digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Speedup Windows XP in Minutes!

mobile-pedia.com — A useful guide to speedup Windows XP without upgrading your hardware.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mattmcm, on 10/12/2007, -14/+28Good article. I do most of these things on a fresh install before installing any programs.
    • Jo9100, on 10/12/2007, -10/+66they should have sped up the server too...
    • coollettuce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+34Disabling auto search for network and printer files really sped up my folder browsing.
    • Snoz, on 10/12/2007, -28/+13*cough* http://duggmirror.com *cough*
    • j01101010, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1woops digg down..
    • ggarenn, on 10/12/2007, -11/+113the article is annoying to read because of these sentences: (there are a lot of suckass sentences, but here are three)

      "The service "claims" to makes indexes of different files on computer..."
      "In face, according to my opinion Microsoft operating systems have a tendency to slow computer sown when you have a lop of programs installed."

      my favorite:

      "This option will display you list of third party services. Uncheck the services that are not undesirable."

      uncheck the services that are not undesirable? so that makes them desirable right? so that means you need to uncheck everything that looks desirable? so all the startup programs you want to keep, you don't get to?

      why are we digging up an article with so many goddamn errors? it's ***** annoying to read! not only that, but it can also be confusing for some. but whatever.

    • quaunaut, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7Or you guys can just go to a site that has been known to have the best info for this: http://www.tweakguides.com/
    • jpjandrade, on 10/12/2007, -44/+9An even better guide to speeding up XP in minutes!

      http://www.ubuntu.com


      Sorry, couldn't resist...
    • OmegaNine, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17@ggarenn

      There may be grammatical errors, but this article is full of useful information. I can skim over the bad sentences.

      As you get deeper in the software development game, you will learn that not all (most don't) developers (and bloggers I assume) speak English as their first language.
    • EruLabs, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9@everyone: Look at cacoe's link. Theres your digg story
      @ggarenn: yes, and not only that, its not at all technical
      @omeganine: It doesn't have any good information though. Its really weak on the tech content, and even weaker in the English content.
      @jpjandrade: Uhm. No. Ubuntu is a beast in the ram too, buddy. Xp just tends to get bloated with vendor crapware unlike ubuntu. And btw, if you think ubuntu is quick.... www.gentoo.org

      Gosh
    • Terc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+30"Selecting default and no wallpaper as background also gives better performance than that of heavy wallpapers."

      Yeah, gotta watch out for those "heavy wallpapers"

      This article is full of *****.
    • goffy59, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Theres a reason windows is setup a certain way. To avoid all problems, leave the services alone. I noticed alot of these tweaks, sound really cool and such, but when you use too much it breaks your windows in the end. Auto Patcher is probably the safest way to go. www.autopatcher.com
    • TomP, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Well i do most of that everytime i install windows
    • SEMW, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I thought the services part of the article was pretty good (telling you to only disable non-MS services) -- for people who don't know *exactly* what they're doing, disabling random Microsoft services can have unexpected consequences. You'd be surprised how many services have more low-level uses than their primary-usage oversimplified descriptions in the services manager.

      The part of the article I disagree with is the part on virtual memory. Setting it to a constant size is fine if you never use more than that size; but if you do use more, for whatever reason (photo/video-editing for one takes up more memory than you'd think), think about what takes more time -- the microsecond it takes Windows to automatically make the pagefile larger, or the 5 minutes it takes you to notice the "out of virtual memory" notification, curse, save everything, set it to a larger size, and reboot?

      If you really feel you're getting a noticable performance hit through it changing size too much in normal use, just set a slightly larger *initial* size -- giving it an arbitary maximum size is just something you'll regret when you need more than that limit (which will probably be when you have loads of stuff open and are doing something complicated -- i.e. just when you *don't* want to quit everything and reboot). It's probably better to just leave it as a system-managed size, though.
    • optikburn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19? here are the 10 tips:
      http://forum.pinoygeek.org/index.php/topic,100.0.html
    • Skrilla360, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3year 2002 called, it wants its story back

      burried as LAME and OLD
    • SmashSource, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1In case the site goes down http://duggmirror.com/offbeat_news/What_sort_of_Digger_are_you. LMAO
    • Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Regarding using MSConfig...

