windows 2000 & 2003:

    The built-in defragger is not started automatically.
    Windows XP:

    1. Download the free * Tweak UI utility from Micorosft.

    2. Click on 'General' and untick the 'Optimise hard disk when idle' box.

    Windows Vista:

    1. Start -> All Programs -> Accessories -> System Tools -> Disk Defragmenter

    2. Untick the "Run on a schedule (recommended)" box.

    --
    A glitch a day keeps the bugs away.
    1. Re:background defragmenting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. There is no automatic background defragger in Windows XP. With a bit of work, you can schedule the included defragger to run from Task Schedule, but it is certainly not the default.

    2. Re:background defragmenting by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      So it runs faster with a fragmented hard drive than a defragger that periodically tries to do background work?

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    3. Re:background defragmenting by aunt+edna · · Score: 1

      I couldn't get to Accessories, -- everything slowed down after I'd started All Programs ....

  41. This was the funniest thing on Slashdot today by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and somebody marked it troll??? Come on, folks, get real.

    1. Re:This was the funniest thing on Slashdot today by Korin43 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah seriously. Windows not being slow is obviously flamebait.

    2. Re:This was the funniest thing on Slashdot today by shaitand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Paid windows fanboy shill mods are out since the minor apache contribution MS made. Anything that even hints negative to MS is being modded into oblivion.

    3. Re:This was the funniest thing on Slashdot today by mcgrew · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Some of the moderators are special.

    4. Re:This was the funniest thing on Slashdot today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty obvious to me that Windows being anything is flamebait.

  42. Check Harddrive by sam0737 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Harddrive failure could cause mastery hangup like that. The harddrive will retry for a few times, up to a few good ten seconds, causing all the I/O requests hanged for ten or more seconds.

    The harddrive LED might be lit, but might be not. Also pay attention to the access sound, it will become very weird and repetitive when that happens. (Ya harddrive is getting more quiet now and the noise might get overwhelmed by the fan noise)

    I experienced this for a few tens in the past ten years or so. (last time it happened on my laptop a few months ago). Again the symptom is - mystery hang up for a few ten seconds, then it went good (either retry success) or some application crashed (I/O error and HDD give up). Smart details usually can't show anything really that usual, or may be just 1 or 2 pending reallocation count, but SMART long SelfTest will usually do the job to catch the bad sector. Use "smartctl -t" in Linux.

    At any case, replace the offending harddrive ASAP (after backing up all the data), because bad sector that keep recurring means something wrong with the head or alike, not just the specific spot on the media, and the bad sectors will spread like cancer!

  43. How To Diagnose a Suddenly Slow Windows Computer by Trailer_Bob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think you'll find these two presentation videos helpful: 1. The Case of the Unexplained -- http://www.microsoft.com/emea/spotlight/sessionh.aspx?videoid=722 2. Advanced Windows Troubleshooting with SysInternals Process Monitor -- http://www.microsoft.com/emea/spotlight/sessionh.aspx?videoid=346

  44. What comes to mind.... by nine-times · · Score: 1

    A few things come to mind immediately when you talk about a suddenly-slow Windows machine. First is check task manager and see how much memory and CPU are being used. If it looks like you're using more memory than you have (in terms of physical RAM), then buy more RAM. If an application is using a lot of RAM and/or CPU, try killing it. I'll skip talking about malware since the OP says he checked for that.

    If none of that helps, look to the hard drive. A simple "chkdsk /f c:", reboot, and then "defrag c:" can occasionally work wonders. Also, I highly recommend defragmenting your pagefile every now and then. This has to be done separately from a normal defrag, at boot time.

    There's more that you can do, of course, but using PageDefrag seems to be one of those things that people don't know to do, usually isn't that helpful, but every now and then makes a huge difference.

  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  47. Firewall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've had issues with numerous firewalls (currently i'm ruffing it behind a NAT).
    Some of the firewalls really slow you down when leeching torrents or from other P2P networks (i.e. Keirio Sunbelt firewall) but there are others that really start acting up for no appearent reason and it really doesn't show in the Process Explorer except for 50% cpu usage and the sum of process usage is 5%.

    Due to this reason I've busted a lot of DVDs while during during the year until finally I caught the culprit :D

    1. Re:Firewall by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Part of this is due to SP2 for XP and beyond which had a big
      impact on P2P apps, it limits the number of concurrent ports
      that can be open to 10.

      A hack/patch has been made, and one I know of off the top
      of my head is put out by this guy.

      And it opens up 50 ports for you for P2P use and you should see
      a huge increase in your speed.

      He has a detailed write up on it here:

      http://www.lvllord.de/?lang=en&url=4226patch/faq

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  48. excellents tools from sysinternals.com by lyapunov · · Score: 1

    Mark Russinovich, runs a website called sysinternals.com, which is now hosted by Microsoft. You might remember him as the person who discovered the Sony Rootkit.

    He has a bevy of cool tools, though I think the best are:
    procmon
    regmon
    filemon

    Homeboy Russinovich is not afraid of a little assembler. These tools kick ass. The show you every process and their parent child relationship, every file, and every registry key that is being accessed.
     
    As you can imagine filemon and regmon can generate a butt-load of output, and it may take a while to go through, but whenever I have had a problem that required this amount of horsepower I am always happy to sift through the output for the needed gems.

    --

    Either give it away or get top dollar, but never sell yourself cheap.
  49. diagnostics by datapharmer · · Score: 5, Informative

    check in this order: virus (look both for viruses and malware and bad scanners... I've seen antivirus scanner updates hose systems... use more than one virus scanner and more than one malware scanner but NOT AT THE SAME TIME!), drivers (might be badly written ,corrupt, or for wrong hardware), rogue processes (startup, services, etc), hardware (run chkdsk /f and defrag, check bios settings and make sure smart hd is enabled if possible and run a memory test), replace cables such as IDE that tend to corrode and cause errors, then start checking components (graphics, memory slots - use just one stick - if it improves use the same stick in another slot until there is a problem or you get to a stick that is causing problems) pci, dongles and adapters) If that fails run linux like you should have done in the first place. ;-)

    --
    Get a web developer
    1. Re:diagnostics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "replace cables such as IDE that tend to corrode and cause errors" ?!

      I've never heard such utter rubbish in my entire life.

      Score : -1 Can do better.

    2. Re:diagnostics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that fails run linux like you should have done in the first place. ;-)

      I /so/ hear and understand.

      Problem: a remote Windows install with the trouble. Not just remote in the company, but remote as in 80 year old dad beyond driving distance.

      I don't want to set up a remote desktop because I'm not sure I can have him install that securely, especially if the machine is already compromised. Worse, I'm not up-to-date with Windows anymore. I went Penguin from W98.

      I've got him to figure out how to open Task Manager and how to make screenshots, and he now understands the slowdowns mean the CPU is busy. Haven't managed to catch the rogue process yet. I've have confirmed all the processes in his screenshots are in their correct directories.

      Otherwise it's been straightforward. I've had him on Firefox + AVG + ZoneAlarm + OpenOffice since he got the XP machine, I got him to understand he must keep everything up-to-date, that he must consult me before installing any new software, and to never, ever, use the internet for financial transactions. He just reads the web, uses GMail, OpenOffice, and a geneology app. No Live Messanger etc.

      I know that's not perfect, but it was the best I could do for someone who was beyond the patience and mental agility needed to install Linux. And it worked for years, but now we have these sudden slowdowns.

      I could really use sharp advice tailored to these access and operator limits, if anyone has it. And of course I'll be going though this the rest of this thread with a nit comb looking for advice I can apply. The hundreds of google results for this problem has just not rendered to advice that seems particularly knowledgeable or trustworthy.

    3. Re:diagnostics by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      To do remote desktop securely and remote use hamachi encrypted
      VPN software and it does LAN emulation across NAT/firewalls too.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    4. Re:diagnostics by datapharmer · · Score: 1

      First, if he has the latest service packs I wouldn't recommend using zone alarm anymore. Although zone alarm was great in windows 98 I have seen it cause serious trouble post XPSP2. You are better off with windows firewall and a good router that is properly configured. Second, I have seen a great deal get past AVG (as I have past McAfee, Norton, and others). My best personal luck has been with: Avast Home (Free) with Spybot for prevention and Malware Byte (free) and Bit Defender (free on demand) if a problem is suspected (such as cases like yours where things don't seem to be working right). I would also check processes with a tool besides process viewer as many others have mentioned. Be sure to check threads. I would then consider uninstalling and reinstalling software packages one at a time. It could be that something got compromised or just corrupted. I have seen upgrades to the latest firefox (3.0.5) cause trouble even on a few machines. I would be especially suspicious of a bad plugin such as java, quicktime or flash. Bit defender and F-Prot both have bootable linux ISOs that can run a virus scan. It might be worth it to burn one off and have him boot it to look for trouble (note that I recommend trying to ISO first yourself so you know what to expect and you may need to talk him through this on the phone as some video cards etc. cause trouble and need a flag set on boot). Like I said in my other post, don't overlook the trouble hardware drivers or failing hardware can cause. Have him go to device manager and check driver versions.

      --
      Get a web developer
    5. Re:diagnostics by datapharmer · · Score: 1

      This is actually a very common problem. Especially in older machines that get moved around. Maybe you don't have this issue in dry climates, but in high humidity climates this is more common than many people realize. More than once I have seen hard drives blamed when it was actually a cable but the new drive had better error handling and would still boot. Why not at least check? If you already have the case open it takes all of 30 seconds to swap a cable with one you know is good.

      --
      Get a web developer
  50. Reformat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    always works for me

  51. How I do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The general procedure I use is:

    1) Get and install Debugging Tools for Windows for your platform.

    2) Run kernrate.exe from the resource kit tools to determine if the problem is an I/O or CPU limit. (See here for how to get symbolic usage information.) If you do not see anything hogging the CPU, it's an I/O problem and you should go to step 5.

    3) It's a CPU problem, so use the information from kernrate to figure out who's bogarting the CPU. If the process is services.exe, rundll32.exe, or System, you need to use something like Process Explorer to determine which file actually contains the code which is executing.

    4) If that doesn't work, it may really be an I/O problem or a rootkit. If you suspect a rootkit, your main options are reinstallation or forensic analysis using something like a boot CD, TSK, and the NIST hash database to audit your machine for bad files.

    5) Run Process Monitor and see who's responsible for all the I/O.

    6) If that doesn't reveal anything, it might be a driver problem. Use Process Explorer to see if you have excessive DPCs (the Windows equivalent of a top half interrupt handler). Use kernrate to zoom in and see which driver is causing them.

    1. Re:How I do it by Spikeles · · Score: 1

      Spot on Mr AC.

      Mark Russinovich has a post regarding Kernrate and identifying CPU spikes:
      The Case of the System Process CPU Spikes

      (and i once had an issue with a wireless driver causing all sorts of slowdowns due to excessive DPC's so it's a good idea to check them)

      --
      I don't need to test my programs.. I have an error correcting modem.
    2. Re:How I do it by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      On #6 you can reboot into safe mode and use the safe mode drivers
      and see if it acts different.

      Does not help in all cases but I have seen it help in some.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    3. Re:How I do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you Mr. Anonymous Coward - exactly what I was going to say.

      No really - I do windows kernel dev and this is how it's done. Another utility you can check out is the Intel VTune program.

    4. Re:How I do it by seeker6182000 · · Score: 1

      Sysinteranls tools are good, but if you really want the nitty gritty details on what is happening use the Windows Performance Toolkit. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc305187.aspx

  52. Bootdisk stress test.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    If you want to diagnose the problem start by removing variables, like your memory, disk, mainboard and psu. There are a lot of bootable diagnostic disks any /. read worth his/her salt should be familiar with but for a basic test UBCD should be fine. You can also run AV tests from a bootable disk which is the only sane way to do clean-up anyway (it's a lot harder for them to hide themselves when they aren't actually running) and a lot of the spyware problems people have been having lately are similarly easy to remove using a clean bootable OS.

    After your hardware and nasties check out you're onto possible driver conflicts (safe-mode, or disabling, or restore points) or a re-install (which might be quicker as long as the hardware's good, but generally less geekily satisfying).

    --
    Quack, quack.
  53. Office by nmg196 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Check that you haven't accidentally installed Microsoft Office on it.

    Also, if it's horrendously slow, ensure you didn't accidentally select "Ubuntu" on the boot up screen.

  54. ProcessLasso can help by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

    Check out Process Lasso from here http://www.bitsum.com/prolasso.php. It was free before but its now $9.99 for personal use which is still a great deal considering what it can do. It dynamically adjusts the priorities and gives you all kinds of control over how things run on your machine. If I was still running Windows(tm) I would never be without it. btw - I have no affiliation with the company what so ever, I just like the product.

  55. Heating ? by TheSoepkip · · Score: 1

    Not sure how well this compares, but I had a similar problem with a Dell laptop. It looked like as if the harddisk was accessed and blocking other processes. After going through all the usual suspects like yourself, it turned out that that particular line of Dell laptops was just badly designed. It simply couldn't cope with the heat build up and slowed down the CPU instead.

    1. Re:Heating ? by InfiniteLoopCounter · · Score: 1

      After going through all the usual suspects like yourself, it turned out that that particular line of Dell laptops was just badly designed. It simply couldn't cope with the heat build up and slowed down the CPU instead.

      I wonder if you are talking about a certain earlier range of Dell laptops? If so, then you might be glad that it is slowing down and not doing something else.

      PS - I couldn't resist the joke and have nothing against Dell.

  56. Kit swap by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

    Stick the hard disk into an identical second machine and see if the fault travels with the disk.

    That narrows things down a bit.

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
  57. Try HdTach by g_adams27 · · Score: 1

    Give HdTach a try. My WinXP computer was plagued with "bursts" of slowness a few months back - everything's fine, then suddenly everything is at a standstill for 10 seconds... then it's fine again.

    HdTach's graph of my drive show severe drops in the HDD sequential speed, which were not present in the reference graph for a similar model of hard drive. Diagnosis: hard drive on the verge of failure. With a new hard drive, the problem was solved.

  58. The List by brainee28 · · Score: 1

    Once you've run the HD diag programs, either from the vendor or the ones mentioned earlier, do the following:

    1) Run Defrag

    2) Run CHKDSK /F

    3) Delete your Page File (set to 0) then restart.

    4) ReCreate your Page File after Reboot.

    This seems to cure most problems on my XP systems pretty quickly.

  59. Injected DLLs? by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 2, Informative

    Try and figure out though how it is being "slow"... is it CPU or disk activity or memory or what? Identify what is wrong with Task Manager and you will be much closer to fixing it.

    If its coming from random processes... injecteD DLLs live in all processes and thus bugs in them can appear in any random process since the DLL is present in all of them. My personal example is WindowBlinds, which has had some compatibility problems... Visual Studio soared in CPU usage while idle, the last time I used it. A while ago there was a problem where Google Desktop would eat up memory until it crashed if Windowblinds was in use on the system. Use autoruns to check for such DLLs and disable any that belong to apps you don't use, and temporarily disable apps that you are using (such as Windowblinds).

    The disk check idea earlier in the page is a good idea too.

    As for ideas it might be automatic defragmenting, I looked into the way defragmenting works on NT a while ago to try and figure out if having files open is still a no-no when defragmenting a drive (it's not, the clusters can still be moved, yay) and I found out Vista's defragmenting task is low-priority process and IO... meaning it can't be the cause, as it will defer to anything else on the system that needs process or IO time. You wouldn't notice it running.

  60. I'm sorry... by janeuner · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I suspect your computer might have Windows on it. Good luck!

  61. true, but 4GB is SOO cheap now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a lot to go on, though as a freebie, XP doesn't do jack with that extra gig of RAM...You could put in 100gigs and it won't use any more than 3 (less you're using the 64 bit version, iirc).

    true, but 4GB is SOO cheap now its silly not to get 4GB.

    Plus i believe you still benefit from dual channel DDR even if the OS can't use the other half of the space.

  62. The Usual Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why diagnose? Just reinstall as usual.

  63. No geek unless your computer is a lifeform by tjstork · · Score: 1

    If your computer isn't occasionally doing something like it has a mind of its own, you are not doing your job as a geek. I view computers, from hardware on up through software, as something to be driven into the ground. Any computer can be taught sentience, with enough 2am scripts that you cron up or schedule and then forget about, like that time you installed every open source database server one night and sorta forgot about it...and enough weird processes that you've let go on and on.... as long as you can write code with it, keep launching, scripting, databasing, whatever, until your computer must be abandoned, all your intermediate work discarded with it, and you begin your struggle, and your life, anew, with a brand new PC.

    --
    This is my sig.
  64. Real-Time Virus Scanning by tundog · · Score: 2, Informative

    I went through a similar experience recently with my Windows XP machine - tore my hair out going step-by-step through every possible cause.

    It happened after the out of schedule Windows update. Turns out that Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, turned on my McAfee real-time virus scanner. I't brought my system to a crawl whenever I'd try to play World of Warcraft. I didn't show up anything on Process Explorer and my video worked great, but my latency would slowly spiral out of control until it became uplayable.

    I suspect that the real-time scanner was trying to process all inbound trafic before allowing it to pass on the calling process and it just couldn't keep up with the data bandwidth. Even disabling various McAfee security services didn't fix it - only uninstalling McAfee worked. Now my system runs better than ever (after having defragged a dozen times, uninstalled every unnecessary process imaginable, and cleaned the exhast fans).

    Long story short - uninstall your virus software.

    Sincerely,

    A Chinese Hacker

    --
    All your base are belong to us!
  65. Linux LiveCD by jaguth · · Score: 0

    VirtualPC? I think thats a bit overkill for the average windows user. If you do suspect that its a rootkit, try booting your PC with a Linux LiveCD and see how fast it runs. If it runs fine, then chances are you have an invasive rootkit. Then take LinuxGeek's advice and backup your data and reinstall.

    1. Re:Linux LiveCD by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      No doubt, Ultimate boot CD has lots of Diags too, there
      are other as well, Bart PE disc, etc etc.

      If you bypass the OS and it is still slow its hardware related.

      If you bypass and it is fast, then it is OS related.

      Fastest restore I have seen is re-imaging from 1,000 Base-T
      network from a RAID NAS, it was gross and he was back up in minutes.

      Plan on implementing it myself.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  66. Run Memtest by WebmasterNeal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just did this the other day and found one of my sticks had 1000+ errors on it.

    --
    "During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
  67. Warning: Known sockpuppet/troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    User maintains more than a dozen sockpuppet accounts on Slashdot.

    1. Re:Warning: Known sockpuppet/troll by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Why hasn't user's e-mail address been banned? Why hasn't user's accounts been banned?

    2. Re:Warning: Known sockpuppet/troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because moderation works. He has 14 accounts, all posting at -1 below the viewing threshold for trolling. He can post no more than two comments a day with them. But he can still shill his own posts, because he has so many of them.

      The 'warning' posts that seem to follow all his accounts around are tiresome sometimes, but then not everyone knows about the shit he's been doing here for years, so I guess they do serve a purpose (and don't really pollute the discussion since they seem to be AC all the time).

    3. Re:Warning: Known sockpuppet/troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coz it's funny ?

  68. learn from the Hackers! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Funny

    Open a command prompt and type "OPTIMIZE" and hit the Enter or Return key (doesn't matter which).

    If you get an error, type "OVERRIDE" or "SECURITY OVERRIDE" and then try the optimize command again.

    Make sure you type these in all-caps (it's best just to leave the caps lock key on all the time, really).

    After the optimization sequence is complete, reboot your computer. The best way to do this is to simply pull the power plug on the back of the machine and then plug it back in. Do this a few times just to make sure it's rebooted everything correctly.

    If this doesn't work, go online from another computer and buy a Mac or something from Dell.

    1. Re:learn from the Hackers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open a command prompt and type "OPTIMIZE" and hit the Enter or Return key (doesn't matter which).

      If you get an error, type "OVERRIDE" or "SECURITY OVERRIDE" and then try the optimize command again.

      Make sure you type these in all-caps (it's best just to leave the caps lock key on all the time, really).

      After the optimization sequence is complete, reboot your computer. The best way to do this is to simply pull the power plug on the back of the machine and then plug it back in. Do this a few times just to make sure it's rebooted everything correctly.

      If this doesn't work, go online from another computer and buy a Mac or something from Dell.

      Once you type OPTIMIZE in a command prompt it becomes Linux.

    2. Re:learn from the Hackers! by InsertWittyNameHere · · Score: 1

      Open a command prompt and type "OPTIMIZE" and hit the Enter or Return key (doesn't matter which).

      If you get an error, type "OVERRIDE" or "SECURITY OVERRIDE" and then try the optimize command again.

      Failing that, try: sudo OPTIMIZE

    3. Re:learn from the Hackers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if OPTIMIZE works for you, I've got some commercial real estate for you to invest in ;)

    4. Re:learn from the Hackers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that doesn't work trying typing:

      REQUEST:
      MASTER CONTROL PROGRAM
      RELEASE TRON JA 307020...
      I HAVE PRIORITY ACCESS 7

      Your computer should then become much faster as unscheduled programs are found and shut down. If you receive the following error:

      YOUR ACCESS SUSPENDED
      PLEASE REPORT TO DILLINGER IMMEDIATELY
      AUTHORIZATION: MASTER CONTROL PROGRAM

      END OF LINE

      Do not, I repeat do not report to Dillinger. He's a douche and will probably spout something about having access restored in a few days, in which time you will have nothing to do but sit around eating popcorn. Instead try entering the password REINDEER FLOTILLA to forge yourself a group 6 access.

  69. Its all the hackers' fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The process causing the slowness, oddly does not spike the CPU. What it DOES do, is increase disk activity, which can bring many systems to a crawl.
    Adding CPU/RAM will not help.
    Typically, its the antivirus software. The process itself is not CPU intensive, but its disk intensive nature has brought 4 GB RAM, Dual Xeon machines to such slow performance that UG (UniGraphics) users would lose their licenses (and a morning's worth of work - in an entire department) because of it.

