|
Speaking of speed, has anyone noticed that Windows NT progressively gets slower over time?
I had to re-install Win NT on my machine last year, and it was noticably faster for the first month, almost like having a new machine, then progressively it went back to the slow crawl as before. I tried defragging my HD and even trying to compress the registry, but it makes no difference. I'm convinced it's something to do with the way NT is designed.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah. I noticed that too. I noticed that if I created a new user and logged into it, NT would speed up again. I figured it must be with my ntuser.dat file getting too big.
Also, I noticed it *significant* slowdown if I installed any Norton programs or utilities.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're an on a network, your user information is read from the PDC if you log on. This user information include (or could include): wallpaper, screensaver, start menu, my documents, ...
Under Win2K look at C:\documents and settings\yourusername
Everything in it (except in Local Settings) is copied from and to the network server.
Another way to look at its size is to go to the control panel, choose System, then the tab 'User Profiles'. Mine is about 28 MB. If the profile's type is 'Roaming' it is copied from/to the network server.
Enjoy life, this is not a rehearsal !!!
|
|
|
|
|
(addition to what Patje said)
Also note that the contents of the desktop is handeled this way, i.e. if you like some ppl (me for example) put various stuff on the desktop (I pretty much use it as my 'downloaded' directory), that could cause some lag during startup. 
It should not cause any slowness in general thogh, when the system is up and running.
|
|
|
|
|
As you install more applications, your environment variables, such as path, are getting longer. That will slow you down.
|
|
|
|
|
Still......it's not nearly as bad ad 9x....with it's linked list implementation of all data structures...hehehe
~Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Win NT? Win 9*? Halo ppl... postnuclear age...  
|
|
|
|
|
This is my first post at CP on my new machine, Athlon XP 1800+ (1.53GHz) I retired my old machine to Advanced Server (not that it does that very fast )
- Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist
-Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John Simmons
|
|
|
|
|
Congrats. It's a nice processor, have a couple of those my self
- Anders
Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
|
|
|
|
|
Coupled with DDR Ram and a 80 GB HD and a Radeon Video Card they sure get the job done
- Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist
-Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John Simmons
|
|
|
|
|
Strange.... I once knew this guy, who was a die-hard Intel fan. Suddenly he changed his mind. Well, things change I guess?
Christian Skovdal Andersen
Don't mention the war...
|
|
|
|
|
Hehehe 
Well, I worked for you back then when I bought my first AMD CPU, maybe you didn't pay me enough to get Intel 
- Anders
Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
|
|
|
|
|
My boss walked in a couple of months ago and anounced that I was going to be getting a new box - P4/2.3 with 1gb RAM and lots more hard drive space.
Three weeks ago, they gave it to me, but there seems to be a problem with the serial ports. No matter what we do, we can't get the damn thing to talk to our debug boards (embedded stuff), however the old system (P3/500) worked just fine. We even tried installing an add-on serial card and disabling the on-board ports, but nothing seems to work.
Everyone here is kind of at a loss. We're using two serial ports and the parallel port for the development/debugging, so it's crucial that all of this stuff work right.
In the meanwhile, I'm back to the old system...
------- signature starts
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio.
------- signature ends
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking that this would be a good survey for those with crappy boxes to show their boss
"Did you know that 95% of developers are supplied with boxes faster than mine? Check out this survey..."
You never know - it might even work.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote:
"Did you know that 95% of developers are supplied with boxes faster than mine? Check out this survey..."
You never know - it might even work
Chris... You shoudl skew the results to say that 95% of developers get over 2 Ghz machines...
Regards,
Brian Dela
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it they will spend thousands on training courses but £300 to update your PC is a no no ??
Davy
Weblog, Ramblings and more...
www.latedecember.com
|
|
|
|
|
training courses??? hahahahahahahahahahaa
Oh, sorry, if I didn't laugh, I would cry.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Where do I sign up for these training courses? 
Dave Goodman on funny error messages:
It is a definite no-no to run BITMAP as a user command. Your nose will grow, your lawn will die, your hair will fall out, and your first-born will marry an aardvark. Shame on you!
|
|
|
|
|
Davy Mitchell wrote:
Why is it they will spend thousands on training courses but £300 to update your PC is a no no ??
Ah, I think you must be working for a training company, are you Davy? 
Gavin Greig
"Haw, you're no deid," girned Charon. "Get aff ma boat or ah'll report ye."
Matthew Fitt - The Hoose O Haivers: The Twelve Trauchles O Heracles.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, looks like most of us has outdated systems. So why boss should upgrade my comouter if other programmers use the same? (0.5GHz - 1 GHz)
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, definately. Otherwise he might take my dual 2.4 away...
|
|
|
|
|
I am pretty happy with my 850 MHz PIII Notebook (which is my main working machine) and my 2 * 650 MHz PIII tower for background tasks (like encoding MP3s )
I personally have the feeling, that speed, speed, speed is no longer the question. All machines with >= 500 MHz are fast enough for most things - if you give them enough memory and a speedy HD.
(Okay, for VS.NET and Java it may be helpfull to have 1GHz, but memory and a fast HD is still more imporant than CPU speed.)
In the last years my focus moved to other aspects. For example I prefer silent machines over fast ones. That's the reason I work mainly on my notebook even if the tower is faster. It's very silent, the fan runs only if I really stress it and the HD is nearly unhearable.
The one and only bottleneck is the HD. 2,5" HDs are significantly slower than desktop HDs. So my personal whish is a speedy, but silent 2,5" HD.
--
Daniel Lohmann
http://www.losoft.de
(Hey, this page is worth looking! You can find some free and handy NT tools there )
|
|
|
|
|
But still Megahertzes are good...
Greets,
Martin
If I'm not back in 5 minutes, just wait longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Compile time is greatly affected by the CPU speed. If you do a lot of compiling, a faster computer can save a good chunk of time.
John
|
|
|
|
|
You are right here, of course 
However, the important part of your statement is "fast computer" which is not necessarily the same as "fast CPU".
Especially when it comes to compiling, the speed of the HD is also a significant thing.
--
Daniel Lohmann
http://www.losoft.de
(Hey, this page is worth looking! You can find some free and handy NT tools there )
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
