Windows Rot - the Causes

Not intended because there is always my human theory which states that since all the tech we have is made by imperfect man, we will make imperfect tech. Of course if you program everything perfectly then there will be no "rot" or anything.

It could be because of lazy programmers, or faulty coding, a virus with faulty coding. Like lets say i pick up a plate in my hand, and it accidently falls. Did i intend for it to fall? No, but because everything needed for it to fall was there (sweat on my hand, gravity, plate surface having little resistance because it's smooth) all it needed was something to trigger it (loosening of my grip) and bam, it falls. You get me?

 

I've noticed no correlation between the skill of the computer user and occurences of Windows Rot. Some experienced users get it after 4 months, and some complete idiots can keep their Windows install happy after 3 years.

It's an interesting, but not well documented topic. In my amatuerish research on computers displaying the symptoms, I couldn't find any regular occurence of program installations, time spent on the machine, anti-virus software, or browsing habits. It just seemed completely random.

As to this day, I have no idea what causes it, but I keep the installation disks handy just in case.

 

And so it's kind of insulting to hear a casual user tell an experienced user that he doesn't know how to tweak his computer, turn off indexing, unecessary services, startups, virus scan, spyware scan, etc. Can we please at least assume that the other person is not a complete idiot.
About the claim that everything happens for a cause, why is that so specific to programming? Any reductionnist would say the same of everything. It doesn't matter, since no human could in any practical way "run" windows in his head to predict if indeed as a whole it would bog down by itself for some reason inherent to it's programming, predict it before it happens. Some of you are sounding very full of yourselves to be assuming that windows does not rot and that it is the user who did something "stupid" with it.
The very fact that windows has a clock that runs even when you do absolutly nothing to it for 5, 10 years, whatever, just the very fact that by itself it's changing to a state that is not similar to what it was a moment ago means that it can "rot" in a time dependant way. Now i'm pretty sure that the clock wont rot windows in any perceptible way in a human lifetime, but that's not the point. My point is just that neither the guy who witnesses rot and the guy who doesn't witness the rot really know every detail of how windows would run as a whole, so neither one can hold beforehand that windows sometimes rot, or that windows never rot. Though proving that windows sometimes rot is a lot easier to do scientifically than proving that it never rots which would require predicting every situation possible.
So if this guy tells me that he notices that windows slow down over time, in an objectively verifiable way, then lets just take that as a fact.
I don't think there is much merit in the fact that your windows has been running smoothly, so acting like the other is a n00b just because his windows rot is pretentious. If for a reason as silly as moving your mouse over a certain pixel at a certain moment could trigger windows rot, i would not call that "a product of the user's stupidity".

 

Sometime ago, I traded my S-460 for my sister's dv5000.
When I got it, that thing(XP) was booting in about 3 minutes. I uninstalled some crap, and got it down to two minutes. Then, right before I got my new computer I gave it to my dad. He wiped 80% of the remaning software(he only needs internet, and a word processor), and now it boots in one minute fifteen seconds.

I don't know how fast it was when we first got it, but I can tell 1m15s is pretty darn good for a 3yo machine.

Also, I do think speed is user related.
My new 1520(Vista) boots in about 2m20s, that's somewhat close to what I had the HP at, and we have to consider the OS difference. And I bet the s460 is now booting in more than 3 minutes(I'll check on it one of these days)...

 

Daniel G, that isn't the mentioned magical "windows rot" they speak of. It's just bad maintenance, and i pretty sure you could get that boot time down to 30seconds. They say that even if you do all you can to help the computer, it rots. I think it's just voodoo, or some other illusion. Also Spare_tire could you please break up that post? It's kind of hard to read, even if i increase the text size in FF. =\

 

Exactly where I wanted to get. I can't give an example of 'Windows rot' because I haven't experienced it, even with the 3yo machine.

 

I see...even more proof that their so called " Windows rot" is merely chimerical. I think this windows rot can have the garbage lid closed over it because it's just someone's messy work, a statement, with no fact behind it to prove anything.

