startup glut.

  • Thread starter Thread starter I agree that you have to be careful abou
  • Start date Start date
I

I agree that you have to be careful abou

Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what can
I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably make
the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
programs that I should expect ? [2] Has anyone a comment about WinTasks 5
? TIA
 
Use msconfig (Start/run/msconfig) or
Try Autoruns from the MS Windows SysInternals site:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/ProcessesAndThreads/Autoruns.mspx
This will show all apps/etc. that load/run when you first boot and
selectively allow you to stop any that you don't want.

Note: To get additional details on an item in the list you may need to
highlight the item (right click) and use the 'Search Online' option to get
the details, especially useful for the more obscure items in the list.

JS

"I agree that you have to be careful abou"
<Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:BAB48290-3BF5-4660-91D1-65D0E42851E3@microsoft.com...
> Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
> lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what
> can
> I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably
> make
> the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
> programs that I should expect ? [2] Has anyone a comment about WinTasks
> 5
> ? TIA
 
On 7/23/2007 9:20 AM On a whim, I agree that you have to be careful abou
pounded out on the keyboard

> Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
> lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what can
> I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably make
> the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
> programs that I should expect ? [2] Has anyone a comment about WinTasks 5
> ? TIA

Hi "Iatyhtbca",

Click Start, Run, type msconfig and click OK. Click the Startup tab and
expand the Command column so you can see the files at the end of the
path (hover the mouse pointer over the right column section divider
until you see a double arrow, then dbl-click). Now you should be able
to see the files that execute. Some may just have a file name, others
will include a long path (i.e. c:\windows\system32\...). Do a Google
search for each one to identify what it does, so you can decide if you
need it or not. You can then uncheck the unneeded files to stop them
from loading on Startup. DON'T uncheck anything you are not familiar
with or do not have understanding of what it does.

For more thorough checking, you could download Autoruns, but it is much
more advanced:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Utilities/AutoRuns.mspx

Each computer is different so there isn't a set number of startup programs.





--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
 
Many thanks to JS and Terry R for the prompt and helpful replies. J. B.
-Delaware

"Terry R." wrote:

> On 7/23/2007 9:20 AM On a whim, I agree that you have to be careful abou
> pounded out on the keyboard
>
> > Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
> > lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what can
> > I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably make
> > the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
> > programs that I should expect ? [2] Has anyone a comment about WinTasks 5
> > ? TIA
>
> Hi "Iatyhtbca",
>
> Click Start, Run, type msconfig and click OK. Click the Startup tab and
> expand the Command column so you can see the files at the end of the
> path (hover the mouse pointer over the right column section divider
> until you see a double arrow, then dbl-click). Now you should be able
> to see the files that execute. Some may just have a file name, others
> will include a long path (i.e. c:\windows\system32\...). Do a Google
> search for each one to identify what it does, so you can decide if you
> need it or not. You can then uncheck the unneeded files to stop them
> from loading on Startup. DON'T uncheck anything you are not familiar
> with or do not have understanding of what it does.
>
> For more thorough checking, you could download Autoruns, but it is much
> more advanced:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Utilities/AutoRuns.mspx
>
> Each computer is different so there isn't a set number of startup programs.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Terry R.
>
> ***Reply Note***
> Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
> Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
>
 
Here is a utility program that I use, that will enable you to determine what
is running on your system. It will also come up with the programs that are
associated with all the running apps...from this utility, you can pick and
choose what applications you want stopped by using the previously mentioned
methods...this program will save you a lot of time doing research on
filenames....click on the link and look at the bottom of this page for the
download of this program...it is a microsoft authenic program...Good Luck

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Utilities/ProcessExplorer.mspx
 
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:20:01 -0700, I agree that you have to be
careful abou
<Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
> lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what can
> I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably make
> the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
> programs that I should expect ?


No, there is no number you should expect. The number is irrelevant.

On each program you don't want to start automatically, check its
Options to see if it has the choice not to start (make sure you
actually choose the option not to run it, not just a "don't show icon"
option). Many can easily and best be stopped that way. If that doesn't
work, run MSCONFIG from the Start | Run line, and on the Startup tab,
uncheck the programs you don't want to start automatically.

However, if I were you, I wouldn't do this just for the purpose of
running the minimum number of programs. Despite what many people tell
you, you should be concerned, not with how *many* of these programs
you run, but *which*. Some of them can hurt performance severely, but
others have no effect on performance.

