Why do computers become slow after few months of usage?

my laptop was extremely fast for first few months,.


now slowly slowly..same apps take more time to open... Outlook 2007 used to open under 5 seconds.

now it takes upto 12 seconds.


COD4 MW2 used to open in 8 seconds...now it takes upto 20 seconds..and the resolution keeps flickering in between while the game is starting.

Windows explorer has also become slower.

i defragment once a month using jkdefrag & use CCleaner every 2 weeks.

what else could be the problem?

 

The problem, my friend...is windows. lol

 

maybe you SHOULDN't defrag and use CCleaner. Windows 7 has its own maintenance tools to do all that.

And you mentioned JKDefrag. Through my own experiences, it seriously slows down the computer after a "good" long defrag. Don't know why. Try not using it.

 

maybe you want to check your installed programs and see how many programs do you have now running at startup and compare that to when you first got your computer.

i configured my sister's computer so that she runs it as a standard user and has no rights to install any software, 1 year later, it's still as fast as she first got it and she has not complained at all as to the performance of the computer.

 

What OS?
If its XP then because its XP.

If its Vista or Win7 then its because you messed around with it too much - for example jkdefrag - what wrong with the built in defragmentation?
And what exactly did you do with CCleaner?

And flickering resolution would indicate another problem - driver changes?
Did you catch malware? (although I can't see a reason to suspect this)

 

You know, the statement that the Windows OS slows down after months of use is something I was unable to substantiate myself in my own personal experience.

I went through XP, Vista and Win7 (which I currently use). The speed at which the OS responds is essentially the same compared to the time frame when I installed the aforementioned OS-es.

People who used their computers for prolonged periods of time complained of the OS becoming slower as well.
Once I cleaned out the start-up programs and left only the basic ones needed for the system and did a little cleaning, the computer was much more responsive/faster.

Lots of start-up programs (along with various tool-bars) are usually the culprit ... especially if they accumulate over time, not to mention potential virus/spyware/malware infections that might have crept onto the system and are slowing it down.

You mentioned you use Jkdefrag and Ccleaner on a fairly regular basis.
Ccleaner is fine to be used frequently if you have lots of temp files piling up on the hard drive along with various programs you installed/removed from the system (and then removed the left-over registry entries).

Jkdefrag on the other hand is a different story.
The only thing I ever de-fragmented on my HDD was the boot sector ... and that I did only once (when I first installed the OS and all the necessary programs).
Same with XP.

Also make sure that the programs you are running with the OS are efficient in what they do (for example, if you have an anti-virus program, then simply verify it has a high detection rate and that it's light when it comes to system resources).

I recommend you check how many programs you have at start-up and disable virtually everything except your anti-virus.
Everything else is essentially a waste of resources unless you actually need the program to startup that is vital to your computer's function.

Using an antivirus program (and running a quick scan with latest definitions) such as: Avira, Avast 5, or Microsoft Security Essentials will make sure there isn't an impact on the OS (plus they all have a high detection rate and are free).
Next, you can use Malwarebytes (free) to run a quick scan (after updating it) and check the OS for potential problems.

 

Defragmentating doesn't work for me, it takes longer and longer for windows mediaplayer to react when I try to open a music file for example.

My pc becomes noticable slow after 6+ months, the best way for me to make it fast again is completely clean my hard drive by reinstalling windows. All the data I need is on an external hard drive anyway.

 

I usually do this every 6 months - 1 year.

Yes, it can be annoying, but it is worth it if you have another HD to copy your data to.

The reason most (if not all) computer become slow over time is because of the usage. That means adding new programs, gaming on the computer, not cleaning the computer (I clean out my Laptop every month or so. You will be surprised on how much dirt and dust is in it), and just general usage.

It's all about maintenance. And I don't mean run a defrag every week, scans every day, just general up-keep, and doing the "heavy stuff" every few weeks, or months.