 

Come on, Calvin . . . chimerical?? Please speak in terms which can be understood by simpletons such as myself. Geez, I have to look up every other word you post in order to understand even slightly the points you're making.

 

Sorry i have language arts teachers who insist on teaching me new words every day. It's not my fault. Well actually i learned that one by myself. Alright what i said was that his post just justified...backed up, my claim that windows rot does not exist, and that it's just someone not doing their maintenance job right, or someone doing nothing but getting lucky somehow. I say it case closed because the fact just overrides the fiction...that is, the truth is stronger than these fabrications.

 

Yeah you could continue to ignore the fact that both me and bc135 are (very) experienced users and have witnessed the so-called 'windows rot' without any apparent explanation to its cause.
Yes I know there's no way it just slows down for no reason at all, but I do believe there must be some sort of inherent flaw in windows (xp) where with regular usage and maintenance, the system gets significantly slower over time, with no obvious way of getting it back up to speed (other than reinstalling windows).

 

Yet a lot of others (for the purpose of this argument let's say just the same amount of people you've mentioned) have not.

There are two sides to this coin, i believe in the logical non-magical way of this, if it "rots" it's because of programming.

Computers aren't sentient beings, once they are they are inherently flawed, but they aren't for now so they are pretty much as flawless as we'll ever be. I don't feel like repeating myself so i'll just ask you to read my last posts about how it can be possible, and give me a supporting post (with facts) about how your "rot" comes about.

Then i will take this chicanery.

 

Windows ROT is a fact of life - love it or hate it.

Sorry I haven't trudged through all these forum pages yet, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

At fault is really the registry and how Windows organizes and handles it.

Every time you plug in a USB device, even if the same device, in a different port, a different registry entry is made, and stays there. Every time you install a program or run the program, more registry entries are created adding to the 'bloat'. Uninstallers have become better but still leave traces of files on the HDD (which usually doesn't contribute to slowdown) and traces of registry entries.

Add spyware, internet toolbars, add-ons, tweaks, etc, they all contribute to the bloat.

IMHO the registry process is a good idea, just executed very poorly.

In the last 10 to 12 years I've managed to be efficient at creating an image of my Windows 95, 98, XP install and restorting them on a regular basis, update again, new image, etc. This process is quick and efficient and keeps the system clean.

I don't know what to do about it, but I've learned to manage...

 

Um duh it's in the programming, I know it's not magic, but you seem to be denying that it happens at all. I'm saying there's probably some sort of flaw in the way windows is programmed. (did you even read my whole post before telling me to read yours (which I already had)?)

 

Yes i have iza, and never have i gotten the notion that you were saying what i was saying, yet it was just a little differently. You say that i say there is no windows rot at all. Yes, by the way you guys have explained it, no. Now i quote:

That user has posted what may be a cause of windows slowing down, but if you clean it properly (he does it by restoring an earlier image) then there will be no "windows rot" as you call it. I say again it is the fault, of someone not dong something properly, and yes i know you said you did all the cleanings, and tweaks, and spells, and what-not but i say you missed something, anything could attribute to your system slowing down because it's not cleaned properly. Windows has faults like that, but not rot that occurs when you clean it properly, and regularly, and are doing everything perfectly.

 

Thanks to iza for voicing some of my thoughts.

This is simply ludicrious. Why have you claimed during this thread that my problem doesn't exist when all these links illustrate that other users do actually experience Windows rot?

http://www.theopensourcery.com/wordp1/index.php?p=399

http://www.theopensourcery.com/wordp1/index.php?p=400

http://blogs.vertigosoftware.com/ja...0/Fighting_Windows_Rot_with_Crap_Cleaner.aspx

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1919007,00.asp

http://www.fus.net/2004/07/windows-rot.html

http://discuss.fogcreek.com/joelonsoftware/default.asp?cmd=show&ixPost=153877

Now tell me that Windows rot isn't a problem. Now, granted that some of these users don't manage their processes or optimize their system, but I do; I know the purpose of each and every process (34) running right now and I know whether I need them or not. I don't install a program unless I need it and I defragment the drive when it needs to be defragged. If you know so much about Windows, why don't you explain to me why this Windows rot phenomenon is occuring? It doesn't just happen to technologically handi-capped people you know.

