NBR Vista Tips and Tweaks Guide

With respect to Trebuins offer and your response, that would be a great idea.

I was going to include it as a tweak with reference to a site that I have had success with with respect to shutting down a number of non-vital processes but the chance is there that it might not work on anothers system.

If Trebuin would like, he can email me the 'insert' and I will add it straight to the tweaks which will leave it at the front page where it belongs...

 

Hi guys i think its my turn to go up to bat and show you what i have been doing

2. Exclude some unused services

1. Run services.msc via the Run command (Win key +R).
2. Stop the following services and change their start-up type to disabled

- Computer browser (if not connected to LAN)
- Fax (if not using printer and fax)
- Windows Error Reporting Service
- Media center extender service
- human interface device access
- Secondary logon
- Tablet PC Input service
- Print spooler (if not using printer and fax)
- Windows time
- Media center receiver service (This caused some disfunction on my computer)
- Security center
- Routing and remote access (if not connected to LAN)
- Windows search engine (if not used...)
- Internet connection sharing
- TCP/IP NetBios helper
- Media center scheduler service (This caused some disfunction on my computer)
- Media center service launcher
- Server
- Offline files
- Remote registry
3. Close the services management console

By Reducing your services that run with vista at initial bootup you can shave a couple more seconds in boot time =)


7.Run IE7 a little smoother.

1.Start/Run Type gpedit.msc and select Computer configuration/Administrative Templates/Windows Components/Internet explorer.
3.You will see the value called disable periodic check for IE software updates enable it. There shouldnt be a new update for IE7 till SP1 for vista anyways =)

IE7 speeds
set Maxconnections to 10 instead of two this will alow for more pipelines to be used when accessing webpages =)

 

My screen still flickers when I disable TMM .

 

Do you mean at the start? Is it possible that there is something else causing the flash? Have you reinstalled the most up to date drivers? What system do you have?

 

that would you require you actually test the command, or know what you're talking about.

the program you're linking to does nothing more than call up the built in defrag executables and passes along the command i referenced. there's no 'secret' behind it as it's built into Vista itself. you can delude yourself into believing there's more to it, but there isn't.

here's a link from wikipedia for reference - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefetcher

everything else that program does is snake oil.

as to the rest of your post - lay off the sanctimony. it's better to allow users to understand the mechanisms of their system, including the command line, than relying on dubious tweaking programs that can often lead to many problems.

then again, i'm not the one constantly whoring for rep points.

 

that, right there, shows how utterly useless your knowledge of Windows is. the wikipedia link spells it out, and the layout.ini and prefetcher have been a feature more or less since the XP days. obviously Vista fleshed it out quite a bit more.

i won't even get into you being a computer 'teacher'.

and a hearty 'LOL' for you editing your ridiculously error-filed post to something more subtle. good thing i saved that choice quote from above for posterity.

 

Ok then....

explain this...then you'll get all the credit you deserve.

Im asking for your assistance here big guy.

Just reinstall Vista on my 700m...complete optimized, tweaked then defragged and ran YOUR command line that apparently does exactly what TuneXP does...

So here are the results...

Before your instruction: 1min32sec
After your instruction: 1min 24 sec
After TuneXP : 43 seconds

Just to help you, thats a difference of 41 seconds between your command line which does exactly what TuneXP does...and the real TuneXP.

Just a simple answer would give you all the credibilty in the world with the fans here and myself.

Why the difference big guy???

Anytime...waiting.

 

answering your question requires me to believe your credibility, which for the above reasons (LOVE the post edit) is obviously not going to happen, so i'll take your 'facts' with a grain of salt.

i'll say it again, there's no 'magic pill defrag' software, and the fact that TuneXP calls the VERY SAME execs that are built-in to Vista says a lot more than your 'test' does.

as to the fans on this board - you are seriously deluded and need to stop appraising your life's worth through this message board. if it makes you better, i'll give you a rep point for trying as hard as you do.

 

Yuppp...your answer speaks for itself and concludes this I think. Oh and I wasn't speaking of only my results; it seems there are a number of others with the same results from the program here..on this thread.

They must be full of it as well eh...

 

obviously those people are noticing the effects of TuneXP's work (also worth noting as that software was made for XP and hasn't been updated in years), since it directly calls the defrag.exe switch i listed earlier. obviously boot files are still being defragmented, because defrag.exe has the capabilities built into it.

this isn't rocket science, and it's points to the disconnect you seem to have at anything that contradicts your dogmatic, and often wrong, views.

the first boot optimizer that came out for XP was BootVis, which Microsoft leaked, and then pulled from their servers surreptitiously.

http://tweakhound.com/xp/bootvis/index.htm

after Microsoft pulled the software, for whatever reason they had, someone then leaked the command switches for Defrag.exe that essentially offered the same functionality (minus the indepth boot graph/report that BootVis provided). it's the same switch that other software tweak programs then incorporated into their own software, which leads to today.

http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2003/2003-09-29.htm#5

believe what you want though on how amazing TuneXP is, even though it was written for a prior OS, not actively developed anymore, nor does the author provide any support for it.