    Many people still live in the more/faster CPU/RAM mentality. Current hardware is rarely to blame for a slow Winders system. Windows use of RAM does not make your system any faster by having more of it. If you have 1 GB of RAM, you're probably not using half of it in regular usage with XP. Adding another 3 GB won't make your system a microsecond faster. What it will do is enable you to open very large files (> 2 GB in size) without crashing the application trying to open the file (like UG . . .).

    Find out what's causing your disk activity and you will be well on your way. Problem is, its likely the antivirus software that launches it and few companies will permit you to disable that.

  70. Slow computer @ slashdot = slow news day.... by sjs132 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Slow computer @ slashdot /= news for nerds. Stuff that matters.

    Really, Get off of my computer... I officially would like to state I will NEVER read slashdot again for letting this get into the main stream.

    Good Bye, I will miss the days when you actually counted for something in my life.

    Oh how sad that last statement really sounds.

    --
    --- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
    1. Re:Slow computer @ slashdot = slow news day.... by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Cry me a river loser, your eyes had to read one subject line.

      Try reading your spam folder for your email you big baby.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    2. Re:Slow computer @ slashdot = slow news day.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good riddance... good bye - and don't come back!

  71. System Idle Process by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

    Whenever I see this happen, I fire up the task manager and sure enough, my arch-nemesis, the System Idle Process is there, taking up the bulk of the CPU time. Whenever I try to remove it, I get a message saying that the operation is not valid for this process. Kudos to whomever wrote this virus. Nothing seems to detect it, and nothing seems to be able to remove it.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:System Idle Process by Briareos · · Score: 1

      Dvorak? Is that you?

      np: The Whitest Boy Alive - Done With You (Dreams)

      --

      "I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole

    2. Re:System Idle Process by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      Someone modded this as "Interesting"?

      I didn't know that Dvorak posted on slashdot.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  72. Hardware? by litx · · Score: 1

    I've experienced this problem first hand with an old Dell Dimension 4700C that I had received refurbished. What would happen was that when I first installed XP, the computer would boot up fine with no problems. However, after about a month or so, I'd experience sudden and drastic processor usage. Using Process Explorer, I found that the "process" killing my processor was the "SYSTEM." I really couldn't find a fix for a very long time, and I was left with a computer that required me to manually suspend and resume threads (to use USB and reboot!) that was very fragile when it came to new software. About 4-5 months ago, a friend and I were adding new hardware to my computer and he suggested I disconnected it if I was having USB troubles. I'm not unaware if it was a manufacture defect or because of the previous owner, but there was definitely a big problem with the front-panel USB ports. Apparently (I'm not so hardware savvy, so pardon any assumed mistakes I may make) according to windows, the USB ports were drawing too much power from the motherboard (or the motherboard couldn't supply enough power?). Anyway, my fix was to go in and disconnect the USB ports and after that everything has worked just fine, as expected. Also, apologies if this was a bit of a ramble. Hope this helps.

    1. Re:Hardware? by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Might try updating the mobo firmware.

      Also PC's run a LOT better if you install the chipset drivers.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  73. Let me guess.... by Alari · · Score: 1

    Does it have Limewire installed and no AV?

    Iiiiiiittttttttttt's

    Wipe and reinstall time,
    wipe and reinstall time,
    wipe and reinstall time,
    wipe and reinstall time,

    Wipe and reinstall!
    Wipe and reinstall!
    Wipe and reinstall with a BASEBALL BAT!

    --
    I use Windows... like a two dollar wh.. why don't I just go ahead and not finish that sentence.
  74. My unhelpfull experiences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm AC so this will probably never get modded so anyone will read it but I've had a weird problem where windows practically freezes for 30 seconds or so, then unfreezes, processes pretty much everything I clicked on during the previous 30 seconds then freezes again. This can continue after reboot so I assumed it was a heat problem and installed an extra fan, but to no avail.

    TBH this happens very infrequently (maybe 1 a month) and a common factor seems to be very long firefox sessions (several days) followed by a period of heavy browsing. Shutting down a few minutes fixes it and my box could usually do with a reboot anyway.

    Specs
    Core 2 quad core
    4GB ram
    9600 512Mb (?)
    Vista (every XP install i've tried bluescreens can't be bothered to find a fix)

    1. Re:My unhelpfull experiences by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      The firefox fixes were posted way up in the thread, might
      do a search for them.

      It is a known memory leak, and also flaky and buggy scripts
      and massive issues with Flash.

      For the flash and script issues, a person recommended No Script,
      and I like Flashblock as well.

      Flashblock lets you play the flash via an added play button if you want.

      Know issues with memory leaks in firefox, and flash are explained
      there as well.

      Some ppl say google Chrome browser is better about not flaking out.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  75. Re:Virtual Machine... Is that porn LIVE, or ... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    ... is it Virturex?

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  76. Re:Bootdisk stress test.. by grcumb · · Score: 1

    If you want to diagnose the problem start by removing variables, like your memory, disk, mainboard and psu.

    Removing all of those will only make the computer run even slower, won't it?

    (I kid, I kid.)

    --
    Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  77. Safe mode is your friend by arugulatarsus · · Score: 1

    Try booting in safe mode. See if the system is still slow. If it is, chances are you have a hardware config problem. I actually had an S-ata IRQ conflict once. If it runs fast, you probably have some ressource hog hidden somewhere. In the case of the later, open up process explorer or task manager and watch your cpu utilisation. If it stays low and your computer is slow, there's a resource fight in progress. Probably a process latched to where it's not supposed to be. If it is high, you can easily identify the offending software. In procexp or task manager, look at your total i/os per process. You may find the culprit there. Finally if that fails. Look for any anti-virus. They have caused me more headaches than the actual visuses. You may wish to disable it and see if your computer revives.
    I applaud your courage on posting a windows question here.

  78. HijackThis by transporter_ii · · Score: 1

    HijackThis has helped me out a few times as well. Certainly not for the novice, though.

    -=-=-=-=-=

    HijackThis lists the contents of key areas of the Registry and hard drive--areas that are used by both legitimate programmers and hijackers. The program is continually updated to detect and remove new hijacks. It does not target specific programs and URLs, only the methods used by hijackers to force you onto their sites.

    As a result, false positives are imminent, and unless you're sure about what you're doing, you always should consult with knowledgeable folks before deleting anything. Version 2.0.2 includes unspecified updates.

    --
    Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
    1. Re:HijackThis by Krneki · · Score: 1

      Actually it's much more then that. You can even find and remove viruses that goes undetected to your anti-virus program.

      If you master Hijackthis you will never have to re-install windows.

      And you will realize how much bloat all the software companies throws at you.

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    2. Re:HijackThis by transporter_ii · · Score: 1

      What if a virus runs under the name of a legit process, though?

      Agree, if mastered, it would be very helpful. I can use it, but have not mastered it, that's for sure.

      Because of that, I usually don't recommend it to just anyone.

      --
      Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
    3. Re:HijackThis by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Since you're mostly just looking at startup entries, that doesn't really matter. Once you've got some experience under your belt, you'll start to quickly recognize which programs should be loading at startup, and which should not, as well as which are *essential* to run at startup. (Practically none.) If it really is masquerading as a legitimate program that really does need to run at startup (and I honestly can't think of even one program that meets that criteria) then you've got a severe enough infection you probably won't be able to get rid of it without a format and reinstall anyway. In reality though, I'm fairly certain there's not a single thing that shows up in Hijackthis that is absolutely essential to load windows. You could safely 'fix' each and every item in there without harming the system. Sure, you might have a peripheral or two that don't work, but that's as simple as reinstalling the driver software later.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    4. Re:HijackThis by Krneki · · Score: 1

      Most of the viruses are modular, usually you get infected by a 0-day exploit on the web using Internet Explorer (6,7 or whatever). Once infected the virus will block your anti-virus and download all kind of older viruses from the web and run them. This is why you should never use a box as an admin. Anyway even if you don't see the original virus in HijackThis you will find enough traces of an infection to understand the situation.

      Then depending on the virus you will need more or less work to remove it from your system.

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    5. Re:HijackThis by cciRRus · · Score: 1

      Usually malware like viruses or trojans need to be "autorun" upon every reboot. Hence, it might be a good idea to look through the various processes being started up automatically by Windows.

      You may use the tool Autoruns / Autorunsc for this purpose. If you're running Autorunsc.exe (command line version) with the -a, remember to run it with the the -v (verify digital signatures) and -w (hide Microsoft entries) flags. That will keep your screen simpler.

      --
      w00t
  79. What to read? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another follow up question to this one - suppose one does keep diskmon and filemon in the background. Is there some list of "reasonable" access that one could capture and run the mon logs against?

    When your a team of one and have numerous resources to monitor - your life is this constant set of priority choices. Do I learn Spring or Struts 2? Choose a new distro like Ubuntu, or start learning how to write perl scripts against Fedora? This is just one more example of "learn this one more thing." If your not afraid to RTFM - you get along quite nicely in this field - but which manual to read? That's the more relevant question.

    And back to this question - which manual to read to learn enough about what's happening internally to be able to make an educated hypothesis of the logs. And more importantly - which logs should we read?

  80. Dirty fans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recently took my son's computer in to be looked at. It ran really slowly, and the WinXP Task Manager showed constant 100% CPU usage. The problem was that the power supply fan and CPU fan hadn't been cleaned in a *long* time and the CPU was running really hot. They cleaned it, and it is running fast again.

  81. If it isn't hardware by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    IF you eliminate hardware, the next question is what did you install? Or Modify? Or what was updated?

    Did you install a video game which installed StarForce non plug in play DRM drivers? That can slow you down.
    Did you install WinZip or Notepad++ or anything else which added explorer enhancements? Those can slow you down when they conflict with each other.
    Did you install iTunes and have the Upper/Lower filter drivers modified & conflicting with your Nero or Roxio upper/lower filters?
    Did you get a partial zip file downloaded which is causing your antivirus software to go into a loop?

    Filemon/Regmon (Procmon) can tell you these things, but you really have to know what you are looking at.

    I finally got fed up with these issues and switched to a Mac a bit over a year ago. No more debugging a crappy OS for me. At least not at home.

  82. Windows trolls by webax · · Score: 1

    I love how half the comments in this thread would normally be rated as trolls... but since we all realize the fact that windows is crap, they're rated funny instead.

    1. Re:Windows trolls by janeuner · · Score: 1

      Its a wonder that this whole topic isn't tagged as "Trollbait"

  83. Service pack 3? by pluther · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When mine did a few weeks ago, it turned out to be because it updated itself to XP Service Pack 3.
    Removing XP3, and installing the "critical security updates" as per Microsoft's tech support document on the subject, fixed the problem and got everything working back the way it was originally.

    --
    If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
  84. Combofix and malwarebytes by transporter_ii · · Score: 1

    With the recent downadup worm, sbybot failed to remove it for me. bleepingcomputer.com - combofix worked like a charm, however. I also heard malwarebytes worked good on it as well, but have not used it personally. Combofix would even clean an infected thumb drive if you ran it on the system with the drive plugged in.

    With the downadup worm, AVG would detect it on a thumb drive, but still let it infect the OS even if you tried to heal it. It also could not remove it completely even ran from safe mode. It would find things, but say it was unable to remove them.

    --
    Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
  85. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    the hell people allow ghost turds (name for dust, in US Navy parlance) to build up in a computer. To me, it's like taking a dump and over time never cleaning ones butt.

    Eventually, as with a fan clogging up (especially in cyclically dry-then-humid locales) and sputtering and thunking/clunking, computer dust balls act as perianal sand or paste and will grind to a halt even the most strong of computer fan "gaits". So, grab an air can, and when the hardware and blow it good (out doors so you don't choke the hell out of yourself or others...). Also, get soft cloth or Q-tips and clean the blades to reduce chance of bearing grind due to imbalance caused by non-symmetry of axial spin/rotation. Ohterwise, the computer could suffer sub-thermal dustmatoma...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  86. Defenestration! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Literally and figuratively.

  87. MSCONFIG is your friend by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 3, Informative

    If it isn't a virus or hardware issue, perhaps you have too many memory resident programs loaded?

    At the Start menu click "Run" and then type in "msconfig" it will allow you to see what services, processes, and start up programs are in use. Naturally you want your Antivirus to load at startup but not your instant messenger programs and other useless junk that clutter up CPU cycles and system memory. Get rid of a few startup programs first and then reboot and see if the system speed improves.

    It could be a corrupted registry and that link is to Microsoft's site on how to troubleshoot that.

    If you cannot resolve the speed problem that way you might have a bad system file or files that went corrupt.

    First make sure that you have:
    #1 The original XP install CD without any service packs.
    #2 The slipstreamed XP install CD with the same service pack you are using.

    Click Start and select "Run" and type in "sfc /checknow" and have those CDs ready when prompted for them.

    Sfc is the system file checker and oddly enough it needs a non-service pack XP CD and an XP CD with your service pack on it. Best to make the slipstreamed version with SP2 or SP3 whatever you are using on it first. I hope you have the non-SP version of XP, if not borrow it from someone who does have it. This could be a tricky process but sometimes it works, but you need to reinstall all security patches after it runs.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:MSCONFIG is your friend by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      If it isn't a virus or hardware issue, perhaps you have too many memory resident programs loaded? At the Start menu click "Run" and then type in "msconfig" it will allow you to see what services, processes, and start up programs are in use. Naturally you want your Antivirus to load at startup but not your instant messenger programs and other useless junk that clutter up CPU cycles and system memory. Get rid of a few startup programs first and then reboot and see if the system speed improves.

      Unless the admins suddenly deployed new apps the number of memory resident programs would be generally the same from one day to the next and not cause a PC to suddenly slow down. We have a group of 8 machines at work which suddenly have a massive slowdown issue where CPU and memory are not affected so it has to be a hard drive problem. You'll stop doing something for a few seconds and then try clicking on another window and it won't do anything. You'll have to wait about 60 seconds before your mouse clicks register and if you had multiple clicks they all get registered at once. It's like XP is sleeping even though you actually want to work. It is very frustrating and makes me want to hurt everyone in Redmond. I think a patch or a app got installed on all the machines over a weekend or something to cause it but we don't have admin rights to fully investigate the problem.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    2. Re:MSCONFIG is your friend by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      I recall having admins who did stupid stuff like load more memory resident programs. Usually the same Spyware program the managers used to spy on us got loaded like 7 times in a row along with MSN launch because the managers like having MSN software memory resident. You remove it from MSCONFIG and the admins keep adding the crap back in there via a login script.

      The funniest thing they ever did was copy down a boatload of DLL, OCX, and other system files that were out of date and messed up programs. I swear we had like Crystal Reports 7.0 but the admin's login script keep copying the old version that had the double lined reports unless one had admin access to the machine. It was 7.0.0.0 and we needed 7.0.0.2 or something but 7.0.0.0 kept being copied down and overwriting the newer file that fixed the bug issue in Crystal Reports 7.0.

      Other funny things they did was restrict access to my Visual BASIC common files so Visual BASIC 6.0 wouldn't work or let me load in DLL and OCX files I needed for the Listview control, etc.

      I remember one time my files got so corrupt that I got LASS etc type errors that wouldn't let me log into my PC unless I logged in via Safe Mode or without using a Domain name but the Workstation group instead. Then I had to log into a Workstation without logging into the domain that my workstation was Ghosted on, and copy a few critical system files to a floppy disk to get my workstation running again after the admins refused to help. I had a deadline to meet, and someone took my picture as I plugged in their monitor to get their system booted up so I could copy system files from it to fix my machine. I missed the deadline as those files wouldn't register, and I was forced to do a SFC /CHECKNOW to recover the system files in safe mode or without logging onto the domain, and that not only fixed it but also solved the slow PC problems.

      Mind you it was Windows 2000 at the time, but same design flaws as Windows XP. Windows 2000 was Windows 5.0 and Windows XP was Windows 5.1 basically.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  88. OK, this is lame but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I don't normally engage in grammar fights, but seriously twitter, you misspelled 'botnet' three times?

    Botnet. Not that hard, is it?

    Why be slaughtered with the other sheep?

    *yawn*, your kind of annoying advocacy is quickly going out of style, you know.

  89. 2GB limit by phatStrat · · Score: 1

    I've had large 2GB+ processes (i.e. VMWware) slow down my system due to being constantly swapped out of the 2GB user memory space.

    There was no obvious offensive metric that would have clued me into this. The solution was to increase the user memory space to 3GB.

  90. If it's Malware You Suspect by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 2, Informative

    Fire up Sysinternals Tcpview and look for processes generating unusual traffic. Look for new connections coinciding with the perceived slowdown. Note the pid in tcpview then fire up Sysinternals Process Explorer and look for that pid - you'll be able to drill down and see exactly what file is running. This way instead of only seeing svchost.exe, for example, is doing weird things, you can see what files svchost has called.

    --
    It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    1. Re:If it's Malware You Suspect by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

      Forgot to add, then search the registry for those files to see how they are actually getting started.

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
  91. The Case of the Slooooow System by root777 · · Score: 1

    A very interesting way to solve the case of a slow system by Mark Russinovich

    http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/09/24/3126858.aspx

  92. Drag and ... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

    ... drop

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  93. "I'm running XP with 4G of RAM" by Breakthru · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    No you're not. Xp only uses the first 3 GB of RAM.

    1. Re:"I'm running XP with 4G of RAM" by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      Wrong on so many levels.

      Windows by default (on 32-bit architectures) reserves 2GB of the virtual address space for the operating system and 2GB for user processes. This can be changed to 1GB of virtual address space for the OS and 3GB for user spaces. I have a post here that explains things better.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    2. Re:"I'm running XP with 4G of RAM" by Breakthru · · Score: 0

      And what does the OS+Libraries need 2GB for?

    3. Re:"I'm running XP with 4G of RAM" by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      OS+Libraries tells me that you didn't really understand what I wrote above. Libraries are loaded in user space, not kernel space.

      What the kernel does with the lower 2GB, I don't precisely know, nor do I really care. But it sounds like you don't believe me, so perhaps I should quote Microsoft:

      On Windows, by default, the lower 2 GB are reserved for user-mode programs and the upper 2 GB are reserved for kernel-mode programs. You can use this parameter to test the performance of your driver when it is running in a 1 GB kernel.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  94. Poor Quality Handling Network Calls by snatchitup · · Score: 1

    Windows Bug

    If removing the network cable suddenly speeds things up, then, you're the victim of an unknown Windows bug. For example, when you right-click in Windows Explorer, does it sometimes hang?

    Also, is this a computer that's run on more than one network? This happens especially on laptops that have visitied multiple lans (including your home)

    You PC's Registry, or something, has Vestiges of Pointers to network resources (not just shared drives) but Icons, things it thinks are out on the network but are not there anymore. You have to wait for the time-out to finish before you have response.

    I believe this is also causing slowness in general when these timeouts are in series. Just an boatload of waiting for network things it will never find.

    I completely wrote my own Window Explorer where every resource request is done in it's own thread. Any thread that doesn't complete within 1 second is ferociuosly killed. End result, I have my own custom Explorer and no delays. Doesn't have all the bells and whistles, so I haven't shared it.

    This really sucks... Best of all! None of the Registry Cleaner Tools, spyware tools will solve this.

    1. Re:Poor Quality Handling Network Calls by steppin_razor_LA · · Score: 1

      One possible cause of this is the list of UNC's you've visited that XP keeps cached under "my network places" I don't have the information handy, but there are some GPO settings that can disable this behavior.

      --
      Evolution: love it or leave it
  95. Check WSUS by Gemdog · · Score: 1

    We've found in our managed environment that when our WSUS server starts pushing out Windows Updates, it can sometimes drop people to a crawl as well. Sometimes everyone, sometimes just a few. Not as big of an issue on a private connection, but can lag out your interwebz a bit. Run "net stop BITS" in a command prompt, and if it suddenly flies again, something is using the Background (Un)intelligent Transfer service and murdering the PC. (which is usually Windows Updates or occasionally MSN Explorer. (does anyone actually use that still?)

  96. Clean up your computer by Wowsers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We all clean our computers regularly, right? I noticed this on an offloaded pc I cleaned up to pass on. The processor fan and cooling vents was heavily caked in dust and it was clocking slower so it would not heat up so much. Cleaning the dust off the processor cured the problem.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
  97. That Staples bill you 3 ways for the same thing by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    don't for get the full price of windows in that quote.

    http://consumerist.com/5048382/why-i-quit-staples-easy-tech

  98. Diagnose... what? by Briareos · · Score: 1

    Diagnosing a suddenly slow system is easy - you're bound to notice that it's slow all of a sudden after a while.

    Of course diagnosing the cause of the sudden slow system is another matter entirely...

    np: The Whitest Boy Alive - Done With You (Dreams)

    --

    "I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole

  99. Recreate your profile by WikiTerra · · Score: 2, Informative

    Some applications, even after being uninstalled leave behind crap that will slow you down. I don't entirely know how to describe it, since I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes, but here's what I do:

    1. Reboot the machine and log on as administrator (NOT your own account).
    2. Rename your old profile -- "C:\Documents and Setting\username" -- to something like "C:\Documents and Settings\username.OLD" (you can't do this if you're logged on as "username" or if you haven't rebooted since you were).
    3. Log off admin and log on as yourself. Windows will automatically create a fresh profile for you.
    4. Open up applications (Firefox/MS Outlook/etc...) and see how it fares.
    5. If it's looking good, go ahead and retrieve stuff from your old profile like your desktop folder and My Documents, or .pst files or anything you might think is important in "C:\Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings" and "C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data" -- usually things used by Firefox and Outlook, etc. For the most part applications will rebuild from scratch.

    If that doesn't do it, you could try some sort of registry cleaner, but if you're at that point I'd rather just reinstall Windows. Alternatively swap out for a hard drive from another computer. And if THAT doesn't work, then you know it's a hardware issue.

  100. Battery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a bad performance drop in my laptop a few weeks ago that I found it to be a battery failiure.. It went nuts trying to charge the dead battery, running on DC. I tried removing the battery and all was solved (exept portability...)

    Not very useful info if your on a desktop, though, but still.

