Having more than 1 instance of IE open has solved the problem of all windows shutting down. However, the original problem still exists, and sometimes with only 1 or 2 windows open. So the search continues
one or 2 usually.
occasionally have up to like 5.
rarely, but happens, like 15.
i mean, i have no life, but i do other things besides using a browser online.
occasionally have up to like 5.
rarely, but happens, like 15.
i mean, i have no life, but i do other things besides using a browser online.
Normally around 20-30 windows. That doesn't include Photoshop, FP, ImageStyler and a couple instances of Netscape.
I'm also crunching SETI in the bg
I'm also crunching SETI in the bg
WOW rootaxs:Q
What OS? RAM? Swap file? IE version? Any other tweaks you did? Any streaming content in those 20-30 windows?
What OS? RAM? Swap file? IE version? Any other tweaks you did? Any streaming content in those 20-30 windows?
One time I came back to my laptop and notice there's at least 20 browser open. My little sister know how to open but not close.
Hi, mariner!
Sorry to see you're still on the old merry-go-round!
I looked through this thread and see that Ladi has already figured out what I've been in the process of learning.
She says:
<< Earlier versions of IE did allow you to choose an option to make each window a separate process (even with ctrl+n), but as far as I've been able to find, that has since disappeared and the current workaround is launching each instance separately (which really isn't all that bad, all things considered....right-click on link, choose copy shortcut, and paste...not many more steps than right-click>open in new window and loading time on the new instance can be reduced by setting the home page to about:blank). >>
Using Ctrl-N USED to work to give you a separate process. Now it's pretty much controlled by IE itself, and mostly it just doesn't start a new process. But, if your registry is set up the way we discussed before, then hitting the IE iconc again will give you a new instance of iexplore.exe in the Processes tab, as well as a new task in the Applications tab. That should provide enough isolation between window that are created this way to protect you from having the whole house of cards come down when you close a non-responding IE task in the Applications tab of Task Manager. The only thing is that this is going to require a lot more memory, I think, per window. I don't know if you'll be able to do your customary 20 open IE windows unless you're a) willing to put up with some swapping to disk, or b) willing to stick in a bunch more RAM.
But I still think there's a problem with your JVM. I just wouldn't expect IE to be whacked so often unless scripts were bringing it down.
Hope you get it sorted out!
Regards,
Jim
Sorry to see you're still on the old merry-go-round!
I looked through this thread and see that Ladi has already figured out what I've been in the process of learning.
She says:
<< Earlier versions of IE did allow you to choose an option to make each window a separate process (even with ctrl+n), but as far as I've been able to find, that has since disappeared and the current workaround is launching each instance separately (which really isn't all that bad, all things considered....right-click on link, choose copy shortcut, and paste...not many more steps than right-click>open in new window and loading time on the new instance can be reduced by setting the home page to about:blank). >>
Using Ctrl-N USED to work to give you a separate process. Now it's pretty much controlled by IE itself, and mostly it just doesn't start a new process. But, if your registry is set up the way we discussed before, then hitting the IE iconc again will give you a new instance of iexplore.exe in the Processes tab, as well as a new task in the Applications tab. That should provide enough isolation between window that are created this way to protect you from having the whole house of cards come down when you close a non-responding IE task in the Applications tab of Task Manager. The only thing is that this is going to require a lot more memory, I think, per window. I don't know if you'll be able to do your customary 20 open IE windows unless you're a) willing to put up with some swapping to disk, or b) willing to stick in a bunch more RAM.
But I still think there's a problem with your JVM. I just wouldn't expect IE to be whacked so often unless scripts were bringing it down.
Hope you get it sorted out!
Regards,
Jim
<< But I still think there's a problem with your JVM. I just wouldn't expect IE to be whacked so often unless scripts were bringing it down. >>
Greetings jaywallen. What is JVM? Something to do with java script I'm guessing?
Yeah, I'm still "on the road to find out", as Cat Stevens sang. Opening separate instances of IE has been helpful (thx Ladi) but you're right, it takes more memory. I'm not finding that my 196K is being maxed out very often (as seen in Task Mgr, anyway). I usually have 5-10 windows open these days. I've been putting streaming content in separate windows. I'm going to pose a question in another thread this weekend about memory/processes and why memory isn't 'freed up' when I close apps. I think maybe a process is grabbing memory and not letting go when I terminate it. I need to investigate a little more first.
Saw your FAT32/NTFS comparison in the other thread, good read!
Hi, mariner.
