JorgeA

BlouBul, Welcome back from garden duty! I gave the file a one-word name, put it in a one-word directory under Users (it wanted administrator approval to copy it to the root directory), and then opened it in Word. The loading time was 3:34. What do you think? --JorgeA

dencorso, I tried opening that file from the Run box. Looks like I'm going to need additional assistance here. Typed in the full directory path for both WINWORD.EXE and the Word file in question, and then clicked on the "OK" button in the Run box to get it going. Word itself opened fine, but then I got a series of error messages saying that it could not open the file. As I saw each error message in turn, I noticed that it was trying to open documents that do not exist! What appears to have happened is that as the file's name has several words in it, it was treating each word in the filename as if it were a separate file. For example, if the filename were "dencorso test October 2.doc", it would try to open a file "dencorso.doc", then a file "test.doc", next a file "October.doc", and finally a file named "2.doc", telling me each time that (of course) it could not find that non-existent file. I'll rename the file in question for testing purposes, but -- as with disabling repagination -- that approach would involve reducing Word's functionality (in the sense that I would have to live with hard-to-read filenames), so it would not be practical on a day-to-day basis. --JorgeA UPDATE: I renamed the file to a single word, and tried to open it that way. Turns out that the FOLDER's name would also have to be a single word, as it's looking for subfolders under each individual word in the folder's name.

BlouBul, I'm replying to your post just after seeing dencorso's. I will wait for confirmation on that question before proceeding. It looks like in addition to typing in the entire path for both the program and the document, I also have to include that /n switch, would that be right? By the way, I have to say that it's pretty neat to be having a troubleshooting discussion involving people from at least three different continents. A mere quarter-century ago this would have been unimaginable to probably 99.9999% of people around the world. Amazing... --JorgeA

dencorso, The Word document in question is located in a different folder altogether from the Office12 subdirectory (under Users). Just to make sure I understand -- When entering the filename, I should type in the full directory path for the Word document (in addition to that for WINWORD.EXE), right? --JorgeA

BlouBul, O.K., I disconnected the Ethernet cable from my PC and then loaded the file by doubleclicking on it from outside Word. Time: 3:20. Then, with the cable still disconnected, I loaded the file from within Word. Time: 3:37. Regarding the disabling of DDE, I couldn't find any way to do that in Vista. What do you think? --JorgeA

puntoMX, Thanks a bunch for the tip! I had seen that option before, but then when I noticed the word "code," I would always think "computer code" and, since I'm not a programmer, go on to ignore it as something I wouldn't know what to do with. But now I know. B) --JorgeA

dencorso, Well... At the time, I didn't realize that it made a difference whether you open a file from within Word, or by double-clicking on it off the directory listing. So ALL the tests (for both computers) that I reported the other day were performed from within Word. Moreover (and again, since I had no way of knowing it might make a difference), I opened the file by single-clicking on it in the "Recent Documents" list. (Except for the first time on each computer, of course.) I've repeated the series for the Vista PC, this time by double-clicking as you described. Here are the results: Loading Time, Double-Clicking from Outside Word: 3:44 3:53 3:54 4:31 4:38 5:27 6:30 Even with the flaws in the tests, it's pretty clear that opening the file from outside Word involves a big hit in loading time. --JorgeA

BlouBul, Hopefully this will help to narrow things down a little -- I do have a network cable connected (otherwise I couldn't post here ), and I do not have any compatibility packs installed. My copy of Office is 2007, taken whole out of the original box. Let me know how this affects the diagnosis! --JorgeA

dencorso, I tried all the suggestions in the link BlouBul provided. - Vista doesn't seem to have an option for disabling DDE, as I reported to BlouBul in another post. - I tried the netstat -a command, and it did not return anything that included SYN_SENT. - The Folder Options in Vista also lack a choice to "Automatically search for network folders and printers." At least, I wasn't able to find it. - One of the earlier load time measurements was conducted with Norton 360 disabled. It didn't seem to cut down on loading time significantly. Looks like we're back to square 1. If I'm counting right, we are now up to 10 cents' worth in this thread! Although the advice from everyone has sure been worth a lot more than that. --JorgeA

GrofLuigi, Thanks for the links! There's several useful things there that I could do, although I'm not sure that they would solve my specific issue. I'm bookmarking them so that I don't forget to study them in more detail. --JorgeA

BlouBul, I'm having trouble finding how to disable DDE in Vista. The instructions say to go to Control Panel > Folder Options > File Types, and then from there select Word Documents. I can get as far as the Folder Options, but then there is no choice named "File Types" that I can select, nor any mention of Word. This seems to be a real change in the OS -- check out this thread, especially posts 9 and 10. (Ignore the jerk who spouted off in #11 without offering any actual help or insight whatever.) --JorgeA

allen2, Thanks very much for pointing me to it! Pretty neat how you got the image directly onto the post. I looked up that part of the Options settings on my Word and found it in the same place. But like yours, it's both checked and grayed out. Do you know how to disable background repagination? --JorgeA Edit: I found this link that shows how to disable background repagination. Trouble is, I'd have to work in Draft mode, which I find more difficult to deal with than Print Layout. But at least now I (we) know there is an option, and how to use it.

