Microsoft Quietly Fixes Windows XP Resource Hog Problem
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft indicated this week that it has fixed a Windows XP resource-hog problem associated with the system's SVCHOST.EXE processes. Windows XP users affected by this problem typically found that the operating system was using up system resources for 15 minutes to an hour after startup, making it difficult to use the machine during that period. The Microsoft Update team had vowed last month to spend the holiday break tackling the issue, which has plagued some users for years. The fix involved stopping the system from perpetually checking Internet Explorer updates. Microsoft indicated that the fix was rolled out on Tuesday."
Bye bye Windows 8 hello xp
Is it always better late than never?
Suppose if they didn't get it over the holiday and it wasn't done by April 8th, they could have perhaps saved themselves all the bother and turned off all update checks (since none would be forthcoming, why bother to check)...
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Windows XP has been out for 12 years and they just started to look into the problem last month?
Now I can turn windows updates back on on about 10 XP computers at work. Even though we're replacing the last 40 or so XP computers over the next month. Just in time Microsoft, thanks!
What next: Are they going to tackle the memory leaks in the Commodore 64 Operating System?
windows embedded systems based on XP still get updates for some time and firms can buy more update for XP as well.
JIT!
...for the finish line.
The performance issue was a constant check for updates.. for another program notorious for performance issues....
This is why I really wish that Microsoft was *truly* forced to allow IE to be ripped out of their operating system completely.
At this point, just give it up guys. You had over 10 years trying to make a browser. Let it go....
but this is proof that IE is inextricable from XP, and my cynical self says that if microsoft had fixed it, they would've lost a good portion of their defense against the EU.
Whilst I'm pleased to see this fix I'm surprised they didn't just leave it. What business sense is there in fixing soon-to-be-obsolete products, especially when takeup of the new ones is lower than expected?
How do you do a memory leak in C-64 BASIC?
No fair faking it by POKING machine code directly into memory!
Memo to Slashdot: If you want to attract more female contributors, don't use "codpiece" as a captcha.
It's ABOUT time.
Yes, XP is not the only Windows OS with this problem...
Suppose if they didn't get it over the holiday and it wasn't done by April 8th, they could have perhaps saved themselves all the bother and turned off all update checks
Windows Server 2003 is supported longer than Windows XP despite using the same update mechanism and nearly the same kernel. Extended support for Windows Server 2003 ends on 7/14/2015, and this problem will only get worse for servers over the last two and a half years of extended support. So there's a benefit for making a fix for Windows Server 2003. And if the same fix applies to Windows XP, it doesn't cost Microsoft that much to release the fix for both, and the gesture of goodwill could help deter companies from switching to GNU/Linux or OS X instead of buying Windows 8.1 + Classic Shell.
If you want to attract more female contributors, don't use "codpiece" as a captcha.
Probably assumed that a "piece" was a firearm, and a "codpiece" was a firearm in Call of Duty video games.
ObXP: Do Call of Duty games even run on Windows XP anymore?
I repair old computers to be resold and the amount of time it would take to get the first updates was the single longest time waster of re-installing a fresh copy of XP on an old machine. The last 2 days it only took about 5 minutes for XP to figure out what updates were exactly needed instead of what had become the normal several hours.
I seem to remember reading that the time used by the previous update conflict resolution algorithm scales exponentially with the number of updates issued for a particular platform. Until recently, the number of updates wasn't big enough to cause a problem, but after 12 years of updates, this has changed.
What I'd really like Microsoft to do for XP (and other versions of Windows) is when the product reaches end of life, create a new installation medium which includes all the updates. If anyone wants to do legacy installations of the OS in future for special purposes, that could be quite handy.
one and a half years
Touché. But that's still 18 months of the server being able to do its job of serving instead of sitting and looking for updates, 18 months of one fewer annoyance that might push IT into "screw it, I'm switching to Linux" territory.
in the past the astroturfers and other MS fans said I was full of crap because I said my computer took 10 minutes to boot to a useable state. Screw all of you. I stand by my past assertions that MS OS's are crap- they always have been and always will be.
When are they going to figure out what causes my Win 7 to take 10 minutes to boot to a useable state? Maybe in 2025...
XP is basically EOL and they just fix this now? Assholes.
Maybe they'll keep XP on life support until they get Win9 out.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
The summary says it is an issue in the first 15-60 minutes after startup. Servers are generally up for longer periods of time
If by "uptime" you mean wall time between reboots, I don't see how it differs. A desktop PC is rebooted monthly to install updates, and it is put to sleep (suspend) after hours. A server is the same; it just doesn't sleep unless it's used only during business hours.
