![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks. |
| |||||||
![]() |
| |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| | Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I have an emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink router DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about 2000 kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that thing). The link for the bandwidth tester is http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ I have Comcast cable by the way. So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB cache, 2 GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This is PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows Vista Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing filter... no help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary people should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a day tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance Sorry you are having problems. Just as a comparison, my results on that bandwidth measurement is 5230.8 Kbps. I am running Vista Home Premium with IE7 and Earthlink/Comcast cable modem. "Tigger" <Tigger@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ED7B18A7-CA20-4285-A1D5-39D5B9097ADD@microsoft.com... > Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I have > an > emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink > router > DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about 2000 > kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that > thing). > > The link for the bandwidth tester is > http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ > > I have Comcast cable by the way. > > So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB cache, > 2 > GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This > is > PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy > this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows > Vista > Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. > > I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using > Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to > "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec > crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing filter... > no > help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary people > should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft > product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know > that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a day > tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance Visit your Vista systems Network Connections and disable dialup and enable a Local Area Connection. Sorry, it's not Vista. It's your settings. "John Hanley" <jphanley@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:O22D3P35HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Sorry you are having problems. Just as a comparison, my results on that > bandwidth measurement is 5230.8 Kbps. I am running Vista Home Premium > with IE7 and Earthlink/Comcast cable modem. > > "Tigger" <Tigger@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:ED7B18A7-CA20-4285-A1D5-39D5B9097ADD@microsoft.com... >> Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I >> have an >> emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink >> router >> DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about >> 2000 >> kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that >> thing). >> >> The link for the bandwidth tester is >> http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ >> >> I have Comcast cable by the way. >> >> So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB >> cache, 2 >> GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This >> is >> PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy >> this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows >> Vista >> Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. >> >> I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using >> Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to >> "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec >> crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing >> filter... no >> help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary >> people >> should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft >> product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know >> that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a >> day >> tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. > |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance New computers are worthless upon arrival because of all the "freeware" and "trial ware" that the manufacturers install upon them. If you were to get the machine stripped bare of all of this, you would see what the actual capabilities of your machine (using Vista) are. Then, as you load each individual item, you would see the impact that it has on the computer and operating system. I "always" load clean. The initial boot is fast beyond my expectations. Then I install my antivirus. System slows down. Then I install some anti-spyware programs. System slows down more. After about three hours of installing and rebooting - the initial lightning bolt now takes 2 1/2 minutes to reach the desktop. But because your computer came with all of this crapware already installed - you were not privileged to see the individual slow downs that each successive application install adds to the boot time. So, start fresh. Get rid of everything. Install Vista and the necessary drivers. Then, make an image of your system (you do use TrueImage, don't you). Install your antivirus of choice. Reboot a couple of times. How is the boot time? Not happy? Revert back to your image and install a different antivirus program. It's all trial and error. Many have found that there are some antivirus programs that are just more efficient than others. These include Avast and NOD32. Most have found that anything from Symantec or McAfee bring your computer to it's knees. The same goes for anti-spyware programs. Some are good, and slow the machine. Some are good, and don't slow the machine much at all. But if you blindly stay with what was delivered on your computer, you will never know! -- Regards, Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User (For email, remove the obvious from my address) "Tigger" <Tigger@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ED7B18A7-CA20-4285-A1D5-39D5B9097ADD@microsoft.com... Quote: > Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I have > an > emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink > router > DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about 2000 > kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that > thing). > > The link for the bandwidth tester is > http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ > > I have Comcast cable by the way. > > So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB cache, > 2 > GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This > is > PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy > this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows > Vista > Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. > > I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using > Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to > "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec > crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing filter... > no > help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary people > should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft > product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know > that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a day > tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance While in general I agree with you about crapware -- Norton/Semantec products in particular -- in this case it turned out the there is a setting in Windows Vista for power savings that does not work with the hardware I purchased from Lenovo. Specifically the Intel wireless adapter Pro Wireless 3945 a/b/g runs at dialup access speeds if the power savings mode (for the wireless adapter) is set to save power, which is how it was set by default. Setting that to "max performance" when the computer is plugged in causes the bandwidth to go up by a factor of 40 to 50, back to where it should be. So my problem turned out to be something the OEM (Lenovo) should have diagnosed and fixed, such that the default settings for this computer would not require a bunch of exploration. What added further confusion are all the articles I easily found online that say the fix for this kind of slowness is "delete Norton", "get rid of McAfee", set the tcp auto-adjustment to such-and-such, etc, etc... none of the solutions worked but it takes a huge amount of time to go through them all. Deleting crapware like Norton does speed the machine up, but in this case not by a factor of 40. I am glad Norton is gone, nevertheless. "Richard Urban" wrote: Quote: > New computers are worthless upon arrival because of all the "freeware" and > "trial ware" that the manufacturers install upon them. > > If you were to get the machine stripped bare of all of this, you would see > what the actual capabilities of your machine (using Vista) are. Then, as you > load each individual item, you would see the impact that it has on the > computer and operating system. > > I "always" load clean. The initial boot is fast beyond my expectations. Then > I install my antivirus. System slows down. Then I install some anti-spyware > programs. System slows down more. > > After about three hours of installing and rebooting - the initial lightning > bolt now takes 2 1/2 minutes to reach the desktop. > > But because your computer came with all of this crapware already installed - > you were not privileged to see the individual slow downs that each > successive application install adds to the boot time. > > So, start fresh. Get rid of everything. Install Vista and the necessary > drivers. Then, make an image of your system (you do use TrueImage, don't > you). Install your antivirus of choice. Reboot a couple of times. How is the > boot time? Not happy? Revert back to your image and install a different > antivirus program. > > It's all trial and error. > > Many have found that there are some antivirus programs that are just more > efficient than others. These include Avast and NOD32. > > Most have found that anything from Symantec or McAfee bring your computer to > it's knees. The same goes for anti-spyware programs. Some are good, and slow > the machine. Some are good, and don't slow the machine much at all. > > But if you blindly stay with what was delivered on your computer, you will > never know! > > -- > > > Regards, > > Richard Urban > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User > (For email, remove the obvious from my address) > > > "Tigger" <Tigger@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:ED7B18A7-CA20-4285-A1D5-39D5B9097ADD@xxxxxx Quote: > > Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I have > > an > > emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink > > router > > DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about 2000 > > kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that > > thing). > > > > The link for the bandwidth tester is > > http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ > > > > I have Comcast cable by the way. > > > > So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB cache, > > 2 > > GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This > > is > > PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy > > this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows > > Vista > > Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. > > > > I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using > > Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to > > "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec > > crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing filter... > > no > > help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary people > > should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft > > product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know > > that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a day > > tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. > |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #6 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance SPECIFICALLY, for those of you out there who purchase a Lenovo ThinkPad with Windows Vista and an Intel PW 3945a/b/g wireless adapter: Go to: Control Panel > Mobile PC > Power Options > Edit Plan Settings (for Energy Star plan, which is the default) > Advanced Settings. Then change: Wireless Adapter Settings > Power Saving Mode > Plugged in to "Maximum Performance" from its default value of "Maximum Power Saving". My bandwidth using the CNET tester was at dialup speeds yesterday. With this one change it is now up to 2900 kbps. That was way more important than getting rid of Norton, which you should also do since it is a dog. "Richard Urban" wrote: Quote: > New computers are worthless upon arrival because of all the "freeware" and > "trial ware" that the manufacturers install upon them. > > If you were to get the machine stripped bare of all of this, you would see > what the actual capabilities of your machine (using Vista) are. Then, as you > load each individual item, you would