{OT} -- Computer Problem

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 17:15:34 -0500, "billy ray"
> wrote:

>PS Stay away from Registry Editors.
>
>Most of the time their use results in a system even more screwed up than
>before unless you know exactly what you are doing.
>

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV VVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
>You may also consider LavaSoft's Ad-Aware and another program called Spybot.
>Both offer a free version that is quite useful.
>

I second this! ;-)
Both are VERY USEFUL apps.
(Find them at download.com)

[snip]


....

Part of your problem is that damn Celeron. No on-chip cache to speak of. You
can install XP from a different CD but the CD key that came with that
computer may or may not work. Nothing you can do but upgrade it to a
Pentium.

Go to start, run. Type MSCONFIG. On the 'startup' tab, uncheck everything.
Most people have an assload of programs running that they don't even know
about. They start up because of a set of code in the registry that loads
certain programs automatically. Uncheck em all and it will help. Go back
afterward and select the ones you want.

Check out Spybot. It works. McAfee sucks a lot of resourse.

Finally, upgrade the ram if you can. Make sure both sticks are at least
PC133. If you have a PC100 and a PC133, they will run at PC100.


HTH

Carl

"Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
news:ZZQrh.9550$Wz.3592@trndny06...
> Yes. The computer says 375,280K, that would be 375M.
>
> Processor is a Celeron running at 2.66Ghz.
>
>
>
>
>
> "Dave Milne" > wrote in message
> . uk...
>> I'm assuming you mean Mb when you said K. Either way, you are better off
>> with 512Mb for XP.
>> What processor are you running ?
>>
>>
>> Dave Milne, Scotland
>> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
>> "Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
>> news:yqQrh.9544$Wz.3408@trndny06...
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> I have defragged and error checked since Christmas. Still slow.
>>>
>>> I have 13G of Used Space and 24G of Free Space. 375K RAM. The 'puter
>>> came
>>> with 128K, and I added 256K, the total is 384K, but displays as 375K.
>>>
>>> The machine is running McAfee Security Suite, 2006 (or 2007, I forget
>> which)
>>> that was recently (Thanksgiving, 2006) installed. the machine was slow
>>> before McAfee was installed, and I was thinking it was "virually
>>> enhanced"
>>> then, and that's why I put the McAfee in. My b-in-law has signed up for
>> FiOS
>>> (fiber optic internet), and that comes with a security suite that I am
>> going
>>> to be setting up. Therer are two versions, one is free and the other is
>>> a
>>> fee-service. I have the same fiber optic service, and my wife bought the
>>> fee-service security suite for three of our machines, but my machine
>>> still
>>> is using the McAfee Suite and seems to run fine. (I replaced Norton
>> Security
>>> with the McAfee back in November -- at the same time I installed the
>> McAfee
>>> in my b-in-law's machine. My machine runs okay, his machine is slow --
>>> the
>>> machines at my house that have the fee-service security offered by the
>>> IP
>>> run fine.)
>>>
>>> I suspect (still) that my b-in-law's machine might have a virus. I use
>>> the
>>> built-in Defrag that comes with Windows, but I haven't a utility that
>> cleans
>>> the Registry. I have a strong suspicion that my troubles are in the
>>> Registry, but I am not smart enough to know what is a Registry
>>> Requirement
>>> and what is a Bogus Registry Entry.
>>>
>>> Do you, or anybody else, know if I can reinstall XP using a different
>>> copy
>>> of the OS than the one that came installed on the machine?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "YouGoFirst" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> > You should first get a registry defragmenting program. The program
>> should
>>> > also look for errors in the registry. (I use a program called WinASO
>>> > to
>>> > both defragment and check for registry errors.) Another source of
>>> > pain
>>> > and anguish is the anti-virus program. The more recent versions of
>> Norton
>>> > suck up immense computing resources. You can turn off a bunch of
>>> > scans
>>> > that Norton does, and that helps. You should also defrag the hard
>> drive.
>>> >
>>> > Part of the problem is that as XP has been upgraded by MS it eats up
>> more
>>> > and more resources.
>>> >
>>> > "Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
>>> > news:KBPrh.21233$wq.14150@trndny07...
>>> >>I (my brother in law, really) have a computer that has a SERIOUS case
>>> >>of
>>> >>The Slows. It takes FOREVER to open apps, and complete any number of
>>> >>different tasks.
>>> >>
>>> >> It is an off-brand box that came from Fry's (I think). I don't recall
>>> >> what the architecture is, but I'm pretty sure my 286-based laptop was
>>> >> faster.
>>> >>
>>> >> The computer is on its way to my house for a checkout. I'm not sure
>> what
>>> >> my strategy will be.
>>> >>
>>> >> The machine has a valid version of XP Home edition, but I do not know
>> if
>>> >> it has the Restore CD or not. Can I use a different copy of XP to do
>>> >> restore operations? I assume that I have to use the Key Code that is
>>> >> on
>>> >> the computer, not the one that belongs to the copy of XP that I will
>>> >> restore from.
>>> >>
>>> >> Do not hesitate to offer suggestions on what to do ...
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>

