need friendly answer to my question please

[Daave]

The date and time was Thursday, May 07, 2009 9:45:34 AM, and on a
whim, WhiteTea pounded out on the keyboard:


Hard to believe "just fine" w/256 meg of RAM. I've upgraded a lot of
2.8GHz machines with 256 meg that were crawlers until I put another
512 meg in them. Now they boot a lot faster and can run a couple
programs without having a cup of coffee after every mouse click.

Of course everyone has their own way of working. If it's just fine
for you, I commend you on your patience.

My work PC has only 256MB of RAM and it boots quickly and performs
well -- with very little paging. Then again, it runs quite lean. And
I only use it for Web, Word, and Excel.

 

[Bob I]

My work PC has only 256MB of RAM and it boots quickly and performs
well -- with very little paging. Then again, it runs quite lean. And
I only use it for Web, Word, and Excel.

Obviously not the 2007 version of Office ;-)

 

[Daave]

Obviously not the 2007 version of Office ;-)

How did you guess? ;-)

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Not hardly.

I run XP on a P-3, 733 Mhz with 256M RAM just fine.
Even play DVDs as well.

Glad to hear it. However, I wasn't addressing you. I was addressing
Strigae, who, if he is like most people who has an "old computer with
windows 98 on" has hardware that is almost certainly way too
underpowered to run Windows XP well.

As a single example of what I'm talking about, very few Windows 98-era
computers have as much RAM as the 256MB you have.

 

[WhiteTea]

The date and time was Thursday, May 07, 2009 9:45:34 AM, and on a whim,
WhiteTea pounded out on the keyboard:





Hard to believe "just fine" w/256 meg of RAM.  I've upgraded a lot of
2.8GHz machines with 256 meg that were crawlers until I put another 512
meg in them.  Now they boot a lot faster and can run a couple programs
without having a cup of coffee after every mouse click.

Of course everyone has their own way of working.  If it's just fine for
you, I commend you on your patience.

Terry R.

Most folks don't take the time to see what slows up computers.

Things that speed it up include:

1. Having very little if any programs starting up on boot up
2. Only loading 50 fonts on boot up
3. Defragging and minimizing "space hogs"
4. Deleting those .txt, other language files, and other unnecessary
files that the OS and other programs install
5. Using registry cleaners as well as manually deleting leftover
entries from removed programs

I use 4 GB out of my 18.6 GB hard drive.

Take care,
Andy

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Most folks don't take the time to see what slows up computers.

Things that speed it up include:


Snipped....


5. Using registry cleaners as well as manually deleting leftover
entries from removed programs

That, of course, is utter nonsense. Unused registry entries have no
affect whatsoever on a computer's performance.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:


http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

 

[Nate Grossman]

Most folks don't take the time to see what slows up computers.

Things that speed it up include:

1. Having very little if any programs starting up on boot up
OK.

2. Only loading 50 fonts on boot up

Used to be important "back in the day", but it isn't any more. I have
over 500 - have had that many loaded since XP.

3. Defragging and minimizing "space hogs"

Defragging is over-rated. Don't know what you mean by "minimizing
'space hogs'"

4. Deleting those .txt, other language files, and other unnecessary
files that the OS and other programs install

HUH? Will save a minimal amount of space, but won't add any speed.

5. Using registry cleaners as well as manually deleting leftover
entries from removed programs

Poppycock. Not only will such "cleaners" NOT speed up a computer, but
they might even render it useless.

Manually deleting entries is an exercise in futility.

 

[Bill in Co.]

That, of course, is utter nonsense. Unused registry entries have no
affect whatsoever on a computer's performance.

Oh no!! Say it isn't so!
(Evidently you haven't been listening to Twain, and all his (alleged)
"documented performance tests"! (snort). LOL.

 

[HeyBub]

Most folks don't take the time to see what slows up computers.

Things that speed it up include:

1. Having very little if any programs starting up on boot up

Mmm, okay.

2. Only loading 50 fonts on boot up

Semi-true under Win98, but XP doesn't load fonts at start up. And where
would you tell XP how many and which fonts to load anyway?

3. Defragging and minimizing "space hogs"

NTFS is almost indifferent to fragmentation as far as efficiency is
concerned.

4. Deleting those .txt, other language files, and other unnecessary
files that the OS and other programs install

Clutter has no effect on efficiency.

5. Using registry cleaners as well as manually deleting leftover
entries from removed programs

Superfluous registry entries have no effect on efficiency. Whether the
registry is 50k or 500M is irrelevant.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Most folks don't take the time to see what slows up computers.

Things that speed it up include:

1. Having very little if any programs starting up on boot up

The issue here is not at all how *many* automatically start when you
boot, but *what* the programs are. Some programs have a large effect
on performance, others do very little and any effect they have on
performance is so little as to be unnoticeable.

2. Only loading 50 fonts on boot up

Although this was an issue in older versions of Windows, it's no
longer an issue in Windows XP.

3. Defragging

Generally overrated, but it could make some difference,

... and minimizing "space hogs"

"Space hogs"? Exactly what do you mean by "space hogs"? If you are
talking about disk space usage, it's irrelevant to performance.

4. Deleting those .txt, other language files, and other unnecessary
files that the OS and other programs install

Again, that's irrelevant. How much disk space you use doesn't affect
performance.

5. Using registry cleaners as well as manually deleting leftover
entries from removed programs

Ugh! That's very poor advice. Registry cleaning programs are *all*
snake oil. Cleaning of the registry isn't needed and is dangerous.
Leave the registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
what many people think, and what vendors of registry cleaning software
try to convince you of, having unused registry entries doesn't really
hurt you.

The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
it may have.

Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html

I use 4 GB out of my 18.6 GB hard drive.

Fine. And that may be good, since it leaves you with space you can use
in the future. But using a small amount of disk space doesn't improve
your performance.