JVM is Java Virtual Machine. In another thread I already suggested that the use of multiple browsers, each of which installed its own Java environment, might have whacked the JVM. I doubt that the file system complement would be changed adversely, unless Windows File Protection were turned off, but the registry's information on how to handle Java apps could certainly be altered / damaged. I saw this once on a system which had seen and installation (and subsequent uninstallation) of Sun's StarOffice. And I've often suspected that Netscape might be doing something to Microsoft's idea of how IE should be dealing with Java.
What are you seeing that makes you feel that memory isn't being freed when applications are quit? Or do you see something that looks more like a continuous leak?
Regards,
Jim
JVM is Java Virtual Machine. In another thread I already suggested that the use of multiple browsers, each of which installed its own Java environment, might have whacked the JVM. I doubt that the file system complement would be changed adversely, unless Windows File Protection were turned off, but the registry's information on how to handle Java apps could certainly be altered / damaged. I saw this once on a system which had seen and installation (and subsequent uninstallation) of Sun's StarOffice. And I've often suspected that Netscape might be doing something to Microsoft's idea of how IE should be dealing with Java.
What are you seeing that makes you feel that memory isn't being freed when applications are quit? Or do you see something that looks more like a continuous leak?
Regards,
Jim
I have not installed Netscrape, AOL, RealPlayer or Star Office. I have only M$Office97 and IE.
About the memory. When I first boot and go into task mgr about 51MB is being used (processes listed below). Last night just before shuting down, after I had quit all apps, I checked task mgr and it indicated 70+MB was being used. I had used several apps during the day so I couldn't determine the culprit. But I am working on it How might I detect 'leakage' and the guilty process?
System Idle Process
System
smss.exe
csrss.exe
winlogon.exe
services.exe
lsass.exe
svchost.exe
spoolsv.exe
svchost.exe again
WinMgmt.exe
taskmgr.exe
locator.exe
Explorer.exe
cpuidle.exe
MBM5.EXE
winampa.exe
StartupMonitor
MSOFFICE.EXE
Another curious thing. On the Performance tab, the mem used after boot-up is about 51MB as I indicated. However, when I add up all the mem usage from the Process tab I get about 34MB:Q It gets curiouser and curiouser
I wonder if these memory questions have anything to do with the original problem
About the memory. When I first boot and go into task mgr about 51MB is being used (processes listed below). Last night just before shuting down, after I had quit all apps, I checked task mgr and it indicated 70+MB was being used. I had used several apps during the day so I couldn't determine the culprit. But I am working on it
How might I detect 'leakage' and the guilty process?System Idle Process
System
smss.exe
csrss.exe
winlogon.exe
services.exe
lsass.exe
svchost.exe
spoolsv.exe
svchost.exe again
WinMgmt.exe
taskmgr.exe
locator.exe
Explorer.exe
cpuidle.exe
MBM5.EXE
winampa.exe
StartupMonitor
MSOFFICE.EXE
Another curious thing. On the Performance tab, the mem used after boot-up is about 51MB as I indicated. However, when I add up all the mem usage from the Process tab I get about 34MB:Q It gets curiouser and curiouser
I wonder if these memory questions have anything to do with the original problem
Oh, sorry about the history mix-up. I thought you had tested a couple of versions of Netscape and Opera, including their Java modules, then uninstalled them. Dang, old brain cells, and damned few of those left, too!
Everything on the process list is familiar, except for cpuidle.exe, MBM5.EXE and winampa.exe. It's pretty obvious what cpuidle and winampa are. MBM5.EXE is unknown to me. I was thinking at first that it might be just a typo for the Machine Debug Manager executable (MDM.EXE), but it's something else?
At any rate, it's my understanding that memory leaks usually take the form of a slow, but continuous, increase in memory use on a static system (e.g. no changes being made). I don't think that shutting down processes after a session is necessarily going to return a system to its post-boot state. I would expect that some processes might not relinquish all memory that was free before they started when they're quit for a number of reasons. There are matters of dependency, where a process you start may cause another process or set of processes to start because of a dependency relationship. Those other processes might not, by design, shut down once the dependent process was quit. And I think that the caching of recent code / data in memory would get in the way, too.
I think the process for monitoring for memory leaks is to boot to a static condition (with the suspect process or driver loaded, of course) and leave the machine untouched in that state for a relatively long period of time while monitoring the Memory Usage History. If a continuous rise is seen, a memory leak has been confirmed. There's quite a bit of information about the exact methods for monitoring different entities for memory leaks. I've just briefly glanced at a little of it out of curiosity, because I haven't needed to make use of any of it. Therefore, my understanding of the appropriate procedures in W2K is incomplete, at best, and possibly even inaccurate. But I think you'll find what you need if you search the MSKB using the phrase "memory leak". You'll want to narrow it down to W2K, of course, because you'll get a ton of stuff about the various development environments and stuff like that in addition to information about the operating systems.