 

for the same reason that the first tweakhound link noted that a fresh run of BootVis, even on a constantly optimized system, still cut down his reboot times by a few seconds. there's a ton of things a user could do between their last defrag that would slow down boot times or other function of the OS. it also needs to be said that defrag primarily runs during idle times every X days, and will slow down or turn off it if notices a high level of user/disc activity. it's meant to be transparent, not overbearing nor intrusive.

btw, i've been very clear in what i've written, but let me state it again since you obviously missed the point, repeatedly.

TuneXP is calling the exact same boot defrag function that 'defrag %systemdrive% c:' serves. a very big hint of this? both functions call the same defrag.exe and defragntfs.exe (well, if Vista is using NTFS). also worth noting - TuneXP has no way to know which boot files are valid were it not for XP/Vista's built-in logging/prefetcher capabilities, which were created in part so that defrag.exe can process the boot files.

and you're not really insulting me - i actually exist outside this message board, so my world doesn't shatter when message board dilettantes attack.

 

BTW if you turn off Tablet PC options in the "Turn Windows Features On or Off" menu and disable the Tablet PC service, the snipping tool will not show up or work.

This is worth noting as a ramification for turning off these "unnecessary services" as the snipping tool is quite useful.

 

I mentioned that in the tweak I added this morning....and...I just made a bold edit on that specific tweak to confirm. Thanx!!

 

If anyone wants to disable Tablet anyway and still need a snipping tool.

Get it here ...... FASTSTONE CAPTURE 5.2 The newer version is shareware, that's why I linked the free version.

Also you can download more Faststone apps at FASTSTONE I HIGHLY recommend the resizer. DO NOT DOWNLOAD THE NEW VERSION OF FASTSTONE CAPTURE UNLESS YOU WANT SHAREWARE. Even if you uninstall and download the old one, the shareware stuff will stay.

 

Calot...

My machine starts around 20 seconds...

My sons, which I just bought, saw a 40sec improvement before any tweaking. If you have any issues...pm me.

Here are my HDTune results for an ssd comparison...

 

There it is. My results. Are they good? I havent done the tune xp thing. Im gonna do it now I guess... How long did you say it takes?

 

20 seconds! Are we talking about startup time?

 

My SSD is 1.8... yours is a lot faster! Is yours 2.5? You also have to take to account that I have an 11.1 inch U7600 processor laptop

 

So this second process that trebuin is refering to is NOT the NTFSDfrg that flamenko is referring to? Does this mean there are THREE processes then? How are we to know when this mysterious unseen process is finished?

Gary

 

Yes 20 second startup time from the press of a button until the screen is finished and the internet is confirmed.

And...Calot, go into your setup screen and see if achi is selected rather than ATA. This is what increased my speed along with the Intel Matrix Storage Manager.

 

Odd then that my dell laptop boots up in 20-25 seconds using only the defrag -b switch mentioned earlier.

Oh wait, they're the same exact thing. Oops!

and there are two processes, Defrag.exe and DfrgNTFS.exe, which will show up on the task scheduler depending on which 'user' (system or active user) starts the process. both are created by microsoft, and both are active in any defragmentation so long as an NTFS partition is being worked on.

 

No you will see two processes as shown in my picture attached. When they dissappear, defragging is complete.

They are defrag.exe and dfrgntfs.exe.

 

Wow! I can increase my speed? What setup menu do you reffer to flamenko? If I can increase my speed I would owe you HUGE!

 

take these times with a grain of salt - it depends on a myriad of things and one quick fix won't solve it.

How many startup applications do you have running?
How fast is your hard drive?
How much system memory do you have?

optimizing/defragging the boot files will gain some speed, but it's meaningless if the OS is bloated down with an excess number of starting processes.

 

He's referring to your BIOS, when you restart your computer it will tell you to hit a specific key to enter setup.

Elscorcho is right, make sure that you've cleaned up the bloat and minimized the number of programs that start with your computer. msconfig is great for the latter, and uninstall any junk programs that came with your computer through the control panel using the Uninstall Programs applet.

 

Go into Bios by hitting F2 at the start screen
Go to On Board Devices
Sata Operation
AHCI should be checked.

