🚀 go-pugleaf

Absolutely.
Upgrading is one of the stupidest thing MS allowed people to do.  It causes
endless problems for others to fix.
Nick
"anyweb" <anyweb@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TD9n6.15973$Qb7.2609601@newsb.telia.net...
> you upgraded ? that might be the problem
>
> try format c: (after backing up) then install win2k fresh
>
> also, id say your page file sizes are too big, should be amount of RAM+12
or
> so mb
>
> also remember that win2k is a very powerful operating system and does
expect
> 'more' from a system
>
> cheers
>
> anyweb
>
>
> "PhilG" <ITp.guerney@jktech.com.au> wrote in message
> news:97heng$t7j$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au...
> > We have two identical Dell Precision 410 Workstations each with one
Intel
> > PIII 600MHz processor on a dual-processor capable board, 256MB RAM and
one
> > IDE 28GB hard drive and each with a CD-R and a CD-RW drive. Twin
machines
> > delivered together about a year ago and wired-up identically in the box
> and
> > with identical BIOS settings. Both use DiskKeeper to defrag the drives
> every
> > early morning. Both have large page files on the data partition (~800MB)
> and
> > the drives are only about 30% full..
> >
> > Except we upgraded one of them to Win2000 (and first flashed its BIOS to
> the
> > next level A13 as required in the upgrade pack provided by Dell).
> >
> > We run image analysis software that often loads large files (50-100MB),
> > number crunches them then spits out large results files to disk. My
staff
> > kept saying the Win2000 machine was slower than the other one
> > [NT4/patch6/BIOS A12] but I did not really believe them until we ran a
> > test:. All other programs unloaded, network disconnected, a batch file
of
> 10
> > jobs was created using the same input files on both machines. The batch
> job
> > took 15 minutes on the NT4 machine and 50 minutes on the Win 2000
machine.
> >
> > THREE TIMES LONGER.
> >
> > I have run benchmark software and both machines run all normal memory
and
> > disk benchmark test perfectly well and return numbers consistent with
the
> > specifications. (Except that the random disk access RW test comes out
very
> > low, but that is the same on both machines).
> >
> > I am at a loss as to where to look for the problem slowing down the Win
> 2000
> > machine unless it is the obvious  - Win 2000 itself. Any suggestion
before
> > we re-install NT4?
> >
> > Thanks for any help.
> >
> > PG
> >
> > REMOVE IT FROM E-MAIL ADDRESS TO REPLY DIRECTLY
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>