PC Review


Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread

What bunch of dipstics wrote this crap?

 
 
ato_zee@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      14th Jan 2008
PC effectively dies with Trusted Installer taking
100% of CPU.
It doesn't appear to do anything useful, only
act like a virus.
What's it doing?
How do I get rid of it?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Cameron Snyder
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      14th Jan 2008
Trusted installer installs, of course, like updates and stuff. It is
scheduled to act periodically in the background. Since you are so hysterical
at 100% CPU usage and apt to get rid of stuff you don't even know what it
does, you have probably already rendered your system unusable with a cascade
of unintended consequences due to your own ignorant acts, so who knows why
your trusted installer can no longer be trusted.

Start with the event viewer and read what is occurring at the times your
mal-trusted installer is doing its thing.


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:478bcd5f$0$21104$(E-Mail Removed)...
> PC effectively dies with Trusted Installer taking
> 100% of CPU.
> It doesn't appear to do anything useful, only
> act like a virus.
> What's it doing?
> How do I get rid of it?


 
Reply With Quote
 
ato_zee@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      14th Jan 2008

> It is
> scheduled to act periodically in the background.


But written by dipsticks, it takes 100% CPU, so the
PC goes into rigor mortis mode, which is definately
not acting periodically in the background.
More like it is acting in the foreground. Surely
any competent programmer, and MS don't seem
to have any, would program in around 30% CPU
max.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      15th Jan 2008
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>It is
>>scheduled to act periodically in the background.

>
>
> But written by dipsticks, it takes 100% CPU, so the
> PC goes into rigor mortis mode, which is definately
> not acting periodically in the background.
> More like it is acting in the foreground. Surely
> any competent programmer, and MS don't seem
> to have any, would program in around 30% CPU
> max.



hahaha...now we're getting somewhere...so you think you're a
"programmer" right...LOL!
Frank
 
Reply With Quote
 
Cameron Snyder
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      15th Jan 2008
Then it isn't 100% CPU that has you upset, but your machine is freezing up.
I often get 100% usage and my PC is still perfectly responsive because of
task priority. This has nothing to do with CPU percentage. Anyway, your
machine is messed up, and given the tone and acumen of your post and
unreasonable need to place blame elsewhere rather than find a solution, is
probably due to your own actions.


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:478bf422$0$21099$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> It is
>> scheduled to act periodically in the background.

>
> But written by dipsticks, it takes 100% CPU, so the
> PC goes into rigor mortis mode, which is definately
> not acting periodically in the background.
> More like it is acting in the foreground. Surely
> any competent programmer, and MS don't seem
> to have any, would program in around 30% CPU
> max.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Robyn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      15th Jan 2008
Have you ever tried right clicking on my computer, and opening it, then click
on you hard drive then properties, and do a disk clean up, might help, in
getting what not needed old cookies and temp files that's not needed anymore.

--
Robyn


"Cameron Snyder" wrote:

> Then it isn't 100% CPU that has you upset, but your machine is freezing up.
> I often get 100% usage and my PC is still perfectly responsive because of
> task priority. This has nothing to do with CPU percentage. Anyway, your
> machine is messed up, and given the tone and acumen of your post and
> unreasonable need to place blame elsewhere rather than find a solution, is
> probably due to your own actions.
>
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:478bf422$0$21099$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> >> It is
> >> scheduled to act periodically in the background.

> >
> > But written by dipsticks, it takes 100% CPU, so the
> > PC goes into rigor mortis mode, which is definately
> > not acting periodically in the background.
> > More like it is acting in the foreground. Surely
> > any competent programmer, and MS don't seem
> > to have any, would program in around 30% CPU
> > max.

>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
ato_zee@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      15th Jan 2008

> Then it isn't 100% CPU that has you upset, but your machine is freezing
> up.
> I often get 100% usage and my PC is still perfectly responsive because of
> task priority. This has nothing to do with CPU percentage.