Don't just stop programs from running willy-nilly. What you should do
is determine what each program is, what its value is to you, and what
the cost in performance is of its running all the time. You can get
more information about these at
http://castlecops.com/StartupList.html. If you can't find it there,
try google searches and ask about specifics here.

Once you have that information, you can make an intelligent informed
decision about what you want to keep and what you want to get rid of.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
Many thanks to Steve and to Ken Blake - and incidentally, as a point of
curiosity and ignorance, what is the translation of 'Iatyhtbca' ?

"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:20:01 -0700, I agree that you have to be
> careful abou
> <Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
> > lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what can
> > I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably make
> > the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
> > programs that I should expect ?
>
>
> No, there is no number you should expect. The number is irrelevant.
>
> On each program you don't want to start automatically, check its
> Options to see if it has the choice not to start (make sure you
> actually choose the option not to run it, not just a "don't show icon"
> option). Many can easily and best be stopped that way. If that doesn't
> work, run MSCONFIG from the Start | Run line, and on the Startup tab,
> uncheck the programs you don't want to start automatically.
>
> However, if I were you, I wouldn't do this just for the purpose of
> running the minimum number of programs. Despite what many people tell
> you, you should be concerned, not with how *many* of these programs
> you run, but *which*. Some of them can hurt performance severely, but
> others have no effect on performance.
>
> Don't just stop programs from running willy-nilly. What you should do
> is determine what each program is, what its value is to you, and what
> the cost in performance is of its running all the time. You can get
> more information about these at
> http://castlecops.com/StartupList.html. If you can't find it there,
> try google searches and ask about specifics here.
>
> Once you have that information, you can make an intelligent informed
> decision about what you want to keep and what you want to get rid of.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup
>
 
I got it ! - I don't know why that doesn't disaqppear - really, I'm John

"I agree that you have to be careful abou" wrote:

> Win XP Pro, 40 GB HD about half full, IBM notebook: I appear to have a
> lot of stuff [59 ?] starting when I start the computer - [1] So what can
> I safely do to reduce this mess, and will reducing the number probably make
> the machine work a bit faster ? Is there any particular number of startup
> programs that I should expect ? [2] Has anyone a comment about WinTasks 5
> ? TIA
 
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:52:03 -0700, I agree that you have to be
careful abou
<Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> Many thanks to Steve and to Ken Blake -


You're welcome. Glad to help.


> and incidentally, as a point of
> curiosity and ignorance, what is the translation of 'Iatyhtbca' ?


Sorry, I'm lost. I didn't use that "word," and have no idea what
you're talking about.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
Ken Blake, MVP wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:52:03 -0700, I agree that you have to be
> careful abou
> <Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Many thanks to Steve and to Ken Blake -
>
>
>
> You're welcome. Glad to help.
>
>
>
>>and incidentally, as a point of
>>curiosity and ignorance, what is the translation of 'Iatyhtbca' ?
>
>
>
> Sorry, I'm lost. I didn't use that "word," and have no idea what
> you're talking about.
>

No, Terry R. actually used the Acronym of "I agree that you have to be
careful abou", and the OP is not familiar with threaded messages.

HTH
 
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:03:12 -0500, Bob I <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:52:03 -0700, I agree that you have to be
> > careful abou
> > <Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Many thanks to Steve and to Ken Blake -
> >
> >
> >
> > You're welcome. Glad to help.
> >
> >
> >
> >>and incidentally, as a point of
> >>curiosity and ignorance, what is the translation of 'Iatyhtbca' ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Sorry, I'm lost. I didn't use that "word," and have no idea what
> > you're talking about.
> >
>
> No, Terry R. actually used the Acronym of "I agree that you have to be
> careful abou", and the OP is not familiar with threaded messages.


Ah! Got it now, thanks.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
 
On 7/24/2007 1:03 PM On a whim, Bob I pounded out on the keyboard

>
> Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:52:03 -0700, I agree that you have to be
>> careful abou
>> <Iagreethatyouhavetobecarefulabou@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Many thanks to Steve and to Ken Blake -
>>
>>
>> You're welcome. Glad to help.
>>
>>
>>
>>> and incidentally, as a point of
>>> curiosity and ignorance, what is the translation of 'Iatyhtbca' ?
>>
>>
>> Sorry, I'm lost. I didn't use that "word," and have no idea what
>> you're talking about.
>>
>
> No, Terry R. actually used the Acronym of "I agree that you have to be
> careful abou", and the OP is not familiar with threaded messages.
>
> HTH
>
>

I think if you look you will see the OP isn't using a newsreader at all.
"Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000". Threading may not be an option. Not
sure as I've never used it.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
 
Back
Top