Jeronimo

This depends on so much things. Are you sure (did you check you last preset), are the proper video drivers installed, did it work when vLite was not used, does your videocard support it, are you using any "mirror" drivers (ATITool, UltraVNC)?

Firewall is disabled, but it still blocks applications. Now gimme my prize, gimme, gimme, gimme!

Component Cache (winsxs) was only present in 0.9, it has been dropped in 0.95. It conflicted with Windows Update amonst others.

I now tried with the Link from the Mozilla article and it plays in Windows vLite 0.9 properly. Maybe too much is removed when selecting WMP under 0.95? Anyone else has this too? here the direct link too the other video and attached my preset used under vLite 0.95.

I checked it out a bit, but I do not understand why it should be so much better than ffdshow. I like that 1 because it seems to be fairly compact and have everything I need in "1" (seperate audio/video interface).

Tried now with another video (other website bandwith was exceeded for the day) so not a complete comparison (vista 0.95, WMP and Codecs kept): WMV Video Applet Test Both Firefox and Internet Explorer show properly (WMP), but MPC does not handle the video properly. http://www.pubclub.com/happyhour/imagesadd/pubclub_lb_2005.wmv::Raw Audio 0 WMAudio Decoder DMO::out0 ACM Wrapper::Output Video is shown, but no audio. Under Vista handled by vLite 0.9 the video plays properly with sound. Have I selected some option to remove ACM or PCM audio codecs or are they removed somehow in vLite 0.95?

I can do an additional test with 0.95 with WMP kept. With 0.9 I have no issues, also I have an additioanl partition for testing, so it is not that much more work compared with a virtual installation.

I tried removing WMP and keeping the codecs, but wanted to see how the video's embedded in the browser would play with Media Player Classic. I used the following guide: Full Step-By-Step Guide: Embedded Windows Media in Firefox After that I needed to install the Media Player connectivity plugin and then the "stream" (WMV) mentioned in the section to where the above link points did not open properly. Disregarding the fact it opened outside the browser, I got an missing codec message in MPC. However I checked in vLite that codecs should remain present. I tried with ffdshow (19-03-2007), but still the media did not open. After installing Windows Media Lite 2.4.0 I got video, but sound is still missing (on audio codecs I still get an error in MPC, but after that it plays). So I got the issue that I would like to drop WMP and have the same functionality (embedded prefereably) with MPC. This is just functionaly, if a WMV-file opens up if I have WMP (vLite'd Vista with 0.9) then I would expect it also to open with another player (vLite'd Vista with 0.95, WMP removed, codecs kept).

Well nuhi, you did the best you could: allow removal off drivers. If no drivers are available for my device(s), then those unkown devices can not cause any additional latency

I checked for this as well, since I would like to remove Task Manager and therefore I would also remove defragmentation. I now use JkDefrag64, I waslocheck the one from AusLogics and it would be a good choice as well. However I like my apps, small and JkDefrag is just 1 file (more if you need a GUI with more options for it). This 1 as well as the one from Auslogics are reviewed here. Another 1 is 1 with a Contig (from Sysinternals) frontend known as Power Defragmenter GUI. Which also seems to do really well.

Ok, now I'm loving it. I read how to use this program exactly today. First thing I tried was disabling storage controllers. iSCSI did not make any difference, but disabling my Jmicron JMB36X controller (on Asus P5B "vanilla") cut down latency to 70us (from 92). Might not be that much, but considering most drivers don't matter altering the setting (Creative Audigy disabled made no difference for example), I consider this quite a big gain.

With almost all counters disabled (PerfOS, PerfProc and WmiApRpl are enabled again automatically) I am willing to believe that latency decreases from 92 to 87. However I need to check further: I also noticed System process takes up 10% right after boot (userinit has stopped) and this goes on until about 32 seconds of CPU time have been used with quite some consistent HD activity. This I had not noticed before and I need to check if this is related to the performane counters as this might not be a good sign (need to check and enable them again to see if it is related).

Less memory usage, does not necessarily mean you gain performance. When you always use 400MB tops on a 1GB machine, it does mean you overpaid. I can understand that the intentions are sound of Superfetch. The tool uses up quite a portion of memory, which can cause portions of other programs to be placed in the pagefile and therefore a degradation might occur there. But that in the majority of cases this is not the cases and programs respond faster when started up. Microsoft is not (that) stupid to create a program to chew up a lot of memory with a tool that provides no additional value. That would only damage their image and have people lose confidence in their products.

