Optimize XP - A Windows XP Optimization Guide

[Nothinman]

Cryptic Answer, why would I expect anything less.

Why would I tell you? It's completely irrelevant to the discussion and the only reason you would want to know is to know which ad-hom attacks to make.

 

[GeneralAres]

GeneralAres, that doesn't necessarily count. I don't have the book, nor do I care enough about enlightening someone so stubbon to spend money on a book. Why doesn't it count? I'd suspect that the quotes you pulled came from some section about configuration dialogs - so it's effectively saying, "On this dialog, we see the words 'Virtual Memory' - and what you're changing when you play with the setting is <blah>". Feel free to provide more context if it is in fact presenting that as a definition of Virtual Memory (in which case the book sucks).

Get the book and look, that is the FULL definition of Virtual Memory, pulled from the GLOSSARY. Everything is Word for Word (except for my typos). Nothing is edited left out or manipulated. ANYONE can get the book and confirm it. Please spare me the rhetoric "it doesn't count" how nieve do you think people are? Here is some more:

Microsoft Windows 2000 Server Operations Guide

Page 293:
"The file system cache, which is a subset of physical memory used for fast access to data, and the disk paging file, which supports virtual memory, influences the amount of memory used by the operating system and applications. (The disk paging file, also called a swap file, is a file on the harddisk that serves as temporary, virtual memory storage for code and data.) Virtual memory is the space on the hard disk that Windows 2000 uses memory."

 

[GeneralAres]

Why would I tell you? It's completely irrelevant to the discussion and the only reason you would want to know is to know which ad-hom attacks to make.

Which means you're young and most likely do not work in the field. Instead, judging by your post count, attempt to prove how smart you are and how little everyone else knows to boost your ego. Yes Elitism is a disease. Look I've proven you wrong and provided proof, from a Microsoft Published book. I have nothing else to prove here, anyone who thinks I am lying can go buy the book. Have fun.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: GeneralAres

Why would I tell you? It's completely irrelevant to the discussion and the only reason you would want to know is to know which ad-hom attacks to make.

Which means you're young and most likely do not work in the field. Instead, judging by your post count, attempt to prove how smart you are and how little everyone else knows to boost your ego. Yes Elitism is a disease. Look I've proven you wrong and provided proof, from a Microsoft Published book. I have nothing else to prove here, anyone who thinks I am lying can go buy the book. Have fun.

You still haven't answered a single one of my quesions?

And you're the one behaving like a kid, Nothinman has made countless useful posts on this forum, I have no idea how old he is, what does it matter?

 

[GeneralAres]

And you're the one behaving like a kid, Nothinman has made countless useful posts on this forum, I have no idea how old he is, what does it matter?

Very mature how he replied to my initial post. :roll:

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: GeneralAres

And you're the one behaving like a kid, Nothinman has made countless useful posts on this forum, I have no idea how old he is, what does it matter?

Very mature how he replied to my initial post. :roll:

Accurate, if a bit cranky.

So, how about the MSDN link? The article by Amit Shah?

 

[GeneralAres]

You accuse me of behaving like a little kid and then expect me to answer your questions? Grow up.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: GeneralAres
You accuse me of behaving like a little kid and then expect me to answer your questions? Grow up.

You didn't answer them before I said you behave like a kid either.
So I guess you simply don't have any answers, gee, that's a surprise :roll:

 

[GeneralAres]

I hate repeating myself. So read above.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: GeneralAres

And you're the one behaving like a kid, Nothinman has made countless useful posts on this forum, I have no idea how old he is, what does it matter?

Very mature how he replied to my initial post. :roll:

He was informing you that your defenition of Virtual Memory is incorrect. Yet it is imature? :roll:

I have never met anyone as stubborn as you are. You could actually learn something.

I hate repeating myself. So read above.

You don't think we hate repeating ourselves. We have told you countless times what Virtual Memory is and how it differs from the pagefile yet you continue not to listen..

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew
I have never met anyone as stubborn as you are.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=38&threadid=1499317

 

[KoolDrew]

Thanks for the link Sunner. I saw the topic before, but never took the time to read it. It is getting pretty interesting though.