 

Without access to your machine and a few hours of time, I can't tell you what is causing the "rot". But I can tell you how YOU can find out what is causing it to be slow. Try this link: Sysinternals These tools will help you get to the bottom of the issue, should it be disk i/o, processes hogging the CPU or a registry bloat issue.

These tools can be quite enlightening. As I said in an earlier post all of these "I have it, I don't" arguments are just anecdotal. I don't have it on the three machines I sited, but I have seen it... so I don't deny it exists.

Gary

 

Sorry if this was said prior, I just skimmed over all the posts, people seem to be divided into two groups "yes windows rots" and "no it doesn't if you clean it perfectly", I would fall into the latter. Now I am not going to explain why because most the reasons have been explained by other forum members. But, what I will throw in, in support of windows rot (also something I think some people pro windows rot will agree with), is why should the user have to clean their machine perfectly to keep it running like new?

Yea, us forum members know why and how to, but the average computer user, such as my mom or girlfriend, really have no idea, nor do they care. All they know is that their computer is not working as well as it was when the first bought it, and to me that rot. The user should not have to clean their machine perfectly to prevent this, basic maintenance should do it, but it doesn't so therefor, we are stuck with rot.

 

If you need to point fingers, put the blame on third party software.

 

Undacovabrutha you may not know this but computer manufacturers and software makers make computers with problems to help out the economy.

They purposely leave some problems in to leave jobs for computer techs. But freeware programs, especially open source don't. That's why IE7 is crap, and Firefox is so good because there are outside programmers working on it so they don't leave anything in.

Also bc135 i'll put aside the fact that all you did was google windows rot and say that this argument has two sides which are strong but you can't support one side without the facts you use to support it disproving your own. The reason we can't come to an understanding is because we haven't had time to experience the other side of the argument.

I haven't experienced it like Scud, but he has seen it happen. So unless we have 100's of computers to carry this out scientifically this is pointless because unless i see windows rot, it never existed. And unless you don't see it not-happen, then it does. Now i don't have the time, and money to do the experiment so i shall recede.

 

No they don't. That's bull.

 

I think his point was to say that it's difficult to prove it either way without a controlled environment, a large sample size and taking specific measurements and not just anecdotal evidence. Windows rot, as we are apparently calling it, is difficult to define. I have seen nearly every windows computer I've dealt with for any significant period of time experience slowdown, but a huge percentage of this is actually due to user error and poor maintenance. Personally, I haven't seen extreme slowdown with my Windows machines, in fact, it's been so minimal that I'd have a hard time saying that it's actually there.

The majority of slowdowns I've seen have been caused by too many programs being installed with their own startup items, Norton or McAfee in nearly any form, messy registries, spyware and adware, and poor choice of programs. It's nearly impossible to clean all of this stuff up and restore the computer to a like-new speed without just reformatting. Now, if that's what you call Windows rot, then sure, I've seen it. With proper maintenance, XP and Vista slowdown is negligible, at least in my experience.

 

Sigh.

Yes, with due diligence, you can keep the "rot" to a minimum. But only a few percent of people that use PC's will actually do that.

Other stuff that is hard to avoid also contributes to it. As an example just plugging a USB device into the PC just adds more 'rot' to the system. So over time if you plug in your iPod, digital camera, printer, dozens of different usb keys from various people, switch the USB port connections around a few times (say you move it or clean your PC and don't pay attention what ports they were in) it redetects everything and enters duplicate registry entries.

Try telling my mother, grandmother, wife, father, and thousands of people I work with that want to just use a PC to use it "properly". An OS shouldn't need continued extended maintenance and hours of training. It should work well enough so the layman only has to do periodic cleanings, of which Windows offers zero tools to perform.