It's pretty much the way it is. You don't expect your car to be looking as new and smelling as new 6 months after you bought it, do you?

 

Been using Win7 64bit for months now, and it's just as fast now as it always has been.

 

XP was pretty bad with software rot. Win7 seems pretty solid.

 

While it is good to clean out your laptop of dust every so often, I really wouldn't have thought that dust accumulation would cause an OS to lose it's snappiness and become slower over time. That's like saying that a PCB is going to perform less well under stress when it's a higher room temperature.

Exactly the same here. Except I'm using 32 bit. I have found that Windows 7 has retained it's snappiness over the time I have been using it.

 

Well this is true, but I was referring more to dust accumulating which causes less air flow, which causes higher temps, which causes hardware problems, which could lead to the hardware slowing down or crashing all together.

 

I try to delete any random crap that may get on my drive as soon as possible. If I just want to try to download some program that I may not keep, I use Sandboxie to run it in a virtual environment. That means I can delete ALL of it's data in one click. Good to have if it ends up being some sort of malware. *click - malware gone*

Avira seems really lightweight, I swear by it.

 

Besides cleaning and removing junk files off of your computer you can use a paging program like readyboost for windows 7 and an aftermarket version for XP and Vista. My XP computer is almost 2 years old and it takes around 1 second to load any of the office software.

 

That's makes more sense now.

 

The answer to this is because Users like to install useless software that tries to add themselves to startup EVEN when it is not running.

 

try spybot s&d
http://www.spybotupdates.com/files/spybotsd162.exe
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/tutorial/index.html

I have XP installed since 11.11.2005 and it works better than when I first installed it. It runs like 12-16 hr/day.
It all depends on user after all. Anti-virus and firewall at least daily updated is a must. Use Firefox. Know what you install and if u really need it.

And most important °Don't fix it if it ain't broken°

 

That's because you probably take care of your OS and laptop.

I had Win XP for a year and half on the same laptop without reformating it. It was as fast as the first day I installed it.

After a clean installation of Windows I turn off all the services I never use and those that I know would slow my system down eventually (such as the windows indexation service, windows auto update...). I also performed regular maintenance using CCleaner and a defrag tool. Whenever I install a new software I make sure it doesn't start in its own such as Adobe Reader, Flash update tool, Java update tool, firefox/internet explorer update tool, Quick time and its update tool, and so on. For that I use MSConfig.

 

Why do computers become slow after few months of usage?

Simple answer: They don't. What is true is that some people load their machines up with crap, which leads to reduced performance. If you don't do that, your PC will run as fast as on its first day. Case in point: My kids are using my five-year-old XP laptop, which runs just as fast as ever.

This is nonsense, of course. None of the built-in services in Windows have anything to do with Windows slowing down. It is true, however, that the indexing service in XP is as close to useless as it gets. Vista and higher are very different in that respect.

This is an important part of keeping your system running well.

 

Do you also avoid all XP updates?
Because on my old laptop they just piled on and did actually slow it down...

Vista - maybe, but not really noticeable if the effect is there.

 

No, of course not. Some of these updates are vital for the security of the OS.

That's pretty much impossible. These updates are usually just patches, and have no effect on the responsiveness of the OS.

 

Every update causes a mess on your HDD.... and if you install 100 odd updates its much slower...
Oddly enough defragmenting for the first time always decreased performance on XP???? Something I don't understand but well... gone are the XP days...

And XP was breaking down constantly for me too...

Vista - no

 

Well, yeah, but that's what defragmenters are for.

I don't know about that. I always used Perfect Disk for dferagmentation on XP, which had no such effect.

 

The built in defragmentation was what I used...

And more recently either JKDefrag or MyDefrag - result: Laptop started slower...
(And old laptop that my grandfather uses - I swapped out the HDD for a new one summer 09)

 

The problem with the built-in defragging tool is that it takes 4+ hours to finish. While others take maybe an hour or so. In my experience.