Now go to Flash Cache Module
It should be enabled.

Now Sony should have a driver site with Intel Matrix Storage Manager. It should be installed.

I will close this by saying Im not too familiar with the internal workings of a Sony; this works well in my Dell however.

And yes, a clean install which removes all bloat and useless registry entries works miracles to any system.

 

I didnt do a clean install. But i erased all the bloatware, and desactivated a lot of unwanted processes. Now I have 79 processes running, I used to have like 98. I also have glary utilities which fixes the registry and erases temp files, it works like ccleaner. Im gonna check that bios stuff now.

 

OK, so the ONLY two processes that TweakXP runs are defrag.exe and dfrgntfs.exe, right?

But what about the other process trebuin talked about? Or is one of the two you mentioned the "separate defrag of its own" that trebuin refers to? We need to be sure we wait for all these things to finish!

Gary

 

I think you are reading him wrong. We spoke and he explained it to me and, as well, I have done the processes. I learned this from him.

You watch those two processes only. When they dissappear, restart.


Ok, I see what he is saying..no I think he believes one of the two processes doesnt show in Vista; they both do.

 

to be clear, DfrgNTFS.exe isn't a 'separate' defrag that TuneXp activates - it's activated, at least as far as i know on Vista, every single time an NTFS partition is defragmented.

if you call a defrag through the standard 'Disk Defragmenter' program in Vista, both Defrag.exe and DfrgNTFS.exe will show up as a 'hidden' system process. however, if you activate defrag.exe through the command prompt, both defrag.exe and dfrgntfs.exe will show up both in the user's processes.

dfrgNTFS.exe CANNOT be run exclusively, and must be called by defrag.exe

 

Well this is quite interesting then. BOTH of those processes are from Microsoft. There is nothing that TweakXP is doing except to fire up two existing Microsoft processes. Maybe elscorcho is right then, huh? Maybe there is no special defrag that TweakXP is running. See the two attachments:


Gary

 

The only thing that is currently standing in the way of that theory is the drastic change in boot times that Flamenko reported after using TweakXP. When he ran the defrag exes that elscorcho mentioned, he did not see as huge of an improvement. I think it's hard to prove the TweakXP does or does not something different and then run the included defrag programs. Until more people try both methods and report back on their changed boot times, then we won't really know.

Actually, once I get home, I think I'll be able to try both methods on both XP and Vista boxes, my family has a couple that have slowed down a bit.

 

as to that - my guess is that he closed the command prompt window right after firing the command and didn't wait for the defrag process to end (it'll take several minutes) and the command prompt window to present a new line. otherwise it's the same process as making sure not to close TuneXP before defrag.exe and dfrgNTFS.exe are complete - don't close the command prompt window until either of these processes disappear. closing the command prompt window before the defrag finishes will kill both processes and end the optimization routine.

there's only so many ways that defrag.exe can be used, and a programmer can't just call up the process with some mythical new function that extends it beyond what Microsoft originally programmed in. that this tweak utility uses defrag.exe in its boot optimization is enough for me to believe that it's using the -b parameter, which is the only switch that optimizes boot files.

 

I'll be sure to let defrag.exe and dfrgNTFS.exe run their courses when I conduct this tiny little experiment.

I wasn't trying to suggest that defrag.exe was being used in any new way. I was considering the possibility that TweakXP itself might do something unique and then call defrag.exe, probably with the -b parameter. I am sort of leaning towards your view though, elscorcho, I am skeptical that TweakXP really does anything different. If I experience the same results that Flamenko reported though, then I don't see how it could be as simple as that.

 

wax4213,

You are right. There is one and only one way to test this. And it is NOT the way flamenko did it.

To test this correctly you need to:
1. Establish a baseline boot time.
2. Make an image of the hard drive as it is.
3. Optimize with tweakXP.
4. Test the boot time.
5. Restore the image.
6. Optimize with defrag c: -b
7. Test the boot time.

Establishing the boot time is not as simple as it might look though. When do you STOP the stopwatch? I'm not so sure the login prompt is the right place. I don't know if the boot process has really completed at that point. I tried to get a baseline by using boot logging, but it only records a start time for the boot process, not an end one. I also tried the old XP standby, BootVis. It was GREAT at establishing exactly what the entire boot time took. But I can't find a definitive way to measure Vista's boot time.

At least not yet! ... big ol' grin...

Gary

 

well let me know what you find. i've had no problem running the -b switch on my PCs for years, and that's continued to Vista, and they all boot quite snappy.

 

I'm not going to be imaging the drive, but what I was thinking to do is to try the defrag c: -b, reboot, try it again, reboot, and then do the TweakXP. Hopefully that would help reveal if it's just the process of running defrag twice that gets such drastic results.