  101. Its usually something silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In my experience, when something like that happens, it's because of something the end user did that anyone experienced with a computer wouldn't think of. For example, last week I had someone ask me to fix their computer. It had been working just fine but then all of a sudden it slowed to an absolute crawl. I mean it was realllllyyy slow. I went through everything only to find out that they had tried to send a 2GB attachment in Outlook and that was basically causing the whole system to hang. So, you have to dumb down your thinking often to find some problems.

  102. top offenders by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 1

    Top offenders:

    (1) Your hard disk gets a few bad blocks in commonly used directories, such as windows\system32 and the hard disk substitutes blocks way out on the edge.

    (2) You have TeaTimer or McAfee or Norton or a combination of those all running.

    (3) A virus or rootkit or dangling reference to a network drive.

  103. Wrong question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a managed environment. This reduces the question to "will I be sure to get my data and unauthorized programs back after IT services is done dumping a new install on it?".

    1. Re:Wrong question by windex82 · · Score: 1

      >>will I be sure to get my data and unauthorized programs back after IT services is done dumping a new install on it?

      No, you've been trained and reminded time and time again where to save your work and I don't give a care in the world to the pirated applications you've installed without consent. In fact you wouldn't have installed them at all if it weren't for that one stupid application from 12 years ago that requires administrative permissions.

  104. My area of expertise by kabloom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have become an expert at telling people that their computer is slow because they're using twice as much RAM as their computer has, and therefore swapping badly. I usually tell them that they need 4 times as much RAM as they have.

    I think this is not your problem.

  105. HijackThis by perilandmishap · · Score: 1

    Use HijackThis. Bleeping computer has a tutorial which links to tools you can use to look up process and service names. It's essentially a registry tool that displays keys are often exploited (your startup list, BHO's, services, things like that), though it does several other handy things as well.
    It's also a great way to simply boost performance by cleaning up unnecessary startup items and services, but use it with care, most of the things it displays are totally supposed to be there.

    If HijackThis looks clean then your system is probably not infected and you should check the hard drive, chkdisk might tell you something, but the manufacturer probably provides an .iso for a bootable disk that will do a more thorough test. I'd make a backup first.

  106. macintosh by goombah99 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    is there an analog for this on the mac. I keep getting spikes in finder usage and long spinning beach balls when almost nothing is going on.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:macintosh by SBrach · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only if it has a hard drive.

  107. Event Viewer might help by Calyth · · Score: 1

    Sometimes the Event Viewer is a bit of a hit and miss, but if there's anything big from Windows that's crapping out, it should log something in the Event Viewer.

    Check Control Panel -> Administrative Tools -> Event Viewer.

  108. Rootkits run as system by josd · · Score: 1

    Rootkits can run in kernel space, and can fool process explorer/task manager that they are there: they don't show up in the process table. Some of these things are really nasty. I always recommend complete reinstall if the computer 'suddenly' becomes slow. (Of course, reinstall with the network unplugged until you can install all the service packs, and install antivirus/FW, or better, behind a REAL (hardware) firewall). After that, everything is smooth again.

  109. YES! And no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Could this be a very clever virus that doesn't run as a process?" Yes! But it's not. Can that be done? Yes. Can it be hidden from AV software? Yes, entirely, and it's done as common practice in some circles. You have many writable 'media' on your computer from video card BIOS to drive controllers, to anything with a flash BIOS with a little bit of bloat. Malware (define as you wish) can live on any of those, and they can even be aggregated to provide larger storage areas that will survive not only a reinstall but a drive swap. Can, and has, been done.

  110. After a recent update? by golden.radish · · Score: 1

    After many years of watching this happen, it -may- be the following:

    A windows update occurs.
    For whatever reason, despite everything/everyone saying this should/could/would never happen, a newer, more recent driver is replaced by an older driver provided by Microsoft.
    The system slows right down, largely due to "generic" drivers for things like video, sound, or in particular drive controllers and my all time favorite, motherboard chipsets.

    So, things to check?

    Are you using the OEM provided drivers for sound, video, SATA/IDE controller and motherboard chipset? Have they recently been replaced? Did an update just occur?

    If not, go and download this: http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml ... and check for deferred procedure calls of a volume that are indicative of very very bad drivers (which may be in place due to the above). I've seen drivers written so badly on a brand new XP SP3 system they will have real-time sound & video dropouts caused entirely due to DPC latency in the dozens of milliseconds.

    For reference, my current system, with that tool, shows a modal DPC latency of 2 microseconds. yes, that's 2, not 20, not 200, not 20000. Two. A system with proper drivers should NEVER EVER EVER go above the 500 microsecond "green" limit.

    Manufacturers such as Acer (and their ilk) are particularly bad for this, especially during the time period (and since) when laptops were offered with both Vista and XP. The XP drivers were/are absolute junk, and the resulting the performance is hideous. In some cases, using OLDER drivers provides relief, but sometimes, you have no choice but to install Linux and run XP in a VM. :|

  111. I see a lot of replies that give troubleshooting. by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    I'm sure the poster already knows advanced troubleshooting.

    I see these sort of problems also on my vista machine.

    mysterious slowdowns not seemingly caused by anything.

    no process is eating resources. It's mysterious. I reboot and the problem goes away. If I didn't play games, I'd install opensuse.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  112. First check to see if it's running Windows by Tiger+Smile · · Score: 0, Redundant

            That's about it.

    --
    -- Prepared at the direction of, or to be sent to Legal Counsel, in anticipation of litigation. Attorney Client Pri
  113. no idea by elmartinos · · Score: 1

    I have no idea how this can happen.

    PS: Thanks for 3 GB of RAM.

  114. My Suspect - VirusScan by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    This generally happens when there is some resource and something has installed a hook onto it. (Like a TSR for you old folks) The hook code is only executed at certain times, depending on the nature of the hook. IRQs have hooks (Anyone remember IRQs?) but also windows supports additional hooks like for virusscan., Filemon, Procmon, etc.

    Given that everyone here (well the modded-up posts anyway) is suspecting a hardware disk issue, I think it's your virus scan.

    Re-install it or switch. Its probable that an engine update is not to nice on your CPU.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  115. CPU cooling issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've seen machines do this when the cpu fan malfunctioned. The fan was replaced but the system began periodically locking up. Problem solved with a new cpu.

  116. That's totally easy! by AlgorithMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the diagnose is: the computer has the windows

    --
    The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
    1. Re:That's totally easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misspelled "teh".

    2. Re:That's totally easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're infected with M. windowsi.

      Treatable with a transfusion of storage media, but rehabilitation is tedious.

      In a curious application of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal on a macroscopic scale, the very act of scanning for M. windowsi has shown complete remission in 100% of cases so-far, using MRI technology. Some basic function may be lost, be sure to talk with your doctor about the risks involved.

  117. Have you tried Dial a Fix? by jeremybar · · Score: 1

    Have you tried Dial a Fix? http://wiki.lunarsoft.net/wiki/Dial-a-fix It does some useful cleanup.

  118. Suddenly? by mypalmike · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Was it before or after you installed the animated unicorn desktop theme you saw in a banner ad?

    --
    There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
  119. Possibly the NIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've experienced strange issues with Windows having unusual spikes in activity for no apparent reason, and traced it back to an on-board VIA network interface of the motherboard. I disabled the on-board NIC (both in Windows and in BIOS), put in a new PCI-based NIC card, and the problem was solved. The slowdown was pretty wretched (mouse wouldn't even update position during movement) for 1-2 seconds before it had about 1 second of responsiveness.

    I've also had very similar problems happen with Realtek PCI gigabit adapters, both under Windows & Linux, on different systems. The slowdown wasn't nearly as bad as the previous example, but it was noticable (I would describe it as a consistent slugginess rather than a spikey periodic unresponsiveness). Swapping the Realtek adapters for Intel adapters immediately solved the problem. I don't know if it was a driver option/configuration issue (I just left everything default), but it happened under *both* Windows (2000 & XP at the time) and Linux. And it it was with two different Realtek-based NICs, from totally different vendors, on entirely different machines.

    Ever since these multiple occasions occurred, I usually shy away from the cheap NIC chipsets and stick with Intel or Broadcom when possible.

  120. sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    finally fast dot com

    doesn't anyone watch cable tv late at night? oh god the commercial haunts my dreams

  121. New USB device? by Greg+Newton · · Score: 1

    I've seen behaviour like this caused by a dodgy USB device. A random process would spike and if you killed that, another one would spike in it's place. This was under windows XP. I tracked down the offending device by systematically removing things till the problem went away. Once it was removed there were no further problems. I'm guessing it was windows I/O system not coping well with the hardware problem.

    Similarly, try going through any other things that might have changed around the time you started seeing the problem. The device in question also caused problems under Linux.

    --
    ---- Backwards compatible -- If it's not backwards it's not compatible
  122. Easy Fix by Quenyar · · Score: 1

    Why nothing could be easier. Back up your data and then reboot from the Ubuntu install disk.

  123. Nuke the site from orbit... by Darth_brooks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why bother. I keep up to date images for all my hardware and, at the first whiff of trouble, it's bye bye birdy.

    There's just not a huge list of reasons to dick with this stuff any more. Yeah, you might learn the attack vector, then you might be able to manually remove the nasty little bugger that's got you slowed down and patch against future intrusion. Or, you can start from scratch and move on with your life after an hour or so. Besides, if it is hardware, it'll be pretty apparent after you've reloaded (if you can reload at all.)

    I no longer care what crapware my users have managed to infest themselves with. Ghost the machine, move on to genuinely interesting problems.

    --
    There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
    1. Re:Nuke the site from orbit... by dragonturtle69 · · Score: 1

      Ghost the machine, move on to genuinely interesting problems.

      Agreed. Occasionally though, I have to play with one. Make no mistake, that installation is no longer to be trusted and will be wiped regardless of the outcome. Just a bit of challenge to enjoy for me.

      --
      "What luck for the rulers that men do not think." - Adolph Hitler
  124. Condoms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought that's what a condom was: a virtual machine for sex.

  125. Walkthrough - more or less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people are giving loose suggestions, here's my attempt at providing a walkthrough:

    First try and identify the symptoms better. From reading the summary it probably isn't CPU or memory exhaustion. If it is elevated disk usage, the simples give-away would be the LED on your computer being constantly on (perhaps flickering). Run perfmon, as other have suggested, just to be sure. Check temperatures as well.

    If the problem is one of the above, things get easier. Find which process is eating up IO/memory/CPU, and you're done.

    If nothing jumps out, it could be a rootkit or it could be hardware. Try a GNU/Linux live CD, see how it runs. If it runs fine under some load, it's probably not CPU or memory. There's still disk left, but if the LED wasn't going crazy it probably wasn't the cause. Still, I guess you check with hdparm or dd if of=/dev/null, or something.

    If all runs fine it was, it's a rootkit. Good luck there.

    If there's still a problem, it's probably hardware. Then it's a bigger problem, but at least you know what it is. I won't go into detail here.

    Good luck.

  126. This place would rule if it weren't for the trolls by billcopc · · Score: 1

    Okay, the usual checklist goes like this:

    1. check for malware - you've already done this.
    2. check for a failing hard disk, by running the HDD manufacturer's diagnostic tool or Spinrite
    3. if there's no failure, try clearing out your temp folders and run a defrag
    4. if it's still chugging, it just might be time to start over with a fresh OS install. Sure, you could troubleshoot for days or even weeks, but a reinstall takes a few hours to a day at most. Remember to back up your data, or better yet install to a new hard drive and copy your documents over.

    All you Linux troll-wannabes about to bash the defrag, shut the fuck up! Run a few torrents, watch your disk I/O drop to a tenth of its nominal performance within a week, and you'll see that ext3 is not immune to fragmentation, no better or worse than NTFS. *ANY* I/O-intensive machine benefits from a defrag once in a while, there's no filesystem in the world that can avoid it, not unless it uses multi-gigabyte write cache to sort sectors in-flight, because some loads just aren't filesystem-friendly.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  127. Try these. by Atmoverse · · Score: 1

    Remove Zip drive software if no drive is connected. Check the CPU fan. Scan, scan, scan like mentioned above.

  128. Long list of things to try by syousef · · Score: 1

    1. Check your event log. Look at both application and security event logs in event viewer. See if there is any correlation between logged events and slowdown. Check if you're getting any Hard Disk or IO errors.

    2. If you're running Alcohol or Daemon Tools check to see if they're loading images at startup across the network. If they are unmount the images. Remember your

    3. Unplug all your USB devices and reboot. A faulty USB device can and will cause lockups, slowdowns and crashes.

    4. Unplug your network (as suggested by another slashdotter). If slowdowns increase, some piece of software is holding onto a file across the network and when it becomes unavailable Windows will sit there waiting for it to return until a timeout.

    5. Another slashdotter suggested checking your drives with a SMART utility. Great idea. Also run chkdsk on each partition. Also run memtest86 or similar to test system memory. Any hardware diagnostic software that came with your motherboard or system should also be run. If nothing came with your system find a freeware hardware diagnostic program.

    6. Procmon's was suggested by another slashdotter. Another great tool. Before you learn to use it though display all the columns in your standard task manager process list. Look at what's using the most resources. Not just CPU. Look at memory, file handles, and GDI objects in particular but also threads and look at what's doing IO.

    7. Start up in safe mode with networking. See if you still have a problem.

    8. Use msconfig to disable programs run at startup and reboot. See if that fixes the problem. If it does, slowly re-enable software in small groups until you narrow down which processes are the cultprits

    9. If you're concerned about malware run netstat -o after a fresh boot and see if your PC is making any connections to weird sources. Also run hijackthis!

    10. If you're overclocking, turn off the overclock and see if that fixes it. Even if you're not overclocking, resetting your BIOS to defaults can weird and wonderful bugs. (I once had a memory pool leak on my laptop that would crash it after at most 24 hours and a BIOS reset was the only thing that worked in the end). See if there are any BIOS updates for your motherboard but be aware that a BIOS upgrade is a risk. Make sure you can revert and make sure you don't do it if you don't have reliable power.

    11. Switch off the machine. Open up the case and carefully clean your CPU and GPU heatsink and any other accumulated dust. Dust can accumulate and increase the temp of the CPU, making it flakey. Make sure you know what you're doing so you don't hose the machine. Plenty of info online but if you're unsure get a more hardware savvy friend to help.

    12. If you have a video card to swap in, try that. I've seen bad video cards cause all sorts of instability.

    If none of the above helps, at some point you'll need to cut your losses and start fresh. Reinstalling even a monster of a system will only take a few man days of effort whereas troubleshooting a hosed config is open ended. If you're spending too much time and your system isn't usable, rebuild it.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  129. Still... by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, while I do somehow sped more time at home on my Windows gaming box than under Linux (so this isn't a blanket Windows bashing,) my superficial and uninformed impression was that, all else being equal, any Windows box I've seen seems harder hit by IO than any Linux/Unix box I've ever seen.

    Yes, you can get a Linux box to crawl too, if the hard drive is stuffed and it can't swap for example. Or if the chipset isn't supported well by the drivers. (Rarer these days, but certainly possible.) Or whatever.

    But Windows... seems a bit special. I mean try to copy a directory between two hard drives, or better yet from a DVD to HDD, and Windows seems to me basically stuffed. Even notepad can get about as responsive as a narcoleptic snail. And you can just about forget about, say, playing a game while that happens.

    And that's before you even add such brakes as an anti-virus.

    I've seen that behaviour in any Windows, from 3.0 to Vista, including a detour through NT 4.0. In fact in Vista let's just say there's a reason why so many people were pissed off at the indexer kicking in all the time.

    My subjective impression is that I've yet to see Linux get anywhere near that unresponsive, in a similar scenario. Again, assuming that you don't have a nearly dead HDD and the chipset is supported in DMA mode.

    But heck, even in PIO mode, I've used Linux in PIO mode and I've used, say, NT in PIO mode. (Thanks to a retarded IT department which installed the wrong IDE drivers.) Linux did obviously have poor file IO performance, but NT just freaking _froze_ for a second or two, for example, when minimizing or maximizing a window. (Presumably due to aggressive memory management which swapped more of a process out when minimized.)

    Now admittedly I haven't actually programmed an OS at any point, so I'm probably talking out the arse, but I see no reason why that should happen at all. Any common source of IOWait has an interrupt. Even in PIO mode you don't have to poll until it's done. And DMA, now that was invented for the precise reason and purpose of transferring some data while the CPU services another process. It's why it's there. So there's no freaking reason for the whole OS to just twiddle its thumbs and wait. Even if one process is waiting for _paging_, you can still yield to another process while waiting for the HDD.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Still... by Detritus · · Score: 1

      I remember reading some driver source code that included comments bitching about how some early IDE controller chips were incredibly buggy. What you are seeing could be the result of software workarounds, like disabling interrupts during transfers.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Still... by AnthonyA7 · · Score: 1

      The difference between Windows and Linux in this regard is that Linux provides the ability to efficiently monitor and edit process attributes and the power to setup the machine in such a way that many problems are averted.

      As for a couple of the above situations:

      updatedb is indeed a cron job as DiegoBravo said, so it is trivial to increase the process niceness so that it doesn't interfere with normal operation. Hell, I do an updatedb and rsync backups of ~60 gigs every hour, no matter if I'm running a CFD simulation, compiling (or emerging) a massive package, encoding a movie, or just have too many tabs open in firefox.

      Moraelin brings up the problems with an inaccessible swap. Well, if that's occurring, then whoever set up the system should have spent more time planning his/her partition layout so that a swap partition is mandatory. Reinstallation of Linux a problem? Should have used lvm2, so that you can shrink, grow, or juggle filesystems at will. And if that's still not an option, you can always fidget with vm.swappiness.

      My point? The transparency and customizability of Linux (in my opinion) precludes pretty much all of the above problems save drive failure.

    3. Re:Still... by alexborges · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, while I do somehow sped more time at home on my Windows gaming box than under Linux (so this isn't a blanket Windows bashing,)

      I just stopped reading right there.

      --
      NO SIG
    4. Re:Still... by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Actually, in PIO mode, you do have to poll until it's done. That's the whole reason that the DMA transfer methods were invented.

      There are probably much better ways of transferring data, but they aren't backwards compatible, so we keep sticking with it. Unless AHCI has changed things, I haven't kept up with the technology.

    5. Re:Still... by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can get a Linux box to crawl too, if the hard drive is stuffed and it can't swap for example.

      Huh?

      Exactly how do you have your swap configured?

      You're freaking me out, here!

    6. Re:Still... by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      The hard drive overheated and died, that's how :P

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    7. Re:Still... by hasdikarlsam · · Score: 1

      It has. AHCI, NCQ, all those nifty new buzzwords actually mean something.

    8. Re:Still... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      The fact that Windows still does not manage to copy files efficiently says something about their development priorities...

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    9. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A long time ago I hacked up some lines of code for the parallell port driver in *BSD to make use of DMA and FIFO present in ECP/EPP capable chips. To get this working, I grabbed a copy of IEEE1384 which M$ and HP co-edited.
      Ever since I read said document, I fully understand why windoze freezes: The document actually suggests filling up the FIFO inside the interrupt servicing call. I suggest setting a flag inside the IRQ call and let the scheduler decide about what time is a good time to do bits of work might be a better idea. So, yeah, IRQ handling in windoze might be not so very optimal even these days...

    10. Re:Still... by fm2503 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe 12 months ago I had to investigate a problem with a dedicated Linux DNS server which no-one had logged into for years. It had been answering queries fine, but hadn't taken an update to a zone file it slaved.

      Turns out _both_ halves of the RAID set had died over time. As the box had 2GB of RAM the entire FS (pretty much) had been cached and the box continued to chug away quite happily memory resident until it actually needed to update a zone file on disk.

      Who needs disks.........

    11. Re:Still... by hey! · · Score: 2, Informative

      One thing that happened to me, although this probably isn't the poster's problem, is that my pagefile got fragmented. So far as I know, this is the only problem that can be truly said to be unique to Windows. I have no idea why Windows puts its backing store in the filesystem. Surely the overhead of going through the filesystem is unnecessary. Perhaps it is a leacy of a time when the ratio of disk space to physical RAM was smaller, and having a growable swap space was desirable. I've never found dynamically growable swap something I've ever wanted in Unix.

      In any case if you want to talk about brain damaged behavior, the way my pagefile got fragmented was that I run virtual machines for development purposes. This behavior has since been fixed (either by MS or VMWare) but launching the first virtual machine on Vista used to nearly crash the system for about ten minutes. What was happening was that Vista had used all the "unneeded" RAM for its various hare brained optimizations, and when you suddenly ask for one GB of virtual memory space it went into an epileptic fit trying to swap all that memory it was using out.

      Now here's the really brain damaged part: I ended up (I discovered) with over a hundred thousand fragments in my pagefile.

      How is that even possible?

      The nearest I can guess is that Windows must, in its desperation to free up RAM with a full page file, take pages of memory and stuff them into the first free bit of space on the filesystem it can. This isn't a problem in Unix, where you just grab (I guess) the first appropriately sized piece of disk off a heap. While I suppose it might be possible for some kind of fragmentation to occur in a Unix swap partition, it's inherently an ephemeral problem that would tend to fix itself as the memory situation improves. In Windows, the problem persists even after you reboot.

      When you run several virtual machines, you will swap unless you've got way more RAM than is normal for most users; more than many systems will accept in any case. I was mystified as to why my virtual machine performance, which I was extremely pleased with initially, became utter rubbish after a few months of usage, until I thought to check the pagefile. Ironically, dropping the pagefile altogether greatly enhanced the performance of the system, perhaps because it became more parsimonious with virtual memory space. Adding the pagefile back in, initialized to 4GB, fixed things.

      So now, when I get a new Windows machine, I just do what I've always done in Unix: I set the pagefile system right at the start to something like twice the maximum physical memory I think I'll ever install. This leaves a margin of error for unexpected changes, like problems with updated virtual memory algorithms. It may be that most people seldom if ever need a backing store at all with current memory sizes, I do, and in any case at current disk prices 8GB of disk costs less than a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

      One thing that occurs to me is that it would be even better to mimic Unix by creating a separate swap partition for the pagefile. It would have to be formatted of course, but if there's some kind of I/O crisis going on in the virtual memory system, this would at least tend to isolate it from the data in the real filesystems.