As I say, I've never had to perform this sort of analysis, probably due the my lack of a sense of adventure when choosing what to run on my systems. I'll be very interested to hear what you find.
Regards,
Jim
Everything on the process list is familiar, except for cpuidle.exe, MBM5.EXE and winampa.exe. It's pretty obvious what cpuidle and winampa are. MBM5.EXE is unknown to me. I was thinking at first that it might be just a typo for the Machine Debug Manager executable (MDM.EXE), but it's something else?
At any rate, it's my understanding that memory leaks usually take the form of a slow, but continuous, increase in memory use on a static system (e.g. no changes being made). I don't think that shutting down processes after a session is necessarily going to return a system to its post-boot state. I would expect that some processes might not relinquish all memory that was free before they started when they're quit for a number of reasons. There are matters of dependency, where a process you start may cause another process or set of processes to start because of a dependency relationship. Those other processes might not, by design, shut down once the dependent process was quit. And I think that the caching of recent code / data in memory would get in the way, too.
I think the process for monitoring for memory leaks is to boot to a static condition (with the suspect process or driver loaded, of course) and leave the machine untouched in that state for a relatively long period of time while monitoring the Memory Usage History. If a continuous rise is seen, a memory leak has been confirmed. There's quite a bit of information about the exact methods for monitoring different entities for memory leaks. I've just briefly glanced at a little of it out of curiosity, because I haven't needed to make use of any of it. Therefore, my understanding of the appropriate procedures in W2K is incomplete, at best, and possibly even inaccurate. But I think you'll find what you need if you search the MSKB using the phrase "memory leak". You'll want to narrow it down to W2K, of course, because you'll get a ton of stuff about the various development environments and stuff like that in addition to information about the operating systems.
As I say, I've never had to perform this sort of analysis, probably due the my lack of a sense of adventure when choosing what to run on my systems. I'll be very interested to hear what you find.
Regards,
Jim
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,003
- 126
Mariner:
BFG10K, can you close non-responding windows from the applications tab w/o closing all windows?
Yes.
And, does your processes tab show a seaprate iexplorer.exe for each window, no matter how it was opened? If so, our configurations must be very different (beyond the obvious diff OS: 2k vs 98).
I'm running Windows 98 not 2000. When I press CTRL-ALT-DEL each of Internet Explorer's windows are displayed seperately in the dialogue box, listed by their title. I can kill any number of them and the rest of them are totally unaffected.
Also using CTRL-N or the quicklaunch bar makes no difference: each window is still a seperate process and is able to be killed seperately. Like I said before, Internet Explorer is not an MDI application.
BFG10K, can you close non-responding windows from the applications tab w/o closing all windows?
Yes.
And, does your processes tab show a seaprate iexplorer.exe for each window, no matter how it was opened? If so, our configurations must be very different (beyond the obvious diff OS: 2k vs 98).
I'm running Windows 98 not 2000. When I press CTRL-ALT-DEL each of Internet Explorer's windows are displayed seperately in the dialogue box, listed by their title. I can kill any number of them and the rest of them are totally unaffected.
Also using CTRL-N or the quicklaunch bar makes no difference: each window is still a seperate process and is able to be killed seperately. Like I said before, Internet Explorer is not an MDI application.
Hey jaywallen, I'll check the memory thing out, but I think that will be another thread. I'm thinking that's not related to this delimma.
Hey BFG10K, the difference in OS that I spoke of was you running '98 and me running 2k; sorry for the confusion I am unfamiliar with '98 but I suppose the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo still brings up a version Task Mgr with the 3 tabs: Applications, Processes, Performance?? Read below; I think there are some significant differences between our systems:Q
It is interesting that you can close non-responding windows from the an "Applications" tab w/o affecting others. In 2k-IE5.5 there is a difference in how a window is opened. If I open an IE window by right clicking a hyperlink another entry is added to the Applicaitons tab in Task Mgr; But I still have only 1 iexplorer.exe on the Processes tab. If I use the Ctrl-N combo I get the same results. Using both of these methods I still have only 1 instance of IE open but with multiple windows on the Applications tab.
Now, if I open another window from the Start->Programs menu or from the Quick Launch toolbar(as Ladi suggested) I get another instance of IE and another entry on the Processes tab; in addition to additional entries on the Applications tab.
In summary, Ctrl-N and RC on hyperlink open only windows in the current instance of IE. While Start->Programs and Quick Launch will start the IE app again (i.e. add another iexplore.exe to the Processes tab)and give it another window on the Applications tab.
