Network speed differences: XP and 2000

[JM]

(I'm in the telecom business, and I do *some* data network work)

A client of mine - a realty company - has a small network: 7 computers and
a file server running Windows Server 2003 Small Business Edition. The
entire C drive of the server is shared, with perhaps 30-40 individual
folders containing data files, such as pictures (thousands of digital pics),
spreadsheets, forms, PDF user guides, etc.

Of the 7 computers, 5 are XP Professional and 2 are Windows 2000.
Regardless of whether the network was set up as a domain or workgroup, one
thing is very obvious: The two Windows 2000 machines access the shared
files on the server much, much faster.

Without getting into a lot of detail at this point (which I will be happy to
do if needed), is this a common situation? Is there something about XP *in
general* that makes it slower on a simple network like this?

Again, I know I haven't provided much info, but at this point I'm just
asking is there an inherent difference in performance between the two OSs in
an environment like I described (however poorly ; )

jm

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

Ensure that you have good DNS name resolution in your environment.
All Windows XP clients should point to an internal DNS server that is
authoritative for the domain.

If that is OK, then you might want to enable UserEnv logging
and take a network trace to see where the delay is:

How to Enable User Environment Debug Logging in Retail Builds of Windows
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=221833

Description of the Windows XP Professional Fast Logon Optimization Feature
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;305293&Product=winxp

Logon Optimization
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...ry/en-us/policy/policy/logon_optimization.asp


--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­----------------

:

| (I'm in the telecom business, and I do *some* data network work)
|
| A client of mine - a realty company - has a small network: 7 computers and
| a file server running Windows Server 2003 Small Business Edition. The
| entire C drive of the server is shared, with perhaps 30-40 individual
| folders containing data files, such as pictures (thousands of digital pics),
| spreadsheets, forms, PDF user guides, etc.
|
| Of the 7 computers, 5 are XP Professional and 2 are Windows 2000.
| Regardless of whether the network was set up as a domain or workgroup, one
| thing is very obvious: The two Windows 2000 machines access the shared
| files on the server much, much faster.
|
| Without getting into a lot of detail at this point (which I will be happy to
| do if needed), is this a common situation? Is there something about XP *in
| general* that makes it slower on a simple network like this?
|
| Again, I know I haven't provided much info, but at this point I'm just
| asking is there an inherent difference in performance between the two OSs in
| an environment like I described (however poorly ; )
|
| jm

 

[Yves Leclerc]

(I'm in the telecom business, and I do *some* data network work)

A client of mine - a realty company - has a small network: 7 computers and
a file server running Windows Server 2003 Small Business Edition. The
entire C drive of the server is shared, with perhaps 30-40 individual
folders containing data files, such as pictures (thousands of digital pics),
spreadsheets, forms, PDF user guides, etc.

Of the 7 computers, 5 are XP Professional and 2 are Windows 2000.
Regardless of whether the network was set up as a domain or workgroup, one
thing is very obvious: The two Windows 2000 machines access the shared
files on the server much, much faster.

Without getting into a lot of detail at this point (which I will be happy to
do if needed), is this a common situation? Is there something about XP *in
general* that makes it slower on a simple network like this?

Again, I know I haven't provided much info, but at this point I'm just
asking is there an inherent difference in performance between the two OSs in
an environment like I described (however poorly ; )

jm

I've also noticed this and in my tests, it seems that the QoS service "option"
that gets installed on the Local Area Network properties to be the cause. Not
sure what the QoS is used for but since it does not seem to be in Windows
2000, I've un-checked on the XPes.