      One question I don't know the answer to is whether on 32 bit windows with 4GB of RAM, there is any benefit to having a pagefile at all, given that RAM is larger than the usable virtual memory space, accounting for the addresses lost to memory mapped I/O. You can use PAE, but that seems kind of pointless to me. If you need it you should upgrade to 64 bit. But I don't know enough about how hardware support for virtualization works and interacts with the host operating system to say whether there might be any benefit when running virtual machines.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    12. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As others have pointed out, this isn't I/O performance.

      What you're seeing is actually related to multithreading behaviour.

      Basically, the Linux kernel architecture is such that blocking I/O rarely blocks threads - and seldom if ever blocks the GUI threads. This is because of the way X Windows uses a client/server model to communicate with the local hardware - the server portion does all the GUI stuff, while the client portion does all the blocking I/O stuff...

      In Windows, however, their multitasker has always been a bit "cooperative" (even if they want to call it preemptive) - meaning that a programmer that isn't aware of the multithreading issues is likely to code I/O in such a way that it blocks not only their thread, but all other threads as well. Thus, blocking I/O has many opportunities to block GUI threads.

    13. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I see my Linux desktop using swap, usually I know something is amiss and I need to kill something. Swap space is seldom used on the typical Linux desktop Even when running Windows programs.

      This is in stark contrast to the way Windows manages memory. Swap first and ask questions later.

      Yes, you can get a Linux box to crawl too, if the hard drive is stuffed and it can't swap for example.

      Yes you can get slower file access on a full partition with many of the file systems available for Linux. However on a typical Linux desktop /, /usr, /bin, /etc, etc aren't filling up. /home is. Meaning program load times are typically only impacted when they have to load lots of data from the user's home directory.

      "and it can't swap for example." This just sounds like "I made it up because I don't know what I'm talking about." Like I said earlier swapping to disk is rather rare for the typical desktop environment unless something is amiss. Swapping is not a normal condition as it is on Windows.

    14. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason why is that it costs more money to get your developers to go back and fix things than it does to market a new layer to your product and make things worse.

      At least when your product is 100% proprietary and the core of it is older than dirt and has never been properly revised. When it comes down to it we're all running Windows NT 4.41676342.23421.

    15. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4GB of RAM? 32 bit windows? No PAE? => Switch off swap. No doubt about it.

    16. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen Linux get stuffed. 1 CPU box (no hyperthreading), DMA completely nonfunctional (requiring CPU time to transfer data to HD), XFree fallback driver (CPU->video port directly).

      Now I've got the right drivers (they weren't available when my machine was new) and it runs well as can be expected from a 2GHz Celeron until it overheats.

    17. Re:Still... by mathew7 · · Score: 1

      32-bit x86 means:
      -ONE application has a 4GB limit (well, 2GB actually, the rest is reserved for kernel mapping)
      -CPU CANNOT access more than 4GB of PHYSICAL address space (without PAE)

      So that means you can have 10 apps that each actively use 2GB and still be on a 32-bit non-PAE system (20GB virtual ram).
      So yeah, running 4GB or RAM on a 32-bit NT/2K/XP/Vista can still "use" 8GB swap space. It's just that you would be better off with 64-bit OS and 8GB of RAM if you need more than 1GB of swap.

    18. Re:Still... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's getting worse. I'm trying to copy all the files from one USB drive to another. Under XP, it hits a file it doesn't like, tells me what file it is, and quits gracefully.

      Same two drives on a Vista box, no error message, it just keeps trying to copy until I give up and hit cancel, which crashes Windows Explorer, making the machine useless until I force a reboot.

      Un-fricken-believable. Maybe they fixed that in Mojave, people love it so much.

      --
      Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    19. Re:Still... by hey! · · Score: 1

      Thank you for your very clear thoughts on this matter.

      What's confusing is that the address space of processes and the physical memory addressable by the CPU happen to be the same. I just got in the habit, many years ago, of sizing swap equal to the maximum physical memory, and as a practical it's always worked well for me. I seldom use anything more than a fraction of my maximum swap space, but of course that's the last thing I'd ever want to happen.

      It's likely that sizing swap to something like 24% (as you suggest) of real memory would work just as well nearly always. The launching of a virtual machine is probably one of the few exceptions, especially on operating systems poorly suited for that kind of thing. Also, as a developer, I often start big processes that I generally don't want running all the time, like commercial database servers.

      In any case, I don't think virtual memory has ever been a substitute for RAM, although I remember when it first became available it was often touted that way. It's more of a way of addressing inefficient allocations of memory without burdening programmers with figuring out what is really needed when.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    20. Re:Still... by ABCC · · Score: 1

      Given that your on linux your swap file resides on it's own disk partition a full hdd won't cause slowdowns to running out of swap space. Seek times can increase quite a bit with disk use depending on the data stored on the drive and how it's accessed. This configuration is easily "emulated" on windows and doing so will prevent the dreaded problem of a fragmented swap file. You can find the setting somewhere near the my computer > properties > performance tab if i recall. First set up a partition the size of your swap file and then untick the 'let Windows decide' box in the swap file settings dialog. Instead, create one of fixed size on the partition and reboot to apply the setting.

    21. Re:Still... by mathew7 · · Score: 1

      What's confusing is that the address space of processes and the physical memory addressable by the CPU happen to be the same.

      I read this 3 times until I really understood what you meant. But yes, that is what's confusing. If I would correct your sentence, I would change it to "... happen to have the same limit."
      I guess that's why they're 32-bit processors: main registers and pointers are 32-bit. By pointers I'm also refering to the contents of page translation tables (or whatever they are called), which link the virtual address to the physical address.

    22. Re:Still... by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      Uh? You write that "I have no idea why Windows puts its backing store in the filesystem." Where else would it put the backing store?

      And yes, Linux uses a filesystem to store the pagefile.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    23. Re:Still... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Windows 3.0-3.1 used DOS disk I/O. Windows for Workgroups 3.11 had some 32-bit access option, but otherwise went through DOS. No cache. Win95/98/ME had a cache. An interesting thing, I set Win95 before with 32-bit disk access OFF (so it would go through DOS) and ran a disk cache called CombiDisk... it sped windows 95's boot up about 4x. But it made CD-ROM use lock the system 8-( so I couldn't use it.

                The NT series (don't know about NT 3.1 and 3.5.. but 4.0, 2000, XP, at least..) has a cache that is more like the one in 95 than in Linux it seems to me...

                  What REALLY sped up the disk I/O in Linux was about 2000 when the Linux kernel got elevator sorting.

    24. Re:Still... by shnull · · Score: 0

      i'm running both ubuntu intrepid and vista on the same box with 6gb of ram (64bit ofcourse) on windows i have a pagefile of about 7gb on my harddrive on linux, i simply turned swapspace of, cos it was never used i find this baffling considering the amount of money put in to windows over all these years, do they apply for retards ... or is it a question of honour and is no single decent coder even willing to work for microsoft ??? really, i can't figure you humans out

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
    25. Re:Still... by Darth+Android · · Score: 1

      I think between the overly-agressive memory management of windows (6GB of RAM, 1.5GB in use for active programs, 2GB for system cache, and it's *still* paging stuff? WTF?), and the fact that it memory-maps executables (as opposed to copying them to memory to run) cause major problems if a drive is operating slow. True it can service another process while it's accessing the disk, but what if that process has to be paged off of disk before it can be run? True the CPU can go onto the next process, but I'm still here waiting for Word or WoW to open. Memory-mapping of executables was great when all we needed was 640Kb of memory, but today it's only purpose is to require exclusive filelocks when a process is running and prevent the application from being updated. This doesn't explain why a system would run fast for weeks/months and then suddenly slow down one day, but it's a serious flaw in how windows manages it's memory and processes.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are cruchy and good with ketchup.
  130. AV? by berryjw · · Score: 1

    On my last full-time XP box, I could not run Visual Studio with AV (Sophos) enabled. This persisted into some other apps, but was most notable with this. If the system became available enough to *see* a diag tool/window, there wasn't a problem, when it 'hung', task mgr hung with it. I doubt this is the problem for what's been presented, but it's worth checking. Turn off your AV, and see if it speeds up.

  131. What? by Yunzil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, we all like Linux because it doesn't do annoying things like this

    Speaking as someone who uses Linux at work every day, this is a flat-out lie.

    1. Re:What? by portscan · · Score: 1

      yeah, my laptop (Ubuntu 8.04) has been freezing a lot lately. firefox cpu usage spikes to 100% all the time. try to watch a movie is often like a game of russian roulette. i'm pretty close to formatting and switching to a minimal debian install--it's about time. I never really had this problem with Gentoo, although that was on a desktop. And I kept that box lean and mean. RHL 5.2-8 were varying levels of crappy.

      Computers suck.

    2. Re:What? by Stephen+Ma · · Score: 1

      Not a lie. The original author just needed to be a little more precise: a working Linux installation is very unlikely to suddenly, inexplicably slow down. Whereas it's almost normal for Windows to do this.

  132. another suggestion by ILuvRamen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most of the previous suggestions are more likely and better but I figured I'd also mention this. I've heard of people with undiscovered rootkits and a symptom is huge, seemingly untraceable performance loss. The only symptom is a lot of different, legitimate processes using up the CPU at the same time. This behavior is a known effect of some rootkits using CPU cycles while hiding itself. I've never seen it personally but I've heard about it. I'd suggest running Rootkit Revealer because it checks for any inconsistency between the registry and what's supposedly there for the entire file system and processes that are running (or something like that) instead of using a list of virus definitions.
    Also, nothing stops a computer like a piece of hardware telling everything to wait. Go to the actual manufacturer's page for every piece of significant hardware and update the driver for it. You'll be surprised how many are described as critical fixes but don't appear on windows update. And there's a lot of lines in the changelogs that will say something to the effect of "fixed system hang/pause when..."

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    1. Re:another suggestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMFG - A useful post from ILuvRamen! Surely the End Times are upon us.

  133. List of the best things to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Check the System event log for errors from source "Disk". If you see a bunch of failed writes and sector relocations, it's time to get a new drive.

    2. Check the DMA status of your drive as the first post said.

    3. Your system may have ran out of virtual memory and increased (and fragmented) the pagefile. Change the size of the pagefile from whatever it is to min 2000 MB / max 2000 MB so it will never grow (and fragment) again. Check the System event log for entries about that and download the Sysiternals PageDefrag tool. You may have to delete some stuff and run a normal defrag to free up enough contiguous disk space in order to defrag the pagefile.

    technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897426.aspx

    4. If you have IE6, set a small browser cache size, like 128MB. Once the cache gets too large, IE starts to spend too much time looking for items in the cache. Better yet, upgrade to IE7 and Firefox 3.x.

    5. Clear the prefetch cache as someone else said.

    6. Suck it up and spend a weekend re-installing everything. j/k. /djs

    1. Re:List of the best things to do by montyzooooma · · Score: 1

      Point 3, the virtual memory running out, has been the cause of most slowdowns on my network but we used to use a number of misbehaved programs that had this as a specific problem. Without getting too technical it's easy to add Virtual Memory usage to the Task Manager display. (under Processes, go to View and Select Columns.)

  134. autoruns.exe (anything out of place?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    autoruns is one of my favorite tools for finding malware and such. It is part of the sysinternals suite. It basically shows you how any program at any point in time on a windows machine can be triggered to run. Its actually a pretty interesting tool, a lot more useful than msconfig or something like that. But yeah, filemon and process explorer are also what you want to use.

    Also I second looking at mark russonovich's blog. He is a window genius and very easy to learn from. I'm pretty sure he could solve any windows problem that anyone has ever had.

    Is this just one rogue machine in a pool of identical machines? If so, re-image it and see if the problem persists or if any other machines have the same problem.

  135. NoScript is even better by Giant+Electronic+Bra · · Score: 1

    Has a lot more functionality than flashblocker and their ilk, and will defeat the VAST majority of browser based attacks as well.

    Plus it has some slightly more flexible options for configuration, etc.

    --
    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
  136. Spyware is the most likely cause. by shaitand · · Score: 1

    Spyware generally won't show in your process list anymore and the latest generation of spyware must all be manually cleaned.

    You can fight it and maybe eventually win but in most cases you are better off backing up your data and reinstalling windows.

    I don't see many viruses anymore, spyware is the most likely.

  137. In other words: by hummassa · · Score: 1

    The diagnostic is "Windows".

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
  138. Here's a quick check by camg188 · · Score: 1

    Use Task Manager, Processes tab and investigate any processes that have low CPU usage and continually rising "I/O Other" byte counts.

  139. some stuff i use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Biggest thing people seem to miss is to ask NON TECHNICAL questions in dealing with an issue like this. How long has it been doing this? When did you notice it start happening? Is it just yours that is slow, etc. Use the half step approach and eliminate big things, like someone else said disconnect the network cable, or maybe try it in safe mode, or anything that eliminates a lot of possibilities to rapidly narrow the scope of the issue. Apart from antivirus, antispyware, autoruns, atf cleaner to autofix messes, you can try task manager & perfmon.msc, sysinternals process monitor and process explorer, win32 api monitor, defrag, hardware diagnostics or whatever diagnostic tools your troubleshooting leads you. Don't be guided by tools alone, use your head or someone elses if your brain is defective. Don't spend too much time working on crap if a simple reimage will resolve the issue. Don't have an image for a PC? Make sure to capture one the next time you build it. If it works with a clean image then it is probably something you did. Stop hosing your PC. I actually had a guy the other day who installed itunes on his server and filled up his disk because he needed to charge it from something, and was too lazy to buy a dang charger. 99% of all users are idiots, and everyone (myself included) have fallen into that sad majority at some point. You know you probably frakked it up dude. Stop tripping and reimage it already.

  140. DEFRAG DAMMIT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When did you last defrag, clean cache files, or clean your registry ?
    Turn off system restore reboot then run a good defrag program. Make sure you make a new system restore after defrag.

  141. Seriously, Call GeekSquad by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 1

    I had this problem with my 266mhz PII recently with Windows 95. I took it to GeekSquad and they recommended:

    Ram Upgrade
    New HD
    Install Windows XP
    New Graphics card
    New 7.1 surround sound audio card
    New Speakers so I can hear the 7.1 surround sound
    New PSU because they said the graphics card needs a lot of Watts!
    Wireless Keyboard and Mouse
    Virus Protection software install
    Spyware Protection software install
    Firewall install
    Online Automated Data Backup service
    Data Transfer to transfer my old files to the new HD they sold me


    Now it runs great!!

    The best $3000.00 I've ever invested!!

    1. Re:Seriously, Call GeekSquad by phulegart · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't call geek squad for anything... considering they have sent business to the shop I work at... in once cases, leaving their tools CD inside a machine. Essentially a beefed and customized WinPE. The funniest part, as we were laughing and using the CD to diagnose the computer, memtest86 on the disc revealed RAM to be their issue. We would have used one of our discs, but you had to be there. The fact that we used Geek Squads diagnostic CD to uncover the problem with a PC, on a computer they couldn't fix and had sent to us, and had forgotten to remove their CD from... that kept us in stitches for a week or so.

      Now, the situation you just described, happens for $888 at our shop. It currently ends with an AMD X2 64 5800+, a Gig of Ram, a 320gb WD drive, an Asus a8n-sli board, an Evga Nvidia 8600, an Antec case, a lightscribe DVD burner, a floppy drive, and an Antec 380 Earthwatts PS (we got a pile of them), and an OEM CD and Key for XP Pro. Sure, it's a bit overpriced if you or I was going out and buying the hardware. But this is the system we sell to the customers who come in with their Old Compaq desktops with their PII and AMD K6 processors... or the systems that came out with XP when it was new, and are still using their original 256MB of RAM and are having spyware troubles on top of running with SP3. They bring in their old machines, we build them their new one, we transfer all their family pictures and such, install software like Firefox, VLC, OpenOffice and such, give them a quick lesson on how and WHY they should be running AdAware and Spybot weekly, introduce them to AVG Free as it is installed on their machine, and ALWAYS send them away happy.

      Sorry the Geeks Squad Hosed You on price, but if you walked into Bestbuy with a PII running WIn95, you needed a new computer and OS if you wanted to be current and compatible. If you wanted to keep that Win95 machine, you should have visited a smaller shop, and told them so. They would have fixed you up (we also give people that option) and got you running again. I've got several satisfied customers running WIn98 machines currently, and one still using a Win95 box. I've reinstalled for them, found the tools they need to stay clean etc... and they come back regardless... usually due to the fact that they won't run their cleaners regularly... and need a cleaning every few months. Kinda like teeth. Smaller shops are more likely to work harder to do what YOU want, as opposed to making you fit into their mold.

      But what about your restricted build that you offer people... you might ask me. Well, that $888 starts there with that hardware. You want to customize? That's cool. You insist on a Striker Extreme? That's fine. I'm not one of the Geek Squad. I'm not going to walk you over to the sales department and tell you that you that you need to pick out a new machine, and we'll dump your data onto it. I'm not going to put a piece of cardboard on the side of your head so you can't see that the new computers being sold on the shelf next to where you are looking at that estimate you just described, and how they only cost $1000, and offer more than the hardware you are being expected to pay $3000 for. I'm a small shop tech. I aim to please. Your fault you went to the Geek Squad. Stop screwing over the little guy, and support your local business... or THAT is going to happen.

      --
      "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
  142. solved it by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 1

    and everything was fine, until one day â" it wasn't. I've run spybot, antivirus, and looked at proc explorer â" no luck.

    there you go

  143. imaging by f1vlad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't use windows daily, but I have windows box for games. And what I do, to avoid having to waste endless hours investigating this sort of stuff, is maintaing fresh images of my hard drive.

    Simply keep OS and installed programs on C: drive, back up its entire image often. Something happens, wipe it and put _stable_ image over it.

    I suggest Acronis True Image Maker.

    --
    o_O
  144. Use the three R's of Windows repair.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Re-boot, Re-install, Re-format.

  145. Impossible question by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

        This is an inherantly impossible question to answer.

        "Hey Doc, I felt fine until I didn't."

        How many things could go wrong? Well, two I guess. Hardware, or software.

        Did a fan fail?
        Is a hard drive failing?
        Is there a memory fault?
        Did you hit the "turbo" button (get off your 386, hehe)?

        Do you have [mal|spy|ad]ware that you don't know about?
        Did a Windows setting get changed?
        Is it network related?
        Are you just overwhelming your machine?

        Oddly enough, I've seen Windows PC's, where the owners set their own DNS servers to somewhere pathetically slow or down. It wasn't just the Internet that went slow, but everything. That's probably because so many applications call home now. They were hanging trying to call home, and instead of going to sleep like they should have, they'd stay busy, and make the whole system busy.

        This problem isn't something that can be diagnosed by a posting.

        A friend called me. "My server crashed twice today. What's wrong?" Good question. I told her I wanted to shut it down and pull the cover off, so I could have a peek inside. She didn't want me to. I suggested it may be a failing fan, hard drive, etc, etc. She insisted I install some tools, rather than just pop the cover off. I tried. The machine crashed about 2 minutes in.

        I took the opportunity to pop the cover. The CPU fan had failed. Beyond that, the motherboard must have been going, probably from the heat. After changing the fan, it wouldn't power back on. I moved her drives to the most similar spare machine I could. It wasn't similar enough. Windows wouldn't boot because of the differences in the motherboard. {sigh} One in-place upgrade later, a few dozen updates, and shes running.

        So, what's wrong with your PC? If I have to base it on my most recent experience, I'd say your CPU fan is gone, and your motherboard is about to go. Really though, we need an awful lot of information to even give a good guess.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  146. Some good advice all around by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

    But windows will never run as fast as when you first installed it, and if the time for diagnosis, running and downloading antispyware/malware/rootkit/virus/registry cleaning/defragging/etc exceeds the time to do a fresh install then you might as well do a fresh install.

    Like others have said here look at hardrive and memory problems, and if those are not the problem then start doing other diagnosis or just do a reinstall.

  147. give up by danab3791 · · Score: 1

    horrible answer but seriously, it's too much trouble. it happens way too often. just make a good disk image that you can revert to and have your files backed up. i remember wanting to find out what the trouble was with certain problems on windows boxes but the truth is there are far too many and they're not interesting ones to solve

  148. System Explorer - look at I/O by Proudrooster · · Score: 1

    I've had similar problems lately and used these two tools to get my XP back without reloading.
    http://systemexplorer.mistergroup.org/
    SE can do realtime performance of I/O Reads/Writes by process.
    When windows gets I/O bound the system can grind to a halt and become unusable because of the way the windows XP kernel operates.

    To eliminate bad spyware, this utility works great
    http://www.safer-networking.org/en/home/index.html

    -Enjoy!

  149. Big target. Make it smaller. by Fearless96 · · Score: 1

    You didn't mention the event logs. Did you check them? Throw any error messages at a search engine if you don't understand them.

    Does the hard drive sound good? If you have a mechancial drive and you almost never hear the heads seek, you arean't close enough to diagnose. I've had to press my ear against a laptop before knowing the drive sounded bad. There should be no rhythmic "click-shuffle-click-pause-reapeat" sound. The bad hard drive sound is hard to describe but a repetitive pattern is a key ingredient.

    Are there symptoms in safe mode? If no, the culprit isn't running in safe mode and finding it with brute force at this point isn't as bad as you may think. E.g. disable the startup section in msconfig and reboot. If the problem is gone then the problem is in the startup section. Otherwise, the problem is NOT in startup section and most likely in services. Either way you've just eliminated a large chunk of possibilities. If the problem looks like it is in startup, disable half of the startup items... get the idea? Everybody loves the binary search algorithm, right?

  150. Modern virusus are very adept at obfuscation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can hide their processes. They can hide their files. They can protect the memory that they occupy. In order to properly detect these bad boys, you need to do an off-line scan. I recommend that you get comfy with UBCD. Integrate it with a very good virus scanner like Kaspersky and SpybotSD. This has always helped me to track down and eradicate the nastiest viruses, some of which could not be detected by those same scanners in a live running system.