 

[MrChad]

System cache windows xp
Why is my page file being used so much?
Putting the page file in RAM disk

kylef is a Windows developer. If you don't respect his statements, don't expect anyone to respect yours.

 

[GeneralAres]

You mean this Kyle Farlow who has still has Duke University email address? And lists his experience as "MIS Support Assistant Summer 1999"? Which means he worked at the schools Helpdesk? Now he does have a BA in Electrical Engineering and is attending or attended graduate school. But even if he is in some way associated with Microsoft he has no more then 2 years of entry level experience. My brother can be classified as a "Windows Developer" by these standards. How nieve are you people?

 

[Nothinman]

Which means you're young and most likely do not work in the field

For the record I do work in "the field", I'm on the network security team at a mid-sized private company.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: GeneralAres

GeneralAres, that doesn't necessarily count. I don't have the book, nor do I care enough about enlightening someone so stubbon to spend money on a book. Why doesn't it count? I'd suspect that the quotes you pulled came from some section about configuration dialogs - so it's effectively saying, "On this dialog, we see the words 'Virtual Memory' - and what you're changing when you play with the setting is <blah>". Feel free to provide more context if it is in fact presenting that as a definition of Virtual Memory (in which case the book sucks).

Get the book and look, that is the FULL definition of Virtual Memory, pulled from the GLOSSARY. Everything is Word for Word (except for my typos). Nothing is edited left out or manipulated. ANYONE can get the book and confirm it. Please spare me the rhetoric "it doesn't count" how nieve do you think people are? Here is some more:

Microsoft Windows 2000 Server Operations Guide

Page 293:
"The file system cache, which is a subset of physical memory used for fast access to data, and the disk paging file, which supports virtual memory, influences the amount of memory used by the operating system and applications. (The disk paging file, also called a swap file, is a file on the harddisk that serves as temporary, virtual memory storage for code and data.) Virtual memory is the space on the hard disk that Windows 2000 uses memory."

Here's a resource for ya.

virtual memory
n. Memory that appears to an application to be larger and more uniform than it is. Virtual memory may be partially simulated by secondary storage such as a hard disk. Applications access memory through virtual addresses, which are translated (mapped) by special hardware and software onto physical addresses. Also called disk memory. See also paging, segmentation. Acronym: VM.

In other words, what we've been saying all along. The amount of memory that appears to an application is virtual memory. This includes physical RAM and hard drive space. The hard drive space is sometimes (misleadingly) referred to as virtual memory, but that is an incomplete definition.

EDIT: Here's another Microsoft site

virtual memory
A view of memory that does not necessarily correspond to the underlying physical memory structure. For example, a given range of virtual addresses might be mapped to and backed by some number of discontiguous physical pages, even though the corresponding virtual pages can be accessed as a single, contiguous range.

 

[CTho9305]

I think all we've established is that Microsoft offers conflicting definitions - some correct, and some aimed at users who want to know why it matters (virtual memory is, by and large invisible to the user - the only really visible and "tweakable" aspect is paging to disk, if it is used). Those with a clue know what virtual memory really means, and others cite the simplified explanations as proof that they know more.

Go find a microsoft kernel developer and ask, "Can virtual memory be turned off in Windows? Please don't simplify the answer in any way." I'd bet money you'd get a reply along the lines of the definition Nothinman offered instead of something about the pagefile (of course, a complete answer would explain how the page file is used to facilitate virtual memory).

Alternately, take a systems programming course (there is a sophomore level course at my school that explains VM) and learn what everybody who knows what's going on at the lower levels means when they say "virtual memory". You can even just read lecture notes.

 

[spyordie007]

This guide is ripe with inaccuracies.

 

[GeneralAres]

This guide is ripe with inaccuracies.

And they are?

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: GeneralAres

This guide is ripe with inaccuracies.

And they are?

Aside from the previously mentioned memory tips there are both inaccuracies as well as bad advice:

Blackviper's services-
Sometimes it's a good idea to trim out a little services to save memory/processor cycles in the event that a service is really not needed. The problem is that a lot of users think they are tweaking their system and then end up inadvertently turning off a service they really need. Most users dont have the knowledge required to pick the services that they need (or their organization requires them to run); the problem I have with the Black Viper site is that it errors on the side of disabling a service which can cause issues for users who actually needed "that service."

