HELP MICROSOFT DISASTER(again!!)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Timmyv
  • Start date Start date
T

Timmyv

I've got windows XP re-installed(after formatting my whole
(and only) C:\ drive) because I was affected with more
than one virus(MS-BLAST and some unpreannouncable) I
bought systemworks with antivirus I'm using ad-aware-
scanner and sygate firewall. Is it normal my computer
(wich is a 2400Mhz AMD Athlon 512 MB ram 40GB HD with
25GB Free) runs like a 486 from the early nineties, I
tought this might have something to do with the installed
software so uninstalled en re-installed it, but there was
no difference, even without any software it runned like
crap. Under Linux(not loaded when I'm running XP
offcourse) it's working at full speed so there's nothing
wrong with the hardware.
HELP ME!!!!!!!!!
 
Timmy;
See if this link can help:
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/Slowcom.htm
Click to expand...

regarding this article:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=815411

Does anyone understand what it's actually saying?
Seems like it's gibberish to me.

The first sentence:
"This fix in the Windows XP Service Pack 1 (SP1) and Windows Server
2003 heap algorithm was released to better handle a particular
atypical and uncommon sequence of heap requests by a private,
internally developed program that is not commercially available."

If this was such a rare occurrence, why was the "heap alogorithm"
changed to accomodate it? And make performance worse for
average users? And what does the "fix" do?

Dave
 
Dave;
As the article states, the issue is caused by a "private, internally
developed program that is not commercially available".
You need to contact Microsoft if you think you may have that program
installed.
For whatever reason. Microsoft chose not to name the program.

The fix will only be furnished if you have this issue and the program
installed on the computer.

The change did not cause a performance loss for the average user.
Only computers with this program have the performance loss referred in
this article.
If you are having performance issues and you do not have that program,
this article does not apply and the fix will not solve your problem.
Your solution is elsewhere.
 
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:15:04 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
Dave;
As the article states, the issue is caused by a "private, internally
developed program that is not commercially available".
Click to expand...
What *is* the issue? Why was the "Heap algorithm" in XP changed to
accomodate this one program? Something is not adding up.
You need to contact Microsoft if you think you may have that program
installed.
For whatever reason. Microsoft chose not to name the program.

The fix will only be furnished if you have this issue and the program
installed on the computer.

The change did not cause a performance loss for the average user.
Only computers with this program have the performance loss referred in
this article.
Click to expand...
I already have this fix; that's not the issue. And I did notice an
improvement in the startup times of some apps, for example
Sound Forge (although I doubt very much whether that's what MS
is referring to in it's somewhat coy and apparently untrue
statements.)

Don't forget, the original title of this article was:
"Programs Run Slower After You Install Windows XP SP-1"
If you are having performance issues and you do not have that program,
this article does not apply and the fix will not solve your problem.
Your solution is elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Regarding this "problem" and it's apparent connection to the
unnamed program:
What was the situation in XP gold; what happened when SP1
was applied, and what does this latest fix do?

Dave
PS this fix was available on the net at a non-MS location for a while;
that's how I got it, and I'm sure, many others.
 
The Heap algorithm was not changed to accommodate this one program,
this one program has issues with the change implemented by SP1.

You would have to contact Microsoft for details on the fix directly.
I have no need for the fix and so I have never even seen it.

I know it was available, some on these newsgroups referred to it.
However considering the scope of the fix and that these types of fixes
often cause issues with non applicable computers, I never suggest an
ill advised fix such as this.
Furthermore, getting a Microsoft fix from a non Microsoft source is
asking for trouble.
There is no assurance to the quality of the fix from illegal sources.

Lastly Microsoft attempts to control these fixes because they often
have not been able to fully test them.
That combined with an illegal source drives the credibility of the fix
you got to the bottom.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html
 
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:59:19 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
The Heap algorithm was not changed to accommodate this one program,
this one program has issues with the change implemented by SP1.
Click to expand...
Then presumably the fix was written to accommodate this program.
Still sounds incredible to me. Obviously something *extremely*
important.
You would have to contact Microsoft for details on the fix directly.
I have no need for the fix and so I have never even seen it.

I know it was available, some on these newsgroups referred to it.
However considering the scope of the fix and that these types of fixes
often cause issues with non applicable computers, I never suggest an
ill advised fix such as this.
Furthermore, getting a Microsoft fix from a non Microsoft source is
asking for trouble.
There is no assurance to the quality of the fix from illegal sources.

Lastly Microsoft attempts to control these fixes because they often
have not been able to fully test them.
That combined with an illegal source drives the credibility of the fix
you got to the bottom.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. The only effect I got from the
patch was that some apps started faster.
I'm very much aware of the risks of malware. However, this file
passed all virus scans; nobody reported anything amiss with it,
and thirdly it's protected by full digital signatures .

Dave
 
Dave;
Apparently you did your homework before installing that patch.
I wish everybody would, that would add more safety to sites like that.
However most do not, so there is always a question of what they really
downloaded and installed.

Also, I realize the vast majority of the sites giving such patches are
giving valid patches.
However some do not and it is nearly impossible to weed the bad ones
out and besides tomorrow the site management changes...

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html
 
Dave;
Apparently you did your homework before installing that patch.
I wish everybody would, that would add more safety to sites like that.
However most do not, so there is always a question of what they really
downloaded and installed.

Also, I realize the vast majority of the sites giving such patches are
giving valid patches.
However some do not and it is nearly impossible to weed the bad ones
out and besides tomorrow the site management changes...
Click to expand...
Thanks Jupiter,
sensible comments. My system is running absolutely fine,
I'm not having any problems before or after that patch.
The only point I tried to make concerned the text of
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=815411

It seems like an exercise in obfuscation, or at
least confusion; apparently even Micrososft didn't really know what
they wanted to say, nor what the effects of the code change was,
since the article's original title was
“Programs Run Slower After You Install Windows XP SP-1”.

I don't know why MS has to be so coy about it. Apparently,
Sp1 did cause certain programs and/or PC's in general
use to slow down;
this whole rigamarole about the program-that-must-not-be-named
is nonsense.

Dave
 
Back
Top