      "After you restart you computer a dialogue will be displayed you can choose not to show this dialogue every time you restart."

      Yeah, and if you disable this dialog, you also revert back all of the changes you did with MSConfig. A better way to disable startup programs is to use the Software Explorers control panel that comes with Windows Defender.
    • akvlad, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1http://theblogjoint.com/2006/12/28/how-to-speed-up-your-computer/
    • WhereAmI, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1English wasn't my first language. Baby talk was. Damn adults keep speaking it near babies it must be a real language that all know.
    • Agret, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2""Selecting default and no wallpaper as background also gives better performance than that of heavy wallpapers."

      Yeah, gotta watch out for those "heavy wallpapers"

      This article is full of *****."

      Nope, windows converts your wallpaper to a BMP and then renders that each time you view your desktop, having no wallpaper definitely gives better performance.
    • praxis22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm with cacoe, black viper FTW, (didn't realise his pages were back up, spiffy!)

      The msconfig stuff is a bit crap, but for that and everything else there is "Tuneup Utilites 2006"

      Personally my page file is the same size as my memory and on a different physical drive to my OS. Though at work where I have multiple programs open, and less memory, I use the "commit change" tweak. YMMV
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Same old *****. Marked as lame.
  • vofuse, on 10/12/2007, -10/+9Not exactly timely, but good info.
  • Dreamseeker, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Nice, helpful article! I'm going to be trying these soon, my XP is getting slow.
  • cam503, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42Because a lot of people may not understand which start-up programs they may be disabling, I would recommend doing it this way:

    1. Go to start > Run...
    2. Type in "regedit" without the quotes and hit Enter.
    3. Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESYSTEMCurrentControlSetControlSession ManagerMemory ManagementPrefetchParameters
    4. Under this key you should see a value named: EnablePrefetcher

    It has 4 possible values:

    0 - Disabled : The prefetch system is turned off.

    1 - Application : The prefetch only caches applications.

    2 - Boot : The prefetch only caches boot system files.

    3 - All : The prefetch caches boot, and application files.

    Although it is usually not a good idea to delete your prefetch folder entirely, it will noticeably speed up your computer's performance if you set it to '2', meaning it only loads necessary system files at start up.
    • spyrochaete, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I'm pretty sure SP2 does this by default.
    • idiotwithastick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Under setting 3, only boot files are loaded under startup... the prefetch info for applications only tells Windows how to start up the applications more quickly. The data for application is loaded at application start, not at Windows startup.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefetcher
    • EruLabs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Not only that, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESYSTEMCurrentControlSetControlSession ManagerMemory Management has some important keys... Google it!
  • crazlunatic, on 10/12/2007, -12/+28pretty obvious info
    • Sargasso_C, on 10/12/2007, -22/+5for a wintard
    • alexforcefive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I dunno, "Uncheck the services that are not undesirable" was pretty new to me.=/
  • Tofm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+114I sped up my WinXP the last ten times something like this was posted. I dont think it can go any faster....
    • kris33, on 10/12/2007, -12/+8It is Windows, after all.
    • iMyst, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3Penguins don't move very fast, but waddling is better than nothing.
    • InsaneMachine, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4@imyst
      If you want to go down that path.... At least penguins waddle, windows break.
  • ishkur88, on 10/12/2007, -33/+5meh..... Linux pwns
  • SNIa, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32Why not take a break and go outside.
  • Quellman, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10There's nothing new about these tips. I think Barnes and Nobles has entire books of stuff like this called "Windows XP for dummies".
    • chewitt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Yeah, why read free information on Digg when we could just drive to barnes and nobles and buy it instead?

      I think you may have missed the point of the Internets
    • ehtishamhaq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Who the hell will read a 500 page goddamn book! Most of the techniques in such books are never be used by most of the people. I mentioned only those tips that are useful.
  • chrispknight, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14Usually messing around with your registry file is not the best idea -- especially under the idea that tweaking one tiny little setting could actually dramatically change the way your computer works. Computer developers worked for years figuring this stuff out -- if one number could change everything, then everyone would be doing it.