Xp eol has been extended to 2015. This was a needed fix even if not for server 2003.
No it hasn't, that is for MS XP security products. ie, MSE [Microsoft Security Essentials].
Really guys? People get crappy performance for years, and it's due to trying to update IE?
That's pretty lame, even for Microsoft.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Sounds like you should have rolled the updates into an updated xp iso. Search the MS kb for more info.
Ever notice that Cobra Commander sounds an awful lot like Star scream?
I'll bet it persists in Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1 or it's prodigy would exhibit the problem. I just looked over the patch Tuesday fixes from this week and there's no mention of anything for SVCHOST however there is a nice memory leak that's been around for a long time in oleaut32.dll. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2870467
I guess they don't take advantage of static or runtime analysis tools at MSFT.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
It was on the NEWS...
OK, so now just incorporate this fix into a shrink-wrap version and launch it under the name of "Windows 9". I'm pretty sure it would outsell Windows 8 comfortably.
No left turn unstoned.
Really as the other poster said. You should have slipstreamed the updates into the install long ago. There is no reason for a new install of XP to be time consuming, especially important if you do a lot of installs.
Which part of "Microsoft product" did you not understand?
When you won't use IE and they have a bug that tries to continuously update software you won't use? That explains a lot of my issues with speed on older rigs. I wish developers would just focus on modular coding rather than expecting everyone is using the system the way that their developers/product designers expect.
I don't use IE, Adobe, and a bunch of other luzers addictions when I'm on the web, I shouldn't have system degradation because of it.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
I want to access my data today, tomorrow and in 15 years time. For me, that rules out any dependence on proprietary software.
Also, it is a bit of an ingenious argument to say to Linux is buggy because the most popular distro has regressions. It wouldn't be the most popular distro unless it had something in its favour.
I wonder, how much Co2 has been released into the atmosphere, with this bug present on millions of computers, over decades, causing PC's to eat more electricity than they should.
At work my computer stops basically completely after 4 programs have once used the file open or file save dialog (and the explorer windows also sleep and eat all CPU.
While I found a lot of potential reasons while googeling bottom line none seemed convincing.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
i bet you sit there and stare at the status bar too.
So when X.Org has a 22 year-old bug fixed it's "awesome" but when XP has 12 year-old one fixed it's "what did they wait for" ?
To be fair they usually don't do this kind of stuff.
"Fixed" isn't quite the right word. The version of Windows Update in Windows XP uses an O(2^n) - exponential! - algorithm to calculate update dependencies. Every time you add another update, the time to calculate dependencies doubles.
Two attempts to fix, in November and December, failed - just culling the supersedence lists didn't work. They haven't changed the algorithm, either. What they have done is remove a bunch of the Windows Updates to Internet Explorer from the catalog which have been replaced by others (the updates were for the most part cumulative, so you only needed the last one to have the most recent version - although I'm not sure if "most recent" is the right term here!).
There's a far more practical way that users will be able to do in April - use nLite to integrate every one of the updates until EOL, and remove Windows Update. After that point, it won't be doing them any good anyway.
Of course, what users REALLY SHOULD be doing is migrating to an OS that isn't end-of-life and that will be getting security updates. Windows 7 is fine. They had the cheap opportunity to update to Windows 8 and then (for free) 8.1, which doesn't suck as long as you install Classic Shell and ignore that the Metro UI even exists. Or any of a number of easy Linux distributions like Ubuntu, of course. I know two groups who are saving 0days deliberately for release after the last XP Patch Tuesday...
not a decade too late.
LOL, In other news, the NSA has annouced the scaling back of domestic surveillance. Coincidence?
They should have released a bug that makes the OS alone eat up the whole PC, and leave nothing for the applications. That way, everybody can be forced to migrate.
Where, exactly, would be up to them.
for the time being
so all those slow downs are so a system service can check for internet explorer updates? A program which shouldn't even be integrated into the OS?
really MS? Knock it off.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I thought M$ did this on purpose to make XP users dump this old OS. :P
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
righto
They fix a years old bug and somehow slashdot manages to spin this into a positive puff-piece for MICROS~1 ..
There's more proof, EU court.
Why should millions of people have to do this on their own? Why doesn't Microsoft do it once? Doesn't anyone understand the concept of scale?
