Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.

I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.

"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.
>
>I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.[/color]


It is a NON issue. Your startup times are fine... to speed things up
will require that you stop unnecessary programs from running at
startup.

Look in MSCONFIG (start/run/msconfig).

I even disabled Superfetch... no noticeable slowdown in programs
loading, and it ended all the extra processing after my startup
programs loaded.

Just so that you are aware, the memory is handled quite differently in
Windows 7 (I'm using 64 bit).

In vista I have about 3 - 5 minutes of disk thrashing after getting to the
desktop. This pretty much disallows any useful work until all the RAM has
been allocated (I have 8 gig). When the free RAM is at zero, or close to it,
I can proceed.

In Windows 7 I can use the computer within 15-20 seconds after reaching the
desktop. Checking Task Manager I see that I still have 5.5 gig of free RAM
and the prefetch has ceased its work (thank you very much M/S).

The overall feel of Windows 7 is (to me) about 40% to 50% more responsive.

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"Manny Weisbord" <mannyweisbord@crimest.invalid> wrote in message
news:urns559fgoct4a66ckhofar28eb1k0s2g1@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> "MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all.
>>Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the
>>startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown
>>takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the
>>start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS
>>installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started
>>(shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it
>>took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and
>>a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.
>>
>>I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.[/color]
>
>
> It is a NON issue. Your startup times are fine... to speed things up
> will require that you stop unnecessary programs from running at
> startup.
>
> Look in MSCONFIG (start/run/msconfig).
>
> I even disabled Superfetch... no noticeable slowdown in programs
> loading, and it ended all the extra processing after my startup
> programs loaded.[/color]

"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Just so that you are aware, the memory is handled quite differently in
>Windows 7 (I'm using 64 bit).
>
>In vista I have about 3 - 5 minutes of disk thrashing after getting to the
>desktop.[/color]

Turning off Superfetch stops all that and doesn't slow down your
computer - at least it didn't slow mine down.

Thanks for the replies, The only thing I did not disable was Superfetch though if I do it, it will probably not do very much the accelerate the startup. However, I have ordered W 7 from MS for the reduced price and eventually will install the 64-bit version even though that requires a clean install and reinstalling all applications but it seems to be the best way since everything is newly installed. Does this statement make sense?
"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.

I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.

You have done something very strange that breaks word-wrap on my
newsreader...

Meantime: please be aware that when you install updates, Windows does a
part - often a large part - of the installation process during shutdown and
during startup. So shutdown and startup times are often long during a
post-installation restart.

By the way, many other programs do the same thing, with the same effect on
the restart time.


On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:59:07 -0700, MKR wrote:
[color=blue]
> Thanks for the replies, The only thing I did not disable was Superfetch though if I do it, it will probably not do very much the accelerate the startup. However, I have ordered W 7 from MS for the reduced price and eventually will install the 64-bit version even though that requires a clean install and reinstalling all applications but it seems to be the best way since everything is newly installed. Does this statement make sense?
> "MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.
>
> I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.[/color]


--
Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom

I'm very surprised you got it to run at all with 4MB of RAM.
"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all.
Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the
startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes
only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As
an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which
required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished
in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3
minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU.
I think that should be enough to make it faster.

I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.

Please, tell me what I should do so it does not happen again. I am using
html messaging.

You are right that slowness affects all updates not only Microsoft's.


"Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote in message
news:wypfnn0d1fcj.15xvzcz3qa1v9$.dlg@40tude.net...[color=blue]
> You have done something very strange that breaks word-wrap on my
> newsreader...
>
> Meantime: please be aware that when you install updates, Windows does a
> part - often a large part - of the installation process during shutdown
> and
> during startup. So shutdown and startup times are often long during a
> post-installation restart.
>
> By the way, many other programs do the same thing, with the same effect on
> the restart time.
>
>
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:59:07 -0700, MKR wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Thanks for the replies, The only thing I did not disable was Superfetch
>> though if I do it, it will probably not do very much the accelerate the
>> startup. However, I have ordered W 7 from MS for the reduced price and
>> eventually will install the 64-bit version even though that requires a
>> clean install and reinstalling all applications but it seems to be the
>> best way since everything is newly installed. Does this statement make
>> sense?
>> "MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>> news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at
>> all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc.
>> etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the
>> shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong
>> with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc.
>> from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart
>> started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the
>> desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has
>> 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make
>> it faster.
>>
>> I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.[/color]
>
>
> --
> Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom
>[/color]

I am surprised that you say this. Should it not work?
"Eric" <someone@idontwantspam.com> wrote in message news:uCV1HDuBKHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I'm very surprised you got it to run at all with 4MB of RAM.
"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.