Opening a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th, etc) instance of IE seems to be the only way I can protect some of my windows when IE decides to crash. I have been able to minimize the effects on memory usage by keeping all windows minimized when not in use
There, is everyone confused now? I am
Hey BFG10K, the difference in OS that I spoke of was you running '98 and me running 2k; sorry for the confusion
I am unfamiliar with '98 but I suppose the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo still brings up a version Task Mgr with the 3 tabs: Applications, Processes, Performance?? Read below; I think there are some significant differences between our systems:QIt is interesting that you can close non-responding windows from the an "Applications" tab w/o affecting others. In 2k-IE5.5 there is a difference in how a window is opened. If I open an IE window by right clicking a hyperlink another entry is added to the Applicaitons tab in Task Mgr; But I still have only 1 iexplorer.exe on the Processes tab. If I use the Ctrl-N combo I get the same results. Using both of these methods I still have only 1 instance of IE open but with multiple windows on the Applications tab.
Now, if I open another window from the Start->Programs menu or from the Quick Launch toolbar(as Ladi suggested) I get another instance of IE and another entry on the Processes tab; in addition to additional entries on the Applications tab.
In summary, Ctrl-N and RC on hyperlink open only windows in the current instance of IE. While Start->Programs and Quick Launch will start the IE app again (i.e. add another iexplore.exe to the Processes tab)and give it another window on the Applications tab.
Opening a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th, etc) instance of IE seems to be the only way I can protect some of my windows when IE decides to crash. I have been able to minimize the effects on memory usage by keeping all windows minimized when not in use
There, is everyone confused now? I am
mariner,
Makes perfect sense. Ladi's advice got you the result I was TRYING to get you with my advice.
I was just going about my business blithely assuming that Ctrl-N would do for me what it had always done before the upgrade to IE 5.5. I just never had a reason until now to question that, since I haven't had enough iexplore.exe problems to make me resort to separate instances. I still haven't actually located anything definitive in an MSKB article, either. It's funny that they're not more up front about it (unless I'm just missing it) because this is probably the issue that's causing the most consternation amongst users of IE 5.5.
So it is working for you, right? I'm a bit confused here, though. What is the "original" problem that still exists? That a browser window will crash on occasion? The disk thrashing that you mentioned earlier?
Regards,
Jim
Makes perfect sense. Ladi's advice got you the result I was TRYING to get you with my advice.
I was just going about my business blithely assuming that Ctrl-N would do for me what it had always done before the upgrade to IE 5.5. I just never had a reason until now to question that, since I haven't had enough iexplore.exe problems to make me resort to separate instances. I still haven't actually located anything definitive in an MSKB article, either. It's funny that they're not more up front about it (unless I'm just missing it) because this is probably the issue that's causing the most consternation amongst users of IE 5.5.
So it is working for you, right? I'm a bit confused here, though. What is the "original" problem that still exists? That a browser window will crash on occasion? The disk thrashing that you mentioned earlier?
Regards,
Jim
<< So it is working for you, right? I'm a bit confused here, though. What is the "original" problem that still exists? That a browser window will crash on occasion? The disk thrashing that you mentioned earlier? >>
LOL, I just knew the original delimma was gonna get lost in that mess somewhere
The original problem, which still exists, was: "What is causing IE to crash? How can I decipher the error log and make it quit?".
Well, it is working as good as it was - I am still getting crashes. However, when it crashes now I just lose that one IE instance/process and not all windows.
And, something I noticed after I first asked the question, my HDD really gets to whizzing just before the crash. Now everytime it gets really 'busy' I start wondering which window I am about to lose
Since, according to Task Mgr, I seldom max out my 196MB of memory, any HDD activity catches my attention. It took me awhile to become accustomed to no HDD activity after I upgraded from 64 to 196MB:Q jaywallen, I'm exploring the memory 'phenomena' here. Please to toss your $0.02 into the ring
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,003
- 126
Mariner:
I am unfamiliar with '98 but I suppose the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo still brings up a version Task Mgr with the 3 tabs: Applications, Processes, Performance??
No, it's nothing like that. CTRL-ALT-DEL brings up a "close program" dialogue box with a list of windows, named by their titles. There are also three buttons at the bottom "end task", "shutdown" and "cancel". You click on one window title in the list and then click "end task" and that kills it.
Basically Windows 98 doesn't have a task manager, it just has a close program manager.
I am unfamiliar with '98 but I suppose the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo still brings up a version Task Mgr with the 3 tabs: Applications, Processes, Performance??
