Jump to content

Official - Windows 10 Worst Crap Ever!


bookie32

Recommended Posts

A single app running in the background that doesn't identify that it is there but is using system resources might be a T-word.

I'd like to see more of the good T-word, Truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Got a tweaked Win 10 v1703 build 15063.413 down to 66 processes and 1.3 GB of RAM to host an empty desktop.  It's now utterly silent online unless I do something that initiates communications. 

66Processes.png

That took heroics; when I started it was at over 100 processes.

I updated a tweaked Win 7 VM earlier today and glanced at Process Hacker while I was in there.  38 processes.  That took a lot less effort than wrangling Win 10.

Win 8.1:  42 processes.  More effort than Win 7, but not nearly as much as 10.

In Win 10 v1703 now almost all the svchost.exe wrappers are now hosting just one service.  I can't measure or sense an improvement in performance because of this - and I've tried.

They claim it'll make a system that has crashing services more stable.  I haven't had services crash in a very long time.  Justification?  "Most computers have more than enough RAM now".  Yeah, THAT's a good reason to make something more wasteful for no practical benefit.  NOT!  Maybe we have more RAM because we need to do more work with our computers.

I keep trying and trying to find a way to want to adopt the latest Windows for my workstation and they keep working and working to ensure I just can't love it - or even like it.

-Noel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NoelC said:

I keep trying and trying to find a way to want to adopt the latest Windows for my workstation and they keep working and working to ensure I just can't love it - or even like it.

-Noel

Well I, for one, admire your determination....I gave up a long time ago after all the problems trying to fix things in this version of Windows. I just accept that Microsoft has lost the plot and carry on with Windows 7...

bookie32

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, NoelC said:

They claim it'll make a system that has crashing services more stable.  I haven't had services crash in a very long time.  Justification?  "Most computers have more than enough RAM now".  Yeah, THAT's a good reason to make something more wasteful for no practical benefit.  NOT!  Maybe we have more RAM because we need to do more work with our computers.

may be true, but there's one single good point. when I find out that a service is going berserk, I can easily kill it without having to kill other just because they share a process. Sometimes this happened when I lost network connectivity just because the LAN port isnt perfect and stuff and immediately cranks up my Laptops CPU up to 100% and I kinda cant find out which service is at fault because a whole lot of them are in one of those processes.

but one thing that might help would be just annihilating services that arent needed. and not creating a service for literally every little crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A slow day at Crapspreader, Inc.:  Gourmet Crap,  a million crows can't be wrong, can they?  Saute your apps with programming fluff.  A mystique setting that makes your mouth water.  You don't even have to logon, MS will do it for you and load you up with choice ops, will make you think that this must be good.   Sorry, just dozed off.  Must have been a dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 2:30 AM, NoelC said:

Got a tweaked Win 10 v1703 build 15063.413 down to 66 processes and 1.3 GB of RAM to host an empty desktop.  It's now utterly silent online unless I do something that initiates communications. 

That took heroics; when I started it was at over 100 processes.

I updated a tweaked Win 7 VM earlier today and glanced at Process Hacker while I was in there.  38 processes.  That took a lot less effort than wrangling Win 10.

Win 8.1:  42 processes.  More effort than Win 7, but not nearly as much as 10.

In Win 10 v1703 now almost all the svchost.exe wrappers are now hosting just one service.  I can't measure or sense an improvement in performance because of this - and I've tried.

They claim it'll make a system that has crashing services more stable.  I haven't had services crash in a very long time.  Justification?  "Most computers have more than enough RAM now".  Yeah, THAT's a good reason to make something more wasteful for no practical benefit.  NOT!  Maybe we have more RAM because we need to do more work with our computers.

I keep trying and trying to find a way to want to adopt the latest Windows for my workstation and they keep working and working to ensure I just can't love it - or even like it.

-Noel

there so much modules that explorer.exe  load.

they relate to metro and other unneeded stuff, cant find way to control it ,just removing the files.

some of them unsafe to remove else it will crash its really bugs me

Edited by aviv00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Explorer's instability that may occur in the long run is related to all Metro extras. It seems like a step backwards in that regard.

BTW, any idea if sync provider notifications are applicable to anything else except OneDrive?

2 hours ago, aviv00 said:

they relate to metro and other unneeded stuff, cant find way to control it ,just removing the files.

