XP

[durock]

I have XP pro, It seems to run slow, any ideas?]

AMD 950
all cards are intergrated on the computer.

[Philip1952]

Have you shut down all of the services that XP default installs in the on position?
Here is a site that tells you what you can shut down.

This site has some good items also.

I am sure there will be more posted by some other members also.

[jad1097]

Over here in the Tips, Tricks & Reference forum there are a bunch of useful XP tips.

link fixed

[Plaster]

How much RAM do you have?

[Strat]

XP only runs optimally with 256MB RAM or more, prefferably DDR.

[Philip1952]

prefferably DDR.

I missed that part in the M$ bullitens when I was reading up on XP.

[arkie]

I used the Blk Vipers Site to set up my Services.
XP Default 41 in auto........ I now have 20
XP Default 39 in manual.... I now have 11
XP Default 1 disabled........ I now have 50 disabled Services.

I have XP Home.

[TARP2]

OOOOH, good info, guys. I can sure use a xp tuneup too!

[fishybawb]

Thanks for the link arkie, I've been looking for something like this for ages

[durock]

Thanks Ya'll good stuff.

[Win2kMan]

Originally posted by durock
I have XP pro, It seems to run slow, any ideas?]

that is the problem!! you're running xp !! :lol: go back to w2k dude

[Johnny Fist]

I can't figure out why people who are so pro-2000 don't like XP. Its the same OS just with a different "pretty" package. If my father can run it on a 500Mhz amd k6-2 machine with 256Mb of sdram, I'm forced to wonder what it is you people are using out there. Granted, he had to disable all the fancy fade ins and use the classic style instead of the visual styles, but hey, it works. And it works stable, too. He keeps it running 24-7 and sometimes won't reboot for a week or two at a time. ITS THE SAME **** OPERATING SYSTEM!!!!

[jad1097]

ITS THE SAME **** OPERATING SYSTEM!!!!

If it is the same then why buy it if I am happy with W2K? I don't NEED the added stuff nor do I want it. There are a number of reasons I will not use it, one being the activation BS. It felt slower than W2K does to me. It requires a lot more tweaking than W2K does. It was less stable for me. etc... W2K w/sp2 is awesome and there is no REAL NEED to buy a bloated OS.


Oh, if you do not think it is a bloated OS then take a look at the min sys requirements of both w2k and XP. XP requires twice the amount of ram and more than twice the amount of hard drive space. Kind of odd that the same OS would require 1.5GB's of space when W2K on requires 650MB.






http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/is...l/XPKernel.asp

[Johnny Fist]

Then if thats what makes you happy, stick with it. As far as the activation goes, it's a joke. A great big joke on Microsoft.

[Win2kMan]

Originally posted by jad1097



If it is the same then why buy it if I am happy with W2K? I don't NEED the added stuff nor do I want it. There are a number of reasons I will not use it, one being the activation BS. It felt slower than W2K does to me. It requires a lot more tweaking than W2K does. It was less stable for me. etc... W2K w/sp2 is awesome and there is no REAL NEED to buy a bloated OS.


Oh, if you do not think it is a bloated OS then take a look at the min sys requirements of both w2k and XP. XP requires twice the amount of ram and more than twice the amount of hard drive space. Kind of odd that the same OS would require 1.5GB's of space when W2K on requires 650MB.






http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/is...l/XPKernel.asp

couldn't of said it better myself...