As far as measuring boot time goes, I was planning to measure the time from power on to when I can open Firefox and load google. That at least addresses the aspect of a "usable" desktop. I don't count booting to the login screen as really booting, at least not as a valid point to stop timing from.

I realize this will not be the most scientific test ever, but hopefully we can get some data that will indicate the causes of the reduced boot times. If boot time doesn't greatly decrease with defrag c: -b (twice) but does with TweakXP, then it will hint that TweakXP is doing something special. If defrag c: -b yields amazing results, then it's probably just the defrag c: -b. If neither shows much change... well, our data won't have really indicated anything.

Any more suggestions?

 

actually, i think you have it laid out pretty nicely. i'm more interested in seeing if two successive runs of defrag -b will help.

 

I don't understand the part about running defrag twice? But if you do that make sure your measure the boot time after each.

Gary

 

I will measure the boot time each time. My thought process behind running it twice is that Flamenko ran defrag c: -b, then TweakXP, and only experienced a large reduction in boot time after TweakXP. There is a possibility that it was the process of running degrag c: -b twice that led to the benefits, not that TweakXP was special.

Running defrag c: -b twice will help to eliminate (or prove) that as a possibility.

 

actually doing some more research i've run across another comamnd line that some others are saying is used by BootVis on XP. i've not seen this until now.

Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks

look it up in google. oddly enough, this one properly activates the OptimizeComplete flag in my registry, which the -b switch defaults to an error. i'll have to test this out.

 

Hmm, maybe it's good I'm not home yet to try this out. What do you think, run defrag c: -b, reboot, repeat, run Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks, reboot, repeat, and then TweakXP, repeat (for consistency's sake)? More and more variables...

 

So I installed tuneXP and ran it, and then realized i hadn't timed my normal boot up speed. So i deleted tuneXP and ran the boot up, which was 1:50. So i reinstalled tuneXP and ran it and got the same time roughly. Once you use tuneXP, even after uninstalling it, does it still affect your system? also, how do u flamenko run 20 seconds from login to screen? Im running about 77 processes of the start of mine and i have installed all the tweaks... any help would be great! i m not liking vista much yet

 

just did some more reading, the 'Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks' command simply tells Vista/Windows through an open API call to process all its idle tasks now. in this case, the idle task for defragmenter in Vista is defrag.exe -c -i

if i were you, i'd first try the 'Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks' command, then try the -b switch. i just tried it myself and couldn't see much of a difference between the two.

 

hey guys i want to put my services back to their default post install startup settings, and start over, can someone post a list or screenshot of a unmodified services listing of their startup types? I do not have a restore point (i turned that off). Also what is the default post install listing in the 'turn windows features on and off' window?

 

Its great that you guys are trying to figure out what differentiates the two but, from my view, the result is quite simple. Thats the response from everybody here. There are any number of people here who have applauded the results before and after so, its not discrediting me at all as i have nothing to prove. I can pull up no less than 10 responses applauding the result.

Secondly, its simply a tweak I included after Trebuin suggest I try it; his boot time is still quicker than mine so I know he hasnt given away all his tricks yet.

I guess in the end, the question still remains to be, "Why is everybody experiencing such great results if this doesn't work?

My last PM "THANKS! vista runs faster."... Your welcome but as I said...its actually Trebs tweak.

 

can anyone help me out? pm or reply here, either's good for me.

 

Your original services will be listed at blackviper.com and if you look at my tweak regarding turning off features, that tells what features to turn on or off.

 

Flamenko, we (or at least I) are (am) not trying to discredit you. I'm personally interested in how TweakXP accomplishes what it accomplishes, and if there's a way to reach the same results without installing something, then in my opinion that's a good thing. I think it's relatively apparent that TweakXP does help boot times, and it's fine for people to keep using it, but there may be other ways to do it too. Hell, you might even want to put it on your front post as an alternate option if it turns out that it works. It's up to you, it's your thread.

 

Wax4213....

Tx. Personally, as much as I can use the command line, its not for everyone. Most people are absolutely terrified of it which is why it doesn't make for a good tweak. Lets face it...we built programs to rid ourselves of this.

I respect everyones expertise here which includes...yes his... but maybe some should just finish jumping in and cutting at others threads. I am not speaking of you specifically and it is obvious to many where this comes from.

I put a thread together for the benefit of all, a thread that probably is way overdue, and find myself being targetted to the point that I finally hit back. Its a thread that takes a decent amount of reading and confirming before I put each new tweak or program in.

Anyway... thanks again and apologies.