    From Wikipedia:
    Incorrect tweaking of the prefetcher

    Many all-in-one tweaking and other windows tweaking applications may incorrectly set the prefetcher value, often setting it to 2 instead of the recommended value of 3. By doing so, boot times are not reduced and applications will load more slowly. Users are advised to check this value is still set to 3 after using any windows tweaking software. More information available by clicking here.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefetcher
    • SEMW, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I've no idea why this guy's got - 4 diggs, he's the most insightful post so far. Guys: if setting prefetch to '2' would result in a faster computer with no downsides, it would have shipped like that in the first place. Microsoft, Apple, et al have lots people whose job is to running lots of copies of the OS in thousands of different configurations dedicated to finding the combination of default settings that gives the best balance of performance and stability. If you find a hundred amateur sites recommending a performance 'tweak', but not a single one of them has a single benchmark that shows even the slightest difference, avoid it. Common sense, people.
    • SpeedyG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Or... MSFT has tweaked their settings to work on an average system, under average conditions. Every system is different and has different demands placed on it.

      That said, one should immediately start with an anti-virus and spyware check before even thinking about touching anything advanced like this. Next would be "figure out which programs you absolutely don't need running in the tray all the time". Lots more ways to make significant improvements before you start trying to eke out a few cycles at a time.
  • zamecca, on 10/12/2007, -82/+4step one: install vista
  • DeskFlyer, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Wait till Ric Romero picks up on this.
  • tjsigouin, on 10/12/2007, -17/+0http://www.vancouvercity.tv
  • Majin, on 10/12/2007, -20/+5step two: install linux
  • secion8, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2you should not use msconfig to disable services. instead go to run and type in "servies.msc"
  • MattLee09, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28Lets be honest, why use this site when Black Viper is so much more comprehensive?

    I hate to accuse myself of being a fanboy, but I love this guy and the work he put into making each OS as fast as possible.

    http://www.blackviper.com/
    • ehtishamhaq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nice website, thanks for sharing
  • Kwipper, on 10/12/2007, -25/+6The best way to speed up Windows XP... or any OS for that matter.

    Go buy a better CPU
    Go buy more ram.
    Go buy better ***** hardware!

    Then tweak Windows XP.
    • dbalaski, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@ kwipper

      No -- The idea is to utilize only what you need to get the job you want done.
      Not everyone has the luxury of being able to buy new hardware,
      nor is that an advisable approach to the speed problem..

      If your car is accelerating fast enough, do you go out and buy a new engine or transmission ?? Or a new car ???
      I hope not! You try some basic tune-ups.

      I give seminars on Oracle Database performance -- and one of my favorite quotes to use is applicable here
      We'll just have to modify it to appropriately fit the situation:

      "Sometimes you can throw hardware at a [speed] problem,
      but any improperly tuned database [or server or workstation] will bring response time to infinity, not matter what the hardware.

      I personally think the recommendations of the article are a decent starting point for people to try if they find a clean install is working slow (I've used a few of the recommendations myself on a few XP workstations) -- I personally prefer Linux as my OS -- but that is a discussion for another time.

    • Tarnum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2In fact, it is good idea to upgrade the CPU/RAM of an older computer.
      A month ago upgraded from 2 GHz Celeron to 3 GHz Pentium4 for just $60. The speed increase was more than noticeable. Why the low price? The Socket 478 processors/motherboards are considered old and unfashionable.
    • ehtishamhaq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nice, money can buy hardware and speed, not professionalism .
      Lame.
  • john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+61Step 8 is incredible! My machine feels literally twice as fast!
    • tysonwilliams, on 10/12/2007, -39/+4Step 8 is the best! It should read: BUY A MAC! lol
    • gr0ss, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14He's a witty one.
    • th3heretic, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9No, no it shouldn't Tyson.
    • korn91313, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2I totally hear that.... Step 8 is all you need to do for your computer to run as fast as possible :D
    • Systembomber, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12@korn91313,

      ...The joke died after the first reply....
    • redxii, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1A Mac is a faster with Vista, any way.
    • johnstar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1number 8 must be format and install linux!
    • ehtishamhaq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1How the heck will I work on DOT Net 2005 and play games on linux!
      Lame.
  • scronline, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0speel cheking wud hav ben grate.

