Anything Forums

This is less of an article but rather a list of Windows tips which mostly work in all versions. They will help speed up your windows system for better performance. This is also a good reference to give to friends that tend to "break" their computer often.

http://www.iceteks.com/articles/db.php/act...windowstips/p/1

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:21355

Yep I'm sure some time we'll get around to adding more, maybe when we add another 30 or so I'll rerelease the article. Glad you like it here.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:22460

Awesome tips man. Kickin' some major butt.


-David

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:29045

Just an FYI but some of these are Myths:

4. Set Windows Explorer to "Launch folder windows in a seperate process.
16. Clean up the registry often.
Cleaning up the registry is a great way to speed up Windows, and increase its reliability.
23. Always unload DLL's

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/XPMyths.html

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:35345

half myth maybe

23. Always unload DLL's

[HKLMSOFTWAREMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionExplorer] "AlwaysUnloadDLL"

Myth - "Enabling this frees up more memory and improves performance"

Reality - "Adding this Registry Key in Windows 2000 or XP has no effect since this registry key is no longer supported in Microsoft Windows 2000 or later. The Shell automatically unloads a DLL when its usage count is zero, but only after the DLL has not been used for a period of time. This inactive period might be unacceptably long at times, especially when a Shell extension DLL is being debugged. For operating systems prior to Windows 2000, you can shorten the inactive period by adding this registry key."

may have to find out if that one really works for 2k+ or 2k-

some good stuff tho red ^^ i might have to put some of it to work on my moms slow compaq

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:35346

most of these are good.

but i have to disagree with masterteck on the cleaning reg. often, he says that is a myth.

not ture.

sure i seen leo on call for help last year test it.

but he tested it with new computers and lots of ram and lots of speed on the cpu's

if running a computer with that stuff sure the reg cleaning is not needed that often maybe once every 3 months for a normal computer user. for lots of downloading and removing of freeware by people considered heavy computer users.

then maybe once a month. just to keep it in order.


but if you are still using the small cpu's and low amounts of ram like on the old 486 cpu's or the early pent 1 and pent 2 computers then keeping the reg. cleaned and in order is needed about once every 2 weeks. by the normal user.

those old slow computers cpu's need all the help they can get to run fast.

i use regscurbxp on this xp once every week or so and it is always finding about 10 errors every now and then it finds 55 or so errors.

so keeping your registry cleaned is needed.


number 4 making the folders open in new windows just take more cpu power and slows down things, any more so it i agree with it is a myth.

number 23 removing all the unused dll's from ram is half right and half wrong.

some of the dll's are not needed after the programs start but they author was sloppy and did not make it remove the dll files when it was done with them.

so cleaning them out is needed. how ever a good ram cleaning program will handle those types of dll's.



number 7 the vitural memory is not completely correct.
it does not tell you that win9x systems have a set size limit and if you go over that your computer might not start. the set size limit is some were around 1600mb's to be safe i have it at 1550 mb's and it is fine.


number one changing outlook express's option to the restricted zone.
will also block some things you might want to use in outlook.
so check to see what it does before you do it.



Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:35347

#7 Rather then defragging Virtual memory have Windows delete the file on reboot

Then it's always fresh & any private info in it is always purged.

I teach u everything I know---and u still no nothing.

And, while you're there, in the same key,

Disable Paging Executive

In normal usage, XP pages sections from RAM memory to the hard drive. We can stop this happening and keep the data in RAM, resulting in improved performance. Note that only users with a large amount of RAM (256MB+) should use this setting. The setting we want to change to disable the 'Paging Executive', as it is called, is called DisablePagingExecutive. Changing the value of this key from 0 to 1 will de-activate memory paging.

Also number 23 will not work as a .reg file.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:35350

Here's another that really worked for me--I had'nt heard of it before:

#12 - Prioritizing IRQs

The main components of your computer have an IRQ number assigned to them. With this tweak we can increase the priority given to any IRQ number, thereby improving the performance of that component. The most common component this tweak is used for is the System CMOS/real time clock, which improves performance across the board. First of all, decide which component you want to give a performance boost to. Next, you have to discover which IRQ that piece of hardware is using. To do this, simply go to Control Panel, then open the System panel (You can also press the shortcut of Windows+Break). Click the 'Hardware' tab, then on the 'Device Manager' button.

