Recommended Posts

I can understand the sidebar (Even I don't use it)

But UAC, System Restore, Superfetch?

Wow. Why run Vista at all if you're not going to take advantage of its improved caching, superior backup skills (I love Shadow Copies. They've saved my ass so many times...), or enhanced security? Those are some of its most appealing features.

Superfetch does NOT slow down games. I have tried superfetch on and off and games and intensive apps that need tons of memory perform the same and apps launch faster. When an application needs memory the cache is instantly purged which is no slower than allocating free memory.

Superfetch also does NOT cause hard drive thrashing, if you have constant drive thrashing it is something else, not superfetch. For me and I have 4 gb of ram superfetch only takes a minute of two to load everything into ram which is hardly "constant thrashing"

I have only disabled the sidebar and put UAC into silent mode on my desktop and laptop. Completely turning off UAC is pointless when you can use silent mode.

Once again: Your experiences may vary.

The only change I made was turning off SuperFetch. My system's performance improved. That's all the evidence I need. I'm glad you don't have such issues; I did, I resolved them, disabling SuperFetch was the resolution.

None there is no reason to disable anything in Vista it runs great just the way it is.

I may get a UAC pop up once a month not a problem.

Superfetch DOES NOT slow your system down so no need to disable it.

System Restore point can be cleaned by running Disk Cleanup if need be so no need to disable it. But if you are that low on disk space it might be time for a bigger one they are not that expensive anymore.

I can understand the sidebar (Even I don't use it)

But UAC, System Restore, Superfetch?

Wow. Why run Vista at all if you're not going to take advantage of its improved caching, superior backup skills (I love Shadow Copies. They've saved my ass so many times...), or enhanced security? Those are some of its most appealing features.

Obviously, you either take very high risks with your system, or simply don't know what you're doing, to begin with, if the backup skills and shadow copies have saved your ass so many times already, with Vista having only been out as long as it has.

Personally,

I disabled them all, including Vista itself after a month, by wiping the POS off the system totally and loading XP Pro onto it. Can't even count the number of machines I have done this too already.

Obviously, you either take very high risks with your system, or simply don't know what you're doing, to begin with, if the backup skills and shadow copies have saved your ass so many times already, with Vista having only been out as long as it has.

Personally,

I disabled them all, including Vista itself after a month, by wiping the POS off the system totally and loading XP Pro onto it. Can't even count the number of machines I have done this too already.

I hear you, I got Vista installed and I don't intend to install XP unless I have major problems, things seem to be working nicely this time around, but I don't know for how long.

Obviously, you either take very high risks with your system, or simply don't know what you're doing, to begin with, if the backup skills and shadow copies have saved your ass so many times already, with Vista having only been out as long as it has.

Personally,

I disabled them all, including Vista itself after a month, by wiping the POS off the system totally and loading XP Pro onto it. Can't even count the number of machines I have done this too already.

I guess "its a southern thang" to blast Vista and install XP on computers specifically designed for Vista. Shadow Copies are for files and documents that the user changes, for example, writing a resume and then deciding to add stuff to it, but you realize that u shouldnt or want to change it back, a shadow copy would be the easiest to do this without doing a complete edit, for example. I believe thats what he was talking about, NOT Vista "deleting" or messing up his documents. Backups are also great if you visit pr0n and get a virus for going to "no no sites" or doing programing where your own coding may mess up the system if ur playing around with system settings.

UAC because TVersity won't work with it switched on in any form.

Sidebar because it's a bit useless and I'd prefer not to lose that screen space on something I find useless.

Security Center because I use commercial third-party firewalls/anti-virus/malware software and have no use for the inbuilt firewall/notifications.

System sounds - not a big fan of aural notifications of clicking something. I'M clicking it so I don't need a sound to tell me I'm doing that!

Disabling superfetch is a bit weird - never really experienced much hard-drive thrashing but that could be because I'm not constantly installing/uninstalling software and am not constantly using CCLeaner to save 48MB of HDD space at the end of a day.

