Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Alternatives to red-installing XP Home

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 9:58:47 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or so I am
now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a common problem and
I've read various articles that suggest the way round this is to backup-up,
format the HD and re-install the lot. Is there no other way at all? Thinking
the problem might be caused by a bloated Registry I've tried numerous
Registry cleaners but to no avail. In fact, many do not really do much at
all other than display a progress bar and give you a message at the end
stating that the Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on
this as follows.
1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
4) Find many of them still sitting there!
Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 9:58:48 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Ben,

A handy Registry tool, that IMVHO works is RegCleaner Supreme.
Your mileage may vary, but you can d/la free trial and buy if you like.
Link is: http://www.jv16.org/

I would also clean out temp files, run disk cleanup and defrag.

Ron Chamberlin
MS-MVP


"Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
news:cr1j5c$p77$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or so I
> am now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a common problem
> and I've read various articles that suggest the way round this is to
> backup-up, format the HD and re-install the lot. Is there no other way at
> all? Thinking the problem might be caused by a bloated Registry I've tried
> numerous Registry cleaners but to no avail. In fact, many do not really do
> much at all other than display a progress bar and give you a message at
> the end stating that the Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various
> test on this as follows.
> 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
>
>
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 9:58:48 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Ben Hardy wrote:
> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or so I am
> now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a common problem and
> I've read various articles that suggest the way round this is to backup-up,
> format the HD and re-install the lot. Is there no other way at all? Thinking
> the problem might be caused by a bloated Registry I've tried numerous
> Registry cleaners but to no avail. In fact, many do not really do much at
> all other than display a progress bar and give you a message at the end
> stating that the Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on
> this as follows.
> 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
>
>
Are you running an anti virus program and keeping it up
to date? Have you checked for spyware? A couple of good
free programs are Sypbot search and Destroy and Adaware.

My guess is that you have a ton of spyware or
or viruses that are slowing down your system. It just doesn't
take that long for your PC to read the Reg even if it's huge.

Check the process tab in the task manager. See what process are
eating up your CPU cycles.

gls858
Related resources
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 9:58:48 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Ben Hardy wrote:
> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or so I am
> now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a common problem


It's a common problem only if you've not been performing regular
maintenance, such as cleaning up the hard drives and defragging them, or
if you've been downloading and installing adware/spyware.


> I've read various articles that suggest the way round this is to backup-up,
> format the HD and re-install the lot. Is there no other way at all?


That should always be the very last resort. Of course, it's often the
first resort of the "technically-challenged," shall we say. Scan your
system for malware, using the latest antivirus definition files, as well
as the latest versions and definition files of both Ad-Aware from
www.lavasoft.de and SpyBot Search & Destroy from
www.safer-networking.org/. Perform a disk clean-up to remove old
temporary files, etc., followed by defragging the hard drive.


> Thinking
> the problem might be caused by a bloated Registry I've tried numerous
> Registry cleaners but to no avail. In fact, many do not really do much at
> all other than display a progress bar and give you a message at the end
> stating that the Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on
> this as follows.
> 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
>
>

"Registry bloat" is an empty threat created by the vendors of automated
registry cleaners to sell their products. There's not the slightest bit
of technical evidence that "registry bloat" even exists, much less
causes any performance degradation. Further, there's little or no
evidence that automated registry cleaners do anything more than greatly
increase the chance of an inexperienced user rendering his computer
unusable. WinXP does a pretty good job of taking care of its registry,
and there's very little need for registry maintenance. On those rare
occasions when something in the registry is causing a problem, manually
addressing that single issue using Regedit is much safer.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
Anonymous
December 30, 2004 11:08:00 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:58:47 -0000, Ben Hardy wrote:

> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or so I am
> now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a common problem and
> I've read various articles that suggest the way round this is to backup-up,
> format the HD and re-install the lot. Is there no other way at all? Thinking
> the problem might be caused by a bloated Registry I've tried numerous
> Registry cleaners but to no avail. In fact, many do not really do much at
> all other than display a progress bar and give you a message at the end
> stating that the Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on
> this as follows.
> 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?

Ben, my desktop setup is a couple of years old. It shows no noticeable
slowing with age. Win95 used to choke when the registry hit a certain size
but haven't seen a "registry bloat" problem with XP at all.

I don't know why your system is getting slower. Have you added programs to
the startup group lately? While the resources these use are not a concern,
it does take time for extras to load. May want to limit these to just the
items you use everyday. Also, have you checked for viruses and adware?
Currently, adware, spyware, and other malware are the most common sources
of computer problems.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows Shell/User
Anonymous
January 1, 2005 12:38:23 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

"Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
news:cr1j5c$p77$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk
> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or
> so I am now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a
> common problem and I've read various articles that suggest the way
> round this is to backup-up, format the HD and re-install the lot. Is
> there no other way at all? Thinking the problem might be caused by a
> bloated Registry I've tried numerous Registry cleaners but to no
> avail. In fact, many do not really do much at all other than display
> a progress bar and give you a message at the end stating that the
> Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on this as
> follows. 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?

First eliminate any scumware.
What You Should Know About Spyware
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/deviou...

CAUTION!!!!! Before you try to remove spyware using any of these programs ,
download a copy of LSPFIX from any of the following sites:
http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm
http://www.spychecker.com/program/winsockxpfix.html
(if your OS is Win2k or XP) The process of removing certain malware may kill
your internet connection. If this should occur, this program, LSPFIX, will
enable you to regain your connection.

See
Dealing with Unwanted Malware, Parasites, Toolbars and Search Engines
http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm

Note that AdAware and SpyBot S & D will each catch some things the other
won't. Also, each needs to be updated with the program's update function
before every use, even when just downloaded. There's also a lot more to do
than just those two programs. CWShredder is also available here:
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/regs_edits/cwshredder.z...
**Post your HijackThis log to
http://www.spywareinfo.com/forums/
http://forums.tomcoyote.org/
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/ or the Spyware forum at
http://forum.aumha.org/viewforum.php?f=30 for expert analysis, not here.**
Alternative download pages for Ad-Aware, Spybot, HijackThis and CWShredder
may be found on this page:
http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm.