Windows offers "desktop icon cleanup" ooooh! wow. It offers disk cleanup - oooh, somewhat useful actually, but just a drop in the bucket.

Cars cost tens of thousands of dollars, yet just need gas to go on a weekly basis, and an oil change every 3-4 months that takes all of 15 minutes... and it just works! An operating system requires hours of maintenance each month to work efficiently and it includes no moving parts. What gives?

 

You can remove those old drivers and related registry entries from the device manager: link

 

There you go. You just answered the OP: Rot can be kept to a minimum; it's not an unavoidable occurrence.

With all due respect, that comparison is not really appropriate. Just because there is a minimal number of moving parts in a computer, and none in the OS doesn't mean that it should be inherently stable. Computer code is not really comparable to a machine. Granted, an OS does take a not insignificant amount of time to keep running optimally, but that doesn't meant that it couldn't be done. The discussion was not on whether or not my grandmother would be able to keep Windows running quickly (she couldn't, she's never used a computer in her life ), it was whether or not "rot" is unavoidable.

It seems that there are multiple people, myself included, that think it is. We have drawn this conclusion from individual experience. This leads me to believe that rot that is "unavoidable" for some people is actually caused by some choice(s) that the user is making, whether it's what software they install, their cleaning regimen (or lack thereof), what hardware they use, etc.

 

Also, your quotation of yourself is... well... it basically says that Windows rot could exist. Lazy programmers, faulty coding, or a virus / other unwanted software are at the top of the list for causes of rot. I'm not sure what you were trying to prove with that statement but it doesn't seem to be furthering your point.

And it's you're, not your.

 

Hey,

Back to topic... My experience... Well, I did experience windows rot but it turned out it was crap like Macfee that was messing up my computer. . . On the other hand, after I learned my lesson I experienced no windows rot. Periodic defrag and cleaning were all I needed.
It has been 2 months and my vista system is still running perfectly...

I read something earlier about M$ making mistakes on purpose to make jobs for computer technicians. Using IE as an example, however, M$ apparently isn't doing a very good job. Instead of spending money to get a computer technician I simply got pissed and switched to firefox instead.

 

Cool it guys!!

Thread reopened.

Posts have either been edited or deleted. I dont mind people having differing POV on an issue but try to keep a level of civility.

BTW, I am not quite sure if Windows rot exists or not...but Thread rot surely does!

 

Well Patrick:
There's websites you can't browse, but for everything else, there's firefox. Sorry, i just had to say that, i've held it in for too long.

 

Software code, wether its windows or open source will eventually rot, not meaning organically rot, but will be outdone by future programming and revisions. If this wasnt true, why arent you still using older versions of windows?
Programming is done to satisfy the mass audience, not cater to the individual. Meaning if your registry didnt leave entries everytime you ran a program or plugged in your camera then it would take longer to initialize for each use. By keeping the registry entries you actually use, it speeds up your overall activities. But if you never intend to use that devise again (or rarely) then it will add to the overall mess. No program can forsee when you will use the program again, or a devise for that matter. So, by default, its gets ready in case you ever want to use it again.
Also take into concideration of the commercial aspect. By making a program start up everytime you turn on your computer makes you more likely to use that program. The more that you use a program, the more likely you are willing to purchase/use the newest version that comes out.
Now lets talk about hardware rot..

 

In any case, I know that something is wrong when I compare the behaviour of a Linux system with a Windows system. If I install/uninstall programs frequently, Windows will slow down. These programs write registry entries and folders without deleting them upon uninstallation. This is my primary suspicion of why Windows slows down; its design. I can criticize it's design simply by comparing it to the Linux OS.

By design the registry is horrendous. Like Jalf said, here you have a large file that contains data about all the program settings and installed programs in a centralized fashion; the editting of the registry is not really monitored by the system as any installed program can write anything to it. This not only results in operating system performance issues, but it also introduces problems from a stability and security standpoint.

