Msconfig will not allow uncheck of Avast on StartUp tab.

[doomer]

Thank you, SooperHOP for that Vista advice. Unfortunately, Blackviper does not load for me, overloaded maybe. But I did go to my other Vista favourite tweak site which is

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2238

Well this time around, based on your advice I did almost any tweak that I deemed necessary, as for example the service for optimized network compression transfer. I have to admit I do not need Remote Differential Compression, if I am not doing network transfer on my home PC on a daily basis. But people like street_lethal who are not on good terms with how an operating system works will say inadequate statements such as

"In today's world of dual core/quad core processors, 2+ gigs of ram(many gamers running at least 4gigs), fast hard drives, etc...disabling services to gain performance is basically pissing up a rope."

And more..

"Problem is you get a noob who thinks he will speed up his machine and just blindly turn off services. "

Well, it's not turning off services blindly per se, provided that you actually do read what a service's function is. Unfortunately for people like you, street_lethal, who started using computers a year ago, and cannot even understand what optimizing system performance means, will not understand what a service does even if they do read its description, so they don't even bother with that, but declare instead that

"I've even seen people go into msconfig and disable all services."

And

"In the end most people came to the conclusion that with today's AV products and current hardware the advantages of disabling resident AV were basically nothing in terms of gaining performance."


Wow.. if that was true we'd all be using Symantec. Please, am laughing hard.


But here is where the debate ends

"I'm minimalist also, I don't even have a instant messenger installed. I run XP pro.."

Well that does it. So he could not even afford to buy the Ultimate edition of Microsoft Windows Vista which automatically means he is not knowledgeable on the inner workings of a Vista system, because he has not had any first-hand experience with it. How then can he provide genuine statements and declarations about it?


Anyway...


Thanks again SooperHOP.

As I have already said, I did visit my Vista tweak site, will try Viper again, I hope they bring it back online soon.

And I did a few optimizations.

It is precisely as you described it, SooperHOP. By disabling Superfetch, my system turned into Windows 95 performance-wise. And I thought my Vista was fast as it is, because it single-handedly disposed of any Win XP OS I have ever seen in terms of perfomance, stability, and security. But disabling Superfetch turned it into a monster performer. No more 2 minutes of pre-fetching on boot. Vista actually starts efficiently now.. The moment I am in the desktop I can start working. When I still had Superfetch on I had to wait for the 'A.I.' to prefetch the things it thought I needed to have prefetched

... for 2 minutes. xD

In addition, I also scoured through all the 99 steps of my guide and streamlined my Vista.

Oh .....

my...

God.

It is indeed a Windows 95 performer now... on a high-end pc... and DirectX 10 enabled with the maximum details, and all the other sweet Vista features and enhancements.

Which is nice.


Thank you, SooperHOP. I greatly appreciate your help, and I do hope to hear more about Vista from you.


In the meantime I am preparing a Vista guide based on my experience after optimizing it, and will post what I did in detail, for instance, disabling what and which was useful, and which is not. That is, of course, based on what I am using my PC for. Still, it is amazing how easy it was to turn my Vista from the fastest Operating System in the market at the moment to the fastest and best computer operating system known in the history of mankind.

Thank you again, SooperHOP.

I'd better prepare the Ultimate Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Vista(TM) Ultimate edition guide and post it on General Forums here soon.

[TheSpirit]

I'm minimalist also, I don't even have a instant messenger installed. I run XP pro and have two things that run in my taskbar on startup, a firewall and Avast. I leave other services alone. I've been to the blackviper site several times in the past, going back 5+ years ago, then he took it down and put it back up. It is handy if you're not sure exactly what a certain service does. I just think that even knowing what each service does you don't really gain much by disabling anything. Superprefetch in Vista is an area of debate, some people swear by it some don't. There's been quite a few threads again on Hardforum about that. I mention Hardforum because it's a very good forum that I have been going to for at least 10 years with knowledgeable people. You do get the Vista fanboy crowd in there though.

It's fair to say in a security forum, that disabling unnecessary services and other programs is not primarily a question about performance, but mainly a question about security. Every running piece of code (including all the unused Windows features) are potential vulnerabilities, so disabling unnecessary features is a good idea. Isn't this common knowledge in the security community?

[street_lethal]

So you buy Vista to disable everything to get it to work like Doomer said "Windows 95" lol.


Doomer, I use Vista everyday. I also deal with people everyday who adopt Vista who piss their time away trying to get it to work like their prior OS..usually XP. A lot of these people are usually gamers(some won't admit they're gamers..odd), who want DirectX 10 and want to see the subtle differences in games. To each his own. I know damn well what most services do what Doomer, you need a guide. My point, show me concrete proof of the performance gained by disabling any of them on a high end system. Not saying there's zero performance gain, in most cases it's not worth the hassle. And don't point me to some link to some guy's blog who pulls figures from his ass. Not "OMG, OMG, the system runs like Windows 95". WTF? LMAO.


To the other guy above me, there's a lot more to security than disabling remote desktop, telnet, upnp, etc...If you're talking about a home desktop system that's behind a router or other type of firewall and a solid AV ...in most cases/environments..not all.. it doesn't mean squat. But yes there are some services that could pose more of a security risk if others areas of your security measures are lacking.

Oh and back on point I like to add I think it's good that Avast has measures in place so it's not easily disabled.

[SooperHOP]

It's fair to say in a security forum, that disabling unnecessary services and other programs is not primarily a question about performance, but mainly a question about security. Every running piece of code (including all the unused Windows features) are potential vulnerabilities, so disabling unnecessary features is a good idea. Isn't this common knowledge in the security community?

wow, very good point!  i remember i use to "uninstall" all the features in my local area connection properties like "file and printer sharing for microsoft networks" for security reasons.  but this system i plan to network.

i hope those links work for u doomer.  i've had great performance gains with indexing turned off and superfetch disabled.  ironically the blackviper guy recommends keeping superfetch on....i do not!  especially for those who use ram intensive programs like games, superfetch must be disabled in this case!!

street, i think his windows 95 comment was to refer to how few processes he has running and therefor how little ram (like 95) he is using on a fresh boot of vista.  what in gods name do i need a sidebar for??  i hate these over blown features in vista, i just want it's kernel!!  windows 7 is coming out soon anyway.

ALSO FOR YOU ON DEMAND FILE SCANNERS like me try this site:  i use it when i have a very suspicious file, any other scan i use right click avast scan.
http://www.virustotal.com/   
avast is part of the scan:)  sometimes you get 1 or 2 hits and it's just a false positive.  5 or more and i'd say it's safe to conclude the file is infected.

[SooperHOP]

mis click