[Mike Rivers]

I have this fairly new (to me) computer that I've augmented from a Dell
Precision 370. I've noticed an unusual interaction with my Mackie 1200F
Firewire audio interface. If I power up the 1200F before booting the
computer, everything is fine. If I power up the 1200F with the computer
running, the cursor motion gets jerky for about 15 seconds until (I
guess) the computer decides what's just been shoved down its throat.
Then it gets back to normal and everything works OK.

Similarly, if I power off the 1200F while the computer is still on, the
cursor motion gets jerky for about 15 seconds before settling down. And
if I power down the 1200F and then shut down the computer before the
cursor settles down, it hangs at the "Windows is saving your settings"
step and doesn't shut down until forced with the power button. The
Firewire cable is always connected.

I realize that the cursor motion is not a problem on its own, but
indicative of something being entirely too busy to deal with normal
things. I'm curious as to whether this is typical behavior, if it's a
function of the (pretty generic, CompUSA-branded) Firewire card that I
have in the computer, an IRQ setting (if there's such a thing any more),
or just something odd about this particular setup. It's not a big deal
and I'll get accustomed to the startup/shutdown procedure pretty
quickly, but if it's something that I can fix, I'd like to fix it.

I've used the 1200F with a laptop computer with a PCMCIA Firewire
adapter and haven't noticed this behavior, but then I might not have
done the same power-up sequence with the Firewire cable connected, but
rather, powered up the 1200F and then connected the Firewire cable. I
have a couple of other Firewire audio interfaces I could try to see if
they behave the same way, but I just wanted to ask the dreaded question:
"Is this normal?"

[Mike Rivers]

On Aug 28, 10:09 am, "Soundhaspriority" wrote:

1. In zee old days, if a computer was supposed to wait for external input,
the processor would execute a "wait loop", a short loop that tests an input
register, until the register contents held what it was waiting for. The same
goes for status lines, etc.

Note: The above little loop ties up the CPU, 100% utilization, while doing
practically nothing.

While this isn't exactly zee old days, that seems to be what's
happening. I turned on the CPU usage meter and watched it jump up to
100% as soon as turned on the 1200F and as soon as it dropped back to
near 0, the cursor freed up. Same with turning it off. I keep
forgetting to try to determine what kind of chip is in the Firewire
interface card (the 1200F uses a TI chip, I think) but I suppose it
doesn't matter. I could probably try half a dozen cards and maybe find
one that doesn't do do this. But as long as there seems to be no
permanent effect, I won't worry about it.

Another goofy Windows thing (a common issue) is that when the computer
was a virgin, it booted up really quickly. Now it takes a bit over a
minute. I've installed maybe 20 applications on it, but there's a slew
of Windows updates. Is it possible that all the files that it's no
longer using after it made its updates (the compressed files, I
assume) are still listed in the registry and it's busy counting off
every one before it finishes booting up?

If that's it, would one of those registry cleaner programs fix that?
They claim to make your computer boost faster by getting rid of
leftovers in the registry, but I haven't been using the computer long
enough for those to accumulate by the usual processes of installing
and uninstalling programs and dirty recovery from crashes.

[Mike Rivers]

Soundhaspriority wrote:

I found that:
1. About half of the CPU usage during bootup was due to my antivirus
program, McAfee. Being a very thorough antivirus program, McAfee scans every
program as it is loaded.

I don't have McAfee's virus scanner on that computer. I do have AVG
Free, but don't have it set to scan constantly so it doesn't start up
automatically. I had to turn off the Windows Security Center so that it
wouldn't keep telling me that my virus scanner wasn't working and asking
politely if it could start it. I also have Zone Alarm and that runs all
the time. I tried taking that out of the startup list and it doesn't
make the computer start any faster. Eventually I'll probably unplug the
network cable from that computer (it's running through the house on the
floor now) and then I won't need Zone Alarm except when I decide it's
time to suck up some new Windows updates.