    But either rate, good things to consider to speed up one's system.
  • DAaaMan64, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Speed up Windows XP in minutes install TinyXP!
  • pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/OptimizeXP.html I found this here on digg a while back.
  • Dolomite, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Pretty much common knowledge, but ok hints if your a total newbie.
  • painkillr, on 10/12/2007, -9/+0set IE browser cache to 5MB's
    • ricerfuel, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Use Mozilla Firefox like any NORMAL person..sheesh
    • SanTe, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"Use Mozilla Firefox like any NORMAL person..sheesh"

      If the goal is to speed up XP as much as possible, using Firefox isn't how to do it. IE is much faster than Firefox in loading and rendering pages. I say this even through I love Firefox and use it at all times except when hitting Windows Update.

      And painkillr... reducing IE's cache size won't help, especially if you reduce it so far that IE can't cache most modern day content. Windows' default cache size for IE can be ridiculously large, so set it to something reasonable like 100MB so it can do it's thing to speed up browsing but still be emptied quickly at shutdown.
    • SEMW, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7To settle the argument over whether IE or Firefox is faster; I Googled a bit, and the answer is... Well, neither of them, actually; most benchmarks seem to favour Opera as the fastest at most things.
  • ReRunx5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Make Your Windows Fast As Never Before! http://www.activehowto.com/how-to/4/11/414.htm
    Boot up Windows before you even log in http://www.brainfuel.tv/boot-up-windows-before-you-even-log-in/
    Guide to Useless Services (Windows XP SP2) http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=70112&cat_id=584
    Speed up your internet http://lvllord.de/?lang=en&url=tools
    Shutdown Windows XP faster http://www.intelliadmin.com/blog/2006/07/why-windows-takes-so-long-to-shut-down.html
  • limitbreakerx, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3http://www.theorica.net/gamexp.htm

    Thread closed.
  • Kailash.Nadh, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Lame.
  • ldude69, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1LOL @ Barack as a baby

    http://morph.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk//Transformer/uploads/php1b3p0c.jpg
  • AcesAndEights, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0http://www.tweakhound.com/xp/xptweaks/supertweaks1.htm
  • loveddevol, on 10/12/2007, -3/+77-9?
    wtf happend to step 8?
  • Boing, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4Do we really need a guide for XP since this info has been available for many, many, many years.
  • epimer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27FTA: "XP has a very cool looking user interface..."

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
  • kahrn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Why is it that every "Speed up XP!" guide says to enable DMA? If your drive supports DMA, then Windows should already have enabled it. DMA has been enabled for every install I have ever done.
    • foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If your IDE has like 5 errors in its lifetime, PIO is the mode it runs in for the rest of its life unless manually changed...
      I know... its stupid.
      Good thing SATA uses DMA all the time!
  • RoflMyWaffle, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3no article needed, here's a quick tutorial:
    1. Uninstall Windows XP
    2. Install Ubuntu
    • Nefi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+253. spend hours on ubuntu forums figuring out how to do what after.
    • anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14you linux fanboys are as bad as a jehovah's witness at 7am on sunday. give it a ***** rest.

      (from a sysadmin who's been using unix since 1986, and runs unix servers for a living. i run XP on my home desktop. so, in other words, and to summarize, eat me.)
    • beercosoftware, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1@anastrophe,

      "from a sysadmin who's been using unix since 1986"

      There's your problem. You should try Linux instead. I have a MSDN pro subscription, and it(the little msdn CD case fanny pack) collects dust because the entire developer paradigm has shifted to Mac and Linux. WPF is a total dud, and there is just too much crapware on Windows for it to be an attractive platform anymore. The web is now a bigger platform than the WIndows desktop. It doesn't matter if you browse the web in Windows or Linux or Mac

      http://www.dellideastorm.com
    • mancat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What the ***** are you talking about?

