The personal Journey

[Kupotek]

Here is a inteteresing thing that I   learned last night thru experimenting in  windows XP
I am by no means a newbie around Windows boxes, and have built all of my boxes personally.  Starting with a 486 DX66 in 1992 to  what I  use today.  
What Im going to talk about today is the sneaky manner in which Microsoft monopolizes  your bandwidth.

I  have never had better then around 15-20 kb/s  downloading in iRC, and on my nice 1.5 mbps rated  downstream  ADSL  this  made me wonder.

So, I began to shutdown a  ton of xp services,  defrag, delete all temp file and  services i just dont need.  I looked into theindex.dat, into the  "hidden files" and all the automatic features, and  glitter of Windows XP, and found I dont use or need half this stuff.
I goto IRC, downlaod a file.. and it receives at 175 kb/s
So I think, ok it's a fluke, right?
I  try  with  someone else,  minimum  stable at  75 kb/s
And its been like that  ever since.  

My next  step is of course to try out Linux Mandrake. As the only  girl in my computer help channel I feel a little  intimidated by non MS  Operating systems, so any advice and guidance is  appreciated!

Thankyou!

[ May 26, 2003: Message edited by: Emiko ]

[TheQuirk]

quote:Originally posted by Emiko:
I  have never had better then around 15-20 kb/s  downloading in iRC, and on my nice 1.5 mbps rated  downstream  ADSL  this  made me wonder.

Oh man. This, of course, is the only determining factor in download speed, right?  :rolleyes:  

You have to download from the same person--the upstream speed of the server/sender (I'm guessing "sender" because you're talking about IRC) is the real determining factor. On normal home DSL/Cable connection, you're going to get 15-35k as opposed to <insert whacky downstream here>.

I seriously doubt that whatever you did increased your download speed by that much.

 

quote:Originally posted by Emiko:
and have built all of my boxes personally. Starting with a 486 DX66 in 1992 to what I use today.

A high roller, eh?  

[Kupotek]

Hey, my brothers both live in Taipei! Where are you in Taiwan?

[avello500]

girls kick ass!!!

i noticed that with a windows box my connection would max out at 340-350KB pulling from multiple stable connections.
on linux i get around 430KB from the same connections and conditions.
  :rolleyes:

[psyjax]

I notice the same thing between my PC and Mac   ...

I gues sM$ just sux at one more thing.

Emiko, I think the Quirks sig is a joke. Hes from TX as far as I know.

[Kupotek]

One thing I found  interesting about  UC Santa Cruz when I went to college there, all the  compy terminals were unix.

I guess they  didnt have any  big techsupport and figured it was easier to  secure then a Sindows box  

[Refalm]

quote:Emiko: Hey, my brothers both live in Taipei! Where are you in Taiwan?

TheQuirk lives in Texas and lived in Russia before... he never even been in Taiwan, he's a bit crazy for putting that in his sig.

[Faust]

I see no reason why MS wouldn't be using up too much bandwidth Quirk, they use too much of everything else.  :rolleyes:  I remember the Australian Personal Computer magazine dudes saying something about overheads involved in keeping their wi-fi link up under Windows (something like 9 meg out of 300 just to keep the connection up.)  And have you ever looked in the status section of Zone Alarm or Kerio and observed just how fucking often scvhost / system / tcpsvcs etcetera send data?  I mean sure they necessary, but not when my cable is out of the network socket!  And why does messenger need to run in the background by default?
Emiko I wouldn't be too worried about being a girl in computing, my CS teacher is a girl and she works on big bad supercomputers. (Of which my uni has 5.) Come to think of it I know of two female comp lecturerers here and only one male.  :confused:
Oh and www.linuxchix.com may be interesting for you...

[Faust]

Hmm that could be .org.  I've never actually been there so I have no idea.  I only know because my religous reading of how-to's lead me to a how-to written by like the head of that page or something.  Was interesting to find a how-to that was actually relevant to Real Life (tm).  (thats a joke for all of you that know that Real Life is Really computers.)

Anyways, another point:Who else has noticed how much CPU time downloading a file / networking uses? Windows can't handle full speed multiple d/ls without chugging up *badly*.  As an example try running a movie and then starting up d/ls on a high speed link - you won't get too many d/ls going before the movie starts chugging along.  Oh and this happens on my friends Windows PC's as well so it's not just me.
Note this will probably not work on a 56K.  I have a 100mbps internet link so I probably notice the effect of this more than anyone else.  Of course Linux has *much* less slowdown when running multiple fast d/ls.  How did I guess?