Nothing, that's why the Subject line says {OT}, which signifies Off Topic.

I asked the question here because I happen to know that many of the gear
heads here are also computer geeks.



"Curtis Geiger" > wrote in message
...
> And what the hell does this all have to do with jeeps?
> "ufatbastehd" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Yes more ram is better. I wouldn't run less than 1 gig.
>>
>> But Microsoft says
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;314865
>>
>>
>> James wrote:
>>> With Windows XP, you are a bit underpowered on ram. Many folks
>>> believe
>>> that 512 mb is minimum, and more is better.
>>>
>>> Good luck !!
>>>
>>> --james--
>>
>
>

"L.W. (Bill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Jeff,
> Do the normal maintenance like click on computer, left click C drive
> Properties, and cleaned disk, Tools tab, Check disk, then Defrag, this
> usually take hours, and runs a little faster without errors from the Save
> Mode.


I did all of that already. That's what we call "the easy stuff" in the
trade.




> See what's running, what's in your Start Up, then Run, MSConfig, and
> uncheck all the unnecessary programs under Startup, looking very carefully
> for a Trojan.
> See just how infected it is by running Ad Awa

I took AdAware off ...

One problem I have is, I'm not sufre what is a trojan and what is something
I really need to have. I have found that SVCHOST is important, even if there
are lots of them ...





> http://www.lavasoft.de/news/product/info/ AVG:
> http://www.grisoft.com/doc/1 McAfee Stinger:
> http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/
> All free.
> God Bless America, Bill 0|||||||0
> http://www.billhughes.com/
>
> "Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
> news:KBPrh.21233$wq.14150@trndny07...
>> I (my brother in law, really) have a computer that has a SERIOUS case of
> The
>> Slows. It takes FOREVER to open apps, and complete any number of
>> different
>> tasks.
>>
>> It is an off-brand box that came from Fry's (I think). I don't recall
>> what
>> the architecture is, but I'm pretty sure my 286-based laptop was faster.
>>
>> The computer is on its way to my house for a checkout. I'm not sure what
> my
>> strategy will be.
>>
>> The machine has a valid version of XP Home edition, but I do not know if
> it
>> has the Restore CD or not. Can I use a different copy of XP to do restore
>> operations? I assume that I have to use the Key Code that is on the
>> computer, not the one that belongs to the copy of XP that I will restore
>> from.
>>
>> Do not hesitate to offer suggestions on what to do ...
>>
>>
>>
>
>

I use both AdAware and Spybot regularly. I also have ZoneAlarm as my
firewall on this computer and it has its own antispyware that picks up
stuff that the other two do not. My computer was getting the sluggishes
and I went from 128 to 356MB of RAM (for $60 - cheap) and now it is
running all snappily again. This is with XP on a Compaq Presario 5900Z
that is getting on now as our #2 computer here, but runs all the email and
online poker.
Tomes

"billy ray" > wrote in message
...
> PS Stay away from Registry Editors.
>
> Most of the time their use results in a system even more screwed up than
> before unless you know exactly what you are doing.
>
> You may also consider LavaSoft's Ad-Aware and another program called
> Spybot. Both offer a free version that is quite useful.