      What popular software is being developed for OS X besides what Apple, Adobe or Microsoft puts out?

      ???

      Don't even bother answering that question in regards to Linux.
    • anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4beercosoftware, you sir or madam, are an asshat, and should join the original poster at 7am ringing people's ***** doorbells at 7am to share the True Word and Revealed Gospel of Linux.

      operating systems i've used personally and professionally:

      SunOS 4.1.4
      Solaris 2.5
      Solaris 2.5.1
      Solaris 7 (2.7)
      Solaris 9 (2.9)
      Solaris 10/OpenSolaris (2.10, and it kicks *every* version of linux i've ever used to the curb)
      Cobalt RaQ linux
      mandrake
      slackware
      suse
      BSD/OS
      FreeBSD
      OpenBSD
      NetBSD
      Redhat
      Fedora
      CentOS
      puppylinux
      knoppix
      ubuntu
      damn small linux

      so maybe you should try taking the red pill, rather than the blue pill.
  • TheFinestShadow, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Dugg, but this guy's grammar is terrible. And what happened to number 8...?
  • u1tima, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0Next time [ehtisham], reread what you write.
  • h3ndrix, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Yeah so it can make it faster but is there any way I can play Super Mario Bros. on it? That's the only HACK I need.
  • shawnz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1tip five is the only thing on that page that isn't "pushing the petal further usually makes your car go faster"
  • cambob76, on 10/12/2007, -13/+0You guys are a bunch of nerds.
  • iRIGHTi6, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2How about "Speedup Windows Vista in Minutes!", that's what we need.
    • stmiller, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Answer: Turn off all the flashy stuff that makes it different from XP. Now it's faster, and just like XP! What has MS been doing for 5 years?
  • Evolve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Pfft, this is just a blatant copy and paste of other articles out there.
    No new information here, and the submitter of the article is clearly just spamming Digg with this one website.

    Marked as Spam, if you want to get detailed information and actual knowledge then Google "windows tweaks".
  • fredjorgenson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2This info is nearly completely useless! Beyond removing unwanted programs (Every heard of Add/Remove programs?) none of these tips are likely to speed up anything at all.

    - Page file is usually best left alone, and the system will allocate more if it needs it. Too much is NOT bad.
    - The Display optimization settings might have been useful 10 years ago with ancient video cards, but NONE of those settings will make the slighted difference on a modern system.
    - The DMA setting can have a big impact, but this is usually the default!
    - etc.

    There is one good change you can make to XP which SHOULD be on a list like like this. IE6 defaults to using 10% of your hard disk for temp files, which is insane on a multi-gigabyte disk. Change that setting to 50MB. (Which is what Vista does BTW)
    • specialK16, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0edit
    • syncosoftkerala, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Page file is usually best left alone, and the system will allocate more if it needs it..."
      - Disagree. I have a dedicated partition for page file, which is the first(i.e., fastest) partition on my disk - separating OS files, Installations AND the page file is quite an effective strategy in speeding up the system, as it reduces fragmentation of files considerably.

      "...Too much is NOT bad."
      - Disagree. If the page file size is too large, windows will keep paging out stuff to it, even the ones which aren't needed. I keep the max. size of page file to 800MB, which is more than enough for even big games.

      "The Display optimization settings might have been useful 10 years ago with ancient video cards, but NONE of those settings will make the slighted difference on a modern system."
      - Disagree. My current system is a P4 1.7GHz with 256mb 133MHz SDRAM and 40GB 5,400rpm PATA disk, bought about 5 years ago. Its performance sees major improvement when I remove the wallpaper and uncheck all display settings starting with 'slide', 'fade', 'show' etc., leaving only these checked:

      1) Smooth edges of screen fonts
      2) Use a background image for each folder type
      3) Use common tasks in folders
      4) Use drop shadows for icon labels on desktop
      5) Use visual styles on windows and buttons

      Unchecking others makes very little difference in the visual appearance, IMO. If you want it to tweak it one more level up, uncheck no.s 2 and 3 - The luna theme look will be sustained as long as you don't uncheck no.5.
  • brison678, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Am I the only one that values having a good looking background/interface?
    Isn't the background thing a little overkill?
    I dunno in my opinion i like having a little "flare" on my screen even if it does suck up a Lil CPU power.
  • LiRM35, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3This is about the ***** advice I've ever seen in an article.

