Clean Up or Buy New PC?

[Flint]

My 9th Grade Honors English teacher wouldn't let us use am/is/are/was/were/be/being/been (passive verbs).

[lookout123]

but to bring the thread back on topic: Send the machine to Flint. He'll fix any problem. repeatedly.

[Shawnee123]

Originally Posted by Flint

My 9th Grade Honors English teacher wouldn't let us use am/is/are/was/were/be/being/been (passive verbs).

Well duh. That's because you were always saying things like "His mouth had been buttfucked by another."

[Juniper]

Hey, cut him some slack. I'm in my senior year of college as an English major and I still sometimes have trouble with passive voice.

I don't think it's passive voice, though, so much as odd word order. The Yoda reference.

But anyway...crap...

I did all that stuff: ditched McAfee and got AVG instead, defragged, checked for spyware and cleaned up my registry and now my computer is SLOWER THAN BEFORE.

ACK ACK ACK ACK!!!!!

[dar512]

Originally Posted by Juniper

But anyway...crap...

I did all that stuff: ditched McAfee and got AVG instead, defragged, checked for spyware and cleaned up my registry and now my computer is SLOWER THAN BEFORE.

ACK ACK ACK ACK!!!!!

Do you have AVG's set up to constantly check your hard drive? If so, that's the new slowdown. It's checking every read and write to the disk.

[tw]

Originally Posted by dar512

Assuming, for the moment, that you are not just jerking my chain.

By now you should know better; I don't jerk chains. I ask a question because the question is targeting an unknown, with intent of grasping like a nuclear explosion focused by a laser. The citation finally explained active verse passive - which most "English nazis" cannot do because they worry more about rules rather than provide facts in a useful manner.

Apparently the 'passive' sentence was "Provided are many suggestions." That sentence should be in active voice? "God provided many suggestions" which is no different from "I provided many suggestions" which also should not read "To dar512 are provided many suggestions". Every 'active' sentence completely and obviously detracts from the (not 'my' - the) only relevant point: "provided" and "many suggestions". Only passive voice says what I meant.

That 'passive voice' post was blunt and directed at the only thing relevant. At no time did I honor or worship an irrelevant "I", "You", "they", or "god". Those references are used excessively by others who need to believe people are somehow more important than a subject/object.

What did they teach in that English course on technical writing? Get rid of what I now know as active voice. When I write a technical paper, a lack of technical knowledge by the editor becomes obvious. She changed sentences to active voice because she was more into humanizing and "English nazism", could not grasp the topic and therefore had to personalize it, and never learned how to write technically. (Notice use of active voice because 'she' is relevant in that sentence.)

Active voice has limited place in a technical answer. References to persons, when not necessary, only creates confusion and adds irrelevance.

Many want an active voice because they don't like being put where they belong - secondary and irrelevant to a subject - therefore unmentioned. 'Passive voice' used because it (and not active voice) best made the statement intended. Again, screw those "English nazis" who are too busy worshipping English rules rather than learning how the world works.

Provided earlier were three tasks to address that computer's speed. Again, no silly references to what is irrelevant to the topic - me, you, Zengum, they, Cellar dwellars, a false idol called god, George Jr, ... I am neither relevant nor so egotistical as to include myself in that sentence.

From that citation:

A passive construction occurs when you make the object of an action into the subject of a sentence.

Exactly. There was no difference between the object and subject. They are one and the same. "Provided were three tasks". "Provided are many questions". Converting either sentence to active voice only adds irrelevant words - wastes bandwidth - distorts what was intended. "English nazi" would rather add more useless words.

[dar512]

Originally Posted by tw

What did they teach in that English course on technical writing? Get rid of what I now know as active voice.

When did you take this course, tw? I believe the current recommendation is to prefer active voice, when possible.

I don't buy the passive-voice recommendation for technical subjects either. There is always a subject even if it is implied. The use of passive voice doesn't eliminate bias, it just hides it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by dar512

Do you have AVG's set up to constantly check your hard drive? If so, that's the new slowdown.

That and a long list of other potential problems are all quickly identified and later solved by the three tasks in that previous post.

I suspect (not confirmed) that AVG is less efficient than other malware programs (notice the active voice because 'I' am relevant in that sentence). But still unknown are important basics such as CPU, memory size, or what that process is. Those other recommendations such as ditching McAffee (not recommended), cleaning the registry (obviously accomplishes little), and defragging would do little to solve a slowness problem. Those three task are the best solution if only because it is not obvious why.

[Pie]

Whatever you do, stay away from Vista. It is the Debbil.

[dar512]

Originally Posted by Pie

Whatever you do, stay away from Vista. It is the Debbil.

Seconded

[theotherguy]

Are you stuck with Windows or can you explore other operating systems?

[theotherguy]

Oh sweet Jesus! This is a thread about computer issues. English class is down the hall.

[Juniper]

Seriously. This SUCKS. I've now taken AVG back off again. I'm not running anything except IE or Firefox, Thunderbird and Word. I need to fix this. I have work to do and I cannot work like this, it is driving me bonkers. My computer is running slower than it was before I started messing with it.

OK, you want to know what I have, here it is. I'm just going to type in what it says on the label on the front of the tower because I used to know what all this meant but apparently my brain cells aren't firing like they used to, either.

emachines T3104
AMD Sempron Processor 3100+
1.80 ghz
1600 mhz fsb
256 kb L2 cache

256 MB DDR SDRAM

Running XP

YES I know I need more memory, but I'm not adding any if the machine isn't worthy of it, KWIM?