Now, right click on the component you want to discover the IRQ for and click 'Properties', then click on the 'Resources' tab.

You can plainly see which IRQ this device is using (if there is no IRQ number, select another device). Remember the number and close down all of the dialog boxes you have opened, then start up RegEdit. Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESystemCurrentControlSetControlPriorityControl in the registry. Now, we have to create a new DWORD value - called IRQ#Priority (where '#’ is the IRQ number), then set the data to 1. For example, the IRQ of my System CMOS is 8, so I would create the key IRQ8Priority.

Now, after restarting, you should notice improved performance in the component you tweaked. I would strongly recommend the CMOS, as it improves performance around the board. Also note that you can have multiple IRQ prioritized, but it is fairly inefficient and can cause instability. To remove this tweak, simply delete the value you created.

I did the above and also priorotized my main drive controller-----------COOL!

HERE'S SOME MORE

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:35352

rovingcowboy wrote: but i have to disagree with masterteck on the cleaning reg. often, he says that is a myth.

not ture.

sure i seen leo on call for help last year test it.

Sorry but Leo doesn't know more about Windows than Mark Russinovich. You have to understand how the Windows Registry is accessed to understand what effect unused keys have on performance, the fact is they don't. Finding "errors" with a Registry cleaner is not proof of anything other than some unused keys are present, it is hardly proof of lost performance.

Registry Junk: A Windows Fact of Life

Mark Russinovich wrote: A few hundred kilobytes of unused keys and values causes no noticeable performance impact on system operation. Even if the registry was massively bloated there would be little impact on the performance of anything other than exhaustive searches.

rovingcowboy wrote: number 23 removing all the unused dll's from ram is half right and half wrong.

some of the dll's are not needed after the programs start but they author was sloppy and did not make it remove the dll files when it was done with them.

so cleaning them out is needed. how ever a good ram cleaning program will handle those types of dll's.

No it is WRONG on Windows XP it does NOTHING on Windows XP. It also does NOTHING in Windows 2000 which is why it is stated for operating systems PRIOR to Windows 2000.

RAM Cleaners are bogus too and will REDUCE performance.

The Memory-Optimization Hoax

Mark Russinovich wrote: RAM Optimizers have no effect, and at worst, they seriously degrade performance. Although gaining more available memory might seem beneficial, it isn't. As RAM Optimizers force the available-memory counter up, they force other processes' data and code out of memory. Say that you're running Word, for example. As the optimizer forces the available-memory counter up, the text of open documents and the program code that was part of Word's working set before the optimization (and was therefore present in physical memory) must be reread from disk as you continue to edit your document. The act of allocating, then freeing a large amount of virtual memory might, as a conceivable side effect, lead to blocks of contiguous available memory. However, because virtual memory masks the layout of physical memory from processes, processes can't directly benefit from having virtual memory backed by contiguous physical memory. As processes execute and undergo working-set trimming and growth, their virtual-memory-to-physical-memory mappings will become fragmented despite the availability of contiguous memory.

"Prioritizing IRQs" is totally bogus as well. Please stop spreading these Myths all it does is misinform people.

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/XPMyths.html

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:37770

Interesting myths there. I loved the one about putting a swap file to a ram drive. The idea sounds all smart, until you think about it more, its totally stupid, since the page file is what gets used if theres not enough ram. Mind you windows tends to use it no matter what. So if you have a rediculous amount of ram, maybe it could help.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:37773

Mastertech wrote:

"Prioritizing IRQs" is totally bogus as well. Please stop spreading these Myths all it does is misinform people.

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/XPMyths.html

UUMM--

Just because this one site says these tweaks don't work means I can find 10 other sites that say they do.

The IRQ priority DOES work, as I've done it myself.

Logic dictates that a software engineer wouldn't make IRQ prioritizing feasible & then have it not work.

I say try the tweaks--nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:2574, old post ID:37780