    Why?

    Anyone who knows anything about computers already has these things done - and more.

    Anyone who doesn't know jack ***** about computers? This is an excellent manual to help make sure you ***** up your system.

    Autoruns (google it) is an excellent program to see what you've got going on at startup - far better then any startupman or using msconfig or other crap out there. But it requires a pretty damn good amount of knowledge to go in and select various services or login items to start or not start. Even people who do systems administration will not go in and haphazardly turn off skids of services without knowing exactly what each one does and which ones are critical for system integrity.

    Better advice then this article? Offer to take your friend who knows something about computers out to dinner in exchange for a good system tweaking. Otherwise, be careful - you could be doing a lot more harm then good.
  • Tarnum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+210. Regularly erase the TEMP and cache directories.
    11. Defragment your disk with the built-in DFRG.MSC. If you can spend $30-40, buy a specialized defrag software like PerfectDisk, that will reorder your Windows and cache files in the order they are loaded at startup. Windows will load faster.
    • DagDurnik, on 10/12/2007, -1/+312. Switch to Windows Classic Style and disable the Themes and Terminal Services extensions.
    • geekitechture, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Tarnum

      AusLogics Disk Defrag is quicker, better, and it's free.
    • SEMW, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Tarnum:
      The Windows XP defragger ALREADY reorders system, startup, & commonly used files to be near the start of the disk. That's part of the function of the Prefetch folder -- to update "layout.ini" with which files & programs are most commonly loaded. Layout.ini is then used by the defragger to reorder commonly used & startup files to be near the beginning of the disk.
  • fallenone05, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Holly *****, so many things to do! I actually have a faster and more simple solution, it's called adding more RAM.
    • fullphaser, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4hey seeing as you're a dumbass, would you mind sending that money for more ram, as if that will alleviate the problem, my way?
    • geekitechture, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@fallenone05

      Why add more RAM when you can do just as well on less by disabling whatever's unneeded? Even if you add a lot of RAM, tweaking services and startup will still result in a performance gain.

      I don't recommend this article to do that, though; surf to BlackViper or one of the other links listed by Diggers on this page instead.

      I don't know what version of XP the author of this article is using, but you can't find half the stuff he tells you to look for by following his instructions, and disabling Indexing from Add/Remove Windows Components is a big waste of time, since you can't tell if it's on or off to begin with from that panel.

      Better is to go into Services from the shortcut under Administrative Tools, and shut off and disable Indexing Service from there.

      As to enabling DMA, same deal; go into Control Panel>Administrative Tools>Computer Management>Device Manager, double-click IDA controls from there.

      The author of this article reached a little too high.
  • Tikkimann, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Speed up windows XP in minutes? uuuuuuun-likely. I'm the writer's target audience, and I'd have to reboot my computer after most of these, which is 10-20 minutes, by itself.
  • ooMissioNoo, on 10/12/2007, -20/+1heres an even quicker way to fix your windows problems(if you pay for fast shipping)


    go to web browser/ www.apple.com/store / Macbook / Payments / Wait at your mailbox

    there ya go!
    • fani, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13shut the ***** up.
    • spudnic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Posts like this are why I never want to own a mac. I don't want to be associated with idiots like you.
  • fani, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Nice article except its getting late for it now... with a new windows version around...
    if you have a decent pc today, win xp runs fine without these tweaks and works well..
  • shajed, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2LAME..
  • fullphaser, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Buried. If anyone here at digg is learning from this than I am more than disappointed. You guys are supposed to be tech nerds, how the hell is this news to you, this is common knowledge.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.