See this link for information about malware:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/malware.ars

If nothing there helps, please post back to this thread.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE
Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Protect your PC
http://www.microsoft.com./athome/security/protect/defau...
Anonymous
January 2, 2005 12:02:24 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Hi Frank and thanks
This machine here (XP Home) is about as clean as I can get it.
I use ZoneAlarm and AVG Antivirus, I regularly run Spybot Search & Destroy
as well as AdAware. I use HighjackThis
and CWShredder, TuneUp Utilities 2004 & MS Baseline Security Analyzer. I
regularly run Disk Cleanup, CHKDSK and Defragmenter.
I've used a multitude of Registry cleaners & defragmenters and am currently
trying both Registry Mechanic and RegSupreme.
Guess what? Windows still hits the treacle after a few months.
If anyone can point me at a solution or explain why I should have to
re-install I'd be a happy man.


"Frank Saunders, MS-MVP" <franksaunders@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:uGC56gB8EHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
> news:cr1j5c$p77$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk
>> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or
>> so I am now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a
>> common problem and I've read various articles that suggest the way
>> round this is to backup-up, format the HD and re-install the lot. Is
>> there no other way at all? Thinking the problem might be caused by a
>> bloated Registry I've tried numerous Registry cleaners but to no
>> avail. In fact, many do not really do much at all other than display
>> a progress bar and give you a message at the end stating that the
>> Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on this as
>> follows. 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
>> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
>> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
>> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
>> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
>> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
>> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
>
> First eliminate any scumware.
> What You Should Know About Spyware
> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/deviou...
>
> CAUTION!!!!! Before you try to remove spyware using any of these programs
> , download a copy of LSPFIX from any of the following sites:
> http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm
> http://www.spychecker.com/program/winsockxpfix.html
> (if your OS is Win2k or XP) The process of removing certain malware may
> kill
> your internet connection. If this should occur, this program, LSPFIX, will
> enable you to regain your connection.
>
> See
> Dealing with Unwanted Malware, Parasites, Toolbars and Search Engines
> http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm
>
> Note that AdAware and SpyBot S & D will each catch some things the other
> won't. Also, each needs to be updated with the program's update function
> before every use, even when just downloaded. There's also a lot more to
> do than just those two programs. CWShredder is also available here:
> http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/regs_edits/cwshredder.z...
> **Post your HijackThis log to
> http://www.spywareinfo.com/forums/
> http://forums.tomcoyote.org/
> http://www.wilderssecurity.com/ or the Spyware forum at
> http://forum.aumha.org/viewforum.php?f=30 for expert analysis, not here.**
> Alternative download pages for Ad-Aware, Spybot, HijackThis and CWShredder
> may be found on this page:
> http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm.
>
>
> See this link for information about malware:
> http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/malware.ars
>
> If nothing there helps, please post back to this thread.
>
> --
> Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE
> Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email
> http://www.fjsmjs.com
> Protect your PC
> http://www.microsoft.com./athome/security/protect/defau...
>
>
Anonymous
January 2, 2005 12:02:25 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

OEAll I can think of is something running in the background and taking up
CPU cycles. I have a WinXP installation from Oct. 2001 that has shown no
slowdown.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE
Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Protect your PC
http://www.microsoft.com./athome/security/protect/defau...

"Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
news:cr734v$1m4$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk
> Hi Frank and thanks
> This machine here (XP Home) is about as clean as I can get it.
> I use ZoneAlarm and AVG Antivirus, I regularly run Spybot Search &
> Destroy as well as AdAware. I use HighjackThis
> and CWShredder, TuneUp Utilities 2004 & MS Baseline Security
> Analyzer. I regularly run Disk Cleanup, CHKDSK and Defragmenter.
> I've used a multitude of Registry cleaners & defragmenters and am
> currently trying both Registry Mechanic and RegSupreme.
> Guess what? Windows still hits the treacle after a few months.
> If anyone can point me at a solution or explain why I should have to
> re-install I'd be a happy man.
>
>
> "Frank Saunders, MS-MVP" <franksaunders@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:uGC56gB8EHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> "Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
>> news:cr1j5c$p77$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk
>>> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or
>>> so I am now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a
>>> common problem and I've read various articles that suggest the way
>>> round this is to backup-up, format the HD and re-install the lot. Is
>>> there no other way at all? Thinking the problem might be caused by a
>>> bloated Registry I've tried numerous Registry cleaners but to no
>>> avail. In fact, many do not really do much at all other than display
>>> a progress bar and give you a message at the end stating that the
>>> Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on this as
>>> follows. 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
>>> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
>>> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
>>> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
>>> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
>>> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
>>> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
>>
>> First eliminate any scumware.
>> What You Should Know About Spyware
>> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/deviou...
>>
>> CAUTION!!!!! Before you try to remove spyware using any of these
>> programs , download a copy of LSPFIX from any of the following sites:
>> http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm
>> http://www.spychecker.com/program/winsockxpfix.html
>> (if your OS is Win2k or XP) The process of removing certain malware
>> may kill
>> your internet connection. If this should occur, this program,
>> LSPFIX, will enable you to regain your connection.
>>
>> See
>> Dealing with Unwanted Malware, Parasites, Toolbars and Search Engines
>> http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm
>>
>> Note that AdAware and SpyBot S & D will each catch some things the
>> other won't. Also, each needs to be updated with the program's
>> update function before every use, even when just downloaded. There's also
>> a lot more to do than just those two programs. CWShredder is also
>> available here:
>> http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/regs_edits/cwshredder.z... **Post
>> your HijackThis log to http://www.spywareinfo.com/forums/
>> http://forums.tomcoyote.org/
>> http://www.wilderssecurity.com/ or the Spyware forum at
>> http://forum.aumha.org/viewforum.php?f=30 for expert analysis, not
>> here.** Alternative download pages for Ad-Aware, Spybot, HijackThis
>> and CWShredder may be found on this page:
>> http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm.
>>
>>
>> See this link for information about malware:
>> http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/malware.ars
>>
>> If nothing there helps, please post back to this thread.
>>
>> --
>> Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/
Anonymous
January 2, 2005 2:43:06 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Well if that were the case it would tend to be a sudden slowdown which would
make it easier to pinpoint the problem. However, this is a gradual slowdown
and it's not the first that I, or many others, have noticed. The net lists
numerous sources of advice re this problem and all the ones I've seen
suggest a total re-install.
I've done this myself several times with various MS OSs and always, even
after you've got all your software etc re-installed it's suddenly fast and
snappy again, but give it 6 months or so and the treacle begins to hit.
There's nothing untoward running in the background here other than the
Antivirus, the Firewall (I'm familiar with MSConfig). The services running
are a little more complicated to judge but as far as I'm aware all's OK.




"Frank Saunders, MS-MVP" <franksaunders@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:un%23%23n1E8EHA.3908@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> OEAll I can think of is something running in the background and taking up
> CPU cycles. I have a WinXP installation from Oct. 2001 that has shown no
> slowdown.
>
> --
> Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE
> Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email
> http://www.fjsmjs.com
> Protect your PC
> http://www.microsoft.com./athome/security/protect/defau...
>
> "Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
> news:cr734v$1m4$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk
>> Hi Frank and thanks
>> This machine here (XP Home) is about as clean as I can get it.
>> I use ZoneAlarm and AVG Antivirus, I regularly run Spybot Search &
>> Destroy as well as AdAware. I use HighjackThis
>> and CWShredder, TuneUp Utilities 2004 & MS Baseline Security
>> Analyzer. I regularly run Disk Cleanup, CHKDSK and Defragmenter.
>> I've used a multitude of Registry cleaners & defragmenters and am
>> currently trying both Registry Mechanic and RegSupreme.
>> Guess what? Windows still hits the treacle after a few months.
>> If anyone can point me at a solution or explain why I should have to
>> re-install I'd be a happy man.
>>
>>
>> "Frank Saunders, MS-MVP" <franksaunders@mvps.org> wrote in message
>> news:uGC56gB8EHA.3076@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>> "Ben Hardy" <bh@hb1.com> wrote in message
>>> news:cr1j5c$p77$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk
>>>> Having been running my current installation of XP Home for a year or
>>>> so I am now suffering the slow down effect. Apparently this is a
>>>> common problem and I've read various articles that suggest the way
>>>> round this is to backup-up, format the HD and re-install the lot. Is
>>>> there no other way at all? Thinking the problem might be caused by a
>>>> bloated Registry I've tried numerous Registry cleaners but to no
>>>> avail. In fact, many do not really do much at all other than display
>>>> a progress bar and give you a message at the end stating that the
>>>> Registry has been cleaned up. I've done various test on this as
>>>> follows. 1) Uninstall a progam and reboot
>>>> 2) Run a Registry Cleaner and reboot
>>>> 3) Search the Registry for instances of the program name
>>>> 4) Find many of them still sitting there!
>>>> Is there no utility that actually does clean the registry?
>>>> Is it just Registry bloat that causes the slow down?
>>>> Is there really no other way to solve the problem?
>>>
>>> First eliminate any scumware.
>>> What You Should Know About Spyware
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/deviou...
>>>
>>> CAUTION!!!!! Before you try to remove spyware using any of these
>>> programs , download a copy of LSPFIX from any of the following sites:
>>> http://www.cexx.org/lspfix.htm
>>> http://www.spychecker.com/program/winsockxpfix.html
>>> (if your OS is Win2k or XP) The process of removing certain malware
>>> may kill
>>> your internet connection. If this should occur, this program,
>>> LSPFIX, will enable you to regain your connection.
>>>
>>> See
>>> Dealing with Unwanted Malware, Parasites, Toolbars and Search Engines
>>> http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm
>>>
>>> Note that AdAware and SpyBot S & D will each catch some things the
>>> other won't. Also, each needs to be updated with the program's
>>> update function before every use, even when just downloaded. There's
>>> also a lot more to do than just those two programs. CWShredder is also
>>> available here:
>>> http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/regs_edits/cwshredder.z... **Post
>>> your HijackThis log to http://www.spywareinfo.com/forums/
>>> http://forums.tomcoyote.org/
>>> http://www.wilderssecurity.com/ or the Spyware forum at
>>> http://forum.aumha.org/viewforum.php?f=30 for expert analysis, not
>>> here.** Alternative download pages for Ad-Aware, Spybot, HijackThis
>>> and CWShredder may be found on this page:
>>> http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm.
>>>
>>>
>>> See this link for information about malware:
>>> http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/malware.ars
>>>
>>> If nothing there helps, please post back to this thread.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/
>
January 2, 2005 12:17:10 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:cr7cic$vc3$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk,
Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> wrote:

> Well if that were the case it would tend to be a sudden slowdown
> which would make it easier to pinpoint the problem. However, this is
> a gradual slowdown and it's not the first that I, or many others,
> have noticed. The net lists numerous sources of advice re this
> problem and all the ones I've seen suggest a total re-install.
> I've done this myself several times with various MS OSs and always,
> even after you've got all your software etc re-installed it's
> suddenly fast and snappy again, but give it 6 months or so and the
> treacle begins to hit. There's nothing untoward running in the
> background here other than the Antivirus, the Firewall (I'm familiar
> with MSConfig). The services running are a little more complicated to
> judge but as far as I'm aware all's OK.

I've been following this thread with interest because I recently had the
same kind of problem, and also asked about it in here.

The only difference between what you (Ben) are up against and what I was, is
that mine only affected the way the machine booted.

And believe me, mine started literally overnight. The machine would take
progressively longer and longer to boot, but would work properly once 'up'.

And also like you, Ben, I'm a fastidious kind of guy. The machine was free
of any scumware or virus. XP-Home (sp2) fully updated. Spyware Blaster,
Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D, and AV were all up-to date and run on a regular basis.
Unlike you though, I had never bothered with a registry cleaner until the
problem arose. At that point, I tried a few of them to no avail. There was
nothing untoward running in services/startup as per the Black Viper page.
HD was defragged, and the disk clean-up utility was run. SFC reported no
errors, nor did chkdsk or the Event log.

Yet still, the machine gradually got slower and slower with each succesive
boot. When it finally reached the point where I was waiting more than ten
minutes for the desktop to appear, I just ditched it, formatted, and
reinstalled.

Regretfully, I never did find out what was happening or what caused it. And
it's doubtful you will either, unless you're a very patient soul. As for
me? After working on it for three days or so, and spending more time
waiting for the machine to boot than actually accomplishing anything, I gave
up.

Bottom line. Unless you've got a lot of time to kill, and you're really,
really curious? I'd say go ahead with the format/reinstall.

By the way? You can get good information about "services" at Black Viper.
www.blackviper.com if you're so inclined.

Best of Luck
Anonymous
January 3, 2005 2:13:41 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I did a Registry backup today and discovered that the size of mine is over
42MB!
That seems to be rather large but I've no idea what size a registry is after
a new instalation.
I agree with you Bill, that a total reinstall is the way to cure it but I
wouldn't agree that it's
the fastest. When you consider the sheer volume of data that needs backing
up plus the
many hours required to reconfigure everthing. Then there's the
re-installation of software too.
I've done it before and know it can take days before you get it back to just
how you want it.
So this is the reason for my question. Why should I need to do that, what
causes the slowdown,
and is there an alternative to reinstallation.
Mine also takes an age to boot and since there's only a few items that start
with Windows I can
only imagine that it's to do with the size of the registry. Unfortunately,
none of the 'supposed' Reg
Cleaners do what they advertise, and I've tried most of them.

>
> I've been following this thread with interest because I recently had the
> same kind of problem, and also asked about it in here.
>
> The only difference between what you (Ben) are up against and what I was,
> is that mine only affected the way the machine booted.
>
> And believe me, mine started literally overnight. The machine would take
> progressively longer and longer to boot, but would work properly once
> 'up'.
>
> And also like you, Ben, I'm a fastidious kind of guy. The machine was
> free of any scumware or virus. XP-Home (sp2) fully updated. Spyware
> Blaster, Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D, and AV were all up-to date and run on a
> regular basis. Unlike you though, I had never bothered with a registry
> cleaner until the problem arose. At that point, I tried a few of them to
> no avail. There was nothing untoward running in services/startup as per
> the Black Viper page. HD was defragged, and the disk clean-up utility was
> run. SFC reported no errors, nor did chkdsk or the Event log.
>
> Yet still, the machine gradually got slower and slower with each succesive
> boot. When it finally reached the point where I was waiting more than ten
> minutes for the desktop to appear, I just ditched it, formatted, and
> reinstalled.
>
> Regretfully, I never did find out what was happening or what caused it.
> And it's doubtful you will either, unless you're a very patient soul. As
> for me? After working on it for three days or so, and spending more time
> waiting for the machine to boot than actually accomplishing anything, I
> gave up.
>
> Bottom line. Unless you've got a lot of time to kill, and you're really,
> really curious? I'd say go ahead with the format/reinstall.
>
> By the way? You can get good information about "services" at Black Viper.
> www.blackviper.com if you're so inclined.
>
> Best of Luck
>
January 3, 2005 2:13:42 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:crb9e2$eui$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk,
Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> wrote:

[reply inline]

> I did a Registry backup today and discovered that the size of mine is
> over 42MB!
> That seems to be rather large but I've no idea what size a registry
> is after a new instalation.
> I agree with you Bill, that a total reinstall is the way to cure it
> but I wouldn't agree that it's
> the fastest.

What's "fastest" is relative, I suppose. For me, formatting soon became the
fastest way to get back on track. As I said, after three days mucking
around and wasting literally hours waiting for the machine to reboot after
trying various "solutions" I was offered both here, and on various websites,
I gave up and formatted. Problem solved.

> When you consider the sheer volume of data that needs
> backing up plus the
> many hours required to reconfigure everthing. Then there's the
> re-installation of software too.
> I've done it before and know it can take days before you get it back
> to just how you want it.

True enough. But sometimes it seems there's just no alternative. Nobody in
this group, though they tried, could bail me out of my jam either. If
someone here really knew what might be going on with your machine, I'm sure
they would have offered something up by now.

> So this is the reason for my question. Why should I need to do that,
> what causes the slowdown,
> and is there an alternative to reinstallation.

I wish I could tell you. I wish anyone could. But it seems nobody can.
And I feel your frustration with the whole mess. I was frustrated too.
What bothered me the most about it was that there was no indication from the
OS that anything was amiss. I mean? How the heck are you supposed to
troubleshoot a problem, when according to your machine, there *is* no
problem? By the way? Have you run System File Checker (SFC), and/or had a
peek at the "Event Viewer"? Didn't help me, but both are worth a shot if
you haven't implemented them yet.

For more info on SFC see: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/310747/EN-US/

For info on the Event Viewer See:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/window...

> Mine also takes an age to boot and since there's only a few items
> that start with Windows I can
> only imagine that it's to do with the size of the registry.
> Unfortunately, none of the 'supposed' Reg
> Cleaners do what they advertise, and I've tried most of them.

Yup. Been there, done that. Formatted. :-)
Anonymous
January 3, 2005 2:15:19 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:crb9e2$eui$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk,
Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> typed:

>I did a Registry backup today and discovered that the size of
>mine is
> over 42MB!
> That seems to be rather large but I've no idea what size a
> registry
> is after a new instalation.


My registry backups run around 39MB, only slightly smaller than
yours.

There's nothing to be concerned about here. Although 42 million
may seem like a large number, in these days of large inexpensive
hard drives, it's actually a tiny number. You are worried about
an amount of hard drive space that is worth less than $.25 USA.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
Anonymous
January 3, 2005 10:38:22 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

No, you misunderstand. Hard drive space is not the issue here.
My concern is the gradual slowdown of the OS.
For what is basically a text file, 42Mb is rather large.
What I'm trying to get to the bottom of here is (1) Why the OS slows down
over time.
(2) Is there a way to solve it other than by a format and re-install.
Is the fact that a 42Mb file has to be read initially anything to do with
very slow start-up.
If you browse the web you'll find very many comments about XP (and other
Windows OSs)
gradually slowing down after a few months of use and they all suggest that
that the only cure is
a format & re-install (unless of course they're trying to sell you a
Registry Cleaner: Nice Progress Bar,
list of Reg entries wizzing by, convincing message at the end to the effect
that your Reg has now be cleaned, Effect: Un-noticeable.) See my previous
comment regarding testing these.

Note to Bill
Hadn't tried SFC before today. Trouble is that it doesn't appear to give a
summary of what was changed, if anything. However, it hasn't made a
difference but thanks anyway


"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:%23$gewAc8EHA.3500@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> My registry backups run around 39MB, only slightly smaller than yours.
>
> There's nothing to be concerned about here. Although 42 million may seem
> like a large number, in these days of large inexpensive hard drives, it's
> actually a tiny number. You are worried about an amount of hard drive
> space that is worth less than $.25 USA.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
Anonymous
January 3, 2005 10:38:23 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:crc6vh$ha8$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk,
Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> typed:

> No, you misunderstand. Hard drive space is not the issue here.
> My concern is the gradual slowdown of the OS.


It doesn't matter from that perspective either. The size of the
registry doesn't affect the speed of your computer.


> For what is basically a text file, 42Mb is rather large.


No, it's typical of the size of teh reistry, as I tried to point
out by comparing it my mine.


> What I'm trying to get to the bottom of here is (1) Why the OS
> slows
> down over time.


It doesn't. If it does in your case, it's not the nature of the
operating system, but is because of other factors. For example,
do you regularly scan for spyware and other malware with
*several* up-to-date programs?


> (2) Is there a way to solve it other than by a format and
> re-install.
> Is the fact that a 42Mb file has to be read initially anything
> to do
> with very slow start-up.


No. As I said, that's not a big file at all.

Even if it contributed to a slow startup, don't mix up slow
starting with slow running; they are not necessarily related.

My personal view is that the attention many people pay to how
long it takes to boot is unwarranted. Assuming that the speed is
otherwise satisfactory, it may not be worth worrying about. Most
people start their computers once a day or even less frequently.
In the overall scheme of things, even a few minutes to start up
isn't very important. Personally I power on my computer when I
get up in the morning, then go get my coffee. When I come back,
it's done booting. I don't know how long it took to boot and I
don't care.

On the other hand, if you're running slow all the time, there's a
problem that needs addressing.


> If you browse the web you'll find very many comments about XP
> (and
> other Windows OSs)
> gradually slowing down after a few months of use


Remember that newsgroups like this one and other online forums
are places where people come to look for help when they
experience problems. Yes, there are some with such problems, but
newsgroups have a dispropotionately high percentage of them.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that this is necessarily
something everyone experiences. I don't, for example.


> and they all suggest
> that that the only cure is
> a format & re-install


"They"? Who are "they"? I vehemently disagree. In my view, this
often-repeated mantra is almost always a mistake. With a modicum
of care, it should never be necessary to reinstall Windows (XP or
any other version). I've run Windows 3.0, 3.1, WFWG 3.11, Windows
95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, and Windows XP, each for the period
of time before the next version came out, and each on two
machines here. I never reinstalled any of them, and I have never
had anything more than an occasional minor problem.
It's my belief that this mistaken notion stems from the technical
support people at many of the larger OEMs. Their solution to
almost any problem they don't quickly know the answer to is
"reformat and reinstall." That's the perfect solution for them.
It gets you off the phone quickly, it almost always works, and it
doesn't require them to do any real troubleshooting (a skill that
most of them obviously don't possess in any great degree).

But it leaves you with all the work and all the problems. You
have to restore all your data backups, you have to reinstall all
your programs, you have to reinstall all the Windows and
application updates,you have to locate and install all the needed
drivers for your system, you have to recustomize Windows and all
your apps to work the way you're comfortable with.

Besides all those things being time-consuming and troublesome,
you may have trouble with some of them: can you find all your
application CDs? Can you find all the needed installation codes?
Do you have data backups to restore? Do you even remember all the
customizations and tweaks you may have installed to make
everything work the way you like?

Occasionally there are problems that are so difficult to solve
that Windows should be reinstalled cleanly. But they are few and
far between; reinstallation should not be a substitute for
troubleshooting; it should be a last resort, to be done only
after all other attempts at troubleshooting by a qualified person
have failed.

I don't know what you've tried so far to address your problems,
but I would look primarily at two things:

1. The possibility of malware on your system.

2. The list of what background programs start automatically when
you boot. Here's my standard advice on the subject:

Despite what many people tell you, you should be concerned, not
with how many of these programs you run, but which. Some of them
can hurt performance severely, but others have no effect on
performance.

Don't just stop programs from running willy-nilly. What you
should do is determine what each program is, what its value is to
you, and what the cost in performance is of its running all the
time. You can get more information about these with at
http://castlecops.com/StartupList.html. If you can't find it
there, try google searches and ask about specifics here.

Once you have that information, you can make an intelligent
informed decision about what you want to keep and what you want
to get rid of.


--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup





> (unless of course they're trying to sell you a
> Registry Cleaner: Nice Progress Bar,
> list of Reg entries wizzing by, convincing message at the end
> to the
> effect that your Reg has now be cleaned, Effect:
> Un-noticeable.) See
> my previous comment regarding testing these.
>
> Note to Bill
> Hadn't tried SFC before today. Trouble is that it doesn't
> appear to
> give a summary of what was changed, if anything. However, it
> hasn't
> made a difference but thanks anyway
>
>
> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:%23$gewAc8EHA.3500@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> My registry backups run around 39MB, only slightly smaller
>> than
>> yours.
>> There's nothing to be concerned about here. Although 42
>> million may
>> seem like a large number, in these days of large inexpensive
>> hard
>> drives, it's actually a tiny number. You are worried about an
>> amount
>> of hard drive space that is worth less than $.25 USA.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
Anonymous
January 4, 2005 12:05:27 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

OK Ken, so lets get this straight-

You are saying:

'The size of the registry has no effect whatsoever on the speed of the
computer but it may affect the Startup time'
OK, I'll accept that.

'A 42Mb Registry is typical'.
Doesn't that depend on how much software/Fonts etc etc you have installed?
Surely a machine with say, 80 apps installed, which according to 'Add/Remove
Programs', mine has, will have a larger Registry than a machine with 20 apps
installed?

'An OS doesn't slow down over time unless there are other issues such as
spyware etc'
Well I know many people that would disagree with that. As far as Spyware,
Adware, Viruses etc go I spend many hours checking and scanning for
suchlike - see my earlier post. I'm pretty confident that I have a clean
machine. Of course, I use numerous applications for this but I am now
beginning to distrust some of them, especially Registry Cleaners.

'It doesn't matter how long a PC takes to boot up'
I don't believe you said that! When I first installed the OS the PC started
up in less than 20 seconds - it now takes about four minutes. (Read the post
from Bill in this group). Now four minutes is not a long time I agree but
what is concerning is why. According to what MSCONFIG and Event Viewer tells
me, there's nothing untoward starting up other than the usual stuff such as
AV & Firewall. This was the case when it started in 30 seconds! If start up
time continues to increase then not only will I have time to get a coffee
but also breakfast, shopping, brunch and who knows what else. I want it to
start in 20 seconds like it used to and like it would do if I was to
re-install

'Don't make the mistake of thinking that this is necessarily something
everyone experiences'.
Well, all of my colleagues and friends agree and many people on numerous
websites agree that it's a common problem. I've also run many OSs and it
seems to have been a problem since Win95. I agree that it's easy to say
'reformat and reinstall' and that's why I'm posting this before I'm forced
to do that.

So rather than rubbish my post, why not read it from the start and you will
discover that I've run all the usual Malware/Spyware apps, Reg cleaners etc.
My AV and Firewall is up to date. I regularly check MSCONFIG, Event Viewer,
Services and now SFC, I clean out Temp files, Caches etc. I regularly run
CHKDSK and Defrag. All of this time-consuming s**t I go through just to have
a smooth, fast computer that I can do WORK on.

Suggestions would be helpful.
Anonymous
January 4, 2005 12:05:28 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:crcc2o$m0p$2@news6.svr.pol.co.uk,
Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> typed:

> OK Ken, so lets get this straight-
>
> You are saying:
>
> 'The size of the registry has no effect whatsoever on the speed
> of the
> computer but it may affect the Startup time'
> OK, I'll accept that.
>
> 'A 42Mb Registry is typical'.
> Doesn't that depend on how much software/Fonts etc etc you have
> installed? Surely a machine with say, 80 apps installed, which
> according to 'Add/Remove Programs', mine has, will have a
> larger
> Registry than a machine with 20 apps installed?


Certainly it depends on things like that. But 42MB is well within
normal range and not cause for concern.

>
> 'An OS doesn't slow down over time unless there are other
> issues such
> as spyware etc'
> Well I know many people that would disagree with that.


I know many people who disagree with that too. However, none of
the people whose views I trust do. As always, you are free to
agree or disagree with whomever you wish.


> As far as
> Spyware, Adware, Viruses etc go I spend many hours checking and
> scanning for suchlike - see my earlier post. I'm pretty
> confident
> that I have a clean machine. Of course, I use numerous
> applications
> for this but I am now beginning to distrust some of them,
> especially
> Registry Cleaners.
> 'It doesn't matter how long a PC takes to boot up'
> I don't believe you said that! When I first installed the OS
> the PC
> started up in less than 20 seconds - it now takes about four
> minutes.


Well, I can't know for sure, but that sounds to me like you have
accumulated more background programs that are starting
automatically.


> (Read the post from Bill in this group). Now four minutes is
> not a
> long time


Right. For most of us it's a once a day event, and not important.


> I agree but what is concerning is why.


As far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter, unless it also has an
effect on the general speed of the machine. And, also as far as
I'm concerned, that's the only issue to be concerned about. If
startup is slow but speed is otherwise satisfactory, there's
nothing to be concerned about. If general speed is *not*
satisfactory, that should be a concern whether startup takes 20
seconds or four minutes.

Startup speed and running speed are not necessarily related.
That's the sense in which I mean that startup time is not
important.


> According to what
> MSCONFIG and Event Viewer tells me, there's nothing untoward
> starting
> up other than the usual stuff such as AV & Firewall. This was
> the
> case when it started in 30 seconds! If start up time continues
> to
> increase then not only will I have time to get a coffee but
> also
> breakfast, shopping, brunch and who knows what else. I want it
> to
> start in 20 seconds like it used to and like it would do if I
> was to
> re-install


Your choice, of course. I think you're worrying about the wrong
thing.


> 'Don't make the mistake of thinking that this is necessarily
> something
> everyone experiences'.
> Well, all of my colleagues and friends agree and many people on
> numerous websites agree that it's a common problem. I've also
> run
> many OSs and it seems to have been a problem since Win95. I
> agree
> that it's easy to say 'reformat and reinstall' and that's why
> I'm
> posting this before I'm forced to do that.
>
> So rather than rubbish my post, why not read it from the start
> and


I wasn't trying to rubbish anything, but to give you what I
thought was good advice. If you don't like my advice, feel free
to ignore it.

I came into the thread late, and didn't see all your earlier
posts. And because I don't save already-read messages, it wasn't
easy for me to back and see the entire thread.


> you will discover that I've run all the usual Malware/Spyware
> apps,
> Reg cleaners etc. My AV and Firewall is up to date. I regularly
> check
> MSCONFIG, Event Viewer, Services and now SFC, I clean out Temp
> files,
> Caches etc. I regularly run CHKDSK and Defrag. All of this
> time-consuming s**t I go through just to have a smooth, fast
> computer
> that I can do WORK on.
> Suggestions would be helpful.


Sorry, it's the end of the thread as far as I'm concerned. We
apparently disagree on a number of fundamental issues, and that's
fine with me.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
Anonymous
January 4, 2005 4:06:59 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Thankyou Ken,
Feeling somewhat admonished I'll run off with my tail between my legs and do
a Format and Re-install



"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:%23bjDnxe8EHA.1392@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> In news:crcc2o$m0p$2@news6.svr.pol.co.uk,
> Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> typed:
>
>> OK Ken, so lets get this straight-
>>
>> You are saying:
>>
>> 'The size of the registry has no effect whatsoever on the speed of the
>> computer but it may affect the Startup time'
>> OK, I'll accept that.
>>
>> 'A 42Mb Registry is typical'.
>> Doesn't that depend on how much software/Fonts etc etc you have
>> installed? Surely a machine with say, 80 apps installed, which
>> according to 'Add/Remove Programs', mine has, will have a larger
>> Registry than a machine with 20 apps installed?
>
>
> Certainly it depends on things like that. But 42MB is well within normal
> range and not cause for concern.
>
>>
>> 'An OS doesn't slow down over time unless there are other issues such
>> as spyware etc'
>> Well I know many people that would disagree with that.
>
>
> I know many people who disagree with that too. However, none of the people
> whose views I trust do. As always, you are free to agree or disagree with
> whomever you wish.
>
>
>> As far as
>> Spyware, Adware, Viruses etc go I spend many hours checking and
>> scanning for suchlike - see my earlier post. I'm pretty confident
>> that I have a clean machine. Of course, I use numerous applications
>> for this but I am now beginning to distrust some of them, especially
>> Registry Cleaners.
>> 'It doesn't matter how long a PC takes to boot up'
>> I don't believe you said that! When I first installed the OS the PC
>> started up in less than 20 seconds - it now takes about four minutes.
>
>
> Well, I can't know for sure, but that sounds to me like you have
> accumulated more background programs that are starting automatically.
>
>
>> (Read the post from Bill in this group). Now four minutes is not a
>> long time
>
>
> Right. For most of us it's a once a day event, and not important.
>
>
>> I agree but what is concerning is why.
>
>
> As far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter, unless it also has an effect on
> the general speed of the machine. And, also as far as I'm concerned,
> that's the only issue to be concerned about. If startup is slow but speed
> is otherwise satisfactory, there's nothing to be concerned about. If
> general speed is *not* satisfactory, that should be a concern whether
> startup takes 20 seconds or four minutes.
>
> Startup speed and running speed are not necessarily related. That's the
> sense in which I mean that startup time is not important.
>
>
>> According to what
>> MSCONFIG and Event Viewer tells me, there's nothing untoward starting
>> up other than the usual stuff such as AV & Firewall. This was the
>> case when it started in 30 seconds! If start up time continues to
>> increase then not only will I have time to get a coffee but also
>> breakfast, shopping, brunch and who knows what else. I want it to
>> start in 20 seconds like it used to and like it would do if I was to
>> re-install
>
>
> Your choice, of course. I think you're worrying about the wrong thing.
>
>
>> 'Don't make the mistake of thinking that this is necessarily something
>> everyone experiences'.
>> Well, all of my colleagues and friends agree and many people on
>> numerous websites agree that it's a common problem. I've also run
>> many OSs and it seems to have been a problem since Win95. I agree
>> that it's easy to say 'reformat and reinstall' and that's why I'm
>> posting this before I'm forced to do that.
>>
>> So rather than rubbish my post, why not read it from the start and
>
>
> I wasn't trying to rubbish anything, but to give you what I thought was
> good advice. If you don't like my advice, feel free to ignore it.
>
> I came into the thread late, and didn't see all your earlier posts. And
> because I don't save already-read messages, it wasn't easy for me to back
> and see the entire thread.
>
>
>> you will discover that I've run all the usual Malware/Spyware apps,
>> Reg cleaners etc. My AV and Firewall is up to date. I regularly check
>> MSCONFIG, Event Viewer, Services and now SFC, I clean out Temp files,
>> Caches etc. I regularly run CHKDSK and Defrag. All of this
>> time-consuming s**t I go through just to have a smooth, fast computer
>> that I can do WORK on.
>> Suggestions would be helpful.
>
>
> Sorry, it's the end of the thread as far as I'm concerned. We apparently
> disagree on a number of fundamental issues, and that's fine with me.
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
January 4, 2005 1:50:31 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In news:crcq8n$d54$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk,
Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> wrote:

> Thankyou Ken,
> Feeling somewhat admonished I'll run off with my tail between my legs
> and do a Format and Re-install

Sadly, that appears to be the only true 'fix' for the problem we both
experienced.

> "Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:%23bjDnxe8EHA.1392@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

>> In news:crcc2o$m0p$2@news6.svr.pol.co.uk,
>> Ben Hardy <bh@hb1.com> typed:
>>
>>> OK Ken, so lets get this straight-
>>>
>>> You are saying:
>>>
>>> 'The size of the registry has no effect whatsoever on the speed of
>>> the computer but it may affect the Startup time'
>>> OK, I'll accept that.
>>>
>>> 'A 42Mb Registry is typical'.
>>> Doesn't that depend on how much software/Fonts etc etc you have
>>> installed? Surely a machine with say, 80 apps installed, which
>>> according to 'Add/Remove Programs', mine has, will have a larger
>>> Registry than a machine with 20 apps installed?
>>
>> Certainly it depends on things like that. But 42MB is well within
>> normal range and not cause for concern.

Agreed.

>>> 'An OS doesn't slow down over time unless there are other issues
>>> such as spyware etc'
>>> Well I know many people that would disagree with that.
>>
>>
>> I know many people who disagree with that too. However, none of the
>> people whose views I trust do. As always, you are free to agree or
>> disagree with whomever you wish.

Agreed. And remember you said that, Ken.

>>> As far as
>>> Spyware, Adware, Viruses etc go I spend many hours checking and
>>> scanning for suchlike - see my earlier post. I'm pretty confident
>>> that I have a clean machine. Of course, I use numerous applications
>>> for this but I am now beginning to distrust some of them, especially
>>> Registry Cleaners.
>>> 'It doesn't matter how long a PC takes to boot up'
>>> I don't believe you said that! When I first installed the OS the PC
>>> started up in less than 20 seconds - it now takes about four
>>> minutes.

>> Well, I can't know for sure, but that sounds to me like you have
>> accumulated more background programs that are starting automatically.

If you'd taken the time to read the entire thread, you would know that's not
the case.

>>
>>> (Read the post from Bill in this group). Now four minutes is not a
>>> long time
>>
>>
>> Right. For most of us it's a once a day event, and not important.
>>
>>
>>> I agree but what is concerning is why.
>>
>>
>> As far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter, unless it also has an
>> effect on the general speed of the machine. And, also as far as I'm
>> concerned, that's the only issue to be concerned about. If startup
>> is slow but speed is otherwise satisfactory, there's nothing to be
>> concerned about. If general speed is *not* satisfactory, that should
>> be a concern whether startup takes 20 seconds or four minutes.
>>
>> Startup speed and running speed are not necessarily related. That's
>> the sense in which I mean that startup time is not important.

At would point would you say it becomes important, Ken? Greater than 10
minutes (as in my case), 20 minutes, half-an-hour, a day?

>>> According to what
>>> MSCONFIG and Event Viewer tells me, there's nothing untoward
>>> starting up other than the usual stuff such as AV & Firewall. This
>>> was the case when it started in 30 seconds! If start up time
>>> continues to increase then not only will I have time to get a
>>> coffee but also breakfast, shopping, brunch and who knows what
>>> else. I want it to start in 20 seconds like it used to and like it
>>> would do if I was to re-install
>>
>>
>> Your choice, of course. I think you're worrying about the wrong
>> thing.

It's not up to you to decide what someone else is "worrying" about. And I
don't care how many times you insist otherwise, it is not *normal* for a
"clean" machine to go from taking 30 seconds to boot, to greater than 10
minutes (in my case), virtually overnight.

>>> 'Don't make the mistake of thinking that this is necessarily
>>> something everyone experiences'.

Certainly not "everyone", but I had a very similar problem. And a simple
Google search will reveal that Ben and I are far from alone.

>>> Well, all of my colleagues and friends agree and many people on
>>> numerous websites agree that it's a common problem. I've also run
>>> many OSs and it seems to have been a problem since Win95. I agree
>>> that it's easy to say 'reformat and reinstall' and that's why I'm
>>> posting this before I'm forced to do that.
>>>
>>> So rather than rubbish my post, why not read it from the start and
>>
>> I wasn't trying to rubbish anything, but to give you what I thought
>> was good advice. If you don't like my advice, feel free to ignore it.
>>
>> I came into the thread late, and didn't see all your earlier posts.

Then perhaps you should have stayed out of the thread until you'd caught
yourself up? Would you barge into the middle of a conversation at a party
and add your two-cents without listening for a while? Basic newsgroup
etiquette and all, ya know?

>> And because I don't save already-read messages, it wasn't easy for
>> me to back and see the entire thread.

You mean to tell me that resetting headers in a newsgroup is a daunting task
for a Microsoft MVP? That certainly explains a lot. Thanks for the candid
admission.

>>> you will discover that I've run all the usual Malware/Spyware apps,
>>> Reg cleaners etc. My AV and Firewall is up to date. I regularly
>>> check MSCONFIG, Event Viewer, Services and now SFC, I clean out
>>> Temp files, Caches etc. I regularly run CHKDSK and Defrag. All of
>>> this time-consuming s**t I go through just to have a smooth, fast
>>> computer that I can do WORK on.
>>> Suggestions would be helpful.
>>
>> Sorry, it's the end of the thread as far as I'm concerned. We
>> apparently disagree on a number of fundamental issues, and that's
>> fine with me.

Typical pompous, "I'm right, and you're wrong" MVP attitude. As soon as
anyone with half a brain posts a real problem, including the steps s/he's
taken to correct the problem, and one of your canned responses doesn't cover
the problem, you get snippy and bail. I've seen it happen far too many
times here.

The only "fundamental issue" you disagree with us on, Ken, is the fact that
you think it's perfectly OK for an XP-based machine to inexplicably start
taking forever to boot.

And whether it happens suddenly, or over a period of time ... It's *not*
acceptable to those of us who are used to booting in 30-seconds or less, who
then for some reason *nobody* can seem to sort out, find ourselves waiting
4-10 minutes or more, for a desktop.

Near as I can tell? There is no solution other than to format/reinstall the
OS when this happens. And it's (whatever it is) IMO, attributable to XP
itself. Not spyware or scumware or ratware or a virus. You (Ken) have no
idea how dilligent I am about keeping this machine clean. You also have no
idea what lengths I went to, to avoid a format/reinstall when this happened
to me. Suffice to say, after running all the XP diagnostics including SFC,
and perusing the Event Viewer for errors only to discover that according to
the OS there was nothing wrong .... I then used various memory checking
devices thinking I might have a bad stick ... Then I turned my cable modem
off and disconnected it for an hour while the machine was powered-down. I
even went so far as not just disabling programs from start-up, but actually
removing them (one-by-one) to see if it made any difference. No joy. Used
system restore. No joy. Format/Reinstall .... JOY!

Not just in this newsgroup, but all over the place, people are experiencing
this problem. The current thinking seems to be that there must be some kind
of virus or malware that causes this to happen. I don't believe it, but if
it's true? It's the most stealth thing I've run across in eight years. It
doesn't show in start-up, everything appears OK as far as msconfig,
Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D and AV's of all kinds can't detect it, Spyware Blaster
can't prevent it, HiJackThis doesn't report it, and Windows doesn't know
it's there.

Note to Ben:

{Pay no attention to the fact that your machine takes forever to boot. It's
really none of your concern how your machine acts. Pay no attention to the
man behind the curtain. It's just Bill Gates operating yet another one of
his automated "MVPs" by remote-control.}

And now as I take my leave, I'll borrow a phrase from Ken ....

"Sorry, it's the end of the [newsgroup] as far as I'm concerned."

And fear not! I won't let the door hit me in the patooty on the way out.
!