2. The rest is split between the chachkis and Windows.

I have practically nothing in the list that you get under Startup when
running msconfig (though I suspect that doesn't tell all). I also have
all the services that I feel comfortable turning off disabled, and most
of the rest of them set to manual startup (about half of which
eventually start, so I guess something needs them).

What seems to be happening is, we add programs, but we aren't immediately
observant of the effect of each. And then one day it hits us all at once.

Well, in this case, I installed about 20 programs in a couple of days,
so the effect was a bit more instant than most.

The other common cause of slow bootups is a fragmented hard disk, easy to
fix.

I've run the Windows defragmenter a few times. And it's only using about
12 GB of a 160 GB drive anyway.

Also, if you install Service Pack 3, the machine will be about 18% faster. I
have installed it on six machines here with no adverse effects.

It was bugging me to install SP3, and I think that on at least two
occasions I told it to do it. I was taking the conservative approach to
let it download the files but not to install them until I said so. I
have a feeling that it may never have finished downloading when I turned
the computer off. But at least once I left it on overnight and it still
wasn't ready to install it. I was a little skittish about installing SP3
since I'd hear that it broke a few things, but now that it's been out
for a few months, it's probably safe. I'm downloading the IT version now
so I'll know when it's done.

Windows XP is now a highly refined product, possibly the most stable desktop
OS in the world. It is a myth that it corrupts with continuuing use.

I stopped believing that quite some time ago. I leave two computers here
on all time and about the only time I reboot is when I install or
uninstall something and it wants to be rebooted.

One
thing you might consider is to hibernate, rather than reboot from scratch.
The only way this bites is if you use a program that has a memory leak.
Firefox 2 is a notorious example.

I have Firefox 2 on the other house computers, but the studio computer
(the one I'm writing about) just uses plain old Explorer 7. I'm not sure
that this one hibernates - I thought that was pretty much the domain of
laptops, to protect them when the battery runs down. It does have
Standby. which I use on the laptop which is always plugged in, next to
the living room couch. I don't really mind that it takes a minute or so
to boot, it just bothers me that it takes longer now than a few weeks
ago when I first switched it on.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Mark]

While this isn't exactly zee old days, that seems to be what's
happening. I turned on the CPU usage meter and watched it jump up to
100% as soon as turned on the 1200F and as soon as it dropped back to
near 0, the cursor freed up. Same with turning it off.

So use task mamanger / processes click the cpu tab so it lists the
processes in order of cpu usage and see which process is using all the
cpu

Mark

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:33:11 GMT, Mike Rivers
wrote:

I don't have McAfee's virus scanner on that computer. I do have AVG
Free, but don't have it set to scan constantly so it doesn't start up
automatically. I had to turn off the Windows Security Center so that it
wouldn't keep telling me that my virus scanner wasn't working and asking
politely if it could start it.

How did you manage that? You can choose for it not to alert you for
firewall and/or virus scanner problems, but I didn't think you could
turn it off completely.

I agree that McAfee is pernicious. I can just about tolerate Norton,
as long as it's stripped down to just virus protection and firewall.
But McAfee seems to break so many things. I'll swear it was stopping
Word running on one computer.

[Mike Rivers]

Laurence Payne wrote:

I had to turn off the Windows Security Center

How did you manage that? You can choose for it not to alert you for
firewall and/or virus scanner problems, but I didn't think you could
turn it off completely.

Well, maybe that's all I did. I don't remember, and the good part is
that since I don't remember what I did to turn it off, I don't know how
to access it to turn it back on. g Anyway, it doesn't annoy me any
more, and, as they say, ignorance is bliss. I just loaded Service Pack
3, and it takes a little longer to boot than before, but only by a few
seconds. And the first thing it did was ask if I really wanted automatic
updates off. So it KNOWS I'm not very cooperative.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Mike Rivers]

Mark wrote:

So use task mamanger / processes click the cpu tab so it lists the
processes in order of cpu usage and see which process is using all the
cpu

Why SYSTEM of course.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Jason]

In article X3Dtk.878$482.410@trnddc06, says...