Disabling sounds-
Come on, you've got to be kidding me. The resources required to play a memory-resident sound clip is next to nothing.

Reduce System Restore Drive Space Usage-
Unless you are out of disk space this is generally bad advice to give.

SP2 TCP Slowdown Fix-
This has got to be one of the biggest inaccuracies on this page.
First off it's not a 10 connection per second limit. It's a 10 un-established connection queue. Nearly all legitimate traffic (yes even PTP traffic) connects to known hosts, therefore the time requred to establish a TCP connection is a matter of miliseconds.

The only time that this queue would become full is if your machine is attempting to connect to a large number of non-existant hosts and your tcp connections are waiting to time out. There's a name for applications that try and connect to hundreds of random (many non-existant) hosts and that's worms. If you have a worm on your machine and you increase this connection queue you're only increasing the damage it can do.

The only legitimate reason that I can come up with that the 10 un-established connection queue would ever become full is if you were running a network/port probe for a security audit. End users simply dont perform this function (even your home power users).

Some of the steps in here are good things (like AV, spyware, OS updates) but there are some things in here that arent good advice to give to everyone.

 

[Nothinman]

Sometimes it's a good idea to trim out a little services to save memory/processor cycles in the event that a service is really not needed.

Very rarely. The only time I would say it's worthwhile is if you're disabling a service that listens on the network because you don't want to leave it available as a potential entry point for attackers. A service that isn't doing anything uses no CPU cycles, perhaps a few to start, and no memory. And most MS services are wrapped inside of svchost so the little resources they do consume on startup are lower than normal.

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Sometimes it's a good idea to trim out a little services to save memory/processor cycles in the event that a service is really not needed.

Very rarely. The only time I would say it's worthwhile is if you're disabling a service that listens on the network because you don't want to leave it available as a potential entry point for attackers. A service that isn't doing anything uses no CPU cycles, perhaps a few to start, and no memory. And most MS services are wrapped inside of svchost so the little resources they do consume on startup are lower than normal.

I agree, it's generally useless. I was just giving them the benefit of the doubt

 

[KoolDrew]

Blackviper's services-
Sometimes it's a good idea to trim out a little services to save memory/processor cycles in the event that a service is really not needed. The problem is that a lot of users think they are tweaking their system and then end up inadvertently turning off a service they really need. Most users dont have the knowledge required to pick the services that they need (or their organization requires them to run); the problem I have with the Black Viper site is that it errors on the side of disabling a service which can cause issues for users who actually needed "that service."

I do agree. I have run into a few people who start disabling a bunch of services and attempt to get as least as possible and they end up with problems. I do disable services, but these are the ones that are more annoying (such as Security Center)

Disabling sounds-
Come on, you've got to be kidding me. The resources required to play a memory-resident sound clip is next to nothing.

I do agree with this too, but I hate the Windows sounds. I disable them just because I hate the sound effects. I do not want to turn on my PC and hear that annoying welcoming sound. Also wouldn't it actually help boot time? I know it will have no real affect in performance during operation of the OS, but I would imagine during boot-up it may make a small difference.

 

[GeneralAres]

The memory advice is accurate and supported by Microsoft's web site and Published Books.

The service issue is simply not true, their are numerous services that have no use to the average home user. Turning them off frees up available memory and reduces security risks (for some). The worry about people breaking applications is unfounded, it just does not happen as much as people are led to believe by service fear mongers. Can it happen sure, if your careless but the solution requires meerly turning the service back on.

The system restore issue is simply not a big problem. By default it can consume quite a bit of disk space everytime a restore point is made. In practice 1-2 restore points is all that is ever needed.

People set annoying custom sounds to Windows that cause windows to take longer to load or shutdown.

You apparently forgot to read this "Keep in mind this is a cap only on incomplete outbound connect attempts per second"

The TCP/IP Problem happens frequently using P2P programs when you attempt search queries as an example.


Thanks Anyway.

 

[Nothinman]

Turning them off frees up available memory and reduces security risks (for some)

Most home users are behind some form of NAT router so the security risks are a minimal and absolutely no memory will be freed because if the server is really inactive it'll be evicted from memory and paged back in if necessary.