Kmuland

I use XP,SP2, folders using always list view (no thumbs or other crap) and when I need to browse a folder with tons of files.. (>10.000 pics for example) with XP windows/explorer.. I have to wait long time.. same waiting when I select 10.000 files and I press copy/cut/paste... I have noticed that using Norton commander like apps the waiting time is really smaller, also if I have accessed to one of these big folders recently and I return to the folder, the access is done instantly (some cache somewhere?) There is any registry hack of fix for XP to get same speed when browsing/editing these big folders with the XP explorer as the other Commanders? (PLZ.- Im not a newbie so don't reply about use antivirus/malware removal. I know that this is a "Feature" of XP.. the delay is cause XP reads some extra data on each file when accessing, and I want to get rid that process. Just display the files and names)

dont show icons: [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Control Panel\Desktop\WindowMetrics] "Shell Icon BPP"="0" "Shell Icon Size"="0" "Shell Small Icon Size"="0" kill explorer.exe and reload

oh thanks for the post.. these tweaks are useful for detail view... Using the list view to display only filenames is faster. Anyway windows continue reading the files... maybe for prepare the time estimation if you select all of them and do right click or press shift+del. The command lines options are useful here: rmdir /s /q folder Removing that stupid "read of files for time estimation" for the copy/move/del animations boxes would be better for increase system performance when doing these tasks

The coder of Far Manager (Norton Commander like app) gave me the explanation: "Explorer enumerates all files to count total size and to display a progress bar. Far by default deletes without a progress bar. If you change this option - far also will slow down." There is a way to disable progressions bars in windows and the previous count size?

oh.. I dont have any program installed but audio/video drivers.. no antivirus, no internet, nothing! (its a dedicated machine for encode video, and these apps are portable) I notice that explorer.exe increases cpu usage when "reading" the folder I bet that is a problem of explorer.exe..

Everyone know the problem. Open a folder with for example >10.000 files and there is a waiting time until windows show them. Much worse... select now these files and press Shift+del.. and there will be a tedious waiting.. maybe minutes until the process start. If I use programs like Norton comander... for XP .. these ones that uses a MS-DOS like gui to display files.. (like this http://relaxander.webest.net/fn/ the folders open instantly.. the deletetion process is also instantly... Why? There a way to solve this bug or feature of windows? a registry edit? I use list view when I browse folders.. .. could be possible that the creation of >10.000 tiny icons would cause the delay? Maybe getting rid of these icons the process would speed up?

Meanwhile I go to search a PE bootable enviroment with WMI support... If anyone know one with the WMI let me know.. so not necessary to the coder to change the program if its working ok

hi!! Its possible create a version of the program without the WMI requirement? or a way to skip WMI requirement? Every OS that I have installed is stripped .. and I tried with all my bootable windowsPE CDs and everyone have WMI removed I tested your program in a friend´s computer (with a bloated full XP install).. and the USB created works pretty nice!!!

ok I removed "micro2003" and replaced by nlited 2003 ... anyway if you want to close this post.. close it

umm probably this option sounds better.. try to strip 2003 explorer to the max... remove features inside this explorer.. Ill search for registry tweaks allowing that

umm but after check all these posts.. no solution is available... and the info seems gone.. Anyone conserve the info or much better the edited files to replace the XP shell with the NT4 one?

wow thanks for the info!!! exactly the thing I was looking for

Im using a nlited 2003 version.. stripped at max.. and no themes or stupid visuals enabled. Everything off... (I only look for max performance in the programs that I really want to use.. and not waste resources in GFX/visuals/etc) Maybe there are registry settings that can improve performance... use 256 color windows and icons.. (if anyone have ones.. plz post). I can downgrade happily if that will speed up the GUI Anyway the classic GUI of 2000 performs faster than 2003 one... probably M$ killed the fast 2000 gui when they wanted to add support for themes in the XP/2003 gui

The reason for use the 2000 shell is cause is fast.. and and pleasure to use. When I did some tests.. the performance between 2003 and 2000 is similar... but the 2D GUI My idea would be have the best of both worlds.. Everyone that uses 2000 knows the pleasure of have a fast GUI.. but there is no reason to continue using 2000 since 2003 is more compatible with current programs than 2000 I dont have the knowledge to create an hybrid like that.. but would be a nice project.

I was testing lately 2000 and 2003.. the explorer.exe in 2000 is really much faster and responsive than 2003(XP)... I wonder if could be possible use the explorer engine of 2000 into 2003. Some registry changes can help? or I need to replace files? I remember the 98lite project.. where they used the fast win95 shell into win98.. they did the trick replacing some files of 98 with 95 ones. I wonder if there is something similar for 2003.. cause 2000 shell is really fast.

thanks for the info pal.. seems that Ill stay with 2003 forever.. or until m$ decide to bring back the 2D accel

everyone have checked these videos showing the problem in win7 my question is... happen the same in Server 2008 R2? happen the same in Server 2008? currently using 2003... and I dont know if update.. I dont want a performance downgrade. Only 2D apps usage here

thanks for the info pal!! I was checking and yes.. it was a drivers problem.. so I tested new ones and now my tests are the same with audio on/off

Im using xp-sp2/q9550.. When I disable the audio service I get a really noticeable boost in cpu performance.. ( realtime rendering jobs.. and similar intensive cpu tasks) Ok I know that nobody would disable this service by default... but why not when you are not working with audio and need extra cpu? My question is: There are other tricks like this one? disable other unnecessary hardware devices or other classics/default things that your apps maybe dont use and consume noticeable cpu?

hi guys!! external USB HD with 7200.11 drive also have troubles? It need the firmware update?

drive is using FAT32.. anyway the lack of support for NTFS makes me think to go back to XP in these old computers

In the win98 machine .. yes.. I have it installed.. In the winME machine not cause I never had USB problems until now I think Its a problem of SATA drivers missing

I have a new external USB-HD drive... its an 1TB external SATA HD. The HD works perfect in XP but the drive is not recognized into win98 and ME There is some update/fix/hack to enable SATA in win98/ME? Thanks

I already have very stripped XP with Nlite.. all "visual" stuffs disabled, using really few services.. and no programs loading at startup.. running all my programs as portable versions I only look for fastest computer response.. and minimal memory usage--- so I was thinking about improving system resources using the win2000 shell instead of the XP one

cause some programs dont work properly on win2k :/