 

Does it?

Only when you run it for the first time, after it hasn't been used for ages.

Then its pretty quick, on XP and Vista.

 

You're saying nonsense. OK, but I have a question?
Are you using any of the following services in Win XP:
Alert
Computer Browser
Error reporting serviceFax service
Indexing service (constente monitoring of the files in HDD = possible slow down)
Messenger (service used often by malware)
Alerts and Performance logs
Remote Access Auto Connection Manager
Remote Desktop Help Session Manager
Remote Registry Service
Indexing service
Windows Time
.....

It you don't know what they are it is likely that you've never used them. They usually start automatically when windows boots. Hence turning them off will reduce booting time and make your computer more responsive.

A service like windows research is a nightmare in Vista whether you agree or not

I don't want my laptop/computer to be a guinea pigs for software developpers. For instance instead of updating regularly my firefox and passing from v3.5 to 3.5.1, 3.5.2 and so on I waited an updated directly from v3.5 to v3.6

 

Windows Search is extremely useful once you actually use it.
I need the maple help file? I just start typing lrn in the Start menu - open CC cleaner, just type double C - yes, it is quite useful.
Messenger - a few people use it.
Error reporting - yepp, very useful gave me some updated Upek software
Logging - very useful, tells you if you have any problems, and where they are.

Computers in which people fiddle around with services for anything but diagnostics should really blow themselves up.

Always this nonsense of "my computer is 0,000000001s faster" - yepp, and then you loose 2 minutes when you could have used the indexing service which will ONLY slow down your computer ONCE when it does its FIRST indexing job - then it will NO LONGER DO SO.

Fax - remove it via "add/remove windows features" NOT by killing a process.

And FF - have fun with your security risks - in fact a branch of the German government actually recommended not to use Firefox 3.6 before you have updated to 3.6.2 - result, they released the update earlier.

 

Have fun with the reinstall afterwards

(Yes, in some cases in can help - in most cases it'll break more than fix)

 

You're wrong and there is a small test that you can do to check that you're wrong. A Service Pack is a collections of updates right?
Install Windows XP SP0, and then install SP1, then SP2, and finally SP3. Then go to Windows' folder (c:\windows) you'll find plenty of new folders. There are named "uninstall something" and are highlighted in blue.

If you install all three services one after the other those blue folders would take up at least 2GB of space if not much more. These folders are sort of backup folders that allow a user to revert back... but how many people have reverted back from SP3 to SP2, or SP2 to SP1, or SP1 to SP0? I can safely say zero, because most new software require at least SP2 to install and run correctly.

installing patches, and update move files around. Moving files around fragment the HDD. A fragmented HDD is a slow HDD hence a slow Windows/laptop.

 

Uhmm, so what? What does this have to do with anything?

As an aside, you can safely delete those folders if you do not anticipate uninstalling the patches in question. You may also be interested in learning that Windows service packs are cumulative, so you can always directly install the latest one. Finally, any service pack will remove all backup folders from previous updates and service packs.

I thought we had already established that there are these magical pieces of software that are called defragmentation programs, which can eliminate this kind of disk defragmentation. As an example, typical fragmentation levels on the partitions of that five year old laptop I mentioned are consistently below 0.1%.

 

The reason it slows down is defenatly fragmentation, but you should use a decent defragmenter like diskeeper or perfectdisk, those programs run always in the background, defragmenting when the CPU is idle or has spare cycles, you don't even notice them running, they also monitor which files are accessed most and they put them on the fastest part of the disk and they keep your system snappy even after years of use, one of those in combination with ccleaner is magic ...

In my experience things like jkdefrag,defraggler, the windows defrag, ... they just make your computer slower. I used to reinstall my system every 4 months, but since i use diskeeper i only reinstall if I broke somthing by messing around, i'm running Windows 7 enterprise 64bit from august last year and it's still as snappy as it was when i installed it

 

Like I said, that's what defragmenters are for. Plus, some smart partitioning that does require, however, a bit of advanced wizardry I have to admit...