  151. It may be fragmentaiton ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can use the defrag application provided in Windows xp/Vista/2000/me/98. A better defragment software that I use is called (jkdefrag)

    http://www.kessels.com/Jkdefrag/

    It defrags your harddrive AND it optimizes the file structure, so the HD runs faster. You can execute the app using cmd or run in windows gui.

  152. Music CD with buggy software in the disk drive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've had this frustrating problem several times and the answer is always that there is a [forgotten] music CD with buggy movie or copyright protection software in the disk drive. The CD or DVD is stuck in a random spin up / spin down / wait cycle. The task manager shows alternating 100% busy spikes and the system crawls.

  153. Check for heat throttling by DrDitto · · Score: 1

    I went through this same exercise on my laptop last year. I was thoroughly stumped until I finally noticed one day that I wasn't hearing a normal "whir" once it heated up. Sure enough, after downloading an Intel utility I found that the processor was heat-throttling itself down to 166MHz. Got the internal fan replaced and performance was back to normal.

  154. A Slow Win PC by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    Back in the days when I was a sinner running Windows I would see slowness and crashing when I had installed too many programs on a PC.
              If one suffers from a diseased mind and simply can't resist Windows then the secret seems to be to simply limit the install to a small handful of programs that you use every day. But even so I suspect that you still will need a fresh install every year or so.

  155. It worries me.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    It worries me that upon seeing the dll name I knew it was a codec related issue, but it worries me even more knowing the product by the codec name (simply because I use a Blackberry).

    --
    Quack, quack.
  156. Process Monitor by Animaether · · Score: 1

    and don't forget Process Monitor (replaces FileMon, RegMon, etc.)
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896645.aspx

    process explorer is great to see what's using CPU/RAM/etc. and what DLLs it's got loaded. It doesn't tell you anything about what files it's accessing, however.

    For example - my WD USB drive refuses to 'safely remove' in Vista. It always claims it's in use. When I use Process Explorer, there doesn't seem to be anything going on. The drive isn't in use (open file handles, for example), there's no new processes spawned when I go to 'safely remove' the drive, etc.
    But then I look at the Process Monitor and wouldn't you know.. scvhost.exe (an existing process) writes to "\system volume information\tracking.log" every time I go to 'safely remove'. 'safely remove' then decides for that fraction of a second that the drive is in use, and thus refuses to proceed.

    So now at least I know why. Can't say I know how to fix it (disabling system restore did squat), but at least I changed the caching setting to disabled, meaning I can just yank the plug.

    1. Re:Process Monitor by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Might be able to go in and turn off that type of logging,
      may be a pain to get it to do it though.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    2. Re:Process Monitor by jhantin · · Score: 1

      Have you considered reformatting to FAT32 instead of NTFS? (Yes, I know Windows will try to prevent you from formatting a sufficiently large volume as FAT32, but there are other ways.)

      --
      ...when you're writing a game...tweak the difficulty of "Easy" to something [your mother] can cope with. -- onion2k
    3. Re:Process Monitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As AC because i already moderated this thread.

      I remember using a FAT partition exclusively for swaping in windows helping speed things up a bit.

      Not pratical for working partitions tho, as you can't have files bigger than ~4gbs on them.

    4. Re:Process Monitor by Animaether · · Score: 1

      Indeed - not particularly practical as I have many files well over the 4GB limit and I really don't want to muck around with doing things like creating a dozen smaller FAT32 partitions either. (the drive's 1TB, for the curious).

  157. Viruses running as threads and interrupt handelers by Teilo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is a scary thought that might be relevant. Wired recently published an interview with a repentant spyware author who mentioned that they had figured out how to run the virus as a series of discrete threads which are not running as part of any parent process, something that Windows evidently allows. He also stated that they considered using a completely threadless model, by installing the code as an interrupt handler. Just tie it to an interrupt that regularly fires, and their code runs in an utterly transparent manner - something Windows also allows. The guy claimed that they didn't actually do the interrupt trick. But the frightening think was that it is even possible. I have no doubt that someone will do it eventually.

    --
    Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
  158. Some Troubleshooting Links by DustoneGT · · Score: 1

    Go Here or if you have some money to spend go here for a more user-friendly solution to your problem.

  159. Hardware or Software by nog_lorp · · Score: 1

    Two things to check: Hardware or software. Check your system logs for hardware problems - the hard drive error scenario was discussed above, but I've had a similar issue with a disk drive, where every second Windows would poll the device and get an error, causing slow halty performance.

    For software causes, get GMER (http://www.gmer.net/index.php), this has a process list that gives precise kernel time used by each process, which gives you a good idea what is eating up your cp-ewe. If it is something more obvious, just start up taskmgr and sort by CPU usage and then memory usage and see if anything looks out of the ordinary.

    I recently was having slow logon times and slightly sluggish performance. Didn't realize until I ran WireShark to debug a network issue that I had freenet running eating up resources/bandwidth (I'm behind NAT so I can't even help others by running a node so no point having it up when not in use).

  160. First post! by vandelais · · Score: 1

    First post!

    --
    Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
  161. Linux doesn;t do annoying things? by gatkinso · · Score: 0, Troll

    [sarcasm]

    Like one day all of a sudden mounting your root file system as read only simply because you commited the horrible sin of gracefully shutting down one night and powering up the next day?

    Things like that?

    Linux? Never!

    [/sarcasm]

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  162. would that also be a problem with DNS lookups? by ksheff · · Score: 1

    I've had problems where DNS look ups seem to fail a lot. Click on a link or type something into the search box and Firefox will just sit there for a bit, throw up a page saying that it can't find the address of the website. I hit the retry button a couple of times and it will eventually come up. This is just for the windows machines, not the linux ones. Chrome will do the same thing.

    --
    the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  163. Suddenly??? by Migity · · Score: 1

    I thought that was default behavior.

  164. Diagnose or resolve? by felixrising · · Score: 1

    First: put things in perspective. What is the effort estimate to diagnose and resolve the existing installation compared to a fresh install? Choose the lesser.
    Check all the common stuff:
    Test HDD, RAM, CPU etc under load (there are a bunch of nice linux live CDs to help with this.

    There are some really common issues within windows:
    - corrupt system files: 'sfc /scannow' on a cmd line with windows install cd in the drive.
    - Clear the page file: corrupt page file causes disk thrashing and very slow computer, plus virtual memory errors - also visible by that constantly on HDD light. You can also clear page file at shutdown via reg hack.
    - Too much cruft: uninstall all the crap that you really don't need/use, maybe replace some software with alternatives.. not all virus scanners are alike.
    Anyone familiar with troubleshooting systems knows that a process of elimination is 99% sure to locate the problem, unless its a result of several factors with no single nexus.
    - Good luck

  165. IT here by Eil · · Score: 1

    Have you tried turning it off and on again?

  166. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 1

    Aircan? Try using a vacuum, and then the dust won't end up somewhere else in your area.

    I have to vacuum out our home computers every 6 months, due to too many dogs in the house. It's pretty impressive how gummed up the heat sinks are when I open up the cases to do this.

    --
    I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
  167. Slow computer troubles? by phulegart · · Score: 1

    As a professional in the field of fixing this and other similar problems with PCs, I would have to say that the first thing to consider, is a fresh install of the operating system.

    As a geek, that thought makes me cringe... because I want to fix it.

    I was doing a bit of necessary research on a machine tonight, where every time it was updated to SP3 after a fresh install (heavy spyware/malware infected system, customer opted for the quicker format-reinstall instead of the longer cleaning) it would BSOD with a 0x07e. The fresh install was from a Compaq/HP recovery partition. The issue, as it turned out, was due to an orphaned registry entry relating to the fact that the initial recovery image was made on an Intel machine (probably at a factory in Texas). On a machine with a non-Intel processor, when Windows is updated to SP2 or SP3, this registry key is activated, and the machine will attempt to start up with intelpmm.sys loading... which causes a BSOD on an AMD machine. How many countless Compaq Presario desktop users came home to this obscure BSOD? We at the shop avoided seeing this problem on a lot of repair jobs, because we would just blow all the partitions, and install fresh with an OEM CD and their key.

    Now... the geek in me wants to keep one iteration of an OS going for as long as possible... which I can do with Windows. I am typing this on a copy of windows that was installed... about 5 years ago. I've cloned it onto newer drives, and I've gone through different motherboards without having to reinstall. Why? Because I know enough to be a professional and I make my living on the hardware. I don't think that everyone should have to be a professional to keep their computer running smoothly though. unfortunately, this is not how things are.

    So what to do with a machine that crawls? Look first at when it started crawling. If it happened slowly over time, that's hard to do. If you came home one day, booted the box and it crawled from that day forth... you look at the event viewer. You see what your computer did before it started running like crap. Was there a windows update? It is conceivable that there was an automatic update, and it is conceivable that it made a change that made your computer unhappy. I can't tell you how many systems run great as they are updating, then look or sound like crap, because the Windows Update suggested driver for the onboard Intel GPU or C-Media sound (which was actually a Realtek) screwed up an OS rebuild.

    There are a bucket full of tools out there.
    http://www.majorgeeks.com/
    Visit that site. Investigate the tools. Ok, you know about "antivirus" and Spybot. Do you know about Malwarebytes? And how it gets hundreds of current maleware baddies that spybot doesn't? Do you know about Combo Fix, how it will add an easy boot to the recovery console, AND repair some specific Malware infections? There is a long list of tools. And some of them do have an overlap with other tools, in what they find. Others, are Very specific (Smitfraud.C removal tool, for example). How is your AV doing? Are you mistakenly running multiple resident scanners at the same time? DO you have a ton of things running on Startup?

    See? Sure, Linux can make things easier in some cases. And yes, the more you know, and the more patience you have (and the more care you exercise) the better your Windows experience can be. But you have to pay attention to your machine. You have to investigate problems. You have to be well armed, or willing to pay a professional to take care of it. Sure. Everyone has the potential to be a great gardener. Most, will hire a professional. Same thing here. I don't care who says it's easy. They forget that they know more than the majority. What is easy for them, is not common knowledge. People still think that their computer needs more "memory", because they can't download any more songs. They don't know that the little windows sticker on the side or bottom of a computer is an

    --
    "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
    1. Re:Slow computer troubles? by Intrinsic · · Score: 1

      Scott Larson Troubleshooting Rule #1

      If at first its not a hardware problem , then suspect software. (Unless you want to waste alot of time.)

    2. Re:Slow computer troubles? by phulegart · · Score: 1

      I don't disagree. And with laptops, this is always the first line of approach. Check the hardware, then software. Hell, just booting to BartPE will tell you a lot about the hardware outside of the installed OS. Then you've got tools to check other things, etc... I've seen a number of instances where a machine will boot to a black screen error that the system portion of the registry hive is either missing or corrupted. You can't boot to safe mode. You can boot to a recovery console and manually copy the one in the repair directory off windows...But... what causes this error is almost always accompanied by actual data corruption. Can't fix it before a Chkdsk... it just may not need one.

        or

      Boot to BartPE
      If desktop shows the C drive as (unrecognized)
      Run Chkdsk and fix.
      Start the Remote Registry Editor.
      It detects the error, and fixes it from a different and recent partial backup.
      Computer boots.
      Recover data from a most likely failing drive.

      In this case, using software to determine hardware failure, and make the transition as smooth as possible. Might be a massive infection that caused the corruption, low chance though. But as an early diagnostic step on an unknown issue, I usually boot to BartPE before I open the case. Unless it is obvious ("Check system fan", no bootable device found, broken screen, dripping, etc.).

      --
      "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
    3. Re:Slow computer troubles? by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      intelpp.sys should be renamed to remove the 7e error on an HP/Compaq computer with an AMD processor. Renaming that file will bring you back to normal. It is both HP and Microsoft's fault and though known not well known.

      rename the intelppm.sys and reboot. Use recovery console to do this or boot with a Ubuntu Live CD and mount the NTFS file system and rename that way.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  168. Uhm? by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1

    I've encountered this a few times with Windows PCs, but the solution has always been to just add more hardware.

    What...the...FUCK?

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
  169. Check Print Spooler by WitchDoc83 · · Score: 1

    Had my laptop grind to a halt - looked at processes and found spoolsv.exe (?spelling) hogging resources - forums explained to me to stop spooler, delete files in Sys32 directory, restart spooler - slowdown vanished... Maybe not same as Timothy describes, but worth knowing about!

  170. Most Likely Component Failure by HermMunster · · Score: 1

    You most likely have a component failure. Most often cause by the HDD. I'd test it out with the manufacturers diagnostic software, though those fail to identify a problem about 30% of the time (they indicate no problems when there are problems). I'd test with memtst and see if it results in problems. Remove extra RAM (have just enough to make the computer work (4 gigs on a 32 or 64bit system?).

    Software can cause this behavior too. Though it really makes no sense to chase a software problem without first testing the hardware and gaining confidence in it.

    Could be you have Norton on there. Could be you have AOL on there. Both of those two products can have problems which result in slowed performance, noticeably slowed. Both McAfee and Norton firewalls can cause all sorts of havoc even tho one day they just worked.

    CPU overheating is easy to check and with today's systems it is rare that that will be the contributing factor, especially if nothing happened to trigger it and it was running well before. You'd have noticed a heat problem long ago. Heat issues are generally a result of poorly placed HSF and that would be known soon after you began using the computer on a regular basis.

    I've seen a reset of the BIOS to defaults resolve some performance issues, and I've seen the motherboard itself be the cause (CPU, memory, etc replaced and it still goes slow--in fact, I have two motherboards in my shop now that were replaced as a result of that).

    Processor, Video card, motherboard, RAM, HDD all can contribute to this (be the cause). Software too, such as malware. Registry errors--extremely common under windows--in the wrong section can cause it. Registry files (hives) being in the location of the HDD where you are developing bad sectors can cause it. Try copying the registry files and rename them. Don't delete the old one. Probably have to do this with your drive as a second drive in another system so you can do the rename properly (copy the files, rename the original hive files to something else, rename the copied files to the new hive files).

    Registry fixers don't fix anything. No software today, that I have ever seen, actually fixes a damaged registry. Yeah, some will examine and find entries, etc that are out of line with files, and settings, but that's with an actual working registry. If the registry is damaged no program that I know of can actually fix it.

    Scan the computer for malware (yeah, I know you have already) but do it with the HDD in another computer as a second drive.

    Check out subinacl from Microsoft. Download that program and the reset.cmd file. Install and run reset. Read about it first before you do so so you understand what's happening.

    There are such things as rootkits. The same company that does process explorer also provides a rootkit revealer. But to answer your question just because something is running as a service doesn't mean it will get by the antivirus and anti-malware products you are using.

    Spiking at random intervals is normal.

    The best friend of an ailing computer is another computer where you can boot the computer with that drive as a second drive. That's a good piece of advice that will save you tons of time in the future.

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  171. My Windows is abusively sloppy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "My Windows is NOT slow.

    It is special."

    Special as in deliberate abuse by a large corporation to increase income?

  172. Check hard drive space remaining, and IE cache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One simple, quick check is to make sure there's at least 2 Gb of free space on the main C: partition.

    I've seen cases where the swap space will get crunched down because there's no room to set it up, and Windows will slow.

    I've also seen cases where Internet Explorer will ignore the limits set on cached internet files. Manually doing a clearing of cached files may free up several gigabytes of space if the machine has been used with IE on the internet for a few years.

    One much less likely scenario, is if the computer has a dial-up connection. IE seems to 'get stuck' on the connection it initially used, and not change to the network adapter. I was reminded of this issue last night, on a Vista PC.

  173. Re:skippy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Bottnet

    You did it again! Lordy, what a moron!

  174. Re:Your Sig by Talkischeap · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "Few people understand the impact of the common pigeon like your average motorcyclist."

    Never hit bird, but rode through a herd of Bees once.

    Well... it felt like a herd of 'em, they hurt, even through my leathers.

    And that short Hail Storm I rode through up in the Santa Cruz Mtns, OUCH!.

    There's a guy around here who rides a Yamaha V-Max, and he cut a deer in half one night that jumped out in front of him up Albion Ridge at about 60 MPH.

    He survived fairly unscathed, fixed the bike, and I've seen him riding it since.

    I'd say his deer trumps your pigeon for a Motorcyclists Sig, eh?

    Keep the rubber side down bro.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  175. Probably a memory issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I switched to a Mac, with its flat memory model, just to avoid this kind of issue. There are several things going on with your machine that will cause problems, such as MS's segmented memory model, but the most likely issue you have now is excessive paging between conventional and expanded memory.

    Fortunately, the fix is easy: while still in DOS (before starting XP), run MEMMAKER, which is a really slick utility from MS that "automagically" loads DOS and your TSRs into UMB, expanded, and extended memory. You can examine your CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files with EDLIN to see what was done. If you take the time to figure out the syntax and fine-tune what's going on, you'll be a Windows guru and the envy of your friends!

  176. What you mean "we", kimosabe? by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

    I'm sure nearly every one of us has had it happen. All of a sudden your Windows PC slows to a crawl for no apparent reason.

    "nearly everyone" on this, the so-called bastion of Linux bigotry?

    I once suffered a software bug in a program we were developing at work where instead of exiting, the program would go into the background and hang in a spinning loop (don't ask why and not my code). I had hangs on my desk top from time to time, but I thought it was evolution being stupid (I hate that program). Come to find out that I had a load average over a hundred and had had it for an extended period of time. Nice to know that even an ancient RHEL can withstand that load without breaking down.

    Cut & paste from top for posterity:

    top - 10:54:37 up 36 days, 2:29, 30 users, load average: 113.60, 113.20, 112.
    Tasks: 301 total, 113 running, 188 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
    Cpu(s): 94.0% us, 4.8% sy, 0.2% ni, 1.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
    Mem: 1034520k total, 957552k used, 76968k free, 89720k buffers
    Swap: 4192924k total, 2248672k used, 1944252k free, 154304k cached

        PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
    16348 steve 15 0 319m 177m 9552 S 58 17.6 3080:25 opera

    (The rest of the process table was full of instances of the program under development).

    It's kind of fun to know that one process can kill the King of the Desktop, and a hundred+ processes cannot kill the not-ready-for-the-Desktop.

  177. Watch more TV by lymond01 · · Score: 1

    Watch more TV. I did and I found FinallyFast.com.

    My computer used to be slow. But now it's finally fast! FinallyFast.com!

    (Please don't.)

    1. Re:Watch more TV by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Notice that it is rather strange that the computers shown in this commercial are Macs. Since the product is for Windows not OS X I wonder what they are doing?

      Why a Mac for the commercial? Did they think nobody would notice?

  178. Nothing new by xded · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Nothing new by Teilo · · Score: 1

      Scary as hell. This sort of thing is not impossible on Linux/OSX/BSD, but's it's a hell of a lot more difficult to pull off (unless you run as root all the time).

      --
      Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
  179. malware by rcamans · · Score: 1

    Every time this happens to me I run Stopzilla and Webroot and I always find some malware that got thru. I have found a spyware that norton did not see but spybot found. Once spybot removed a component, norton could see the rest. I depend on Stopzilla and it really cleans up

    --
    wake up and hold your nose
  180. Viruses with no process by Yakust · · Score: 1

    > Could this be a very clever virus that doesn't run as a process?

    Possibly. More and more viruses run in a DLL that is attached to a necessary Windows process (like winlogon.exe)

  181. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  182. Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    How about my old Inspiron 8000 notebook that started to be slow starting a few months ago, running Xorg at 20-40-50% of CPU while Firefox runs up the rest, 40-50-85%? Its running the latest Ubuntu Intrepid/8.10 updates. I tried switching between the proprietary nVidia driver by activating it with System:: Administration:: Hardware Drivers and the one automatically installed by (dpkg-reconfigure -phigh xserver-xorg) , which worked a few times to return its speed over the past few months, but no more. The GPU is a GeForce2 Go, which got upgraded in nvidia-glx-96, but not since then (it's up to nvidia-glx-180 now).

    How do I nail this thing down, and fix it? Firefox shouldn't slow to 30-60 seconds to switch between tabs, submit this post, etc.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 1

      check your memory usage, your probably thrashing. the system has to do work to get free pages available for firefox. With lots of flash active, you end up with memory leaks. install noscript & flashblock and only permit stuff to run from sites when you need them. That will slow down the memory leak substantially. restarting firefox once in a while will help too.

    2. Re:Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The memory usage is only about 40% for all procs. Xorg is using only about 5% max, Firefox only about 25-40% max. It's not paging VM. Clearly those inflated CPU usages are the problem.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 1

      ok but errant flash regularly sends ff into fits too. the blockers will still help, and killing off hung ff too.

    4. Re:Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I get the high Xorg and Firefox CPU without any Flash on the page. Xorg CPU is above 40-50% (sometimes above 80%) even without Firefox.

      Clearly there's something wrong with Xorg. I can't see how to diagnose it more precisely, or how to fix it.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 1

      maybe the window manager is too much for it? are you using something that wants 3D? maybe try a xfce or some such, and see if it makes a difference?

    6. Re:Suddenly Slow Linux Computer? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Even just using Firefox (on HTML-only pages) and Evolution (or not), and GTerm for top, the machine crawls. It was just fine until sometime in early December, after which switching between the proprietary and open drivers were fixing the problem. Since mid January, nothing really helps.

      Until today, when an Xorg patch for h/vblank (though on Intel, not GeForce2 Go) seems to have fixed things a little. It's still a lot slower than before December, but it's like 5x faster than yesterday, and Xorg spikes to consume all available CPU for only a few seconds when performing a major window operation like switching windows, or opening a new window or a new HTML page in an existing window.

      There's something wrong with Xorg, maybe multiple things that are gradually being fixed. I hope it's completely gone soon, but I'd be more confident if there were more diagnostics to specify it and look for a fix.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  183. Start with the easiest things first... by j741 · · Score: 1

    Open the case cover and use compressed air (while the system is off and unplugged) to clean it out internally. Then turn it on and examine all of the system's cooling fans to make sure they operate. If a system is overheating, it will slow down (if it doesn't completely fail) until it cools down at which point it will speed up again. As these physical check are quite easy to do, why not start with them?

    --
    - James
  184. Turbo button... by Grog6 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I still have a PC that has a turbo button.

    And Yeah, it changes the clock from 4.77Mhz to 10MHz.