Why is hard-drive thrashing such a bad thing for many people? My hard drives are very quiet and the trashing only happens when idle - soon as the mouse is moved or keyboard keys are pressed, it stops.

I think too many people pay attention to the Vista-haters or the tweak sites.

Why do people really disable superfetch? Your most used applications will start faster, and although it takes up ram, it will free it up if you need it. So there is no win situation in disabling it.

because when some program says "it takes up ram, but it will free it up if you need it", chances are, it doesn't free it up when you need it, or takes an excruciating process of disk thrashing or something to free it up when you need it.

it happened with Firefox 2 and Opera 9 before, and it is happening with Superfetch right now.

Never trust a problem when it says "I'm eating tons of RAM now, but I promise that I'm SMART so I'll free it up when you need it". because it definitely won't be smart enough.

Only start navigation sound...Vista just works great with default settings.

Totally agreeing with you. Also I prefer to start up the Windows Sidebar manually after logon only if I really need it, because it adds a lot of delay time to startup.

It just works with the default settings, and I think that instead of using their time to research what to tame in Vista most new Vista users should spend time learning about the new features and how to use them most efficiently.

Obviously, you either take very high risks with your system, or simply don't know what you're doing, to begin with, if the backup skills and shadow copies have saved your ass so many times already, with Vista having only been out as long as it has.

Personally,

I disabled them all, including Vista itself after a month, by wiping the POS off the system totally and loading XP Pro onto it. Can't even count the number of machines I have done this too already.

I have one question for you.

Why are you posting in a Vista Support Forum when you hate Vista so much that you don't even run it?

Anyway, I've disabled no services at all on either my Desktop or Laptop, they run just fine with them all enabled

Edited by neo158
because when some program says "it takes up ram, but it will free it up if you need it", chances are, it doesn't free it up when you need it, or takes an excruciating process of disk thrashing or something to free it up when you need it.

it happened with Firefox 2 and Opera 9 before, and it is happening with Superfetch right now.

Never trust a problem when it says "I'm eating tons of RAM now, but I promise that I'm SMART so I'll free it up when you need it". because it definitely won't be smart enough.

Superfetch does NOT take itself as a higher priority than other applications, If I open a game for example it instantly frees ram, and when superfetch frees ram there is NO disk thrashing, it just purges it from memory and the superfetch data is already on disk and will only be loaded back into memory when you have free memory again. Superfetch does not touch the disk when it is freeing memory for something else it happens instantly.

The ones that don't disable UAC or just put in silent mode, are probably the same ones that complain on forums that an X game/application doesn't work under Vista.

Because even if you put it (UAC) in "silent mode" (in group policy), some games and applications just won't start. When you disable completely UAC, somehow the same game/application works perfectly. And if you enable it back, you'll just be annoyed with permit for every god damn action again, that ends with the same result as in "silent mode".

So to skip all that mess, I just keep it disabled. I know what I'm running on my machines and I don't need more than anti-virus running in the background for security.

The ones that don't disable UAC or just put in silent mode, are probably the same ones that complain on forums that an X game/application doesn't work under Vista.

Because even if you put it (UAC) in "silent mode" (in group policy), some games and applications just won't start. When you disable completely UAC, somehow the same game/application works perfectly. And if you enable it back, you'll just be annoyed with permit for every god damn action again, that ends with the same result as in "silent mode".

So to skip all that mess, I just keep it disabled. I know what I'm running on my machines and I don't need more than anti-virus running in the background for security.

What games are you talking about? I even have old games that start fine. Have you tried running them as admin? (properties under compatibility)

Everything tied to media center. This cut my start up time in half (P4 3.0 GHz), and it just seems to run a lot better.

Function Discovery Provider Host

Function Discovery Resource Publication

PnP-X IP Bus Enumerator

Windows Media Center Extender Service

Windows Media Center Receiver Service

Windows Media Center Scheduler Service

Windows Media Center Service Launcher

Windows Media Player Network Sharing Service

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      579
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!