GrofLuigi

I didn't know about this. I thought it was called matrix because it allowed mixing of IDE and SATA. And creating RAID sets from partitions surely doesn't look bulletproof (for one, adding another layer of complexity = asking for trouble). GL

I'm not asking about unattended, just everyday usage. Anyway, with this particular program it doesn't matter (i've put it in user's start menu startup), but I have another one that I want to be started as soon as possible. Also, I want to try my ideas of rearranging the order of startup programs. I couldn't find definitive info on the exact startup order - for example, some kind of table - where it would say hklm/run first, then hklm/start menu, then hkcu/run... then startup scripts... then logon scripts... Or maybe it isn't guaranteed - there is some paralelism and there is no guarantee which will come first? I often see the order of the tray icons changed in consequent reboot (and there is no icon hiding here ) so that would mean some of the programs started faster/slower than before. One factor for this could be drive fragmentation, for example. But, when I think about it, something has got to come first. I've read there are programs for this, but they insert delays - and I don't want that. GL * Edit - and what about the order of several items in one place (start menu, for example)? Who gets executed first? I read there is also no guarantee for this.

I have a commandline program that I want to execute on every boot (hdparm with some parameters, not decided yet on all, I just know I need - B 254 to stop the annoying HDD head parking clicks). The OS is Server 2003 used as a workstation. Where to put it so it gets executed as soon as possible? From googling I think hklm/run, but maybe there's another more suitable place (I haven't found definitive info on startup order - does autoexec.bat come sooner or later)? Thanks. GL

Don't laugh... by calc.exe. And others. Some "smart" copy protection shemes (trial programs) - DRM would be too heavy word for it - also insert themselves there. And take a look at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\IniFileMapping In theory, you could get rid of a good part of your registry by deleting that key (don't try it!). GL

Thank you, it certainly is promising, but: 1. It seems complicated - I'll need some time to devour it. 2. Nothing silent or unattended please - I want loud and attended (monitored and controlled). 3. I don't want all packages - I want as little as possible (if anything can be stripped, good). 4. I'll have to do 1. to see if 3. applies. GL *EDIT - I needed admin point, that's why this thread was useful

I came back searching for this after some time. Really useful, can it be stickied somewhere? GL

They are needed, don't delete them. GL

No point keeping wuaucpl.cpl.manifest if wuaucpl.cpl doesn't exist. I delete both and haven't had any problems. GL

This is why I wouldn't recommend Yahoo. Even if all of the above is not true, this is what I know: That 'feature' was on for only couple of minutes after I first signed up - just until I navigate to the page to disable it. I never gave this address to anyone. I was never infected with spyware/virus (and it doesn't matter, because it's webmail). Yet to this day, several years later, I receive spam on that address. I leave the conclusion to the reader. GL

I agree with iamtheky. If you can't use Windows file sharing, next best would be FTP, because: - You need only TCP/IP protocol. - It can reach (nearly) the top speed of your network. I doubt there's anything (significantly) faster. - You don't depend on one vendor/program or even operating system. There are many clients/servers. - But might be a little tricky to set up, depending on the software. GL

Have you used "set AllowAllPaths = TRUE" ? Can you expand it to another place and copy it to system32\DRIVERS ? Sometimes (often?) error descriptions are not accurate (something else is wrong). GL

To make a statement? GL

No, but it worked OK - there was some power management going, just don't know how much. (The original UnNlited inf was installed with "update driver".) I haven't gotten yet to try a full installation. The main thing I want to check is if intelppm.sys EVER gets installed with this hardware. Anyway, for power management of the processor I use RMClock and/or CrystalCPUID which work beautifully (the former just doesn't recognize half multipliers). And software UNDERVOLTING kicks a$$. GL * Edit - I doubt Server2003 or XP power management bothers to change multipliers/voltage on the fly, so those utilities are essential. For Vista, I don't know, but from the Control Panel applet I've seen on another computer, it isn't clearly exposed what does it do.

They were probably so thrilled they got it working that they forgot to assume that higher speed will appear. I always enable it and have seen devices with both lower and higher rates. I *think* (after all, I'm not an insider) it enables, but not restricts to. B) GL

But I doubt they'll allow the true crap to be removed. GL

Windows tries to read [HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\Explorer\NoCDBurning] - verified with ProcMon. GL

If USB keyboards also don't work, try resetting CMOS by pulling the battery out for a couple of minutes or using jumpers, if any. In the (distant) past, there were cases of PS/2 circuits blowing off if mouse was plugged in keyboard port or vice versa. There were even fuses. GL

Thank you Anders, Very nice first post. I will try it when I have some more free time. GL

Windows won't boot if you remove tcpip.sys. Try removing all networking components, that'll stop them for a while. If you are allowed to, consider cutting wires off the ethernet connector or filling it with glue or something. For bluetooth and wireless, I don't know... you might be out of luck. In any case, try something with group policies - their sole purpose in life is to prohibit things. But they can be circumvented... GL * Edit: Set a BIOS password of course - on laptops it's not so easy to find the CMOS battery.

You guys had too much time on your hands Good laugh. GL

I thought so before, but recently I switched a 4500 RPM drive with a 5400 one in a 2,5 inch USB enclosure and witnessed a speed increase. Shouldn't the USB bus have been the bottleneck there too? I know it isn't the same, but... Recently I always check before I believe in theory. Anyway, my question above was purely theoretical. It would be inpractical to realise it physically. GL

I wonder if this could have something to do with the problem... (It also applies to Vista) GL

As recently mentioned in a Microsoft's blog, Disabling 8.3 Name Creation on NTFS Partitions improves performance: It's been known for quite some time, but when I checked my computers, I was in for a nasty surprise - I had 8dot3 Name Creation enabled on all of them. Then I remembered I enabled it some time ago when I had problem with some old installer from the 16-bit era. I disabled it, ran some test (plain old file copy) and indeed it was faster. So no problem from now on - but what do I do with all those short names lying on the disk? I had enabled it shortly after initial windows installation, so practically all filenames have short counterparts. Is there a program or method to find all short names on a given partition? For normal folders i'll just copy over and back to/from another partition, but also what about windows' system files? Maybe it won't yield enormous performance, but I want to try. Also, I ran with disabled 8dot3 name creation before and I don't expect problems. GL

I enabled it on a Core2Duo P7350 (mobile) and it didn't crash. But how do I determine/measure if it has any effect? GL

Since SATA appeared, I wondered if an IDE device connected through such an adapter to a SATA USB HDD box would show any difference in performance. I know it shouldn't in theory, but was someone crazy enough to try it? I don't have all the necessary hardware. GL Edit: to clarify, two identical USB HDD boxes - one SATA, one IDE (or one box with the two interfaces, if such a box exists), one IDE HDD.