 

I would like to go back, but I can't since the industry has moved away from it. I mean most modern software are designed to run in Windows only

I still use DOS from time to time to do things that can not be done in Windows such as BIOS flashing (I know it can be done in windows too, but it is safer under DOS), and hardware monitoring and diagnostics.

I like to be in charge of my computer. This means that I control what application/services is running and which one isn't. That's all.
I like your anology with cars as I'm a car fun myself. I have XP an for a long time I thought it is pointless to have more than 1GB in particular for the type of application I run. In Autocad I work mostly in 2D, and I have 2GB of RAM. When I turn my laptop ON, and once windows has completely booted I have a little over 1.8GB ram free. In addition to this I have a paging file of 4GB. I was working on a script the otherday, a VBA script that draws 100s lines on the screen and does few calculations with them. My autocad frequently crashed when I run this script complaining that I didn't have enough ram. Checking the task manager confirmed that all my ram was used. So having a ferrari might come handy once in a while

It's a matter of preference. I prefer to do it in my own, while you prefer to leave windows take care of it for you.
I don't like the additional burden on my system, but you don't mind it... Again a matter of preference

I've used IE7 and IE8 and to me they are like turtles compared to IE6.
I've used Firefox mainly 3.5 and 3.6 and I like it because it have the modern feeling/features of IE8 but it is as fast as IE6.
I've used Chrom and like it very much. It is the fastest but still buggy sometimes
Last I've used Opera for a short time about a week ago but I don't know....

Thanks for the link I'll read through it in a second. I have to disagree with their opinion. Firefox as any other software is not bug free. But since it is open source, bugs are know quite early and dealt with quickly. With a Corporation softaware (Windows, IE, AutoCAD to name few), most of us wont know about the bugs untill a patch/update is released for them, or until their next release

+1 for open source

 

Are you serious? In reality it's the other way around.

 

Yes I'm, and I tested IE6 against IE7 and/or IE8 in 3 desktops and 2 laptops (i.e. various CPUs and RAM configurations), and IE6 is still faster.

 

Faster at what?

Opening the programme?
Surely not rendering webpages - unless you are lucky enough to live in a JavaScript free world.

 

My XP 32 bit install on my NEC goes back to Dec 2008, and it's working as smooth as the day I installed it after the HDD upgrade. The Toshiba too has it's OS install from around that time frame, with excellent performance.

The key is avoid installing useless programs and to do some basic maintenance once in a while. I too run Diskeeper on auto defrag mode and it certainly helps to keep the hard drive in great condition, v.2010 even prevents most fragmentation

IE6 has more holes in it than swiss cheese. In fact, even IE8 is a miserable browser . I am an Opera fanboy, so for me, nothing comes close to it Seriously though, FF and Chrome are also very decent choices. But IE? Never!
See an interesting browser comparison from TH.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/firefox-chrome-opera,2558.html

They tested Opera 10.5 which according to some is quite glitchy, that may have contributed to some of the negative points against Opera. I am still using 10.10, may upgrade to 10.51 soon.

 

If only you had a clue what you were talking about. Ever hear of defragmentation? Did you know that if you leave your system idle (and don't turn off the wrong service) that the system will automatically defragment the drive for you? But ignoring that FACT, wanna give us some empirical evidence of how much your scenario would actually slow things down. Measurements only, none of this "well I just know" or "it feels slower" balderdash. Measure it and tell us.

Gary

 

Who said anything about MSN? Some folks do use and need the messenger service.

Really? It most assuredly WAS. The report of a problem with the Upek software was reported back to Microsoft. In turn the software was fixed BECAUSE of the report and an update was published. If everyone turned off this reporting how would bugs be uncovered. Oh wait I know, Joe and Jane are expected to call Microsoft and say "My software just died. Huh? What? How should I know what the error message was? No I don't know what the state of the AX register was, and what are registers?" Yep error reporting is totally useless, complete waste of time.