That's the deal, no switches to turn stuff off. These things are coded without much fallbacks in place. Reading this forum, performing even less drastic measures tends to quickly break something, like updating process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Maybe Explorer's instability that may occur in the long run is related to all Metro extras. It seems like a step backwards in that regard.

If im trying to unload same module like settings sync dll its crash the explorer

BTW, any idea if sync provider notifications are applicable to anything else except OneDrive?

No idea, but if u go to WindowsRuntime key reg there bounce of keys relate to notification

That's the deal, no switches to turn stuff off. These things are coded without much fallbacks in place. Reading this forum, performing even less drastic measures tends to quickly break something, like updating process.

yes this is bad but in ltsb 2015 its easier to make this happened

removing more modules is possible

Edited by aviv00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, aviv00 said:

Maybe Explorer's instability that may occur in the long run is related to all Metro extras. It seems like a step backwards in that regard.

If im trying to unload same module like settings sync dll its crash the explorer

I actually meant when normally using computer without interfering, Explorer crashes seem more frequent on Windows 10 than on older versions. Although in my case, I was able to solve them by enabling option that puts explorer windows in a separate process. There is also a possibility that it might have been one of the extensions I use, although with the same extensions on Windows 8.1, no crashes out of the box, even without the separate process option enabled. The odd thing about those crashes, the crash reports didn't reveal the crashing module.

Indeed it's easy to crash it by forcefully unloading a module, since the code doesn't anticipate one of the modules randomly disappearing. I think you're only saving a little amount of RAM that way, assuming none of the code paths try to reach the now unloaded module.

I remember reading somewhere some time ago about the possibility of running Windows 7's Explorer on Windows 8, just to have Metro free shell. Might have been the thing before OldNewExplorer came about, which takes care of some usability issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yea cos metro is hooked to it

and metro apps is not stable all the installation updating process there, is new or just not good

taking something simple and make it complex so it will be hard to remove or manage it by non-power user

"was able to solve them by enabling option that puts explorer windows in a separate process."

Im wondering how

Im looking to it cos i want to make lited version thats works ok on non ssd pc or old ones

Less handles less modules , better responsiveness for those old pc

Edited by aviv00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, aviv00 said:

"was able to solve them by enabling option that puts explorer windows in a separate process."

Im wondering how

Control Panel->Folder Options->View->Launch folder windows in a separate process

You do end up with 2 explorer.exe processes. Who knows why that worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, UCyborg said:

You do end up with 2 explorer.exe processes. Who knows why that worked.

thx

i duno why, but im guessing too much modules that not optimized to work  together

try to lite windows or lited windows with those extensions might reduce crashes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to report No Crap today.  The Dell laptop updated to W10 Insider Preview 16226 today with no errors and no loss of WIFI.  Everything tested, worked.  Please excuse the bewildered forum entry.  It's been so long since W10 worked out of the chute.  I can't remember when it ever worked out of the chute and this time on the 11 year old Dell!  Maybe it's the Dell laptop, second wind?  Is it possible that W10 actually worked?  Or has the "Blind Chicken" syndrome kicked in?  It's too hot in Phoenix for Hell to be freezing over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Encore:  No Crap, the MacBook is updated to 16226 with no errors.  Well, the same "old crap" is still there.  The invasive theme of W10 hasn't changed.  And after this miraculous update, the computers are parked in the safe zone, powered off.  The shutdown worked nicely, the computers actually shut down.  W10 functions well in the "safe zone."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 10 months of Win10 on my AMD FX machine, I went back to Win7.

It was really annoying having tons of useless notifications that it needed new information about my Microsoft account, which was working just fine. Then, the permanent communication to the Internet: I didn't care about how much bandwidth it was using, but WHY it was using it! After the last major update, RAM usage went from 1,2 GB to 2,2 GB, all used by new svchost.exe processes, which only two of them were AMD related services!

Now, with Win7, no more useless and unknown CPU and RAM used by a huge OS. Note: I disabled WinUpdate because it used to fulfill RAM (10GB) and CPU (8 cores at 4.2GHz).

I had Win10 even on my 13-inches MacBook Pro from 2010, but after Creators Update, BootCamp drivers went all bad: I couldn't use built-in keyboard or trackpad and it kept going Blue Screen every time I turned on the laptop. Now, with WinXP (yep, the one which uses 70MB at the first startup, not 700MB!) I have no problem at all, it works like a charm.

IMO, Win10 is being crappier every time I turn it on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...