Fishing - OT...calling all geeks

FishingBanter (http://www.fishingbanter.com/index.php)

- Fly Fishing (http://www.fishingbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - OT...calling all geeks (http://www.fishingbanter.com/showthread.php?t=3080)

OT...calling all geeks

OK, I finally got tired of bsods, lockups, illegal ops etc, etc. so I
upgraded to WinXP Home Edition today. So far, what I've seen I like; the
only fly in the ointment seems to be that windows open slower and it takes
noticeably longer to boot up and shut down. I'm used to windows fairly
snapping open with W98 (when it wasn't locked up, etc) I have 512 megs RAM
and an Athlon 1.2 gig processor. Am I gonna have to go to a faster
processor to kick this thing in the butt or what? One small negative in
this whole thing is my scanner software does not work with WinXP..time for
a new scanner I guess.

Frank Church

No, you should be fine. You will probably want to find one of the pages on
the Internet on tuning XP. Things like Instant Messager will be running in
the background and you can kill them. Just google the XP tuning or
"secrets."
Go to your scanner's home page, they may have new XP signed software. The
1.2 GHz, 512 RAM, should be fine, especially after some tuning. I let one
of the serious MS geekazoids point you at the appropriat pages.
G'nite Dad
--
Frank Reid (the one who didn't become a squiddly)
Reverse email to reply

OT...calling all geeks

Frank Church wrote:
OK, I finally got tired of bsods, lockups, illegal ops etc, etc. so I
upgraded to WinXP Home Edition today. So far, what I've seen I like; the
only fly in the ointment seems to be that windows open slower and it takes
noticeably longer to boot up and shut down. I'm used to windows fairly
snapping open with W98 (when it wasn't locked up, etc) I have 512 megs RAM
and an Athlon 1.2 gig processor. Am I gonna have to go to a faster
processor to kick this thing in the butt or what? One small negative in
this whole thing is my scanner software does not work with WinXP..time for
a new scanner I guess.

Since ROFF is now the default source for Windows help, I suppose it's OK
to ask a question about Linux:

Is there a way to call shutdown(blah, SHUT_WR) on a network SOCK_STREAM
connection's fd without discarding pending output? Or some way to block
until pending output has been acknowledged by the far end? (There's a
TCP/IP acknowledgement packet being sent, I'm fairly certain of this...)
I want the connection at the far end to get EOF from read, but still be
able to send me data back from the other half of the connection.
I've looked at the BSD networking documentation, the source code to
"netcat", all the man pages I could find, asked google, etc. The 2.4.18
net/ipv4/tcp.c source has some interesting comments (line 396) about
poll not having a notion of HUP in just one direction, but I've gathered
that select and poll behave differently on files, pipes, network
sockets, block devices, etc... In any case, this doesn't help me find an
exported user-space API that might help me implement this behavior. (By
the way, is "PULLHUP" on lines 414 and 417 a typo for "POLLHUP", or
not?) There doesn't seem to be any variant of a blocking flush() call on
a socket (that I can find), or a way to tell shutdown() to wait for
pending output the way a normal close() does. (Maybe I can do something
fancy with poll or select?) If there IS no way to do this, why does
shutdown(2) bother taking a second argument? (Maybe I can disable nagle
and then do a write of length zero, to make the other end unblock with a
read of length zero and THINK the stream's done? Probably won't work,
but it's worth a try...) (P.S. yes I can rewrite the protocol being sent
over the wire to signal EOF in-band (yet again) but this keeps coming up
over and over. Processes that work when stdin and stdout are seperate
file handles don't work when the data goes back and forth through a
network socket...)

Thanks in advance. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

OT...calling all geeks

"Frank Reid" moc.deepselbac@diersicnarf wrote in message
...
OK, I finally got tired of bsods, lockups, illegal ops etc, etc. so I
upgraded to WinXP Home Edition today. So far, what I've seen I like; the
only fly in the ointment seems to be that windows open slower and it
takes
noticeably longer to boot up and shut down. I'm used to windows fairly
snapping open with W98 (when it wasn't locked up, etc) I have 512 megs
RAM
and an Athlon 1.2 gig processor. Am I gonna have to go to a faster
processor to kick this thing in the butt or what? One small negative in
this whole thing is my scanner software does not work with WinXP..time
for
a new scanner I guess.