> "Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
> news:ZZQrh.9550$Wz.3592@trndny06...
>> Yes. The computer says 375,280K, that would be 375M.
>>
>> Processor is a Celeron running at 2.66Ghz.

>> "Dave Milne" > wrote in message
>> . uk...
>>> I'm assuming you mean Mb when you said K. Either way, you are better
>>> off
>>> with 512Mb for XP.
>>> What processor are you running ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Dave Milne, Scotland
>>> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
>>> "Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
>>> news:yqQrh.9544$Wz.3408@trndny06...
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> I have defragged and error checked since Christmas. Still slow.
>>>>
>>>> I have 13G of Used Space and 24G of Free Space. 375K RAM. The 'puter
>>>> came
>>>> with 128K, and I added 256K, the total is 384K, but displays as 375K.
>>>>
>>>> The machine is running McAfee Security Suite, 2006 (or 2007, I forget
>>> which)
>>>> that was recently (Thanksgiving, 2006) installed. the machine was
>>>> slow
>>>> before McAfee was installed, and I was thinking it was "virually
>>>> enhanced"
>>>> then, and that's why I put the McAfee in. My b-in-law has signed up
>>>> for
>>> FiOS
>>>> (fiber optic internet), and that comes with a security suite that I
>>>> am
>>> going
>>>> to be setting up. Therer are two versions, one is free and the other
>>>> is
>>>> a
>>>> fee-service. I have the same fiber optic service, and my wife bought
>>>> the
>>>> fee-service security suite for three of our machines, but my machine
>>>> still
>>>> is using the McAfee Suite and seems to run fine. (I replaced Norton
>>> Security
>>>> with the McAfee back in November -- at the same time I installed the
>>> McAfee
>>>> in my b-in-law's machine. My machine runs okay, his machine is
>>>> slow --
>>>> the
>>>> machines at my house that have the fee-service security offered by
>>>> the
>>>> IP
>>>> run fine.)
>>>>
>>>> I suspect (still) that my b-in-law's machine might have a virus. I
>>>> use
>>>> the
>>>> built-in Defrag that comes with Windows, but I haven't a utility that
>>> cleans
>>>> the Registry. I have a strong suspicion that my troubles are in the
>>>> Registry, but I am not smart enough to know what is a Registry
>>>> Requirement
>>>> and what is a Bogus Registry Entry.
>>>>
>>>> Do you, or anybody else, know if I can reinstall XP using a different
>>>> copy
>>>> of the OS than the one that came installed on the machine?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "YouGoFirst" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>> > You should first get a registry defragmenting program. The program
>>> should
>>>> > also look for errors in the registry. (I use a program called
>>>> > WinASO
>>>> > to
>>>> > both defragment and check for registry errors.) Another source of
>>>> > pain
>>>> > and anguish is the anti-virus program. The more recent versions of
>>> Norton
>>>> > suck up immense computing resources. You can turn off a bunch of
>>>> > scans
>>>> > that Norton does, and that helps. You should also defrag the hard
>>> drive.
>>>> >
>>>> > Part of the problem is that as XP has been upgraded by MS it eats
>>>> > up
>>> more
>>>> > and more resources.
>>>> >
>>>> > "Jeff Strickland" > wrote in message
>>>> > news:KBPrh.21233$wq.14150@trndny07...
>>>> >>I (my brother in law, really) have a computer that has a SERIOUS
>>>> >>case
>>>> >>of
>>>> >>The Slows. It takes FOREVER to open apps, and complete any number
>>>> >>of
>>>> >>different tasks.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It is an off-brand box that came from Fry's (I think). I don't
>>>> >> recall
>>>> >> what the architecture is, but I'm pretty sure my 286-based laptop
>>>> >> was
>>>> >> faster.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The computer is on its way to my house for a checkout. I'm not
>>>> >> sure
>>> what
>>>> >> my strategy will be.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The machine has a valid version of XP Home edition, but I do not
>>>> >> know
>>> if
>>>> >> it has the Restore CD or not. Can I use a different copy of XP to
>>>> >> do
>>>> >> restore operations? I assume that I have to use the Key Code that
>>>> >> is
>>>> >> on
>>>> >> the computer, not the one that belongs to the copy of XP that I
>>>> >> will
>>>> >> restore from.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Do not hesitate to offer suggestions on what to do ...
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