BlouBul, I appreciate the concern, thanks! Believe me, whatever we decide to do here will end up saving me either time or money. It's probably already saved me the expense of a solid-state drive, and possibly of a new CPU, too. Check out the results in my reply to dencorso, and let me know what you think. Especially in light of the load time in Works. --JorgeA

Sorry, but I remain in doubt. 2:21 min is not so far from the shortest time you obtained in the main machine, JorgeA. While there the values seem to cluster around 3:00 min, this might have been an incredibly lucky single try. To believe it's really different, I guess some more tedious work is needed. We only have facts when they are reasonably validated... So, I suggest you time the opening of the big document 7 times in the Pentium 233, and further 7 times in the main machine. And, then, let's compare the *median* value of each set. If it turns out that the median value of the opnening times in the Pentium 233 is really smaller than in the main machine, then I'd say BlouBul's conclusion is warranted. dencorso, O.K., I've completed the load time test series on both the Win98SE notebook and the Vista laptop. Here are the results: 98SE Vista 1:43 3:25 1:49 3:25 1:50 3:26 1:54 3:26 1:58 3:27 2:01 3:27 2:03 3:28 Out of curiosity, I also tried loading the same file on Microsoft Works (Vista). Load time there was... 1:12. Maybe allen2's hypothesis about Word repagination being the culprit is the correct one! --JorgeA P.S. Is there some way to show a table properly on a post? When I hit the Tab key while preparing a post, all it does is send me elsewhere on the webpage. My intention was for the "98SE" and "Vista" columns above to be more widely separated, for easier reading. I had to resort to hitting the space key (5 blank spaces between items, but only one shows in the actual post).

allen2, Intriguing idea, but I couldn't find any reference to repagination in the Word options. A search of the Office Help files under "repaginate" and "repagination" didn't turn up anything, either. I'm using Office 2007. How do I get to the repaginate-when-opening setting? Or is it located somewhere outside of Word, as such? --JorgeA

BlouBul, Good idea -- I'll try that and let you know what happens. --JorgeA

BlouBul, I loaded the big Word file on my little Pentium-233 notebook. The time on the stopwatch when the file finished loading was 2:21. --JorgeA

CoffeeFiend, Very informative rundown on the various CPU options for my motherboard, thanks! It sounds like the likeliest candidates would be the E5500 and the Q8300. Single threading vs. multithreading is (yet another) one area where I'm fuzzy on the features and benefits. For example, how can I find out whether, given my customary PC usage, I could benefit from having four cores vs. the current two? I just don't know where or how the additional cores would come into play. But speed I can understand, and either of those processors appears to be much faster than my current one! --JorgeA

BlouBul, Thanks for pointing out the /a switch, I did miss it the first time. Oh, and thank you for the method to replicate the Run function. I used it to load Word in one of today's tests. --JorgeA

Trying it with Windows in safe mode is another option. Why not I just wanted to check if some word addon slows it down (easy and quick way to rule something out) CoffeeFiend, O.K., I tried loading that Word file today two different ways: In "little" Safe Mode using the /a switch, and in "full" Safe Mode involving a reboot into the mode. Load time for "little" Safe Mode was 3:47. This is longer than I've been averaging when loading the file the regular way. Load time for "full" Safe Mode was 2:54. This is a bit less than I've been averaging the regular way, but not by much. Neither value seems way out of the realm of possibility. One time it took me well over 4 minutes to load the file "normally," another time it took 2:59. Hopefully we can glean something useful from this information! --JorgeA

BlouBul, Thanks for the explanation about changing the CPU, this is reassuring. I love the excuse!! Today I'll copy the file over to another machine, open the file, and see how long it takes there. --JorgeA

CoffeeFiend, I, too, thought that you meant rebooting in Safe Mode. I'm on Vista, and there's no "Run" option that I can see off the Start button. Closest I seem to be able to get to it is to type "winword.exe" in the Search window, then it finds it and I can click on it. Did try that, and the loading time was no better. Next I tried typing in the entire path in the Search box. The same search result appeared as the first time, but this time I hit Enter instead of clicking on the search result, and then tried loading the big file. Loading time: 2:59. Maybe it's just a darned huge file that simply takes a while to process in its mixed text and graphical elements. We may have to try the "full" Safe Mode route. I'll make time for this today. --JorgeA

dencorso, Thanks for the link on using a RAMdisk, I'll check it out as soon as things settle down a bit. How risky a proposition is it to replace a CPU? This is my main (work) PC, so any tinkering must be of the ultra-safe kind. --JorgeA

CoffeeFiend, Thanks very much for the detailed explanation! Sorry I haven't done the Safe Mode trial yet -- work got in the way today. The available spare time was dedicated to running Crystal DiskMark and to monitoring the loading process with Task Manager. I intend to do Safe Mode and report back as soon as I get a long enough chunk of contiguous free time. I also want to look further into the different CPUs that you discussed. Much appreciated! --JorgeA

dencorso, I just tried the procedure you described. I opened Task Manager to monitor the running processes (CPU usage is shown across the bottom). The maximum CPU usage by Word at any given point as it loaded that file from the RAMdisk was 50%, and the highest total CPU usage reading was 60%. Most of the time both values were much lower. There does seem to be plenty of slack there. I'll copy the file to the Win98SE notebook tonight and see what happens. Thanks for following up. --JorgeA P.S. A faintly related question: If having a RAMdisk doesn't speed up the loading of a big file, then where is the benefit of using a RAMdisk? Back in the times of DOS and floppy disks I would put my WordStar files on a RAM drive, and it made a huge difference when scrolling up and down large documents.