No, it's nothing like that. CTRL-ALT-DEL brings up a "close program" dialogue box with a list of windows, named by their titles. There are also three buttons at the bottom "end task", "shutdown" and "cancel". You click on one window title in the list and then click "end task" and that kills it.
Basically Windows 98 doesn't have a task manager, it just has a close program manager.
Then I am in the dark BFG10K, so waht's new How do you determine which processes are running? How many instances of each process? Memory usage by each process? I guess I need to upgrade my 95b boot partition to 98
How do you determine which processes are running? How many instances of each process? Memory usage by each process? I guess I need to upgrade my 95b boot partition to 98Hi, mariner.
Okay, I'll look at the other thread. I'm tapped out here. I think it's unlikely that you can prevent all IE crashes, or at least the ones that are caused by script problems on Web sites. So many variables, and so little control over some of them.
Regards,
Jim
Okay, I'll look at the other thread. I'm tapped out here. I think it's unlikely that you can prevent all IE crashes, or at least the ones that are caused by script problems on Web sites. So many variables, and so little control over some of them.
Regards,
Jim
<< I think it's unlikely that you can prevent all IE crashes,... >>
[sadly]I fear you may be right. Time for another service pack?[/sadly]
Thanks for all your input jaywallen
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,003
- 126
Mariner:
How do you determine which processes are running?
Each window is listed by its title, in addition to OS processes like "systray" and "Rundll".
How many instances of each process?
It doesn't say IEXPLORE.exe anywhere. It says things like "AnadtechForums - reply" or whatever the window's title is. The same goes for any other window (process). It lists the window's title, not the parent program that created it (except for MDI apps of course).
Memory usage by each process?
There's no detailed information like processor/memory usage. Only the names of the windows.
I guess I need to upgrade my 95b boot partition to 98
I guess so. I haven't seen Windows 95's CTRL-ALT-DEL system so I can't comment on how it compares to Windows 98.
How do you determine which processes are running?
Each window is listed by its title, in addition to OS processes like "systray" and "Rundll".
How many instances of each process?
It doesn't say IEXPLORE.exe anywhere. It says things like "AnadtechForums - reply" or whatever the window's title is. The same goes for any other window (process). It lists the window's title, not the parent program that created it (except for MDI apps of course).
Memory usage by each process?
There's no detailed information like processor/memory usage. Only the names of the windows.
I guess I need to upgrade my 95b boot partition to 98
I guess so. I haven't seen Windows 95's CTRL-ALT-DEL system so I can't comment on how it compares to Windows 98.
Remember, I am running 2k and that is where my troubles are occurring. But I also multiboot into 95b. Thus if I upgraded that installation, I might be able to see what you are seeing.
<< Each window is listed by its title, in addition to OS processes like "systray" and "Rundll". >>
So, if you have 2 instances of IE running, can you determine that from this window?
<< It doesn't say IEXPLORE.exe anywhere. It says things like "AnadtechForums - reply" or whatever the window's title is. The same goes for any other window (process). It lists the window's title, not the parent program that created it (except for MDI apps of course). >>
Again, I am curious if you can tell which 'windows' are 'connected' to which IE when you have more than one instance open.
It sounds like you are seeing something like I see on my Applications tab of Task Mgr. Only, the windows I see are just that, windows. I might have 5 IE windows on that tab but actually only be running 2 instances of IE.
<< I guess so. I haven't seen Windows 95's CTRL-ALT-DEL system so I can't comment on how it compares to Windows 98. >>
And I don't remember what it looks like
Well, anyway, this is not very related to my original post, but is interesting. I'll follow up later by booting into my 95b installation.
cya
<< Each window is listed by its title, in addition to OS processes like "systray" and "Rundll". >>
So, if you have 2 instances of IE running, can you determine that from this window?
<< It doesn't say IEXPLORE.exe anywhere. It says things like "AnadtechForums - reply" or whatever the window's title is. The same goes for any other window (process). It lists the window's title, not the parent program that created it (except for MDI apps of course). >>
Again, I am curious if you can tell which 'windows' are 'connected' to which IE when you have more than one instance open.
It sounds like you are seeing something like I see on my Applications tab of Task Mgr. Only, the windows I see are just that, windows. I might have 5 IE windows on that tab but actually only be running 2 instances of IE.
<< I guess so. I haven't seen Windows 95's CTRL-ALT-DEL system so I can't comment on how it compares to Windows 98. >>
And I don't remember what it looks like
Well, anyway, this is not very related to my original post, but is interesting. I'll follow up later by booting into my 95b installation.
cya
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter