Frank

Tiberius wrote:
> I know all the tweaks....after doing them vista still craws like a klingon
> earthworm that has been stomped on.
>
> Only by hacking at it like a berserker with vlite you can possibly make it
> faster...

That is simply not true!
Either you don't have Vista or (probably) don't know what you're doing.
One thing for sure, you seem to enjoy lying and intentionally misleading
others about Vista.
Frank

Frank

Tiberius wrote:

> NTFS claimed that it didn't need defrag at one point.. hastily Microsoft
> changed their story knowing that
> it would produce an uproar of complaints

Got a link (URL?)
Frank

Stephan Rose

Frank wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:
>
>>
>> It isn't cool, it is actually sad that in todays age windows STILL needs
>> a defragger!
>>
>
> Stephan, why do you think Windows OS's still need defragger's?

By the simple fact that MS Invests time, energy and money into a defragger
for their OS? On a small hard drive, defragging may not even be all that
bad.

I on the other hand have over 1 terrabyte of hard drive space. Now just
imagine the time it would take me to defrag *that*! Luckily all but the
WinXP disk are formatted ext3 and controlled by Linux so that hours long
defrag sessions are a thing of the past.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

君のこと思い出す日なんてないのは
君のこと忘れたときがないから

Jon

"Chris" <nospam@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:1RPRGrDRivWGFwlj@[127.0.0.1]...
> How can Vista be speeded up for use on an old computer?
>
> Are there things that can be turned off - and which make a lot of
> difference?
> --
> Chris


Yep, plenty of things can be turned off. It tends to be a question of taking
a number of smaller items off from the camel's back, than removing one big
item.

I reckon you could get a workable Vista with any machine with 512 MB Ram,
10gb hard drive space, and a 1Ghz processor. Below that I think you'd
struggle.

--
Jon

mikeyhsd

Black Viper has son\me good information on services and what can be turned off.

http://www.blkviper.com/index.html



mikeyhsd@comcast.net



"Chris" <nospam@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:1RPRGrDRivWGFwlj@[127.0.0.1]...
How can Vista be speeded up for use on an old computer?

Are there things that can be turned off - and which make a lot of
difference?
--
Chris

Julie Smith

Soooo, can you give me a technical run down as to why linux handles
fragmentation better?

I'd like to know... I'm serious.


"Tiberius" <James@tiberius.kirk> wrote in message
news:Oa$$OEVoHHA.208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> linux systems are better at handling fragmentation... and that's why they
> don't even include a defragger
> on most linux distros.. however fragmentation can occur when the disk
> starts getting almost completely filled up.
>
> NTFS claimed that it didn't need defrag at one point.. hastily Microsoft
> changed their story knowing that
> it would produce an uproar of complaints
>
>
>
> "Chad Harris" <vistaneedsmuchowork.net> wrote in message
> news:eWffe2UoHHA.208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Stephan--
>>
>> You raise a very interesting point. I don't know enough about Windows
>> architecture to start to posit how it could be constructed not to need
>> defragging. Mac OS's and others need defragging as well. Defragging does
>> not seem to be as necessary in Linux systems:
>>
>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1455687,00.asp
>>
>> This is the kind of question I'd like to pitch to Mark Russinovitch
>> types:
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sys...s/default.mspx
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>> "Stephan Rose" <kermos@nospam.somrek.net> wrote in message
>> news:mcadnQlEoZAkmcbbnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>>> "Chad Harris" <vistaneedsmuchowork.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Chris--
>>>>
>>>> There sure are. Redmond default turns on services and processes that
>>>> most
>>>> people will never use or have the requisite hdw and software for. They
>>>> also used to start wisptis.exe which is only needed for a pen for a
>>>> tablet
>>>> and my figures are that tablets are not the majority although they are
>>>> going to grow and laptops notebooks are 50% of pc sales as of today.
>>>>
>>>> Your old pc should have at least a GB of RAM IMHO, and the paradox is
>>>> that
>>>> RAM for really old pcs can be very expensive if it's high end RAM like
>>>> say
>>>> Crucial's best. RAM for newer pcs is exponentially cheaper so
>>>> sometimes
>>>> there is the age old decision: do you upgrade the hdw on ole Rusty or
>>>> do
>>>> you "buy a new pc Dude?" If you take steps to minimize CPU draw, you
>>>> can
>>>> run Vista very well on some old pcs depending on the hdw but software
>>>> moves are crucial (no pun) as well.
>>>>
>>>> I would advise you to shoo the pigs away from the resource troth. I'm
>>>> going to give you a
>>>> number of steps, but usually if spyware or malware or malicious scripts
>>>> rarely aren't the cause of this, defragging with a competent defragger
>>>> regularly (MSFT has one in Vista) and I recommend Perfect Disk from
>>>> Raxco,
>>>> and cutting services and processes that Vista has on by default that
>>>> you
>>>> don't need--you don't even have the hardware or software for some of
>>>> them
>>>> works very well.
>>>>
>>>> Don't judge a book by its cover - why Windows Vista Defrag is cool
>>>>
>>>
>>> It isn't cool, it is actually sad that in todays age windows STILL needs
>>> a
>>> defragger!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Stephan
>>> 2003 Yamaha R6
>>>
>>> ????????????????
>>> ??????????????
>>
>
>

norm

Julie Smith wrote:
> Soooo, can you give me a technical run down as to why linux handles
> fragmentation better?
>
> I'd like to know... I'm serious.
>
>
> "Tiberius" <James@tiberius.kirk> wrote in message
> news:Oa$$OEVoHHA.208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> linux systems are better at handling fragmentation... and that's why they
>> don't even include a defragger
>> on most linux distros.. however fragmentation can occur when the disk
>> starts getting almost completely filled up.
>>
>> NTFS claimed that it didn't need defrag at one point.. hastily Microsoft
>> changed their story knowing that
>> it would produce an uproar of complaints
>>
>>
>>
>> "Chad Harris" <vistaneedsmuchowork.net> wrote in message
>> news:eWffe2UoHHA.208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Stephan--
>>>
>>> You raise a very interesting point. I don't know enough about Windows
>>> architecture to start to posit how it could be constructed not to need
>>> defragging. Mac OS's and others need defragging as well. Defragging does
>>> not seem to be as necessary in Linux systems:
>>>
>>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1455687,00.asp
>>>
>>> This is the kind of question I'd like to pitch to Mark Russinovitch
>>> types:
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sys...s/default.mspx
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>> "Stephan Rose" <kermos@nospam.somrek.net> wrote in message
>>> news:mcadnQlEoZAkmcbbnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>>>> "Chad Harris" <vistaneedsmuchowork.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chris--
>>>>>
>>>>> There sure are. Redmond default turns on services and processes that
>>>>> most
>>>>> people will never use or have the requisite hdw and software for. They
>>>>> also used to start wisptis.exe which is only needed for a pen for a
>>>>> tablet
>>>>> and my figures are that tablets are not the majority although they are
>>>>> going to grow and laptops notebooks are 50% of pc sales as of today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your old pc should have at least a GB of RAM IMHO, and the paradox is
>>>>> that
>>>>> RAM for really old pcs can be very expensive if it's high end RAM like
>>>>> say
>>>>> Crucial's best. RAM for newer pcs is exponentially cheaper so
>>>>> sometimes
>>>>> there is the age old decision: do you upgrade the hdw on ole Rusty or
>>>>> do
>>>>> you "buy a new pc Dude?" If you take steps to minimize CPU draw, you
>>>>> can
>>>>> run Vista very well on some old pcs depending on the hdw but software
>>>>> moves are crucial (no pun) as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would advise you to shoo the pigs away from the resource troth. I'm
>>>>> going to give you a
>>>>> number of steps, but usually if spyware or malware or malicious scripts
>>>>> rarely aren't the cause of this, defragging with a competent defragger
>>>>> regularly (MSFT has one in Vista) and I recommend Perfect Disk from
>>>>> Raxco,
>>>>> and cutting services and processes that Vista has on by default that
>>>>> you
>>>>> don't need--you don't even have the hardware or software for some of
>>>>> them
>>>>> works very well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't judge a book by its cover - why Windows Vista Defrag is cool
>>>>>
>>>> It isn't cool, it is actually sad that in todays age windows STILL needs
>>>> a
>>>> defragger!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Stephan
>>>> 2003 Yamaha R6
>>>>
>>>> ????????????????
>>>> ??????????????
>>
>
>
This might do:
http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/ind..._defragmenting

--
norm

Doris Day - MFB

Frank wrote:

> Tiberius wrote:
>
>> NTFS claimed that it didn't need defrag at one point.. hastily Microsoft
>> changed their story knowing that
>> it would produce an uproar of complaints
>
> Got a link (URL?)
> Frank

Sure here's one Frank. BTW, didn't know that you had become such a
celebrity. :-) <snort>

http://tinyurl.com/cp9va

Finally get to see what Dr. Frank has been up to.

Love and Kisses,
Doris


--
My Microsoft Hero (he loves this company!) ... http://tinyurl.com/yp9cn2
Installing: Windows vs Linux ... http://tinyurl.com/ywqmbw
BallmerBumBois: Frank, Julian, Richard Urban, Jupiter Jones, Harry Krause,
Feliks Dzerzhinsky
Sorry if I missed anyone, place your name here _________________.

Doris Day - MFB

Julie Smith wrote:

> Soooo, can you give me a technical run down as to why linux handles
> fragmentation better?
>
> I'd like to know... I'm serious.
>
This mailing list article should help explain it...

https://listman.redhat.com/archives/.../msg00124.html

A less geeky explanation :-)

http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/ind..._defragmenting


Love and Kisses,
Doris

--
My Microsoft Hero (he loves this company!) ... http://tinyurl.com/yp9cn2
Installing: Windows vs Linux ... http://tinyurl.com/ywqmbw
BallmerBumBois: Frank, Julian, Richard Urban, Jupiter Jones, Harry Krause,
Feliks Dzerzhinsky
Sorry if I missed anyone, place your name here _________________.

Tiberius

If blocked trolls Frank and Julie.. but since I saw their questions I place
the answers here:

Educating the vistaboys and vistagals for one more time....

MS thought NTFS was fragment-proof and did not provide defragmentation tool
-See second paragraph.
http://www.lascon.co.uk/d009002.htm

Linux file systems get fragmented very little, so little there is no defrag
utility in linux and here is why:
http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/ind..._defragmenting

Its funny.. the MS rumor that NTFS does not need defrag is still floating
around...
and is much alive. Is that why they have defrag as a service in vista? LOL

see here in the comments: http://vistarewired.com/2007/02/15/defragment/







"Doris Day - MFB" <snort@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:1180409599.381796@netadmin1.interbaun.net...
> Julie Smith wrote:
>
>> Soooo, can you give me a technical run down as to why linux handles
>> fragmentation better?
>>
>> I'd like to know... I'm serious.
>>
> This mailing list article should help explain it...
>
> https://listman.redhat.com/archives/.../msg00124.html
>
> A less geeky explanation :-)
>
> http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/ind..._defragmenting
>
>
> Love and Kisses,
> Doris
>
> --
> My Microsoft Hero (he loves this company!) ... http://tinyurl.com/yp9cn2
> Installing: Windows vs Linux ... http://tinyurl.com/ywqmbw
> BallmerBumBois: Frank, Julian, Richard Urban, Jupiter Jones, Harry Krause,
> Feliks Dzerzhinsky
> Sorry if I missed anyone, place your name here _________________.
>
>
>
>