I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.

4 MB of RAM was common in 1994.

Today many have 4 GB of RAM, or more!

<grin>

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:eDyW4mxBKHA.1252@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I am surprised that you say this. Should it not work?
"Eric" <someone@idontwantspam.com> wrote in message news:uCV1HDuBKHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I'm very surprised you got it to run at all with 4MB of RAM.
"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc. etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc. from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make it faster.

I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.

No html when posting to a newsgroup.

--


Don't pick a fight with an old man.
If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.


"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:u9yPRixBKHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> Please, tell me what I should do so it does not happen again. I am using
> html messaging.
>
> You are right that slowness affects all updates not only Microsoft's.
>
>
> "Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote in message
> news:wypfnn0d1fcj.15xvzcz3qa1v9$.dlg@40tude.net...[color=green]
>> You have done something very strange that breaks word-wrap on my
>> newsreader...
>>
>> Meantime: please be aware that when you install updates, Windows does a
>> part - often a large part - of the installation process during shutdown
>> and
>> during startup. So shutdown and startup times are often long during a
>> post-installation restart.
>>
>> By the way, many other programs do the same thing, with the same effect
>> on
>> the restart time.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:59:07 -0700, MKR wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Thanks for the replies, The only thing I did not disable was Superfetch
>>> though if I do it, it will probably not do very much the accelerate the
>>> startup. However, I have ordered W 7 from MS for the reduced price and
>>> eventually will install the 64-bit version even though that requires a
>>> clean install and reinstalling all applications but it seems to be the
>>> best way since everything is newly installed. Does this statement make
>>> sense?
>>> "MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:uVtSPeZBKHA.5092@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Whatever, I did to accelerate the start up of Vista did not help at
>>> all. Whether killing services, ditching the sidebar, cleaning up etc.
>>> etc. the startup still takes up to two minutes. As opposed to it, the
>>> shutdown takes only 10 secs. I really do not understand what is wrong
>>> with the start up. As an example, today the usual security updates etc.
>>> from MS installed which required a restart. From the moment the restart
>>> started (shutdown finished in 10 secs) to full availability of the
>>> desktop, it took more than 3 minutes. This is ridiculous. My laptop has
>>> 4MB of RAM and a 2.0 GHz AMD CPU. I think that should be enough to make
>>> it faster.
>>>
>>> I hope Windows 7 resolves that issue.[/color]
>>
>>
>> --
>> Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom
>>[/color]
>[/color]

"MKR" <m-kr@prodigy.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Please, tell me what I should do so it does not happen again. I am using
>html messaging.[/color]

Use PLAIN TEXT messaging!

DUH.

On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:43:21 -0400, Mike wrote:
[color=blue]
> No html when posting to a newsgroup.[/color]

You took the words right out of my mouth :-)

All the material I might have quoted from your post disappeared because you
put your signature (and the delimiter) ahead of it. I could have copied and
pasted, but the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but ourselves.

--
Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom

"Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote in message
news:1jvnh7mxxk9v8$.1qivkgirxlerv.dlg@40tude.net...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:43:21 -0400, Mike wrote:
>[color=green]
>> No html when posting to a newsgroup.[/color]
>
> You took the words right out of my mouth :-)
>
> All the material I might have quoted from your post disappeared because
> you
> put your signature (and the delimiter) ahead of it. I could have copied
> and
> pasted, but the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but ourselves.[/color]

I've been saying this same exact thing to some of the drones that post their
problems here. Most of their problems are not caused by their OS, but by
them.
--

Don't pick a fight with an old man.
If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.

"Gene E. Bloch" <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:43:21 -0400, Mike wrote:
>[color=green]
>> No html when posting to a newsgroup.[/color]
>
>You took the words right out of my mouth :-)
>
>All the material I might have quoted from your post disappeared because you
>put your signature (and the delimiter) ahead of it. I could have copied and
>pasted, but the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but ourselves.
>
>--
>Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom[/color]

Notice that MY newsreader had no problem with your delimiter. All I
had to do was select what I wanted to reply to, and hit R on my
keyboard.

No copying or pasting required.