My friend's XP computer was very hard to use: clicking on My Computer in
Windows Explorer caused a sort of freeze, as did using the Send To menu,
DIMAGE (software that came with a camera) popped up a "Server Busy"
window (finally opening after about 15 minutes), and save and load
windows, if you used the up button or the drop-down list to change the
save/load location from the default, also locked up. Bringing up the
TWAIN selection list also gave a freeze or _long_ pause, though if you
didn't change the selection but just used something (well, we tried the
scanner), it worked fine.

Googling brought the fact that lots of people had similar problems, and
a few reported that turning off the "service" WIA made an amazing
difference.

WIA seems to be part of Windows, and something to do with getting images
from cameras and scanners. In my friend's it case wasn't running, but
showed as "Starting" - this being some time after the computer had been
running.

We set it to Disabled (though not being sure what the difference between
Disabled and Manual would be; the other option, which it was, being
Automatic), and restarted the computer.

Amazing; everything is back as it should be - all the things that had
either frozen or paused for some minutes now work fast enough. The
scanner still works (Canon), the film scanner ditto (and we can select
which of them via the TWAIN selection list, which comes up at once). We
haven't tried anything that relies on Windows alone, such as a webcam (I
suspect that _wouldn't_ work).

What I'm curious about is: why does this "service", which seems to be a
standard part of Microsoft Windows, cause such apparently unrelated
problems when started (or rather allowed to try to start)? [And, for
that matter, what triggered the slowdown: probably something enabled the
service, such as a Windows update, but it could have been something else
which interacted badly with WIA?]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If vegetarians eat vegetables,..beware of humanitarians!

On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> My friend's XP computer was very hard to use: clicking on My Computer
> in Windows Explorer caused a sort of freeze, as did using the Send To
> menu, DIMAGE (software that came with a camera) popped up a "Server
> Busy" window (finally opening after about 15 minutes), and save and
> load windows, if you used the up button or the drop-down list to
> change the save/load location from the default, also locked up.
> Bringing up the TWAIN selection list also gave a freeze or _long_
> pause, though if you didn't change the selection but just used
> something (well, we tried the scanner), it worked fine.
>
> Googling brought the fact that lots of people had similar problems,
> and a few reported that turning off the "service" WIA made an amazing
> difference.
>
> WIA seems to be part of Windows, and something to do with getting
> images from cameras and scanners. In my friend's it case wasn't
> running, but showed as "Starting" - this being some time after the
> computer had been running.
>
> We set it to Disabled (though not being sure what the difference
> between Disabled and Manual would be; the other option, which it was,
> being Automatic), and restarted the computer.
>
> Amazing; everything is back as it should be - all the things that had
> either frozen or paused for some minutes now work fast enough. The
> scanner still works (Canon), the film scanner ditto (and we can select
> which of them via the TWAIN selection list, which comes up at once).
> We haven't tried anything that relies on Windows alone, such as a
> webcam (I suspect that _wouldn't_ work).
>
> What I'm curious about is: why does this "service", which seems to be
> a standard part of Microsoft Windows, cause such apparently unrelated
> problems when started (or rather allowed to try to start)? [And, for
> that matter, what triggered the slowdown: probably something enabled
> the service, such as a Windows update, but it could have been
> something else which interacted badly with WIA?]
Other Devices are shown in your My Computer window. Occasionally,
Windows loses track of a device, and therefore can't finish populating
the My Computer window. So it hangs. One symptom of this is that, if you
click on a random file and point to Send to, the Send to menu doesn't
fly out. If it's a permanently connected device (such as a scanner) the
fix is to unplug it and plug it in again. Setting the WIA service to
manual will cure the My Computer problem, as it will only start when
needed, as opposed to when Windows starts.

Tony Luxton replied way too late:

> On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
<something now really old>
>
<tony replies way too late>

You thought after *OVER 8 MONTHS* that Gilliver was still waiting for
replies?

In news:j2mnpd$2e2$(E-Mail Removed),
VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
> Tony Luxton replied way too late:
>
>> On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> <something now really old>
>>
> <tony replies way too late>
>
> You thought after *OVER 8 MONTHS* that Gilliver was still
> waiting for replies?

Good responses to old posts are often useful to other people who come along
later lookng for answers. It helps a lot with searchinig for thinigs and
avoids looking at a thread with no answer in it. YOu're such a cry-baby on
these groups, I swear.

If you're not part of the solution, ... .

In message <j2mrm3$a77$(E-Mail Removed)>, Twayne
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>In news:j2mnpd$2e2$(E-Mail Removed),
>VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
>> Tony Luxton replied way too late:
>>
>>> On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> <something now really old>
>>>
>> <tony replies way too late>
>>
>> You thought after *OVER 8 MONTHS* that Gilliver was still
>> waiting for replies?

