Reducing the number of processes to speed up Windows

[M]

I have a PC which is very slow. I have scanned for viruses and spyware and
it is clean. I think that the next step must be to reduce the number of
programs and processes that start when the PC boots. I have downloaded a
list of programs that start up on booting from
http://www.3feetunder.com/krick/startup/list.html and I am disabling as many
as I can. I hasn't increased the speed of the PC by very much. I would now
like to start disabling unnecessary Services. Can anyone recommend a web
page that explains what every service does and which ones can be disabled?

 

[jopa66]

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/service411.htm

 

[Patti MacLeod]

Hi M,

Try here:
http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

There is a table of services about 1/2 way down the page........click on the
name of the service under Display Name column and it will display further
information about that particular service.

If you do decide to Disable any services, please take note of these services
and their original configuration in case you need to restore them (eg., for
Power User and Bare Bones, it is recommended to disable Automatic Updates
and Background Intelligent Transfer Service which will result in an error if
you use the Windows Update site).



Regards,

 

[Rocket J Squirrel]

I have a PC which is very slow. I have scanned for viruses and spyware and
it is clean. I think that the next step must be to reduce the number of
programs and processes that start when the PC boots. I have downloaded a
list of programs that start up on booting from
http://www.3feetunder.com/krick/startup/list.html and I am disabling as many
as I can. I hasn't increased the speed of the PC by very much. I would now
like to start disabling unnecessary Services. Can anyone recommend a web
page that explains what every service does and which ones can be disabled?

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

 

[Plato]

I have a PC which is very slow. I have scanned for viruses and spyware and
it is clean. I think that the next step must be to reduce the number of

You may have too little ram for XP. You want at least 512.

 

[Alex Nichol]

You may have too little ram for XP. You want at least 512.

No you don't . A lot of people have it working quite well on 256 - it
depends on how heavy a program load you put on. I had 384; put it up to
768 (for reasons unrelated to XP) and really do not notice the
difference, in *my* load

 

[Ken Blake]

In

You may have too little ram for XP. You want at least 512.

I disagree. This not a one-size-fits-all situation, and for
many, perhaps even most, people, as much as 512MB is completely
unnecessary.
How much memory you need depends on what apps you run, but almost
everyone needs at least 256MB for decent performance. For some
people, for example those who edit large photographic images,
more than 256MB--even much more--can be required for good
performance.

If you are currently using the page file significantly, more
memory will decrease or eliminate that usage, and improve your
performance. If you are not using the page file significantly,
more memory will do nothing for you.