It was bugging me to install SP3, and I think that on at least two
occasions I told it to do it.

SP3 is problemmatic. I have two XP Pro and one XP Home system. SP3
installed without a problem (yet, anyway) on both Pro systems. On the XP
Home system it crashes with a BSDO during installation. Upon reboot, it
backs everything out, but continues to bug me about installing SP3.
Google searches confirm that I am far from alone...

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:02:54 GMT, Jason
wrote:

In article X3Dtk.878$482.410@trnddc06, says...


It was bugging me to install SP3, and I think that on at least two
occasions I told it to do it.

SP3 is problemmatic. I have two XP Pro and one XP Home system. SP3
installed without a problem (yet, anyway) on both Pro systems. On the XP
Home system it crashes with a BSDO during installation. Upon reboot, it
backs everything out, but continues to bug me about installing SP3.
Google searches confirm that I am far from alone...


There was a problem with some HP computers. Aparrantly the
factory-loaded Windows was a disk image that didn't quite match the
hardware. There's a fix.

Unfortunately HP is a brand widely advertised and supplied by the UK's
leading computer-store-for-idiots.

[Mike Rivers]

Jason wrote:

SP3 is problemmatic. I have two XP Pro and one XP Home system. SP3
installed without a problem (yet, anyway) on both Pro systems. On the XP
Home system it crashes with a BSDO during installation. Upon reboot, it
backs everything out, but continues to bug me about installing SP3.

When I rebooted after a reported successful installation of SP3 from the
downloadable version, it went to DOS to do what I assume is its cleanup
work, flashed several "file not found" messages but ended normally and
restarted Windows, which now reports that it's running SP3. So far no
problems but one can never be sure about that.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[ramtazz]

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 10:51:13 +0100, Laurence Payne
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:02:54 GMT, Jason
wrote:

In article X3Dtk.878$482.410@trnddc06, says...


It was bugging me to install SP3, and I think that on at least two
occasions I told it to do it.

SP3 is problemmatic. I have two XP Pro and one XP Home system. SP3
installed without a problem (yet, anyway) on both Pro systems. On the XP
Home system it crashes with a BSDO during installation. Upon reboot, it
backs everything out, but continues to bug me about installing SP3.
Google searches confirm that I am far from alone...


There was a problem with some HP computers. Aparrantly the
factory-loaded Windows was a disk image that didn't quite match the
hardware. There's a fix.

Unfortunately HP is a brand widely advertised and supplied by the UK's
leading computer-store-for-idiots.

My HP Laptop (DV9000) works with no issues on my TC Konnect Live
Firewire module.... (XP Pro SP3) Now this Isnt the factory Image as it
came with Vista and I promptly removed that abortion off my laptop and
did a reg standard XP Pro SP2 load.

BUT I try a MOTU 828MKIII and it would NOT even see it. Also doesn't
see HD-24 Tools. After alot of Internet research... I found that on
the PC.. a specific firewire chip set is needed.. the name eludes me
right now but can be looked up. (I think Texas Instruments) Other
chipsets are subject to intermittant or no response at all. I even
tried the MOTU on my Studio's PC with a firewire card... every other
day I would have to reinstall the drivers to get it to be seen, until
one day it just stopped. It went back the next day to Swee****er
(great people) and went with a 2408 module instead. PCI card. (XP Pro
SP3)

My .02

Bill

[Geoff]

ramtazz wrote:

BUT I try a MOTU 828MKIII and it would NOT even see it. Also doesn't
see HD-24 Tools. After alot of Internet research... I found that on
the PC.. a specific firewire chip set is needed..

That's possibly the case, but nothing to do with "Windows" it's a
MOTU-versus-computer-end-firewire chipset issue.

geoff