Only problem is I'm trying to get some work done, with 100% CPU and
a PC with rigor mortis, Excel macros also have rigor mortis, since
Excel macros also demand 100% CPU.
MS just don't seem to have any competent programmers, they
can't even make Excel a 64 bit program.
MS seem totally incompetent in most areas.
Their WGA server going down and crippling legitimate
machines is just another example.
Surely for a critical server you have a backup server.
 
Reply With Quote
 
DarkSentinel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      15th Jan 2008
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:478c7d90$0$8418$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> Then it isn't 100% CPU that has you upset, but your machine is freezing
>> up.
>> I often get 100% usage and my PC is still perfectly responsive because of
>> task priority. This has nothing to do with CPU percentage.

>
> Only problem is I'm trying to get some work done, with 100% CPU and
> a PC with rigor mortis, Excel macros also have rigor mortis, since
> Excel macros also demand 100% CPU.
> MS just don't seem to have any competent programmers, they
> can't even make Excel a 64 bit program.
> MS seem totally incompetent in most areas.
> Their WGA server going down and crippling legitimate
> machines is just another example.
> Surely for a critical server you have a backup server.


Funny, I never have those problems. And AGAIN, check your facts about the
server crash. Don't you think that IF the server had been doing that it
would have garnered more press, especially from the smacktards? Funny that
the ONLY mention of a problem says August of 2007. Perhaps you should wait
until you know what you are talking about before posting.

--
Sanity calms, but madness is more interesting.
http://www.lockergnome.com/darksentinel
Undo the munge to reply by email


 
Reply With Quote
 
MICHAEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      15th Jan 2008
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:478bcd5f$0$21104$(E-Mail Removed)...
> PC effectively dies with Trusted Installer taking
> 100% of CPU.
> It doesn't appear to do anything useful, only
> act like a virus.
> What's it doing?
> How do I get rid of it?


If you haven't immediately installed any programs, you can kill it.
Supposedly, Trusted Installer has to do with Add/Remove
and optional components. It's Service name is "Windows Modules Installer".
However, when you check the dependencies for that Service,
none are listed.

Go into Admin Tools>Services and find "Windows Modules Installer".
Be sure it is set to "Manual". Stop it if it is causing problems.

You could also right-click on the process name -> set priority -> below normal

http://www.speedyvista.com/services/..._Installer.php


-Michael


 
Reply With Quote
 
Andy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      16th Jan 2008
LOL you could get a REAL OS WINDOWS XP PRO.
not that over priced pice of crap window dressing called VISTA.


--
AL'S COMPUTERS
"MICHAEL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:#(E-Mail Removed)...
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

news:478bcd5f$0$21104$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > PC effectively dies with Trusted Installer taking
> > 100% of CPU.
> > It doesn't appear to do anything useful, only
> > act like a virus.
> > What's it doing?
> > How do I get rid of it?

>
> If you haven't immediately installed any programs, you can kill it.
> Supposedly, Trusted Installer has to do with Add/Remove
> and optional components. It's Service name is "Windows Modules

Installer".
> However, when you check the dependencies for that Service,
> none are listed.
>
> Go into Admin Tools>Services and find "Windows Modules Installer".
> Be sure it is set to "Manual". Stop it if it is causing problems.
>
> You could also right-click on the process name -> set priority -> below

normal
>
> http://www.speedyvista.com/services/..._Installer.php
>
>
> -Michael
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: amy wrote Gary VanderMolen \(MVP\) Windows Vista Mail 0 10th Jun 2010 03:53 PM
What bunch of dipstics wrote this crap? ato_zee@hotmail.com Windows Vista General Discussion 23 20th Jan 2008 08:42 AM
Where is XP SP3 ? What a bunch of crap ! SAM-R Windows XP General 15 8th Jan 2007 06:44 AM
re-wrote MBR, any way to fix it tilopa Windows XP Help 4 2nd Aug 2006 11:01 PM
If OE can't connect to msnews then why offer MSNEWS - Use linux or solaris or UNIX (you wrote the Intel version) or OS/2 (you wrote that too). David Candy Windows XP General 25 6th Oct 2003 07:58 PM


Features
 

Advertising
 

Newsgroups
 


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:28 PM.