Sloooow Startup

[hmphargh]

I am having very very slow startups on my T42. I have it plugged into the wall (and battery maximizer set to full performance when its plugged in). I have XP Pro w/ SP2, and the IBM utilities I'm running are Access Connections, Active Protection, and Battery Maximizer. I know that active protection adds time to startup. I did some tests, I'm calling a boot from off to when the taskbar is visible. I uninstalled all of the IBM utilities and got a 40 second boot time (times are approximate- didnt have a digital timer handy) I then installed Access Connections and the boot was 50 seconds. After that I added Battery MaxiMizer and the boot was about 60 seconds, which by my standards is not unacceptable at all. When I added active protection, however, i started up, the system went to the welcome screen, sat there for about 20 seconds, then just the background appeared and sat there for over a minute. In the end, the boot time was 2 minutes 25 seconds. I find this a bit annoying and long. Are these times typical for the T42 w/ these programs installed? is it a compatibility issue with sp2 and the IBM utilities? could someone with xp pro sp1 time their system startup with those utilities installed (I uninstalled all other programs to test this, so nothing on startup) or could someone verify errors with IBM utilities and SP2? I feel like im rambling, but long story short, any help would be greatly appriciated

Thanks,
John

[jdhurst]

When I boot my T41, it loads (amongst other things):
1. Symantec Client Security (which doesn't start until the network piece is finished).
2. Access Connections 3.21 (which determines whether to fire up wired or wireless, and that takes time).
3. A bunch of other ancillary things, none of which take much time by themselves but added together take time.

Then I find that the network finding its DHCP server and getting and address can take time if DHCP services are slow at that instant.

Finally, SP2 has added to boot time.

So your total times are not out of line to me. I load more, and it takes longer than you. I have just learned to be patient for a few minutes. Once fully started, the machine is plenty and pleasurably fast.
... JD Hurst

[hmphargh]

I agree that once started the laptop is plenty fast, my worries are because I have to take my computer to classes sometimes, and waiting for a few minutes while everything loads isnt an option at times. I suppose I'll just have to wake up 2 1/2 minutes earlier for those 8 am classes thanks for your help though

[Leon]

on those days, just use standby......

[hmphargh]

true, but i like to shut down my computer when i go to bed and im afraid of putting my computer in the case on standby (i know basically everything is off, but im afraid of overheating or suffocation or something in the neoprene insert i use)

[Leon]

nothing to worry about, it will be as cool as can be, and start instantly...

[whatsinthename]

u can put your computer on hibernate instead of stand by. i would prefer that.

[Leon]

i suggested standby cause he wanted to start up quickly.. if hibernate is fast enough for him, thats fine too....

[jdhurst]

hmphargh - If once in a while you leave your computer on Standby overnight, you won't do it any harm. But certainly during classes, the suggestion to use Standby is a good one. If I am going to start my Laptop very soon, I use Standby. I always have it on sometime during the evening, so I don't forget to turn it off. ... JDHurst

[hmphargh]

thanks for all of your advice- all of it was very helpful in one form or another, i think hibernate may be what im going to go with for the most part. are their any drawbacks to hibernate? (in comparison to shut down, i understand stand by is faster)

[Leon]

no disadvantage......

[Kenn]

To the OP:

Do a search for Microsoft Bootvis.

Install it, and fo a "trace + driver delays" to see what's slowing down your boot, and then "Optimize." My boot time went down from about 2 minutes to 28 seconds. YMMV.

Oh yeah, if you're running Norton Antivirus, everything will be slow

[jsmit86]

I second the motion for bootvis. Mine went from about a minute to 29 seconds.

[T41mbi]

start>>>run>>> type "msconfig" and press enter

Click the start up tab and deselect anything that you don't want to load up on startup

[hmphargh]

yes bootvis...i was trying to remember what it was called thank you SO much

[Kenn]

yes bootvis...i was trying to remember what it was called thank you SO much

No problem, let us know if/how much it helps

[hmphargh]

it did help some, although not as much as i had hoped...it seems ot be down to around 1:45 - well within the expected range- it seems that bootvis works best if you let it run a few cycles. thanks a lot for reminding me about that program, i remember i used it to do the same thing for a desktop (but i was hoping to go from 40 sec to 30 sec ) anyway thanks a lot

[GACrabill]

According to Microsoft as regards BootVis ....(bold by me)

"BootVis.exe Tool for System Manufacturers
Updated: September 19, 2003

About Bootvis.exe
Bootvis.exe is a performance tracing and visualization tool that Microsoft designed to help PC system designers and software developers identify performance issues for boot/resume timing while developing new PC products or supporting software.

Please note that Bootvis.exe is not a tool that will improve boot/resume performance for end users. Contrary to some published reports, Bootvis.exe cannot reduce or alter a system's boot or resume performance. The boot optimization routines invoked by Bootvis.exe are built into Windows XP. These routines run automatically at pre-determined times as part of the normal operation of the operating system."

[Kenn]

According to Microsoft as regards BootVis ....(bold by me)

"BootVis.exe Tool for System Manufacturers
Updated: September 19, 2003

About Bootvis.exe
Bootvis.exe is a performance tracing and visualization tool that Microsoft designed to help PC system designers and software developers identify performance issues for boot/resume timing while developing new PC products or supporting software.

Please note that Bootvis.exe is not a tool that will improve boot/resume performance for end users. Contrary to some published reports, Bootvis.exe cannot reduce or alter a system's boot or resume performance. The boot optimization routines invoked by Bootvis.exe are built into Windows XP. These routines run automatically at pre-determined times as part of the normal operation of the operating system."

While that is technically true, what the Microsoft statement doesn't tell you is that there are processes which cause others to hang or delay as they wait for god knows what to happen. So while bootvis doesn't doesn't actually decrease the time it takes for such processes to run, it can do a great job of repositioning those lagging processes so that they don't interfere with processes such as the shell and logon that give you control of the desktop and allow other processes to run.

In short, going from well over a minute to under 30 seconds is very possible with bootvis.

[Humpa]

These routines run automatically at pre-determined times as part of the normal operation of the operating system

You can run them any time, too. Just type this into the Run box:
Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks
It will run in the background (you can only see it in the task manager), and takes 10-15 minutes(?).
This is supposed to be similar to running bootvis.exe
This is what I've read, at least.

[Leon]

has anyone successfully run this alternate method with positive results?

[Humpa]

I didn't get any gain by using bootvis (Trace Next Boot, then Optimize)- I'm still at 63 seconds till 100% booted up.
The alternative method was no different - though I also wasnt sure what process it is in the task manager. There is always a rundll32 running in my task manager.

Here is where I got that info from:
http://www.tek-tips.com/faqs.cfm?fid=4518