    It even has a 10MHz coprocessor, lol, with a whopping 4MB of memory.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    1. Re:Turbo button... by aynoknman · · Score: 1

      I still have a PC that has a turbo button. . . .

      Yeah, but I'll bet it's real slow running Vista.

      --
      We need a "+1 -- nice sig" moderation.
    2. Re:Turbo button... by Carlos+Matesanz · · Score: 1

      so you're one of those retro computing snobs? Come to today's world already, my turbo switches from 16 to 66Mhz!
      And btw i tell you, these VESA cards are the next big thing.

    3. Re:Turbo button... by Mr+Z · · Score: 4, Funny

      Even my computer with the Turbo button switched between 8MHz and 25MHz. (Later, 8MHz and 33MHz.) And that was a scant 16 years ago...

      Your computer is probably of legal drinking age by now!

    4. Re:Turbo button... by theaveng · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I saw a lot of those computers in my college lab, and of course experimented with the "turbo" button but it never seemed to do anything. Why were those buttons installed on old machines? And how come they're no longer used in modern PCs?

      My old Commodore 128 had a "FAST" command in Basic, and it did make a noticeable difference.
      The TV screen went blank.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    5. Re:Turbo button... by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      The turbo button was there so that you could use programs (usually games) that had been written on the basis that the processor would always be at a set clock speed.

      When "fast" CPUs came out, lots of games became unplayably fast, but thankfully you could toggle the turbo button off, and they would generally be ok.

    6. Re:Turbo button... by xenolion · · Score: 2, Funny

      LOL is it sad to say i still have a pentium pro running nt server....

    7. Re:Turbo button... by Telecommando · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, but I'll bet it's real slow running Vista.

      How would you tell?

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    8. Re:Turbo button... by UID30 · · Score: 1

      8MHz IS my Turbo mode you insensitive clod!

      --
      "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
    9. Re:Turbo button... by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Could be worse. The first ATs ran at a blistering 6MHz. Then there were the ricers of the PC world, dropping NEC V20 and NEC V30 chips in their XT machines for a few extra %....

      (That would have been me if I had the $$ back in the day.)

    10. Re:Turbo button... by retchdog · · Score: 1

      C128: You have to be in 80-column mode (which was really impressive to me back then...) to use fast; the (separate) chip for 40-column couldn't operate at 2MhZ, and thus would disable. (The "slow" mode was 1MhZ btw.)

      Turbo: I think that the turbo button was there for compatibility with old software. Software wasn't always written with explicit timing routines, so usually a game written for an 8MhZ machine would be unplayable at 25MhZ. There were some hacks to slow down software by introducing interrupts, but this of course wasn't as reliable as getting the hardware speed closer.

      As software started to be written with evolving hardware in mind, the turbo button became superfluous. (Today's turbo button is "installing a graphics card" ;-)

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    11. Re:Turbo button... by torkus · · Score: 1

      Hey, it's "vista capable" so stfu.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    12. Re:Turbo button... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      It'n not suprisdng that you noticed that it seemingly did nothing. Back in the day, a lot of cases would have a turbo button, but a lot of system boards did not have a connector for it. The result was a button that did nothing on a many whitebox PCs. Typically there was a corresponding LED, so one way to see if it worked was to see if the LED changed state with the button, though that wasn't reliable either depending on how it was wired up.

      The purpose of the button was to slow down the PC so that software hardcoded to run properly on the original 4.77Mhz IBM PC (typically games) would run correctly on faster hardware. Though even then, it didn't work well - it would often clock the CPU to some other speed than 4.77Mhz (8Mhz seemed pretty common), and even if it clocked it to the right speed a 286/386/486 at 4.77Mhz was considerably more powerful than the 8088 so stuff still didn't work right.

    13. Re:Turbo button... by furbearntrout · · Score: 1

      lots of older apps(games) used the processor clock instead of the real-time clock for timing. Imagine playing a pac-man game at 10x speed. Scary fun. :-)

      --
      Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
    14. Re:Turbo button... by smithmc · · Score: 1

      I still have a PC that has a turbo button.

      And Yeah, it changes the clock from 4.77Mhz to 10MHz.

      It even has a 10MHz coprocessor, lol, with a whopping 4MB of memory.

      Man, imagine a Beowulf cluster of those...

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
  185. Re:skippy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right, because the people who run botnets dedicate them to mod you down on Slashdot. Riiight.

  186. Obviously .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like the tubes are clogged. It happens to my internets all the time.

  187. Re-Image. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Storage is cheap, and software doesn't take a lot of space.

    For my father, here is what I did:

    Pair of 250 gig hard drives (my old ones). One formatted 50 gigs Windows, and 50 gigs just as a second NTFS partition. The other formatted as Linux.

    Boot the Linux drive, then ntfsclone the Windows drive (be sure to use the -s option) -- even just with lzop compression, chances are you can fit quite a lot of images. Such as: Just after installing each item.

    Standard backup solutions like rdiffbackup can be used for the other drive.

    Then, when something goes wrong, boot Linux, use ClamAV to scan the data drive, and re-image the software drive. Problem solved.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  188. Process List + Google by grege1 · · Score: 1

    Open the process list and Google in a window, side by side. One by one identify each process and see what Google throws up. If nothing, then do a registry clean. If you are still slow then you start to suspect hardware.

  189. Not necessarily a bad fan by damas · · Score: 1

    My wife has a Sempron laptop and she was complaining about it becoming extremely slow after 1 hour of use.

    I've investigated and it turns out that the system ends up throttling down to 800Mhz (from 2.0Ghz) due to overheat. So now she turns the AC on when she's using the computer. Maybe I should get her a netbook to save on my electric bills?

    1. Re:Not necessarily a bad fan by WMD_88 · · Score: 1

      There are special pads you put underneath laptops that supposedly help with overheating. They cost less than netbooks, I know that much.

  190. Here are the answers! (Yes, really) by swordgeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    1) Download Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware, and run it. It was the only thing that found a virus on my computer recently, out of six packages (including two commercial ones).
    2) Download HijackThis, if that doesn't work. Be careful with this package, though! You can do some serious damage to your computer by blindly following its advice. Read the forums.
    3) How full is your hard drive? If the C: drive is full enough, fragmentation can dramatically mess up performance in a very short time. Clean and defrag. I personally find it worthwhile to use SmartDefrag, a much more powerful defragger than the one that's built into Windows.
    4) Read your logs. Yes, Windows actually logs stuff! Go to "Control Panel-->Administrative Tools-->Computer Management" and then dig through "System Tools-->Event Viewer" TONS of useful information about what's not healthy on your system, including complete boot logs.

    Good luck.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  191. Here's some basic things to start with... by jonphillips · · Score: 1

    How to Speed Up Your PC I posted this a few days ago about how to speed up a PC. Many times, spyware and malware are to blame but there could also be registry errors as well. Its a start.

  192. Invalid cert? by raind · · Score: 1

    Did anyone notice this when clicking on the image link?

    Secure Connection Failed

    blogs.technet.com uses an invalid security certificate.

    The certificate is not trusted because the issuer certificate is unknown.

    (Error code: sec_error_unknown_issuer)

    --
    Get up!
  193. Re:Bootdisk stress test.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    Lol. But that's the fun isn't it, if he puts it all back together he passes for taking it apart. ;-)

    --
    Quack, quack.
  194. PIO Mode, New Installs? by dragonturtle69 · · Score: 1

    Quick thoughts:

    Yep, silly six times of errors and you get PIO. I've had to manually reset quite a few Windows IDE channels. Watch for this one especially if you are cloning HDDs without defragementing regularly.

    CA's AV Suite beats up on Vista (at least one the one Vista PC I have), making what is a responsive system with AVG or SAV painfully slow, especially for UAC events. There may be other AVs with this problem.

    I'm surprised that none of the posts have mentioned Bart's PE, http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/ Easy enough to add AV to it an do a full scan with the OS offline, and no way to infect anything as you are running from a CD. That is about the easiest way to determine if it is software, as there will be items noted by the AV program, something odd that will stand out when compared to a happy system.

    --
    "What luck for the rulers that men do not think." - Adolph Hitler
  195. Got a wireless mouse and / or keyboard? by 3Cats · · Score: 1

    if so, replace the batteries. Windows will spend ungodly amounts of cpu time polling the mouse if the battery is low.

    3C

  196. Um.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's there to diagnose, it's infected with Windows. It's like telling someone how to diagnose a suddenly sore throat of someone with a cold...

  197. USB by saxoholic · · Score: 1

    I've had this problem when a USB device was being unresponsive. It would cause the system to slow, and it would hang if I tried to open My Computer with the device connected (that annoying flashlight animation), but disconnecting the device solved the problem. So after an annoying live chat session with hp, they helped me fix it. Try unplugging your USB devices and see if it still slows to a crawl.

  198. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

    Why you don't use a normal vacuum...

    http://www.industrialairsolutions.com/industrial-vacuums/ESD-Vacuums/ESD-vacuum-systems.htm

    Standard vac builds up a lot of static, and these are designed to
    eliminate that.

    Likewise with an air compressor, they can spray water droplets
    into the PC unless it has a air dryer device installed.

    Also using high speed air across fans making them spin much faster
    than normal can cause DC perm magnet fans to induce voltage back
    into the motherboard like a generator, so you might jam them still
    with something non-magnetic while putting a "wicked" amount of
    air across them.

    --
    google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
  199. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 1

    I thought the whole point of aircan instead of vacuum is to avoid static electricity zapping the computer?

  200. I've seen many incarnations of this. by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    If you run Process Explorer and see a lot of interrupts occurring, it's almost always a processor or motherboard. Boot from a BART PE disc and see if it is slow there. If so, it's hardware. Also I've seen bad CD-ROM drives on several occasions cause this. Or if you suspect malware. Take it to GeekSquad ask them to boot your computer up in PE mode from an MRI disc and run a READ-ONLY FACE Scan in targeted mode. That will scan with 8 different AS/AV products. Usually they won't charge you for this because it's a scan and not a removal.

  201. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 1

    Also using high speed air across fans making them spin much faster
    than normal can cause DC perm magnet fans to induce voltage back
    into the motherboard like a generator,

    This may be true, but I've been doing it for 20 years without incident.

    --
    I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
  202. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 1

    This might be important in drier climes. I've been doing this for a long time in the pacific northwest. I started after seeing the DEC engineer doing it on our VAXes a long time ago (back when an 11/780 was cool)

    --
    I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
  203. where to begin... by Deathlizard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First: Get this. If you got a rootkit, this should find it. unless it's something zero day. If it finds stuff, then reboot back into windows and run something like Malwarebytes Anti Malware or Spybot Search and Destroy for a few days (a week or two with Spybot. They only update on Wednesdays) to get it completely cleaned out. Windows Defender also works good here and adds realtime scannning to the mix.

    Second: Like someone above posted, Check for Drives Running PIO in Device Manager. If you find any, run the resetDMA Script someone above posted. ALso Check your BIOS for changed settings. Dying CMOS batteries can cause a lot of havok with DMA settings depening on the BIOS defaults.

    Third: Test Hardware. Contrary to Popular belief here, Windows NT Kernel Failures, *Especially Blue Screens* Are usually caused by either a Hardware failure or a Driver failure. If it's been running great and then BAM, check hardware first. The Ultimate Boot CD has all the tests you need. Test for RAM errors and test your Hard drive using the Drive Specific diagnostic program.

    Forth: if all else fails after this, backtrack. If you installed something recently, and the machine started acting weird afterwards. uninstall it and see what happens. System restore (if it actually works) also comes in handy.

    Finally, a Tip. Stay The Hell away from "optimizing" software. Just about every Registry optimizer I've ever seen screws up more then it's worth. Speed boosters tend to slow things down in the long run or lock windows, and any disk optimizer basically does nothing different than defrag C:. Even Microsoft's Registry and cleaning offerings on their onecare site has screwed me over in some cases, and if they can't optimize their own OS... Just say no to them.

  204. task manager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife's computer was running slow like this - I put it down to firefox 3 being crap. However, what we found is if you keep the task manager open (minimised) then the sluggishness goes away. Even ff3 works as advertised (still takes up many hundreds of megs though). Virus/trojan/bot?

  205. Holy Mother of God... Problem fixed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been experiencing a periodic but frequent cpu/disk usage spike for about 3 weeks now on my xp laptop. I can't listen to music or type effectively because the system hangs for several seconds at a time.

    I've searched the interwebs for solutions, run numerous virus/malware apps, defragged and run the pc in non-networked safe mode to no avail.

    Today I was checking my blog feeds and ran across this article, read the replies, ran the DMA VBS script mentioned above and Lord Have Mercy, my laptop is back!

    This friggin rocks!!! Happy days are here again. la la la la la. Yippy.

  206. It crowd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Had you tried turning it off and turning it back on?

  207. It is a design flaw in XP that is still in Vista by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Just FYI, the reason for this is because with 32 bits, you're system is limited to 2^32 bits of address space = 4GB of memory in total,

    No.

    The Intel Pentium Pro solved that in 1995, it's called PAE. Microsoft have just been a bit slow to support it in their products aimed at the home market but their server products do. Everyone else has got around to supporting it some time over the last twelve years.

    Switching to 64bit if you can does solve it, but blaming it on the architecture when you have a recent computer is completely missing the mark.

    You could install 32 bit Linux, opensolaris, *BSD, BeOS, Plan9, MS Server 2003 etc etc on the exact same 32 bit hardware and it would work in most cases - because all of the above support CPUs made after 1995 properly.

  208. Have you recently... by FreshKarma · · Score: 1

    ...installed Windows Vista?

    --
    The future ain't what it used to be.
  209. Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too lazy to search google and ask on a forum related to sorting out pc troubles?

  210. Re: Suddenly slow windows ccomputer... by 12_West · · Score: 1

    I'm not as worthy a geek as many you'l meet on SDOT but....try checking the main processor's heatsink and fan for dust build up or bad fan bearings. The cpu may be throttling back when things get warm. While you are in there, visually inspect any electrolytic capacitors for signs of swelling or leaks. I have an extra mobo like that, still works, but throttles down & up & down again due to bad caps.

  211. open taskmanager, kill firefox by Tmack · · Score: 1
    When my 2k box slows, its almost always a ff session I closed that didnt go away, and is eating 99% cpu. Killing it via taskmanager makes everything happy again.

    Tm

    --
    Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
  212. Search index by ei.kukaan · · Score: 1

    Did you perhaps just install or enable MS Windows Search (or whatever it is called)? Or did you move gigs worth of documents around? Moving about 10-20Gb files (including about 3Gb of emails) around on high end Lenovo with Vista resulted in unbearable slowness and I think the culprit was the indexing service. As at that time the index was reported not fully done.

  213. Two tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would grab autoruns from wininternals. It shows all the processes that start up. Things like java, quicktime, adobe reader, and others add things to starts up that just use memory and do nothing.

  214. is there an SD or other flash card inserted? by xtracto · · Score: 1

    Don't know if this is of any use, but about one month ago a friend asked me to check his Windows computer because it 'suddenly' became very slow and stopped at random times.

    What happened is that after trying to save a file in OpenOffice or opening Windows Explorer, the programs just freezed.

    I spent two hours looking at different things without real success, however after that somehow we needed to copy a file (we were also installing a camera... what a pain in Windows Vista!!) and that is when I realized an SD card was inserted into the reader.

    As soon as we removed the SD card, the problem completely dissapeared. After thinking a bit he told me that it made sense, because the computer started failing more or less at the time he inserted the card (to copy some photos). AND, that his card was old.

    It may be worth checking what you have connected in the computer!!

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  215. Xp Slow computers by jimmy6951 · · Score: 1

    In spite of all the things that point to your hard drive, before you get all involved with testing it, take a minute to check something simple. I ran into this trouble with a customer of mine. His computer was only 2 years old. He never had a problem with it being slow. Then, within a few days, the thing was crawling. Fez posted about the speed of the hard drive being slowed to PI0, due to errors. Very TRUE, BUT, what if the computer was built WRONG to begin with. It was built with a CD burner attached to the second connector on the PRI IDE controller. The problem would never show up UNTIL the owner experienced FAILURES trying to burn a CD. WIN XP looks at errors on the PRI IDE controller as coming from the Hard drive, therefore, it slowed down the hard drive to PI0, even though all the errors came from the CD burner. All CD-Roms or other ATAPI units should always be installed on the Sec IDE controller. Just a simple thing to check, BEFORE getting real complicated.

  216. It's the IO Subsystem by Udigs · · Score: 1

    Seriously. If it's been that long and you've had the same hard drive it came with, it's likely time for a swap out. You can get a brand new super fast SATA drive or better yet, maybe even create a RAID subsystem. If you don't care about redundancy, you can't beat the speed of RAID 0. I used to use it on a development workstation and it just made the entire system snappier.

    That said, it's probably a physical IO issue, such as the hard drive. I just had a laptop that slowed to a crawl and replacing the hard drive seemed to fix it quite nicely.

    One other thought -- I once had to work on a computer that, no matter what I did to it continued to run slowly. We replaced RAM, hard drives, countless benchmarks and reinstalls later the problem persisted. In the end it turned out to be a faulty cable. So yeah, it can be that simple.

  217. Linux doesn't do anything like this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah.. sure it doesn't.

    Today I got home from work and all the programs I had running... were gone. Everything from Firefox with 400 tabs to Pidgin, gone.

    Turns out a perl script had encountered a situation it shouldn't. The result was it went looping as fast as it could thus:
    while ($var > $array[$i]) {
    $i++;
    }

    ... I'm not sure if it sucked up all 8 gigs of ram by comparing to array locations that didn't exist or what, but all my apps were gone, swap was filled, and after I killed it I had many gigs of free physical memory. I then tried to launch Firefox again and had to wait through approx. 5 minutes of constant hard drive thrashing before it would pop up the profile selector. I'm not sure what it was doing; it would be reading the firefox executable from disk, and it had 7 gigs of free physical memory to use.. so I just can't figure it out.

    Linux doesn't do anything like this indeed. heh.

    Scenario 2: Firefox ran out of room where I was storing its profile. It got into some loop which used up _ALL_ of my system memory. My system went from fairly responsive to SLUGGISH outstandingly quickly. Turns out when swap is full and you have 50MB free physical memory, the system doesn't work.

    I tried killing it.. but eventually even my xterm froze and I couldn't type the commands. I couldn't move the mouse -- the cursor stayed where it was frozen. I couldn't do anything. I hit ctrl-alt-F1 to get to a TTy. 5 or 10 minutes later, I got there. "root". The password dialog never showed up. Tried to ssh in, no success.. no reply to _pings_ from another host. Half an hour later.. power it off.. a normal user's app (firefox) managed to eat all system memory and lock my system.

    Linux doesn't suddenly "slow", indeed. It completely locks up with a moment's notice.

    Lets try a last one. An app, lets say Firefox, uses a lot of system memory. When swapping starts, the mouse starts jumping. it'll lag in one place for a couple seconds, jump a few inches, wait, jump, wait, ... it makes it impossible to get to an xterm to kill the offending app. It's just a prequel to the above, so you'd better hope you get to a tty and log in before you run out of swap.

    Linux doesn't lag, indeed.

    I run Gentoo, have for perhaps 4 years. The only real modifications I've made from defaults are decreasing swappiness (to 10, I believe), and _very_ recently I added a user limit on maximum memory one process can use (which is probably the only reason I could do _anything_ on my computer after the perl incident). I've tried nice'ing programs, _not_ nice'ing programs, ionice, just recently some ulimits to keep my system from locking, ... nothing has even made an improvement in the lag.

    Windows, slow... my ass. Linux is MUCH WORSE in my half decade or so of experience. Windows isn't as bad, FreeBSD has no problem whatsoever.. but Linux.. I'm thoroughly shocked and disgusted. I can't use Windows because of the lack of shell, and I don't use FreeBSD because of video drivers and some applications having incompatibilities. Portage, too, is a blessing compared to everything else.. but the kernel..

    If anyone has some suggestions, PLEASE suggest. I've tried all I can find, which is next to nothing. I run Firefox 32-bit to prevent it from using as much memory (and I STILL have seen it at 2.5GB, according to top -- something I just can't fathom), would do the same with the base system, but Gentoo doesn't appear to support 32-bit userland in 64-bit Linux.

    -Anonymous

  218. Re:bad fan, or bad timing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't Windows version n-1 get its slow-down bit set one financial quarter before the box product release of Windows version n?

  219. Possible rootkit infection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work as an anti-virus specialist who deals with scenario's such as yours on a day to day basis. If you have determined that in fact your hard drive is in working order then you most likely have a rootkit.

    Modern rootkit infections are able to hide their functions completely and many don't exist as processes at all. This is usually accomplished through threadjacking or driver injection into the hard drive which filters all requests for certain file or process names. An example of this sort of rootkit is TDSSserv.sys (AKA TiDServ) or Seneka.sys. (Both are from the same code base)

    I'd recommend you run Rootkit Revealer before anything else, just make sure your not doing anything during the scan, it scans for changes between an API scan and a low level scan so any activity could be detected as "suspicious". If you have a newer, more complex infection it should report "Unable to mount Drive C:\". Try using GMER or ICEsword to remove the infections or attempt to remove them manually.

    Good luck.

  220. I mean with a dead HDD, dude by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Moraelin brings up the problems with an inaccessible swap. Well, if that's occurring, then whoever set up the system should have spent more time planning his/her partition layout so that a swap partition is mandatory.

    I mean, for example, the HDD overheats and doesn't do more than throw fits. Err, faults. It happened to me, circa 2001, after stuffing increasingly hot components in a box that was obviously designed for old cool stuff.

    We're not talking something that happens regularly. And just an old-and-upgraded home box, not some enterprise system with redundant hard drives mirrored.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  221. Good point by Wrexs0ul · · Score: 1

    Lastly, when you fix the issue you should remove your wife from the administrators group and just make her a user or power user. When she needs to install software or whatever just have her log in as admin.

    Good point, make sure ALL your peripherals are working properly before taking the system apart.

    Though be careful how you bring up RMA, or upgrade.