I've got an old Aptiva around here somewhere that when upgraded from 128
MB to 512 actually SLOWED DOWN. It recognized the memory but only
supported 128 MB.

Jeff DeWitt

Jeff Strickland wrote:
> It was once pointed out that one can be neither too rich, too thin, or
> have too much RAM.
>
> I dispute that rule, one CAN be too thin -- though it's much easier to
> be too fat.
>
>
>
>
>
> "James" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> With Windows XP, you are a bit underpowered on ram. Many folks believe
>> that 512 mb is minimum, and more is better.
>>
>> Good luck !!
>>
>> --james--
>>
>>
>

If the machine has Google Desktop on it you might try removing it. It's
nice to have but sometimes it goes nuts and slows the system to a crawl.

Jeff DeWitt

Jeff Strickland wrote:
> Nothing, that's why the Subject line says {OT}, which signifies Off Topic.
>
> I asked the question here because I happen to know that many of the gear
> heads here are also computer geeks.
>
>
>
> "Curtis Geiger" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> And what the hell does this all have to do with jeeps?
>> "ufatbastehd" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>
>>> Yes more ram is better. I wouldn't run less than 1 gig.
>>>
>>> But Microsoft says
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;314865
>>>
>>>
>>> James wrote:
>>>
>>>> With Windows XP, you are a bit underpowered on ram. Many folks
>>>> believe
>>>> that 512 mb is minimum, and more is better.
>>>>
>>>> Good luck !!
>>>>
>>>> --james--
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

"Jeffrey DeWitt" > wrote in message
...
> I've got an old Aptiva around here somewhere that when upgraded from 128
> MB to 512 actually SLOWED DOWN. It recognized the memory but only
> supported 128 MB.
>
> Jeff DeWitt
>

Yeah, I thunk of that one. The 'puter is only about one year old, so I
discounted that one. the RAM upgrade that I bought with the machine is the
same architecture (PC100, or whatever -- but NOT actually PC100) as the
factory RAM, so it should not be the problem. The BIOS is happy, the RAM is
reported at boot, and in the System dialogbox.

Really!?

I do not use Google as my Home Page, but it occurs to me that my b-in-law
might have. I prefer Yahoo as my Home page, and I keep Google as a Favorite.




"Jeffrey DeWitt" > wrote in message
...
> If the machine has Google Desktop on it you might try removing it. It's
> nice to have but sometimes it goes nuts and slows the system to a crawl.
>
> Jeff DeWitt
>

If your system is running poorly you have a real problem participating in
the newsgroup.

While this is not strictly on topic and occasional foray into computer
problems does not bother or offend me.


"Curtis Geiger" > wrote in message
...
> And what the hell does this all have to do with jeeps?
> "ufatbastehd" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Yes more ram is better. I wouldn't run less than 1 gig.
>>
>> But Microsoft says
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;314865
>>
>>
>> James wrote:
>>> With Windows XP, you are a bit underpowered on ram. Many folks
>>> believe
>>> that 512 mb is minimum, and more is better.
>>>
>>> Good luck !!
>>>
>>> --james--
>>
>
>