You've got to be freakin' kidding me. You are suggesting folks turn off logging? I am not even going to dignify that RIDICULOUS suggestion with more of a comment than that.

Do you understand the concept of events in an operating system? A service consumes no CPU at all until a corresponding event invokes the service. And do you understand the concepts around memory management where unused memory segments can be paged out until needed?

Oh how quaint, you know where every file is and what every word is in every file. For the rest of us mere mortals who have thousands of client related documents, we don't want to be bothered with memorizing the fact that the information about a flux capacitor was in the Spacely Sprockets file from 1998. No we bought a computer to do such mundane tasks as remembering that sort of stuff.

Again I am not even going to dignify this assertion. It goes beyond the ridiculous.

Gary

You like to be in charge, because we all realize you know so much more about the operating system than the folks who wrote it and you know exactly what is and what is not needed.

Let me make sure I get this Ferrari analogy correct. Your system is being equated to a vehicle. And the vehicle is complaining of a shortage of hauling capacity (running out of ram). So your solution is to make sure the car is faster, not to add more hauling capacity. So now your vehicle will go down the road quicker but still have things hanging out the windows and on the roof because there is not enough room in the vehicle.

Yep, you really are in charge. And you really do no more about these sorts of things than the operating system designers.

Gary

 

lol @ scuderia..but im totally with you. Defrag doesn't really matter anymore, since Windows automatically sorts out the files by itself. The file management is so good that even after huge installations (e.g. games) there is no fragmentation at all. Slowdown as i said is quite likely due to your JKDefrag...i find defragmenters that say "complete defrag, optimize" yadda yadda tend to make my computers run slower than ever.

and i believe somebody mentioned that a lot of crap being installed and never taken out. Thats another reason.

 

I never use GUI defrag, I always use the Microsoft version command line in command prompt. Defrag driveletter: /v /w /r if you want to know what they're for open command prompt in admnistrator mode and use "defrag /?". I think windows uses the lighter/weaker/faster defrag when you use the GUI version.

 

Read my post using the link in my signature line. Windows does do the defrag, but ONLY if certain conditions are present. As stated in my post, these conditions are often NOT present in the typical usage patterns of most laptop users. My post does not talk about using some fancy schmancy new super dooper defrag. It is a method to force windows into thinking that the "certain conditions" are present and allows it to do its own defrag.

In addition, this is NOT a typical defrag either. Windows has that AND a special one specifically for the boot files that not only defrags them but optimizes their placement for faster boot times. This is no smoke and mirrors, it really does help speed things up if that special defrag has never been run since drivers and startup files were added or changed.

Again, read the post, it's all there in detail.


As for a lot of crap being installed and never taken out, unless these were startup items, that would have zero affect on boot times. Even if they involved registry stuff. That whole notion that a clean registry makes for a faster boot time is hogwash. Only small very specific portions of the registry are ever read during boot up.

Gary

There is no gui version any more, gone in Vista and Win7. In addition there are other command line options that are only documented in MSDN or TechNet that never appear with the /?. Refer to my post via the link in my signature line for the comand line switch that defrags and optimizes the boot files.

Gary

 

uh...i said that these 'fancy schumancy' defragmenters were not to be used... maybe you should read my post more carefully

as for the loads of crap, yes it does slow boot times. If you forgot Superfetch.

 

I was not disagreeing with you, I was agreeing that there is no need for any third party defrag. Not sure why you are taking such offense. But I went on to point out the fact that the Windows defrag doesn't always get an opportunity to run. Did you take a look at the link I suggested?

I am not forgetting Superfetch at all. It only fetches the stuff you actually use. If you install something and don't continue to use it, it will not affect boot times UNLESS it involves some driver, startup app or service.

Gary