Position your mouse over each icon to see the program name. Even after you check the notification area, you might still have missed some programs that load automatically at startup. You can find and disable them using Windows Defender. If that causes any problems with the program, you can go back and re-enable it to start automatically.
This utility, which has the most comprehensive knowledge of auto-starting locations of any startup monitor, shows you what programs are configured to run during system bootup or login, and shows you the entries in the order Windows processes them.
These programs include ones in your startup folder, Run, RunOnce, and other Registry keys. You can configure Autoruns to show other locations, including Explorer shell extensions, toolbars, browser helper objects, Winlogon notifications, auto-start services, and much more. Was this reply helpful? Yes No. Sorry this didn't help. Thanks for your feedback. Have you scanned it with a virus scanner, for malware?
I could check with teamviewer whats in startup, if u want. Nor does it pose more or less of a security risk than the other desktop programs you use. I still prefer Copernic Desktop Search for its easy customization options and clear interface. Boost performance by tweaking Vista's indexing options Just because the Vista version Google's desktop-search tool uses the same indexer as the OS doesn't mean you can't improve its performance by deciding for yourself what file locations it should include in its index.
When you're done, click OK to return to the Indexing Options dialog box. Entries under the Index Settings tab let you index encrypted files, move your index to another location, rebuild it, or restore its default settings. After you click OK, you may be warned that "Indexing speed is reduced due to user activity. Another way to disable indexing of a particular drive is to right-click it in Windows Explorer or other folder window, choose Properties, and uncheck "Index this drive for faster searching.
Be respectful, keep it civil and stay on topic. We delete comments that violate our policy , which we encourage you to read. However, the same pattern of core scaling emerged that we experienced under Windows Vista. Single-core was still unplayable, dual-core was much more playable, and quad-core delivered the best experience with noticeable improvements.
Task Manager however showed us that Windows Vista is actually being more efficient with all four cores than Windows XP. We found that overall each core was being utilized more than under Windows XP. Therefore Windows Vista may very well be taking better advantage of multi-core CPUs in Supreme Commander, even though the performance is overall generally slower.
The reason for this may be due to another bottleneck, more specifically, the video card drivers. It is true that the video card drivers under Windows Vista operate differently than they did under Windows XP. In Windows Vista much of the driver has been moved to Kernel space rather than User space.
Unfortunately, all things are not equal just yet. Remember the crashing to desktop problem we mentioned earlier in the evaluation? It is quite possible the driver is simply holding back performance under Windows Vista at this time.
Another indicator of this is SLI. Under Windows Vista we noticed that the SLI indicator did not seem to be showing that it was operating at peak efficiency in this game. We noticed that with dual-core there was less performance benefit with SLI, but once we enabled all four cores SLI efficiency was much better.
This proves that quad-core is allowing the video cards to simply do more in the game. So overall, if you want the best gaming experience right now in Supreme Commander, it seems Windows XP is the best way to go. If you do go with Windows Vista you will really want a quad-core CPU to make up the deficiencies in the graphics card driver at this time. Quote: Original post by daviangel In Windows Vista much of the driver has been moved to Kernel space rather than User space.
Those two sentances are rather frightening, depending on if they are directly related. If so that sucks and a good reason to avoid upgrading to Vista if you are a gamer, but I can't beleive MS would do something so stupid? Quote: Original post by noisecrime Quote: Original post by daviangel In Windows Vista much of the driver has been moved to Kernel space rather than User space. It is true that changing from one level say user space to another kernel space will incur overheads.
It is one of the arguments against microkernels, as the different modules inside the kernel will incur these overheads as well. However, I haven't studied Microsoft's system layout, so it might not even be the problem. The writer of that article is misinformed - he has things completely backwards. Vista actually moved most of the video driver out of kernel mode where it lived in XP and into user mode. Under XP, video drivers run almost entirely in kernel mode and this imposes a performance overhead since transitioning from user mode to kernel mode is expensive and on XP many D3D API calls require this transition.
Vista moves much of the driver work out of kernel mode and into user mode which should in theory have both performance and stability benefits since crashes in driver code that is in user mode won't bring down the whole system the way crashes in kernel mode will. Microsoft has publicised this change pretty widely in their developer presentations so it's pretty shoddy journalism that the guy got this basic fact completely backwards.
Doesn't say alot for the reliability of the rest of the article. Quote: Stability In Windows XP, display drivers, which are large and complex, can be a major source of system instability.
These drivers execute entirely in kernel mode i. According to the crash analysis data collected during the Windows XP timeframe, display drivers are responsible for up to 20 percent of all blue screens. Thus it became one of the primary goals of Windows Vista to reduce such crashes and provide customers with a more reliable desktop experience while also lowering partner support costs.
0コメント