On top of it all, my flat-screen monitor croaked a couple weeks ago and I'm using an ancient 14".

Oh, and the CD/DVD drawer doesn't pop out all the time anymore, sometimes it needs a little cajoling.

SOMEONE may be getting an early Christmas present, from herself!

[tw]

Originally Posted by Juniper

Seriously. This SUCKS. I've now taken AVG back off again. ... My computer is running slower than it was before I started messing with it.
...
YES I know I need more memory, but I'm not adding any if the machine isn't worthy of it, KWIM?

More labor wasted because, again, ignored is the best advise posted - three points in post 4. UT defined how cheap memory is. However had you done those three points long ago (stop wasting time with anti-virus games, etc), then you would have known how cheap memory was AND ... ignore point three at serious risk.

It is an eMachine. Some type of 1 gigabyte memory does not work in some eMachine systems. A problem that does not exist in machines from responsible manufacturers. Provided in post 4, point 3 was had a hperlink to crucial.com. Executed that immediately so that UT did not have to post a price and so that you don't get the wrong type of 1 Gb memory and so that ... you don't yet know how important that post was in getting a solution fast and the first time.

Be cautious with eMachine. It should be screaming fast and (if not eMachine) then would execute even faster. But eMachines is designed by cost a controller - not innovators - which is also why you must be extra careful (sometimes) when buying memory. That eMachine will only scream - not do what it really could have done.

How poor are eMachine designed? Minimum size for memory in any machine of that date especially when using XP - 512 Mb. Yours only has 256? Do you also buy GM cars? Appreciate why eMachines, on the bottom line, actually cost more money. However we have what we have. So stop stifling useful replies.

Post 4 has three points. Meet all if you want the next post to create results.

Second and third points in post 4 made most all previous posts unnecessary. How to get useful answers the next time. Post 4 point 2 describes using Task Manager. Since anything in Task Manger makes no sense to you, then it is probably THE fact that gets a solution, when posted here.

Described is what to look at and then post here. CPU time and Memory Delta. Had you done that, then wasting time with MacAfee, et al would have never happened.

Still not described: what software you want to execute. You want a fix? Three points in post 4 are about knowing what is wrong long before fixing anything. Trying to fix something on wild speculation, as you have been doing (which is why you are frustrated), is how to waste time AND sometimes makes problems even worse. Click on any underlined hyperlink such as post 4. Then report back what all three points are asking ... but only if you want the next post to be helpful, and if you want to stop wasting time, and if you want to avoid frustration.

Want frustration? Then don't execute that crucial.com hyperlink. I don't want to post "I told you so". You may need to know more than just buying that memory.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by tw

point 2 describes using Task Manager. Since anything in Task Manger makes no sense to you, then it is probably THE fact that gets a solution, when posted here.

Described is what to look at and then post here. CPU time and Memory Delta.

If you think that Task Manager supplies the answer, then you should explain what Task Manager is, and how to find it. Perhaps the original poster (and the lurkers you often write for) don't know that you find Task Manager by holding down the Ctrl-Alt-Delete keys at the same time and selecting Task Manager from the options offered. It's not obvious. Either you happen to know it, or you don't. I can imagine someone browsing around the programs or the control panel, not seeing this so called "Task Manager" and thinking you are full of BS. Just out of curiosity, I opened my own Task Manager, and don't see anything called "CPU Time" or "Memory Delta." There is lots of CPU and Memory information there, but those specific terms don't exist in my version of XP.

If you are going to write a long post about the problem, why don't you write a long post with specific instructions? You said "Task Manger makes no sense to you," so you obviously believe that the person asking the question doesn't know a lot about computers. Make it a little easier. Pretend you are a teacher. Explain step by step what to do and why.

You devote a lot of time to answering these "computer help needed" threads, so I assume you are genuinely interesting in helping out. Those of us with limited computer knowledge love to have this stuff explained with detailed instructions and explanations.

Instead of your post 4

What is the objective? To make it faster? First, most of what you did does not address that objective.

Not stated is what needs more power. Second, two bottlenecks are CPU and memory. To alleviate stress on both, find and eliminate as many other processes as possible. Start with Task Manager. Two important numbers are CPU time and Memory Delta. Any process that is consuming too much CPU time might be eliminated. Any unnecessary process with numerous Memory Deltas, when eliminated, should permit that main program to run faster.

And finally, third, go to www.crucial.com to run the memory scanner. Learn how much memory can be installed, how much more might be purchased, memory type, and prices.

You might have tried something like this instead:

The next time you experience this slowness, hold down the Ctrl, Alt, and Delete keys at the same time. Select "Task Manager" from the options. In Task Manager, click on the "Processes" tab and look at the list of processes there. This list shows everything that your computer is doing, and how much memory is devoted to each one. Look down the list at the memory used for each process, and make note of anything using over, say, 10,000K of memory. Report those results back to us. Next, click on the Task Manager tab for "Performance." Look at the box at the bottom for "Physical Memory" and tell us what the "total" and "available" amounts are. Also at the left is a fluctiating bar that shows CPU usage as a percentage. What value does that show?

After you give us this information, we can help you find unnecessary processes that can be eliminated to speed up your machine.

You should also go to www.crucial.com to run the memory scanner. Learn how much memory can be installed, how much more might be purchased, memory type, and prices.

Of course, I'm not a computer guru, so some of that suggested quote may be bad advice, but you get the idea.