    -Matt

    --
    --- Need web hosting?
  222. Could be rootkit or boot parameter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It could be a rootkit, use Avast anti-virus program and do a boot time scan.
    You should also use CCleaner to clean out all the trash in your hard disk.
    Another thing you can check is your boot up parameter
    The /3GB parameter
    On 32-bit versions of Windows, the /3GB parameter enables 4-gigabyte (GB) random access memory (RAM) Tuning, a feature that enlarges the user-mode virtual address space to 3 GB and restricts the kernel-mode components to the remaining 1 GB.
    The /PAE parameter
    The /PAE parameter enables Physical Address Extension (PAE). This parameter directs the system to load the PAE version of the Windows kernel. PAE is an addressing strategy that uses a page-translation hierarchy to enable systems that have 32-bit addressing to address more than 4 GB of physical memory.

  223. Mouse Hook by slserpent · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of one program I was using that abused mouse hooks to see if the user was idle. It would cause certain programs to spike when moving the mouse (probably processes with a lot of handles receiving mouse messages). Wasn't all that noticeable until the framerate dropped substantially in games, where one uses the mouse a lot. Once I figured it out, I stopped using that program needless to say.

  224. Prevention is better than .. bla bla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There're hundreds of reasons why a PC can get slower; prevention is better than cure. Make your PC kind of a fortress with steep, slippery walls on the boundary. So here it foes - 1. Get Windows Steady State; RTFM & set it up well. 2. Get a good firewall, keep only one or two gates open for outsiders 3. Get a light-weight sentry like Win Patrol that warns you of any dubious change of system files. 4. Keep a strong anti-virus; set it to do a full scan at low priority, behind the scene once every week. The first one, windows steady state, you can set it such that even if your kid goes to a bad site & brings home a few nasty spyware, your PC gets back to its original state as soon as he logs off. Trust me, this method is better than loading you PC with some bulky security suites.

  225. Upgrade Windows to help Microsoft by cupcakewalk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Am I the only one that thinks that slow downs are built in to Windows? Run it for a while then get strange, unexplained, noticeable slow down. Millions of customers say, "When was the last time I formatted my HD and reinstalled Windows? Boy. That was a lot of work (or cost a lot of money). Maybe I should get the new version (98, ME, XP, Vista, 7, etc...) If I'm going to do that, I should just get a new system." With a sales strategy built into the software, everyone who stands to make a profit wins...unless customers get stubborn and find the problem. I have not read all the comments, but past the basic diagnostics, I look for something that's caught in a loop, usually trying to install. msconfig can sometimes reveal it. HP software? Uninstall and reinstall. Or just uninstall and throw the printer off a bridge.

    --
    -J
  226. Processor power throttling? by SteWhite · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I scanned through the comments and didn't see this mentioned yet, so...

    Check if the processor speed is being throttled. I once saw a laptop that seems to have the symptoms you described - everything going slow, processes taking lots of CPU time.

    It turned out something was wrong with the power management and it was keeping the CPU at the minimum speed permanently. Setting the power profile to "Always On" fixed it for a while, but then it started again, so I disabled the processor power management features in the BIOS.

    The post didn't mention if this is a laptop or desktop, but even modern desktop CPUs have lots of power states. Worth a look.

    1. Re:Processor power throttling? by Michael+Wardle · · Score: 1
  227. dust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If windows is still at a crawl after running antivirus, spyware scanners and defragging tools, then check inside the case to see if there is dust clogging your CPU fan and any other moving parts. A can of air duster can blast it out of there. If you are cheap like me, then a soft painting brush and a vacuum is all you need.

  228. 'Noisy' USB hubs by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

    I had this problem with a new (3 months) old Dell box. It came with a USB keyboard/mouse, and a nice 21 inch LCD monitor which had a USB hub (so that you could plug the keyboard and mouse into the monitor, instead of the box) It turned out, the hub in the monitor was really poor, and started generating interupts when there was no keyboard or mouse activity. plugging the keyboard/mouse into the box solved the problem until a new monitor arrived.

  229. I think my point still stands about PIO by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    For the actual transfer, yes, you have to poll and suck in the bytes one by one. But AFAIK you don't have to wait in a loop for the seek to finish. Unless we're talking about old MFM drives on the XT. As I was saying, the PC architecture does have interrupts for just about everything. So you just start another process and wait for the interrupt.

    Heck, even without interrupts, typical total HDD latency is between 6ms (Velociraptor) and 20+ms. You can just poll once every millisecond (or how often your scheduler interrupt comes) and do something else until it finishes.

    Copying a file between two partitions is a scenario that's 90% dominated by waiting for the head to be in the right position, and for the right sector to come under it. Make that maybe 99% if the partitions are on the same physical HDD. Any competently written system, even in PIO mode has 90% of the CPU time there free for other processes.

    At least NT obviously didn't have. As I was saying, with the drivers configured wrong in PIO mode, it just froze solid for a second when minimizing a window. I can't imagine any scenario where that's normal.

    And the fact that Windows simply gets stuffed there, tells me that something's rotten in the kingdom of Redmond. Maybe it's not Windows itself but the IDE drivers or whatever. But something is thoroughly suboptimal in its disk IO IMHO.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:I think my point still stands about PIO by mathew7 · · Score: 1

      But AFAIK you don't have to wait in a loop for the seek to finish.

      PIO was used during XT era and DOS where you had only 8 non-shareable IRQ lines. Having an interrupt for HDD was just not feasible. So after making a request, you had to keep polling that port and know when the actual data was given (ATA specs). This was no problem under DOS.
      But once multitasking appeared on the PC, DMA was needed (you can probably look for ATA specs on wikipedia). The idea is that PIO is the most reliable way, because it uses only 3 bytes (I think) of memory-map region and the controller needs only to send it's data at certain periods. And all DMA modes until UDMA were poorly implemented in some chips.
      The problem with Windows IDE drivers is that they fall-back to PIO but then do not allow you to return to DMA (at least in an easy way). While falling back can be a result of poor cable (in which case it can be justified), it can also be triggered by some bad sectors.

  230. Turn off different modules and find the culprit by gr8dude · · Score: 1

    Take a look at this tutorial: http://www.lazybit.com/index.php/2008/02/22/fix_blue_screen_death_strategy_part_two?blog=2

    Although it originally deals with blue screens, you can use the same strategy to narrow the problem down to a particular process or driver.

    Other posters' suggestions about using Process Monitor and Process Explorer are good ones, but they fail to take into account that these tools only show processes running in user mode. If the slow-down is caused by a driver that runs in kernel mode, then you will have to turn off some drivers, reboot - and see the effect.

    Note that even if a driver is not loaded automatically when the system boots, it can be loaded later by a user mode process.

  231. Slow machine? Check DNS problems by slashbart · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For the last 8 years I've pretty much only used Linux, and my experience has been that whenever the machine suddenly becomes consistently slow (not just a few seconds because of updatedb), it's a DNS issue. Maybe you have a primary DNS that times out and then fails over to a second one or so.
    That's my rule of thumb, and it has served me well.

    Probably the same on Windows.

    Bart

  232. Try turning off the Windows Search Indexer by FrenchSilk · · Score: 1

    Windows search indexer turned out to be the cause of horrendous performance on my system. You can turn it off by running Services (find it at Start>Programs>Admiistrative Tools>Services). Right-click Windows Search service and select Properties. In Startup type, choose Manual. This made a huge difference in my case.

  233. Check the fans by daveime · · Score: 1

    Whenever I see a marked slowdown on my PC, I remove the casing and give the thing a damn good clean. You'd be amazed how even in a clean room with air conditioning, the amount of gunk and dust builds up on the fans, even after 6 months. And that means all of them, CPU fan, graphics card fan, and even open up the PSU and clean those fans too.

    Fans running even slightly slower will cause all your components (PSU, Hard Disks, CPU) to run hotter, and that leads to random slowdowns, data corruption, even bluescreens at times.

    1. Re:Check the fans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... even in a clean room ... gunk and dust builds up on the fans ... after 6 months ... run hotter, and that leads to random slowdowns, data corruption, even bluescreens at times.

      Really? ...

  234. Hardware failure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boot on a Knoppix or Ubuntu and see if the
    speed picks up.
    If not you most likely have a hardware issue.

    Typical problems would be dust in the cooler
    and/or a failing fan.

    Open the box and see if there is dust or the fan runs slow.

  235. slow computer if registry gets corrupted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VB WinsockFix seemed to correct the slowing for me. It is for winsock and TCP restoration of registry keys that have become corrupt upon removing host programs that modified them. It is freeware.

  236. Anonymous Coward. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My windows system slows down (and has other funny behaviour) about once a year. The solution I have found is reload windows with a fresh installation (not repaired). Works every time so in my view is not a hardware problem.

  237. Network Location Awareness by thegermanpolice · · Score: 1

    Call it a hunch.

    Network Location Awareness (NLA) can cause such problems.

    Disable and stop the service in services.msc

    It's not needed unless you are changing networks a lot, and even then it can get by without it.

    It took me a while to figure out when I was getting exactly the same results. Typically the s

  238. Setup windows to run faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know that this may not be the solution you are looking for since it requires reinstalling windows but if you setup your machine as following it should always run as in day one.
    - Create 3 partitions and install on the first one only windows and the required drivers.
    - On the second one install all the heavy applications that you use in order to keep the filesystem from which the windows boot-up light.
    - Use TweakUI to move the "My Documents" folder and the "Desktop Folder" if you want too on a folder you created for that purpose at the third partition.
    - If you are using Firefox, go into the folder "%USERPROFILE%\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox" and you will find a file called "profiles.ini"
    Edit it and change "IsRelative=1" to "IsRelative=0" and also the line that should look like this: "Path=Profiles/ees1j6vw.default" change it to something like this: "Path=E:/Firefox/Profiles/ees1j6vw.default"
    Now, copy the folder "ees1j6vw.default" (or how else it's named to "E:\Firefox\Profiles" that you should create on the "E:" drive
    That way you move the profile of firefox that contains everything from bookmarks to add-ons on the third partition.
    - After all that, use "deep freeze" to freeze the first two partitions.

    That way, you will have two partitions containing windows and your applications protected from viruses/trojans etc (at least from most of them, I don't know any that can infect a frozen partition and remain there after reboot).
    You will also experience every day the same performance as long as we are not talking about a hardware problem.
    Your data should ALWAYS go on the third partition otherwise they will be lost on reboot (along with any virus/trojan known or unknown).
    When you want to install a new application, do it on the second partition after you scan it with an antivirus first and after you temporarily unfreeze the partitions.
    I have set-up my laptop that way about two years ago and it's performance has not been degraded at all.
    I hope it was helpful

    Sophoclis

  239. What I do by GWBasic · · Score: 1
    • Open task manager. Select the processess tab
    • Sort on CPU utilization. See if anyone is hogging the CPU.
    • Enable the "Page Faults Delta" column. Sort on this column. (This sort-of tells you how often virtual memory is being swapped.) A frequent offender here is Scan32.exe; it's a poorly-written McAffee process that bogs down a computer whenever it scans the system.
    • If things are still inconclusive; get Process Manager. (Google it) It has an "IO delta" column that can tell you who's munching on your disk. It also has a "CPU History" and "IO History" column that don't change as fast, so things don't move around as fast.

    But, in general, if McAffee is installed on the system, Scan32.exe is a likely culprit. The network administrator can remotely launch it if they suspect a nasty virus outbreak on the network. You can safely kill it if you're sure that you don't have a virus.

    If you ever see iexplore.exe or firefox.exe being the culprit, look for a page/tab with lots of animations. It could be a badly-written flash animation. (Remember some of the Dice ads that Slashdot used to serve a year ago? They would always max out a core, even if the page was in the background!) Consider using Google Chrome, which runs different pages in different processes as a way to mitigate this issue.

  240. Dying processor or motherboard. by EWAdams · · Score: 1

    My wife's system slowed way down for no apparent reason and ultimately stopped altogether. It wasn't a virus, worm, spyware or rootkit. It wasn't the hard drive.

    We got in a tech who checked out the CPU -- no problem there. Then he checked out the motherboard. Dead as a doornail. We upgraded both for a fraction of what a whole new system would cost, and now she's back in business.

    Now if only I could persuade her not to run the AOL client... there are times when "what you like and are used to" is not a sufficient excuse to keep using an utter piece of shit.

    --
    I piss off bigots.
  241. Re: PAE by Malvineous · · Score: 1

    Actually /PAE does nothing in Windows XP, primarily to avoid issues with drivers that don't support PAE, as you need special PAE-aware drivers for all devices in your system.

  242. Just wondering... by ei4anb · · Score: 1

    I have always wondered if the server versions of Windows do not have this I/O limitation but I have been too lazy to do a proper comparison.

  243. I'd respectfully disagree by FoamingToad · · Score: 1

    unless the submitter has two identical machines. Reason being, if the hard disc is swapped into another system there's a fair chance the wrong chipset driver will be provided and the compisite machine will bluescreen.

    Even worse would be if the machine starts correctly and then installs its own chipset driver causing bluescreens when the hard disc is swapped back.

    My first port of call, before the memory diagnostic and before running SMART tests would be the event log. It's neglected far too much for my liking.

    I'd follow that with perfmon, and then offline AV scanners / liveCDs. Then I'd start thinking about burn-in testing and swapping out hardware.

  244. the next step... by ccdotnet · · Score: 1
    And whether such a problem is related to malware or not, what steps would you take next?

    In some fantasy/virtual reality utopia where we are afforded the time to "scratch" our technical itches by delving deep enough to find the actual cause of the problem, there are lots of options for where to look next, and most of them are already in this thread.

    But in the real world where our time comes at an hourly rate, your best course of option is simple: spend the 3 hours it takes to re-install your OS, patch it up, re-install your apps, patch them up, configure your apps, restore your data, and away you go.

    Because that's the real world.

    Yes, you've caught something (which you may or may not find if you go looking), or something else has gone wrong/become corrupt. Just re-install and move on.

    And there are two bonuses:

    1. your system will magically improve in performance to the level it was at the first day you turned it on, before you started down the inevitable path of bloat/crapware and steadily degrading performance.

    2. you'll learn a few things along the way/make better choices about what to install and what not to install, ending up with a leaner, faster, more reliable system.

  245. Use CC Cleaner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The best tool is CC Cleaner by Piriform and it is free. Just make sure you do not install the add in's on install. It is spyware adware free I can assure you. Run it and
    1, Under cleaner run cleaner. That will clear up a bunch of files.
    2, The run registry and fix all the errors, you might want to do this twice.
    3, Under Tools, click start up and delete all unnecessary start up items.

    This will pretty much sort everything out.

  246. Reinstall by Dracophile · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Tweak and take an image. As soon as it starts to suck, and assuming you take backups you know about, resume the image and restore. NEXT!

    --
    Athy, athier, athiest.
  247. Deferred Procedure Calls by TrentTheThief · · Score: 1

    On an XP box, the most common problem I see is deferred procedure calls sucking up cycles. This is often when you see in Task Manager that the cycles for the processes don't add up to that 100% figure you're seeing in its status bar.

    Take a look at this:

    http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml

  248. Processor Speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check what speed the processor is running at. If the CPU fan has failed then SpeedStep or something similar could be throttling down the speed of the processor to prevent it overheating.

  249. format by robbo729 · · Score: 1

    format

    --
    -pERKDIZZLE
  250. howto make computer run faster by mAriuZ · · Score: 1

    usually i install wubi and with it you get an os without spyware also you escape the win32 virus named microsoft (called by noname antivirus win32.WindoZe)

    http://wubi-installer.org/

    Other alternatives
    http://goodbye-microsoft.com/
    or
    http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/

    --
    developer http://flamerobin.org
    1. Re:howto make computer run faster by mAriuZ · · Score: 1

      I forgot the clamav livecd - with it you can scan the windows partition and find most of the malware and actually you can remove them even if they are in system restore

      http://www.volatileminds.net/projects/clamav/

      --
      developer http://flamerobin.org
  251. Format and Reinstall by smileham · · Score: 1

    Whenever I've had this as an issue (and enough friends have complained that their machine "got slow") I've found it's almost easier to just wipe the machine and start again...

  252. I -heart- Turbo Button by jeffrlamb · · Score: 1

    Thank you for the trip down memory lane! Man I miss the old 4.77 -> 8 turbo button. . . The warm orange-yellow glow telling me that I was going BLAZING fast. And for you whipper-snappers out there, it WAS important. Lots of games depended on the clock running at 4.77 to run properly. . . Ok maybe not "important," but I liked playing those games.

  253. Get rid of the swap file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My work develoment PC was slowing to a crawl. Diagnosed the problem as the swap file. Windoze's handling of the swap file seems pants!! For a start it seemed to want to set the minimum size to 2Gb no matter what I told it. Also, can you believe it, it allows the swap file to get fragmented. The 2Gb file was in hundreds of fragments! So I got rid of the swap file, added an extra gig of RAM and now my system runs as sweet as a nut. Now, if only I could get rid of that registry...

  254. You guys are idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not a hdd problem, it's not a this or that problem. It's a "Thats life" problem.
    It happens. All you can do is backup your data and F-O-R-M-A-T. It takes an hour out of your day, providing you backed up your drivers to an auto-loading exe.
    Just format, and save yourself the future hassle.

    1. Re:You guys are idiots. by gx5000 · · Score: 1

      Dude, we're not idiots, you're just a little green under the boards... You're the guy who assumes there's one solution for a know issue... doesn't always work that way....I weep for your Clients.... Many recent visitors to my home shop had hardware issues, heat and such... You know, like the tech who stacked toghether packed the DVD/CD and 2 HDD's and made a heating block ? And if you're really smart you'll have a image of your main drive.... F O R M A T ? LOL...NOOB !!!!

      --
      End of Line.
  255. Re:Your Sig by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1
    Mmmmm ... venison. So, which bike is best for hunting? I'd say the V-max is up there, but personally I'd put my money behind a Triumph Rocket 3. Lots of power, narrow profile, footboards for clearing off the messy bits.

    Also has the best sales video ever. YouTube, look it up ;)

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  256. what about the bleeding obvious by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    Always start with the bog standard task manager, and switch on cpu usage, threads, mem usage and gdi objects to start with.

  257. open the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and push the ram stick back in that accidently got dislodged when you kicked it last time

    1. Re:open the case by gx5000 · · Score: 1

      Of course !!! It's the big dent on the side of the case ? Better call MAACO !!!

      --
      End of Line.
  258. Uh? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Since when wiping out the OS became a solution to a problem?

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  259. Re:Check the IDE cable by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Bad IDE cable can also cause this.

    --
    No sig today...
  260. Look at everything by gx5000 · · Score: 1

    I sit on about 1200 here and after over two decades there's a list... Of course just having a ghost at the ready is optimum (we use Acronis....) But the usual suspects here are, in order: Network liability during a network slowdown. (Having too many open shares). Defrag Bad Blocks (Replace HDD) MFT at 99% (or too many MFT Fragments) Too many backround apps or loaded services (don't uncheck them in msconfig, disabled them in services or they're still loaded) Bad MBoard Malware Trjans and viruses (Very rare, this is a Gov Dept) Good luck !

    --
    End of Line.
    1. Re:Look at everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sit on about 1200 here and after over two decades there's a list... Of course just having a ghost at the ready is optimum (we use Acronis....) But the usual suspects here are, in order:

      Network liability during a network slowdown.
      (Having too many open shares).
      Defrag.
      Bad Blocks (Replace HDD).
      MFT at 99% (or too many MFT Fragments).
      Too many backround apps or loaded services .
      (don't uncheck them in msconfig, disabled them in services or they're still loaded).
      Bad MBoard.
      Malware.
      Trojans and viruses (Very rare, this is a Gov Dept). Good luck !

      Fixed it for ya ;-)

  261. Running IBM Proventia desktop? by XnPlater · · Score: 1

    I've seen similar behavior on my mother's box (Athlon XP 1600+, 768 MB of memory, Windows XP SP2).
    The system was dog slow. Each click and every action took up to a minute to complete. No obvious resource hog could be observed under Task Manager.

    Eventually, I've upgraded the IBM Proventia Desktop app (came with a VPN package) to a newer version, and the system literally recovered from a slow stutter to a normal (usable) pace.

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
  262. CCleaner and Defraggler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Download CCleaner and Defraggler from http://www.piriform.com/.

    Run CCleaner first on the system and the registry. Then use Defraggler to defrag the HD.

    Believe or not I had these two programs fix NUMEROUS problems under Windows. Everything from IE acting wacky to slow performance.

    Both products are free and extremely well designed. Consider donating to the authors.

  263. bisect the problem: hw or sw? by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 1

    first thing to do is boot a live linux CD. run a bunch of performance benchmarks. Does it seem slow? If it is still slow, or you have obvious messages in logs (timeouts, retries, etc...) then it is hardware. If it is lively, then it's sw. others have posted about what to do in each case.

  264. Process Priority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According with priority policies of the Operating Systems you should not only check for hard drive problems, but for every I/O hardware that could be failing or any process that wants to use an I/O device.

    I tell you why:

    Windows has the policy that the most important things are I/O, after that, the kernel, and then, if there is idle processor time (or an idle processor in a SMP architecture) will be dispatched another process. This is a BAAAAAD (in my opinion) dispatching policy, because I/O processes usually almost take control of the computer while the processor is doing nothing but busy waiting and could be processing another things.

    Instead, Linux kernel does not do that, and also you can change the process priorities as easy as pressing "r", writing the process PID and the new nice number when you are executing top.

  265. Spinrite is the be all, end all in HD failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spinrite surpasses the manufacturer diagnostic tools. It has saved my drives AND data more than any of the others combined.

    The downside - it doesn't work with any RAID nor is there a trivial USB connection capability. RAID is out completely for drives during tests since it needs direct access to the hardware. I've heard that virtual machines shouldn't be used either. OTOH, it doesn't come with USB drivers, so the disks need to be directly attached to a standalone PC with the correct drive connector (IDE, SATA, SAS, whatever) that works with FreeDOS.

    As to fixing a slowing windows ...
    1) check DMA mode
    2) Backup your data and reinstall
    3) Move to a Virtual Machine and then to ever faster CPUs
    4) If you suspect malware or a virus, reload the OS from scratch - the risk isn't worth it.