Good enough to buy it or you both still in your trial period ;-). I prefer freeware: certain software is not worth buying condsidering the freeware alternatives. You just need to know where to look and accept, that it might not fulfil all your needs. You may need to accept this or find an additional freeware program and indeed otherwise buy it.

Yes Kalabaze that was the tool I have used in the past, thanks!

I tried disabling all performance counters, but no impact on latency. First reboot gave me a blue screen, 2nd boot worked and checked in registry that counters where disabed which was the case. I also had no spikes when my pc was idle, so no comparison for me if this was reduced.

Where can I find this Performance Counters Configuration tool. I had it in the past, but I can not find it anymore. I am at 92us. I have a C2D E6400 @ 3200MHz, but I have EIST enabled so it runs at 2.4GHz (6x400) idle. When disabling it and running at 3.2GHz (8x400), DPC whows consistent around 86us. Disabling my Avast! virusscanner provides no decrease in latency whatsoever. My absolute maximum is at 23us, quite high it seems. However I this does not say anything to me now, beside the fact that with latency less is more (better). I have not read the DPC guide and I intend to do this first before I can comprehend the full meaning and useability of the tool.

Advantage: it improves start-up performance over time of applications, because it recognizes at which time programs are started. Therefore it can be helpful. Disadvantage: what if your using a shared PC, where different users perform different actions at different times. Effect is reduced or can even be a disavantage. Superfetch uses a certain amount of memory, if you do not mind program starting up a bit longer or you have a lot of applications open which take up a significatnt amount of your memory, then I would consider disabling it. I am going to do a comparison for myself to see if it has any value for me, but because of the principles of Superfetch this is quite hard to do. I would need to perform similar tasks at specific times on 2 seperate installations and see if there is really much benefit from Superfetch. This result would be the biggest gain I could ever have from Superfetch.

In my opinion, removing components might be good if done properly. When components are reported missing in Event Log, then this most likely increases the latency, where as when those componnts are present and started (in case of a service), then latency is not influenced or at least not as much. Maybe if there is some way to remove the (performance) monitoring from Vista (not sure if this is a component), then the latency might be reduced. Under XP there was an option to disable Performace Timers(?), not sure if this can be done for Vista. I can understand some people find it useful to see Reliabilty and performance monitor, but I rarely use them. Only for fun from time to time and I add not value to it. I know that if I am overclocking and I have system crash that my system is not that reliable, but if I alter system settings like voltage, then stability is increased, but this not reflected in Reliabiluty monitor. In other words: drop these montioring and logging services if possible. I do want to give a thumbs up to the topic starer: a lot of people look at memory usage and the amount of services started, but this is also an important aspect. I do not share is opinion that this is the holy grail, it is really important but a lot of aspects are important as well. there is no 1 holy grail.

I am quite confused about the data provided. Are you drawing a comparison in Latency between XP and Vista vLite'd? I would expect a compsarison between a Windows version and a *Lite'd Windows version.

I googled and came here. The exact site I could not find, but this will allow you to downloads the selfextracting archive. Please note: not an official site, be careful and check for virusses!

Home Premium has Aero interface, which allows additional selection of Glass. Both with and without Glass it supports Flip3D and Live Taskbar Thumbnails. Home Basic has Windows Vista Standard, which is the Aero interface, without Glass, without Flip3D and without Live Taskbar Thumbnails. It is more clear if you see the additional features like Glass and Flip3D seperate from the Aero interface. Additional features are only supported by Home Premium and upwards. Aero interface is present on all Vista editions. I would like point here, but the information here is flawed or at least confusing (section User interface features). it would be best as following: Windows Aero UI: all Vista versions "Glass": Home premium and upwards.

If you disable pagefile/swapfile (is it around 770MB?) completely and then restart does Vista still not allocate all of your RAM? According to this maximum RAM is 4GB for 32-bit editions. If this covers total memory including pagefile I don't know, but I think so judging from the above.

As jaclaz states, these are the version of Windows you can edit. Both programs can be run on "all" Windows versions

Hehe, no sorry my nose won't fit, cause my arm is too far up there. Probably you do not get the point of a forum Clint? It is a place to help eachother and exchange information. If you looking for a place to boast your ego, please go somewhere else. If you think you can help people here, then try and do so. I must admit I am not always that polite and can flame from time to time, but check my postings, it are not that many, but I do try and help. When I asked you earlier for some information, you provided something, which is not really what you can call enlighting. I was looking for something, to make me wow because you would really know your stuff, not know your way around with an hex-editor.