Frank Church

No, you should be fine. You will probably want to find one of the pages
on
the Internet on tuning XP. Things like Instant Messager will be running
in
the background and you can kill them. Just google the XP tuning or
"secrets."

This is new to me. I also have XP, 1.2 gig and 512 megs, and I also noticed
that my bootup is a lot slower than my desktop, with 256Meg and a slower
processor. I googled "xp tuner" and got a lot of german stuff. Where do I
find more info on tuning my laptop for faster performance?

Also, Frank, I have found that my version of Norton slows things down a lot,
too.

--riverman

OT...calling all geeks

riverman wrote:

This is new to me. I also have XP, 1.2 gig and 512 megs, and I also noticed
that my bootup is a lot slower than my desktop, with 256Meg and a slower
processor. I googled "xp tuner" and got a lot of german stuff. Where do I
find more info on tuning my laptop for faster performance?
http://support.microsoft.com/

Go to http://support.microsoft.com/, and then, when you're finished,
come back.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

OT...calling all geeks

rw Since ROFF is now the default source for Windows help, I suppose
rw it's OK to ask a question about Linux:

rw Is there a way to call shutdown(blah, SHUT_WR) on a network
rw SOCK_STREAM connection's fd without discarding pending output? Or
rw some way to block until pending output has been acknowledged by
rw the far end? (There's a TCP/IP acknowledgement packet being sent,
rw I'm fairly certain of this...)

Rw, the good ole Rob Landley?

http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linu...2-22/1291.html

and the answer is:

http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/linux/linu...2-22/1337.html

Do I get a bisquit?

--
Jarmo Hurri

Spam countermeasures included. Drop your brain when replying, or just
use .

OT...calling all geeks

Jarmo Hurri wrote:

Do I get a bisquit?

When we meet, Jarmo, I'll give you a fresh biscuit slathered with fresh
churned butter and blackberry jam.

Now all that ROFF needs is a Windows guru, and we'll be set. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

OT...calling all geeks

"rw" wrote in message
hlink.net...
riverman wrote:

This is new to me. I also have XP, 1.2 gig and 512 megs, and I also
noticed
that my bootup is a lot slower than my desktop, with 256Meg and a slower
processor. I googled "xp tuner" and got a lot of german stuff. Where do
I
find more info on tuning my laptop for faster performance?
http://support.microsoft.com/

Go to http://support.microsoft.com/, and then, when you're finished,
come back.

Wow, thanks rw. I looked through that site, but I didn't find any info on
how to make my computer bootup faster. I guess 'tuning' is a rather general
term; I already know how to do a lot of stuff, but I know there's a lot more
to it. Maybe I should ask if anyone has specific things I should do to speed
up my startup time? I already saw Frank's suggestion about disabling
Messenger. Any other things that are obvious to folks that know about this?

--riverman

OT...calling all geeks

"riverman" wrote in message
...

"rw" wrote in message
hlink.net...
riverman wrote:

This is new to me. I also have XP, 1.2 gig and 512 megs, and I also
noticed
that my bootup is a lot slower than my desktop, with 256Meg and a
slower
processor. I googled "xp tuner" and got a lot of german stuff. Where
do
I
find more info on tuning my laptop for faster performance?
http://support.microsoft.com/

Go to http://support.microsoft.com/, and then, when you're finished,
come back.

Wow, thanks rw. I looked through that site, but I didn't find any info on
how to make my computer bootup faster. I guess 'tuning' is a rather
general
term; I already know how to do a lot of stuff, but I know there's a lot
more
to it. Maybe I should ask if anyone has specific things I should do to
speed
up my startup time? I already saw Frank's suggestion about disabling
Messenger. Any other things that are obvious to folks that know about
this?

--riverman

Check out a small program called "Tweak XP 3.0.1 Pro" from www.totalidea.com
You might find some tweaks useful.

/Roger
And if you don't already use NTFS then convert.

OT...calling all geeks

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 11:44:26 +0100, "riverman"
wrote:

Any other things that are obvious to folks that know about this?

Probably the most obvious things are to do a 'disk cleanup' and 'error
checking' on your boot drive and then defragment it. If you are
comparing XP boot times to win9x boot times I doubt you will ever get
it faster, since XP is booting an OS where win9x is just a DOS shell.
--
Charlie...