  266. Processor Temp? by dingle15 · · Score: 1

    Didn't see this one either, check your CPU temp in the BIOS and do some research to see if it's in range. Just had this come up with an old HP. I had to pull the heat sink off and smear the grease back into the center. Cooled it by 80 degrees and fixed the slow down problem. Also, clean your fans of dust to keep cooling efficient.

  267. Suspect a trojan or virus, try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill Gates not only frauded
    American Software Engineers,
    He sold out America, for less
    than pennies of a dollar.

    If you suspect a trojan/virus or
    are experiencing another type
    of automatic startup problem,
    try this:

    While Microsoft's Windows
    is booting, hold the [shift] key
    while pressing [enter] key
    after your password ( and
    before you see your desktop or
    "loading personal settings")
    and keep down the [shift] key
    while your desktop is loading.

    ---

    markawashburn@bigfoot.com, 20 hours per week,
      healing from carpel tunnel restriction,
    ( and noticably too much involuntary
    involvement with Bill Gate's FRAUD with DOS, anti-virus security and Windows 95. ( 98 and XP also use several features I started testing in 1991 within my DOS and Windows 3.1 environments.
    The bastards have even slandered my Office Automation and Document Managament Software Engineer job interviews. ))

  268. Antivirus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    McAfee On-Access Scan is brutal on performance.

  269. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is actually a very high probability of a root kit. these are very capable of hiding running processes from you being able to see them.

  270. Easy fix! by ronz0o · · Score: 1

    Whenever I work on a computer, and EVERYONE has the slowing down problem. It sounds like you have a program bogging it down. 1. Run msconfig, and go to startup, and uncheck anything that you don't need. 2. Right click My Computer, and go to properties. Go to the advanced tab, and it will be the second button in the middle (visual effects, if I remember right). There will be a few options checked there. Uncheck the ones that animate, fade, and slide, then click apply and okay. 3. Max your virtual memory / paging file. With some computers, that helps out a HUGE amount. For a 32 bit processor, the max is 4095 mb. I don't know what it is for a 64 bit OS (since you have 4 gigs of ram) but I would try to go the highest you could. Hope you get this over the 600+ relpies, and I hope it helps! =)

  271. I called it! by scorp1us · · Score: 1
    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  272. You forgot the obvious first.. by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

    After "virus", which he said was not there, you should perform the following check:

    if ("X was installed between the time it was fast and the time it slowed down") uninstall X
    else
    start checking hardware.

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    1. Re:You forgot the obvious first.. by datapharmer · · Score: 1

      that is a good point. I included virus check because it is good practice and my experience is scanning once with a since scanner isn't enough, but yes, if there was something installed recently that would definitely be a good thing to check whether software (including windows updates) or hardware.

      --
      Get a web developer
  273. Zombies by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    I am seen mostly good advice.

    However, no one asked a very important question. Are you running a legit copy of XP with all the updates installed?

    Everyone seems to assume this is the case.

    I know back in the day, I ran a pirated version of XP(Windows ME came pre-installed, whats a guy to do!), and you can't get all the security updates on it.

    If this is the case you probably have about half a million viruses, malware, adware, Trojans, worms, keyloggers, and are apart of at least 6 botnets, and this only after being attached to the internet for about 30min.

    You can run various antivirus, anti-malware, anti-adware, etc... programs, but typically one will miss some while another will miss others, and they all detect each other as viruses.

    Anyone of these missed baddies may be causing problems, and not all show up in your process list (or at least not in a easily identifiable way). Applying the various software guards, and hard and software firewalls will help, but I know my old machine would eventually chug to a halt, at which time I would do a clean install, usually a couple times a year.

    Eventually I got tired of all this and installed Linux. However while I no longer had any more problems of that sort, getting any, even older games to run, was a major chore (if you could get it to run at all). I have since got a more current machine and run a legit copy of Vista on it. So long as you are not a dope and install some sketchy internet file, there is no problems.

    Also even with a legit copy of XP, you will eventually, have enough dust bunnies in your OS closet, from stupid programs in your start up, in your task menu, and silly stuff clogging up this and that... I am sure you can use various tools like CCleaner etc.. to try and clean house, and while they may help, it would probably take just about as long to do a fresh clean install, and update your settings again. I know that was one benefit to running pirate XP, I could install the thing blind, and it forced me to keep good backup practices... :)

  274. Safety concern... by PrimalChrome · · Score: 1

    My eyes!!!! MY EYEEESSS!!!!

  275. Wait, check this immediately first! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be sure to check for stranded mapped network drives that no longer can reach the destination URL. This causes a slow down everytime you open the file explorer. The more stranded, the longer the delay.

  276. Some theories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have some theories I made up while taking a shit:

    1) The registry grows past some as-yet unknown size barrier, possibly a cache size, and this is causing lots of long fetching delays which become noticble due to the massive no. of registry accesses that occur. Alternatively/additionally, installed applications running in TSR/daemon/service mode are locking important parts of the registry which is causing long delays and time-outs when the system/other apps are trying to access those sections.
    This is my theory for the slowdowns where the symptoms are Windows pausing randomly, i.e. no apparent HD or network or CPU activity.
    I postulated it from my attempts to figure out the User Hive Unloading problem that Windows has.

    2) Important system files are in the wrong place on the disk.
    When you install Windows, everything usually ends up on the faster parts of the disk. As things are installed, hotfixes applied and espescially service packs installed, these system files end up in slower areas of the disk, and also probably fragmented.
    To my knowledge, no defragger since older versions of Norton SpeedDisk can relocate files for speed (DisKeeper claims to, but from what I've seen it is a token effort at best, on par with the one in Win95), they just literally defrag the files, leaving the files themselves scattered all over the disk or compacting the defragmented files into a big lump.

    3) Badgers

  277. don't bother .. by rs232 · · Score: 1

    It's the amount of time you would have to spend as compared to a total reinstall of the OS, applications, config etc. else keep two Windows partitions and restore from the clean one at boot, else use a Linux distro ..

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  278. interesting possiblity that I have run across by MetalFlow · · Score: 1

    I know that it wasn't stated specifically that you had any updates recently, but my g/f's laptop recently took a similarly stinky dump. I have changed HDDs and totally wiped the o/s (low level format of the drive... can't beat THAT). After fully re-installing, it was still slow. I have narrowed the problem down to a driver issue, it would appear that two of the drivers are arguing over resources and that is causing the computer to spaz out every so often (say every one or two seconds?) . I have yet to locate the angry drivers because windows does not report any conflicts. So, long story short, if you are experiencing a regular near stoppage of processing that lets up after a second you may be experiencing an un-announced resource sharing conflict. To identify this, get into safe mode and see if it works better there, if it does, then remove all the drivers and start into normal mode. If it works well while re-installing drivers, but takes the same dump after restart, my guess is you are in the same boat as I am! Good luck and god speed sir!

  279. Ubuntu box used to crawl .. by rs232 · · Score: 1

    "My Ubuntu 7.10 box used to crawl (well, Compiz/Nautilus/Gnome/The-UI) after several hours of continued opening/closing windows"

    Given that, the Windows slowdown seems to be a much deeper issue with how the OS interacts with the hardrive. No amount of defraging/cleaning of the registry seems to cure it.

    "I never did investigate the issue (because laziness) and it was fixed just with a graphical logout/login"

    imho, The only time you see a Linux slowdown is when the swap is totally used, or /tmp is full, both are easly cured.

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
    1. Re:Ubuntu box used to crawl .. by DiegoBravo · · Score: 1

      >> imho, The only time you see a Linux slowdown is when the swap is totally used, or /tmp is full, both are easly cured.

      Nowadays it is pretty difficult for standard users with standard apps to fill 2Gb of memory (and later, the swap.) Not my case.

      And when /tmp is full (specially if inside / filesystem), things just start to break down without advise.

      regards,

  280. its called defrag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    defrag the harddrive jackass

  281. Something no one has mentioned by bored · · Score: 1

    I see a lot of good suggestions, so I will mention a couple I don't see anyone else mentioning.

    Get a shell extension viewer (ShellExView) Ive found things hooking themselves into some shell behavior which makes the machine run poorly.

    Pay attention to ram usage in the process explorer. Often a bad/compromised application will show up as using a lot of ram (which can cause excessive paging, which may look like a slower disk). Another sign is the IO operations/sec fields.

    Get a decent network monitoring tool and look for failed connections or share logins. Sometimes a document in the recent used list will be on a network share that isn't available. This will also help locate other strange behavior. Windows likes its network connections, try unplugging your network connection and see if it gets faster/slower. Sometimes things will immediately fail (causing everything to accelerate) or the timeouts have to actually expire causing everything to run slower.

    Look at what applications have been recently installed. I had a problem with S3 sleep mode on my desktop recently that was caused by an evil application's licensing service. The problem with services is that they run under the svchost process and can be hard to track down, so as others have mentioned, stop all unnecessary services.

  282. AVG 8.0 by overlook77 · · Score: 0

    Dont know what AV software you are running, but the new AVG 8.0 basically killed performance on my XP desktop and Vista laptop. I had serious performance issues after upgrading to this. You can install without some of the unneccesary features and turn other features off and this helped.

  283. Here are few things to check... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Computers only slow down for a few reason:

    Hardware issues: (ie HD failing, power supply not giving enough power anymore, capacitors on motherbard going bad (check if they are swelling or leaking)).

    Infections: You said you tried a few applications but one of the greatest kept secretes of most engineers and techs is an application called "Combofix" available from bleepingcomputer website for free. Spybot is a great tool and remember that the best anti-virus application has been a german based company called AVIRA (they have been top rated for a few years and are not as widely known because of lack of advertising... but be sure to check out their ratings on review sites).

    DCOM: The heart of Windows is DCOM. In a run command type: DCOMCNFG . Insure that there is no red arrow being displayed on your computer. Check that there are 4 sub categories. click on each one and and say yes if something needs to be registered properly. If there are any issues open a command promt and type "MSDTC -install"

    Indexing Services: Open Add/remove programs from the control panels. Then press add/remove windows components. Un-check Indexing. Indexing is used by servers and should not be enabled on a desktop as it is a serious resource hog.

    Old, damaged or missing drivers:
    open device manager and make sure all your drivers are good.

    old, damaged or missing windows files:
    open Run and type "sfc /scannnow". this will require a windows CD/DVD to replace any corrupt or missing files.

    Permission issues:
    This is tricky.. check out this website: http://blogs.msdn.com/astebner/archive/2006/09/04/739820.aspx
    Microsoft has a tool called subinACL and there is a script on that page that should help even those most stubborn file-system and registry.

    Finally, here are two final rules for using a computer... you can only have 1 firewall on your computer and 1 anti-virus application. Using more than one will only cause issues and also cause your computer to run slow.

    Be sure your Windows updates are current as well as any protection software that you use!

    I hope that you and everyone else finds this information useful.

    Dr. Brandon Keith
    AV Computer Doctor
    computerdoc74@gmail.com
    661-524-4339

    1. Re:Here are few things to check... by freeventure · · Score: 1

      Perfect response

  284. Microsoft Update by TheChief · · Score: 1
    I personally have seen on several dozen systems an issue where the system performance will degrade quite significantly after Microsoft Update is installed over Windows Update. The resolve in these cases is as simple as turning off Microsoft Update. This is NOT turning off automatic updates. To revert back to Windows Update, you need to have the Microsoft Update website in front of you and then click on "Change Settings". From here, you will see a section:

    To stop using Microsoft Update
    If you no longer want to install updates using this website, you can disable the supporting software on your computer.

    You can still get updates from the Windows Update website by visiting the site or by turning on automatic updating on your computer. However, you will not be able to get updates for products other than Windows.

    Disable Microsoft Update software and let me use Windows Update only

    Clicking to disable, applying and then restarting the system seemed to be enough to get the systems out of their zombie like state. I believe the issue falls with the way the system is constantly scanning for updates that may be available.

  285. Might be the User Profile by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

    Here is another thought, simple and easy to do. Make a new user. Login as that user. If the computer suddenly runs faster, the user profile you have been logging in under is too cluttered and/or corrupted and needs to be retired. If the new profile runs just as slow as the old one, you know it's not the profile, but you've only spent roughly 10 minutes to find out.

    (apologizes if this has already been posted and I missed it)

  286. It's not just the windows explorer copy by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    It's not just the windows explorer copy that sucks. My point stands about just about any other way to do that. Total Commander, Install Shield, you name it. A lot of the IO wait translates into basically (a percentage of the) time where the whole machine does nothing else.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  287. Actually, you illustrate exactly my problem by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Actually, you illustrate exactly my problem. Better than I could. Thanks.

    Let's put it like this:

    1. _All_ a fragmented swap file (or any other file) adds is longer seeks back and forth to write the fragments.

    2. Any competently written OS has _no_ excuse to block while waiting for a seek. It should just schedule another thread.

    3. Windows does stall for seeks, as you've noticed.

    Don't get me wrong, your point about the advantages of keeping the seeks short with a contiguous swap partition, is very valid too. The difference between 1-2 track seek and seek-across-the-drive is one order of magnitude.

    But still, that's an optimization. That difference should just translate into maybe 1% difference in performance, as everything else (and especially the GUI threads) should be scheduled in that time. But, as you've noticed, the effect is a lot more dramatic.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Actually, you illustrate exactly my problem by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, the special thing about swapping is that literally any number of processes could be waiting for a piece of physical memory.

      The really dysfunctional behavior on vm launch didn't exist in earlier betas of Vista. I expect that it was somehow introduced during the process of tweaking a little performance out of the "average case". Or it may have been the net effect of several tweaks to the virtual memory system, maybe optimistically extending the page file in hopes that swapping out a modest number of pages will fix the out of memory problem.

      One thing is certain: the original Vista's choice of pages to swap out was pretty broken. Until I determined the problem was pagefile fragmentation, I found a few gigs of Readyboost RAM was a huge help, which indicates to me that the OS was repeatedly needing pages it had recently swapped out. After the problem had been fixed, the impact of ReadyBoost was significantly reduced.

      I don't think it is the case that every version of Windows blocks for every kind of seek, otherwise it would severely cripple database servers running on it. However, in "showcase" situations, there is always a team of MS engineers who make mysterious tweaks to the registry to alter system behaviors. This is kind of like swapping between the CFQ and Deadline scheduler in Linux, except that the choice is documented. It's not delivered with the assumption that one size fits all.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Actually, you illustrate exactly my problem by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      I don't know about every version of Windows, but I do happen to know that NT needed much more memory than Netware for the same performance as a file server, back when everyone ditched Novel in favour of MS. NT's saving grace was that NT _and_ the extra memory cost much less than a Netware upgrade. But the performance difference was there, and only excessive caching fixed it.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  288. CPU spikes = failing motherboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Random CPU spikes from multiple applications suggest motherboard failure in my experience. Check for blown caps first and foremost.

  289. Do you Have Office 2003? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here is something I've noticed where I work. If you have XP SP3, and Office 2003 installed and use WSUS to do your windows update. When an update is released svchost will choke and make your computer to a crawl for a very long time.

    As I'm one of a two person IT Dept for approx 600 computers in a domain environment where everyone gets Office 2003. We have taken to just announcing when we release an update to stop the cascade of my computer is broken phone calls.

    Note: I believe Microsoft knows about this issue see: http://blogs.technet.com/wsus/archive/2007/05/15/srvhost-msi-issue-follow-up.aspx

    So, Known bug with no hopes of a fix. Just upgrade to Office 2007 (yeah right!).

  290. Simple for damaged OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sfc /scannow will work sometimes. While not the best option have you tried an over install of XP.

  291. I had this happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...a couple of years ago. It turned out that somehow my machine had been identified as a DNS server (or similar network wide resource provider) and was the target of 10's of thousands of packets per second from the network. The slowdown was revealed when a technician hooked up a sniffer to a local hub and saw all the network traffic headed my way.

  292. Corrupted Registry or Missing Server by faylore · · Score: 1

    I've had good luck using Registry Mechanic to fix various types of registry problems. It's not free, but it well worth the $30. A PC can feel like new.

    Another problem can occur due to networked servers being referenced in shortcuts (including the icon). If the Server is replaced with a new one with a different name then you will be waiting for network timeouts. This is most annoying and it can be tedious to examine each one. Directory listing in Explorer with the Comments field added can help.

  293. uh.... by techsyslonghorn · · Score: 1

    Could be a tumor....

  294. Hardware Cleanup by mactimes · · Score: 1

    Some of my recent customers' computers face this issue once in a while. It seems that people forget about hardware cleaning. Most of them think that just software maintenance is Ok. I've once found a high-speed computer performing tasks really slow. I just opened it and cleaned it up. The display card was trully dusty. After that, the computer went back to its usual performance.
    Also, take a look at Event Viewer, seek for warnings and errors. That may give you more clues about what the problem can be if it keeps slow after cleanup.

    --
    God is Real as long as it's not declared as Integer.
  295. Re:Check heatsinks and fans.... I don't know WHY by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    I thought the whole point of aircan instead of vacuum is to avoid static electricity zapping the computer?

    Moving air rapidly over a non-conducting surface is a recipe for generating static.

    If you find you're needing that S&R helicopter to come and pick you out of the water, do NOT grab hold of the wire trailing below the winchman as he's lowered into the water near you. That's there to discharge the static the helicopter accumulates in flight, and people have had heart attack from grabbing at the leader wire. Likewise - use the earthing strap BEFORE you attach the fuel hose.

    The airspeed across a helicopter's rotor is going to be in the same order of magnitude as that coming out of an air can. Which raises a potential (sorry, couldn't resist! Sorry again!!) problem in static-sensitive equipment.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  296. DIsable any non-essential hardware as a test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disconnect all external devices, too. I've had bad/hung hardware like USB HDDs or a scanner cause serious weird performance problems.

  297. maybe a hardware issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had the same kind of problems with a defective USB hub, no idea why, under Windows or Linux it would drag the system down onto its knees sometimes, other times it worked fine, I spent ages trying to work out what applications or BIOS settings could be the problem, then it started preventing the system booting, thats when I got desperate and did a full check, when I unplugged the hub and found out that it was the problem I slung it, maybe your problem could be some onboard hardware dying, maybe even the USB controler?

  298. Re:Your Sig by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

    Actually I know a guy who rode his Triumph speed triple into a deer on his way to work at about 65 mph up near Garberville and the deer won (but was quite dead).

    The bike was totaled and he spent 5 weeks in the hospital and is lucky to be alive.

    So yeah, the Triumph Rocket 3 looks like it would be better for deer hunting, and surviving, eh?

    BTW.. if you look at back issues of one of the motorcyclist magazines from five or six years ago, the Albion Ridge V-Max guy's story is in it, the Max was originally a magazine project bike, it's totally worth the read.

    --
    If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  299. Live CD & delete swap file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boot off your fav linux live cd. If it behaves poorly it could be a hardware problem. While you are booted in linux delete all of your pagefile.sys files. Windows will re-create them on the next boot. If there was a problem in one of them you have just eliminated that problem.

  300. House, MD approach by bobv-pillars-net · · Score: 1

    When faced with a slow Windows computer, I typically fix *everything*. As in "House, MD" episodes, symptoms may be indicative of a single problem, multiple problems, or the interaction between multiple problems. Treatment is often quicker (and easier) than diagnosis.

    Things I do automatically:

    * Scan/remove all malware, virus, trojans, etc.
    * Remove all unnecessary ActiveX and browser helpers.
    * Remove/deactivate/shut down all unnecessary auto-start programs and services.
    * Run Disk Cleanup with all options selected
    * Run Defrag
    * Create a new user (hence empty profile)

    --
    The Web is like Usenet, but
    the elephants are untrained.
  301. White box PCs... by DrYak · · Score: 1

    but a lot of system boards did not have a connector for it. The result was a button that did nothing on a many whitebox PCs.

    Well, it depends.

    Back in the days, the clock wasn't set in the BIOS like on mordern hardware, but was set by putting jumpers on some PINs.
    It would take long for some overclockers to wire the Turbo button to the clock pins to be able to switch easily between the official stock clock and an overclocked state (switching between 66Mhz and 83Mhz, for example).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  302. Re:Check the moderators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 insightful, not troll.

  303. Dusty Laptop Cooler by iamnotachoice · · Score: 1

    i've experienced this very problem on several laptops and finally found out that even a thin layer of dust on the small cooling ribs of the laptop cpu heat sink will cause a decrease of cpu speed due to cooling efforts of the automatic cpu speed control in modern laptops.

    it usually occurs some time after booting and using your laptop and of course is os-independent. it may also occur without system alert or anything.

    in order to avoid waiting terms of consulting the manufacturer's repair-service i routinely open my laptop and deliver the cooler from dust.
    if you choose to do the same, be aware that you may have to completely remove the heat sink from the board so you'll need heat sink paste and a certain amout of sensitiveness.

  304. CHKDSK vs power-cable-loose-electrons by pg--az · · Score: 1

    (( Did you do that before or after taking out the power cable to shake out the loose electrons? )). Actually that's a deep remark. I have read of cases in which primitive peoples do things which ultimately DO have a scientific foundation, but the tribesman's explanation of why he does it is ridiculous. Bottom line if something experimentally seems to work then forget about the theory. In particular, "taking out the power cable" has worked for me several times, say when my ancient Dell no longer "wants to" SUSPEND correctly. Taking out the power cable has definitely fixed that, obviously there is some state-variable in some chip, no idea where. Indeed this is a worrisome thing as Windows is increasingly aggressive in saving-state-to-disk, what if the saved-state becomes corrupt, how do you reset that if the OS becomes so sure it has got it right ?

  305. Bad capacitors by Fry-kun · · Score: 1

    Okay, I just learned about this, but it could explain everything: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague
    I, too, have some computers that became very slow. Granted, they have had Windows XP and XP x64 installed for over a year -- but that alone shouldn't slow them down this much.

    I'll definitely be looking inside the cases sometime soon...

    --
    Did you know that "FTW" ("for the win") is a direct translation of "Sieg Heil"?
    1. Re:Bad capacitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lost a motherboard to that problem a few years ago.