Or if he is constantly doing installs and doesn't want to keep having to burn .ISOs he can just use WSUS Offline dropped into a share folder on his network and call it a day. I have a copy on my network and it has everything from XP and Office 2K3 to Win 8.1 and Office 2K10 on it and between that and Ninite the amount of time it takes to go from bare metal to fully patched and ready to go has dropped right off the map. What is nice is the fact you can just flip UAC off and have it run fully unattended, just run it and it'll take care of any reboots required and fully patch the system, install the latest IE and DirectX as well as .NET and Office patches if you want, easy peasy.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I wonder how much energy has been burned up by this sloppy code. Thanks Microsoft.
Windows slowed down my mom's Pentium 4 2.4 GHz computer. Yes, she still uses XP. don't diss her. I will have to upgrade her OS to Windows 7 in March or April though.
My first PC was a TRS80/4p in 1982 that cost over $5,000 for it and the 15M External Disk, so I've been using a computer for a very long time. Hell the next system I bought was a Tandy 1000 (Intel 286) and I used that for 4 years. The first Windows system I had was in 88 and ran Dos 6.22/WFW 3.11 and that was a 386. I've had damn near every generation of Intel based chip other then P4 over the last 30 years.
In fact, I've used every consumer version of Windows (3.11/95a/b/c/98/Se/Me/XP/Vista/Win7/8/8.1) that MS has released and let me tell you: Win8 is not crap and yes I do know as I'm running 8.1 now. 8 was a clusterfuck in your face change - as bad as Vista was but with a fucking reason. Yes 8 is not for anyone who uses a desktop and 8.1 fixed many of the fucking desktop complaints but it still isn't as good as Vista/Win7 is for that purpose.
Personally, I'm no fan of desktop effects and have disabled them since Win95b with IE4 since the slide open menus simply wasted time. When I use Linux, I prefer Fluxbox to anything else as it has a plain text syntax for the fucking menu and I can edit it as needed but when I need a full DE, I'll stick with KDE 3 as it actually works better then the crap called 4 - email actually works w/o bogging the fucking system down and Amarok is damn near perfect (2.0 still hasn't reached feature parity) and who's bright idea was it to use an SQL DB for email? Sounds like something from Microsoft.
The biggest complaint I'm hearing about 8/8.1 is WMP is not included (finally killed by MS) and those folks don't use iTunes so I suggest they get VLC for Videos as it handles damn near everything including music though I do tell em that it wont save the fucking playlist for some reason. If they have an extensive music library, I suggest FooBar2000 as it works quite well - use it myself. Personally, I'd stick with Open Source but Wine doesn't support my games worth a damn (at least I haven't figured out how to get some of them running) and don't even mention Steam to me as I don't like/trust them.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
Dear Microsoft,
please stop providing updates to any Version of Internet explorer less than version 10, and likewise stop providing updates to any (consumer) operating system that does not run IE-10+.
you want customers to move on, developers want them to move on. really, please make it an easier decision for then to all upgrade. you are doing nothing but encouraging security exploits, and preventing progress. (it's like IE6 all over again)
To be fair they usually don't do this kind of stuff.
Right. Normally, if it's broken, it stays broken until a new product release really fucks it up...
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Hi, would one of you that has received the update please post the kbase number ... when I try windows updates I don't see any update that would address this issue.
Thanks,
Daniel
Hi, would you have the kbase number for the update? I don't see the update when I go to windows updates. Thanks, Daniel
That garbage browser turns 20 next year.
Which is really fucking sad actually, until you consider Hurd has had more than 20 years of MIT development time and its still not up to stuff.
At the XP era, slipstreaming updates didn't always work.
My XP computer works fine, no BSOD, no unstable operation, until MS issues patches. Then the machine gets flakey, and the only solution is a reboot. Is MS setting a switch that essentially forces me to reboot? I install patches, understand the need, but I want to do it on my own time.
As a techie that works and supports accounts at a large 3 letter Tech company, trust me to say the next 18 months if going to be VERY busy due to the 10's of thousands of 2003 servers still out there. As many have mentioned its sounds "easy" to just say well you need to upgrade. The reality is a lot more sobering, especially with those legacy software applications that only run on 2003 or lower.
Hell W2K is still out there in many cases.
Got tired of windows, installed that newfangled linux thing on all my machines, it seems to run faster, also it works nice with the internets. It is so good norton and macaffe don't work on it..that in itself is a good thing.
They engineered the problem to get people to upgrade.
They are using the last window of fixes to remove the intentional code in case someone eventually works that out, although it seems stupid as I imagine a lot of XP installs can still be decompiled to look at this.