I'd forgotten the posting, but am still interested! (The reply still
doesn't explain _why_ WIA causes such problems - I don't _think_ it
would have just been Windows "losing track" of some connected device, as
although we didn't go round disconnecting and reconnecting devices, the
problem did remain through several complete powerdowns, after which I
would have thought contact would have been re-established, nor what had
turned WIA on, if it had been off.) But ...
>
>Good responses to old posts are often useful to other people who come along
>later lookng for answers. It helps a lot with searchinig for thinigs and
>avoids looking at a thread with no answer in it. YOu're such a cry-baby on
>these groups, I swear.
>
> If you're not part of the solution, ... .
>
>
.... I agree with Twayne's sentiments: new replies to old queries can
help new readers. (And also provide closure if they actually answer the
original question in a way nobody had when the thread was originally
active!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... "Peter and out." ... "Kevin and out." (Link episode)

In news:lcwZaPXyF4TOFw+(E-Mail Removed),
J. P. Gilliver (John) <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
> In message <j2mrm3$a77$(E-Mail Removed)>, Twayne
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>> In news:j2mnpd$2e2$(E-Mail Removed),
>> VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
>>> Tony Luxton replied way too late:
>>>
>>>> On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> <something now really old>
>>>>
>>> <tony replies way too late>
>>>
>>> You thought after *OVER 8 MONTHS* that Gilliver was
>>> still waiting for replies?
>
> I'd forgotten the posting, but am still interested! (The
> reply still doesn't explain _why_ WIA causes such
> problems - I don't _think_ it would have just been
> Windows "losing track" of some connected device, as
> although we didn't go round disconnecting and
> reconnecting devices, the problem did remain through
> several complete powerdowns, after which I would have
> thought contact would have been re-established, nor what
> had turned WIA on, if it had been off.) But ...
>>
>> Good responses to old posts are often useful to other
>> people who come along later lookng for answers. It helps
>> a lot with searchinig for thinigs and avoids looking at
>> a thread with no answer in it. YOu're such a cry-baby on
>> these groups, I swear. If you're not part of the solution, ... .
>>
>>
> ... I agree with Twayne's sentiments: new replies to old
> queries can help new readers. (And also provide closure
> if they actually answer the original question in a way
> nobody had when the thread was originally active!)

These mght help a little plus allow better searching if you want more. WIA
seems simple but can be complicated:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...(v=vs.85).aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Image_Acquisition

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/264598

In message <j2r5ku$n55$(E-Mail Removed)>, Twayne
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>In news:lcwZaPXyF4TOFw+(E-Mail Removed),
>J. P. Gilliver (John) <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
>> In message <j2mrm3$a77$(E-Mail Removed)>, Twayne
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>> In news:j2mnpd$2e2$(E-Mail Removed),
>>> VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
>>>> Tony Luxton replied way too late:
[]
>>>
>> ... I agree with Twayne's sentiments: new replies to old
>> queries can help new readers. (And also provide closure
>> if they actually answer the original question in a way
>> nobody had when the thread was originally active!)
>
>These mght help a little plus allow better searching if you want more. WIA
>seems simple but can be complicated:
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...(v=vs.85).aspx
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Image_Acquisition
>
>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/264598
>
>
>
Thanks; probably quite informative, but way over my head. So I still
don't know why it slows things to unusability, nor how it got turned on,
but those are due to my hignorance.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

They say no one rehearses any more, and I suppose if your output is all scenery
and sick cats you don't need to. - Victoria Wood, Radio Times, 1998

On 19/08/2011 11:24 pm, VanguardLH wrote:
> Tony Luxton replied way too late:
>
>> On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> <something now really old>
> <tony replies way too late>
>
> You thought after *OVER 8 MONTHS* that Gilliver was still waiting for
> replies?
Who cares whether he was or not? It could be useful to someone - what
else are newsgroups for? And even if my post *was* useless, what was
yours then?

In news:(E-Mail Removed),
Tony Luxton <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
> On 19/08/2011 11:24 pm, VanguardLH wrote:
>> Tony Luxton replied way too late:
>>
>>> On 28/11/2010 7:52 am, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> <something now really old>
>> <tony replies way too late>
>>
>> You thought after *OVER 8 MONTHS* that Gilliver was
>> still waiting for replies?

Probably not, but others searching for a similar solution to that problem
mght be quite pleased to see the correct response. Nothing wrong with
answering old posts; it adds closure to the queston regardless of who looks
it up.

> Who cares whether he was or not? It could be useful to
> someone - what else are newsgroups for? And even if my
> post *was* useless, what was yours then?

I agree with you and I think I can tell you what his post was: Some people
are just so useless feeling that they'll grab onto anyone in an attempt to
usurp power from them and make themselves feel bigger and more important.
The world is full of such ego-suckers and they love newsgroups so they can
hide like the cowards they actually are. My opinion anyway, so I agree with
you.

HTH,

Twayne`