BleepingComputer.com: How To Make Your PC Run Faster

It's been some years since I've last posted here. Not because I disliked the forum, but, I didn't really have anything to post about. Until now. For the past three months or so, my HP Pavilion with XP Home has ran very slow loading my Yahoo browser and my favorite websites. It was to the point that I could impregnate my wife and before the website loaded, the baby would be born. Now, that is a slow computer.

So, this week I decided to try something. My HP Pavilion with XP Home has a built in PC Recovery system. Your's may have one also. If so, here's what I have done. My PC has "Standard Recovery and Full System Recovery. The Standard Recovery is a non-destructive format, which you want lose any files, emails, etc. Your computer manual should tell you how to make a system receover... I use the Standard Recovery system on mine. NOTE: When all is done and you are asked for all the details...Internet Outlook Express sign-up, and Windows Internet Explorer. My HP with XP Home came with Internet Explorer 6 and Service Pack 1, and I love it over the 7 and 8 versions. I didn't want Microsoft Windows Update to do it's thing, so I didn't set the PC to receive new updates. Instead I went to Microsoft Downloads and manually downloaded Service Pack 2. (Which BTW, Microsoft no longer has any updates for Service Pack 2), only Service Pack 3. When SP2 is finished, you can do the same for Service Pack 3 from the download site. When all is done, you will notice the difference is loading your Browser and Outlook Express if you have such. What has happen here, you didn't download all those 134 or more Microsoft Security patches that would have installed on your PC if you had gone the Automatic Update route. I would guess these security patches are in the SP2 and SP3 downloads.

Today, I have my HP Pavilion with XP Home with SP2 and 3 loaded on the computer, and it is as "fast" has it was the day I bought it. Real fast, and unbelievable how the PC works from the past few months.

Doing a recovery on a manufactured PC or a re-install on a built PC is always the most effective way to get the computer back up to snuff. Over time the Windows registry gets bloated with bits and pieces of programs that were uninstalled or are just never used. That bloat slows everything down. A recovery or re-install eliminates those issues. One more step if you haven't done it is to do a defragmentation now that you have done the recovery. This will organize the drive making your system as snappy as it can be. One problem with running IE6 is that even with the service packs and updates there are still gaping security holes and unblocked exploits so run it at your own risk. Personally I am still using IE7 (even though there are risks involved here too)along with Firefox.

Baltboy, on 06 September 2011 - 10:19 AM, said:

No, it really doesn't.

This is good advice, It's not a bad idea from time to time to start from scratch...Of course, the obvious caveats should apply; back up your data, make sure you have all of your installation media and licence keys for any programs that did not come with your PC, and make sure to get all updates and service packs. This can be a bit time consuming for people who are still using Windows XP or Vista, even if you have a high speed internet connection (after XP service pack 2, for example, there is still SP3 and about 120 updates to download and install after that, and Vista after SP2 isn't much better). For XP users, I would suggest upgrading to IE8, not just for the sake of added security features, but because older browsers and plugins may not properly display content. For Vista and 7 users, most websites are now compatible with IE9. It's a more streamlined version, with even more security...and it looks nice. Unfortunately, it is not available for XP users (support for this product ends April 8th, 2014). If you're still using IE6, you've probably already noticed most of your webpages look a little funny or give you a message that you need to upgrade your browser (which will not be possible for people still using 98, 2000,or ME). Firefox may work, but it is not, in my experience, any safer or really all that better than IE. Just an opinion, of course. Again, reloading the system is a good idea from time to time, especially if you fear you are a victim of a nasty rootkit, so all in all, good advice!

This post has been edited by Required Field: 06 September 2011 - 11:03 AM

Required Field, on 06 September 2011 - 11:01 AM, said:

I've used IE8 for some time now, and for me it's not my cup of tea. Too many little things to make the PC run slow, and I have read on many computer forums that most dislike IE8. Have read on these forums that most wedpages were set and designed setup to run IE6, and some still do. That is the reason I get so quick a load and not wait some 30-50 seconds for these webpages to load. I'm staying with IE6 and will not run any security patches that Microsoft send out. It didn't take Microsoft only a few months to throw IE8 out, and come up with IE9, which only runs on Windows 7.

Actually Allan it does. Have you ever had edit through the registry on a computer that has been up for years that you have owned?? I have and there is always chunks and pieces of programs left behind mostly due to bad or just lazy programming. I've found stuff in the registry from programs I uninstalled years ago.

Windows rot is real. I'm always amazed at threads of computer running slow and people are so hesitant to suggest a fresh install.

More opinions for those who want to read:

Registry Bloat

Personally...I think that "cleaning the registry" by any method...is probably a myth created back in the days of Windows 9x, when many users weren't sure what caused the problems experienced. The fact that the registry does contain outdated data...is probably misinterpreted in today's world.

Seems to me that drivers, programs installed, hardware problems, poorly written programs installed, and malware...are more likely to contribute to system slowdown...than registry entries that exist but are outdated. But I'm certainly no expert.

I notice a distinct lack of any suggestion by Microsoft...that such registry entries are something to be concerned with.

As for clean installs...well, a clean install normally involves a new partitition structure, a new file system structure, new files installed, and (often) an elimination of programs which previously consumed system resources. Seems to be a much more comprehensive process...than just removing entries from the registry...and eliminates files which may have beeh damaged/malperforming in a less-than-obvious manner.

Louis

Baltboy, on 06 September 2011 - 09:55 PM, said:

Of course I have . What you need to understand is that the registry is nothing more than a database. A VERY LARGE database. The entries left behind by are irrelevant. They have ZERO impact on the loading time of the database (the differences is literally milliseconds). And of course, once the database loads the first time any subsequent accesses by programs are directly to their entries so there is NO time lost. No offense intended and I'm not looking to start an argument, but the idea that "cleaning a registry" or that it's a good idea to reformat from time to time because the registry is littered with left over entries is one of those old wive's tales right up there with clearing the Prefetch folder or using a static pagefile.

@ jdoolittle- You might want to read this article from 2009
http://mashable.com/2009/07/16/ie6-must-die/
There are some pretty good reasons to upgrade your browser. Also, IE9 runs on Vista as well as Windows 7.

Required Field, on 09 September 2011 - 11:04 AM, said:

But IE 9 does not run on XP and that is the forum this topic is in. Just for the record.

^ That's true, animal, I had actually brought that up in my first post, but I was responding to the part where he said IE9 only runs on Windows 7.

Understood, my addition is directed more for the casual reader/topic searcher who may miss that nugget and wonder why we didn't say so. Thank you for your contributions and clarification.

There used to be a 200MB limit in windows 2000 for the hive file that I often saw cause boot time errors. Apparently that limit has now been lifted in XP and above. I guess that is why I don't see that anymore. Never the less databases do have slower access times as the database size increases and the fragmentation of the database increases. Of course this is also dependent on the hardware being used, the database engine, and the design of the database. Tree based databases are slower than hash based databases in most instances. While the registry isn't huge in database terms size (and fragmentation) still affects performance during bootup and during routine access.