From the security/stability design perspective the registry is flawed; being a centralized, system critical component with little or no write control, it is understandably an ideal target for any programmer writing malicious code.

Linux (Ubuntu in my experience), on the other hand, has no registry to speak of and uses a modular fashion of storing data and installing packages; every program (even the GUI and kernel) on the system can be fixed (not sure about fixing the kernel, but it can be completely replaced assuming the system is up) by simply purging the package from the system and reinstalling it with no residual data left behind. Program settings are kept in the /home folder made for each user and records of what packages are installed are kept in text files that, if rendered unusable in some way, can be recreated by the APT package management tool.

The design differences between Windows and Linux are analogous to a laptop and a desktop; the former (Windows) has parts soldered right onto the motherboard, making the system impossible to fix without a huge, expensive repair (reformatting is, we all know, very time consuming). The latter has modular, replacable parts that are easy to replace; from my personal experience, I would even go on to say that this analogy extends even further to performance, reliability and stability, but that is another topic for another day.

The advantages of the Linux OS design really becomes evident when compared to the centralized structure of Windows. I'm not a Linux fanboy or anything like that since I understand that Windows has it's advantages in terms of hardware and gaming compatibility (due to manufacturer and developer support really, not Microsoft's design), but that's what I believe is the problem behind Windows.

 

I hate the word "rot."

 

In addition to using CCleaner and Autoruns, I'd also add:

1. ToniArts EasyCleaner for removing empty/unnecessary files/folders. This is the only thing I use it for. It's powerful, safe, and thorough.

2. JV16 PowerTools from Macecraft. Does a great job of cleaning the registry (can choose safe or aggressive, can filter, etc.), has a registry compacting function, and several other useful tools. My 3-year old Gateway desktop runs just as perfectly today as it did when new. (Well, better since I got rid of the initial crapware when it came home.)

3. Organization. If you keep your files/folders organized, Win runs much more smoothly. If you just dump everything on your desktop or in My Documents, it groks things up. Windows likes organization.

4. Firewall. And check your outbound logs for signs of bot behavior.

And rootkits/bots are reportedly really proliferating through new infection methods. No longer necessarily need to click an email attachment or open a program. Supposedly, it's now possible to get infected just by visiting web pages.

 

Are these programs free, sanpabloguy? I might try them out sometime.

 

JV16 PowerTools is free to try for 30 days. Fully functional. www.macecraft.com.

ToniArts Easy Cleaner can be downloaded from http://personal.inet.fi/business/toniarts/ecleane.htm. It also has a registry cleaner, compactor and several other options. It's kind of a "safer" version of JV16 Powertools. Not quite as thorough.

 

I was once infected through JavaScript.

 

That's plausible but that would have to only be the beginning of how it happened. The javascript probably told your browser to open a window infected with something. javascript isn't that powerful at all. It would never be able to do that.

 

Advanced windows care is a good combo with ccleaner and is actually more efficient and picks up alot more registry fixes. Also defragging your registry also improves performance.

 

For me, windows rot is not an issue, but that is because I just simply know what I am doing. For me, everytime I have users/friends that have issues with their computer, these areas I alway check first.

regedit - I check 2 places
HKLM\software\microsoft\windows\current version\run
HKCU\software\microsoft\windows\current version\run

start up folder
root\Documents and Settings\userid\Local Settings\Temp
root\temp
root\windows\temp
services.msc

In these areas, you can find almost anything that can cause "windows rot".

Registry issues are tricky and complicated, and even with registry cleaners, this may not do the job. And of course any viruses/rootkits not detected by updated virus scanners can do the same.

Many times, imop, the rot problem is installing/uninstalling software/updating drivers, which in every instances touches the registry. DLL hell was a huge problem with win9x and was the main culprit of windows rot, although with win2k and xp, it was not so much. Really I hope microsoft junks the registry, it creates so much dependencies, which is the real problem.