see the impact that it has on the > computer and operating system. > > I "always" load clean. The initial boot is fast beyond my expectations. Then > I install my antivirus. System slows down. Then I install some anti-spyware > programs. System slows down more. > > After about three hours of installing and rebooting - the initial lightning > bolt now takes 2 1/2 minutes to reach the desktop. > > But because your computer came with all of this crapware already installed - > you were not privileged to see the individual slow downs that each > successive application install adds to the boot time. > > So, start fresh. Get rid of everything. Install Vista and the necessary > drivers. Then, make an image of your system (you do use TrueImage, don't > you). Install your antivirus of choice. Reboot a couple of times. How is the > boot time? Not happy? Revert back to your image and install a different > antivirus program. > > It's all trial and error. > > Many have found that there are some antivirus programs that are just more > efficient than others. These include Avast and NOD32. > > Most have found that anything from Symantec or McAfee bring your computer to > it's knees. The same goes for anti-spyware programs. Some are good, and slow > the machine. Some are good, and don't slow the machine much at all. > > But if you blindly stay with what was delivered on your computer, you will > never know! > > -- > > > Regards, > > Richard Urban > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User > (For email, remove the obvious from my address) > > > "Tigger" <Tigger@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:ED7B18A7-CA20-4285-A1D5-39D5B9097ADD@xxxxxx Quote: > > Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I have > > an > > emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink > > router > > DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about 2000 > > kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that > > thing). > > > > The link for the bandwidth tester is > > http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ > > > > I have Comcast cable by the way. > > > > So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB cache, > > 2 > > GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This > > is > > PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy > > this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows > > Vista > > Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. > > > > I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using > > Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to > > "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec > > crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing filter... > > no > > help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary people > > should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft > > product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know > > that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a day > > tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. > |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #7 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance Generally the references you found are correct. Unfortunately as you just discovered, the number of possible solutions is countless since the variations of hardware/software are nearly infinite. Hopefully someone with your model can learn from your experience. -- Jupiter Jones [MVP] http://www3.telus.net/dandemar http://www.dts-l.org "Tigger" <Tigger@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:C949709E-361A-4929-AE64-0806DD5D559B@xxxxxx Quote: > SPECIFICALLY, for those of you out there who purchase a Lenovo > ThinkPad with > Windows Vista and an Intel PW 3945a/b/g wireless adapter: > > Go to: > Control Panel > Mobile PC > Power Options > Edit Plan Settings (for > Energy > Star plan, which is the default) > Advanced Settings. > > Then change: > Wireless Adapter Settings > Power Saving Mode > Plugged in > to "Maximum Performance" from its default value of "Maximum Power > Saving". > > My bandwidth using the CNET tester was at dialup speeds yesterday. > With this > one change it is now up to 2900 kbps. That was way more important > than > getting rid of Norton, which you should also do since it is a dog. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #8 (permalink) |
| | Re: Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance "Tigger" <Tigger@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:ED7B18A7-CA20-4285-A1D5-39D5B9097ADD@xxxxxx Quote: > Like many people I've been stunned by how slow my Vista machine is. I have > an > emachines 6805 running Windows XP Home, talking to my wireless Dlink > router > DI-604. When I go to the CNET Bandwidth measurement page, I see about 2000 > kbps for my Windows XP machine (3 years old, Opteron processor in that > thing). > > The link for the bandwidth tester is > http://webservices.cnet.com/Bandwidth/ > > I have Comcast cable by the way. > > So I try the same thing with my brand-new Lenovo R61 Core 2 Duo 4MB cache, > 2 > GB ram machine... and I get 56.8 kbps!! That's like a dial-up modem. This > is > PATHETIC! Microsoft you really screwed up. If this isn't fixed in a jiffy > this will be my last Windows machine for personal use! I have Windows > Vista > Basic, and almost everything else is out of the box. > > I tried futzing around with "netsh interface tcp" with advice found using > Google searches, setting auto-tuning to "disabled" and to > "highlyrestricted"... no help there. I tried uninstalling Norton/Semantec > crapola that came with the machine, and turning off the phishing filter... > no > help there. But -- and this is the real important point -- ordinary people > should NOT have to futz around like this with your flagship Microsoft > product. You are BEGGING the world to stop buying your software. I know > that's how I feel, really really angry that I've already wasted half a day > tweaking a new computer that is basically worthless on arrival. http://www.pcpitstop.com/ I got 4556 Kbps and at http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/ I got 4918 Kbps, at http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest I clocked 4556 Kbps. I would not trust the results at the cnet site! Bob |
My System Specs![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Extremely slow Internet browsing... Download speeds are fine | Network & Sharing | |||
| Lack of Performance while Browsing | General Discussion | |||
| Horrible performance with ATI Radeon Mobility 9700 Drivers | Vista hardware & devices | |||
| Pathetic Vista download performance | Vista performance & maintenance | |||
| Horrible performance with ATI Radeon Mobility 9700 drivers install | Vista hardware & devices | |||