How to speed up Windows 8 but up sequence
When i first time installed Win8 in November the but-up amazing, i have some problem with adjusting to new UI, but now it's really really slow,
Is there a good program to speed up the loading of Windows 8, my sytem quickly turns on, but when I type my password and hit enter, it shows the start screen, but still something doing really slow, as I click the tile desktop icon are slowly loading, general computer works quickly, often i choosing to hibernating the system, rather than shut down system because when i turn on computer everything turns on itself in a few moments.
Enter the "butt" jokes.
The only real way to speed up BOOT times is a faster disk drive, really. Some sort of solid state or hybrid hard drive.
Is it a new Intel system? If so, adding a 64GB SSD (solid state disk) and using it with Intel's disk caching SRT (Smart Response Technology) is your best and cheapest bet!
Shatbat
Veteran

Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,791
Location: Where two great rivers meet
Press Ctrl+Alt+Del
Look for a tab that says "Startup"
Now you will see a list of all the applications that are started when you turn on the computer. Check them, see what they do, watch for their "Startup Impact", and disable some of them as you see fit (but again, see what they do. You don't want to disable something you actually use.)
It should be helpful, and doesn't require any particular computer expertise
_________________
To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day. - Winston Churchill
Fogman
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,986
Location: Frå Nord Dakota til Vermont
I hate to say it, but after make the permanant switch to *nix a couple of years ago, I've come to the conclusion that Windows makes even new hardware perform like 5-10 year old hardware because of the Windows resource overhead. That being said, however, do as the others have suggested and turn off startup items, as these slow down your boot sequence.
If Win 8 still has the ability, (I've only toyed around with it for less than 10 minutes)run an MSConfig and disable both startup items, as well as any Windows services that don't need to start up. --Be careful with this, as you may possibly render your system useless by doing so.
Items that don't need to star tup are Java, Acrobat Reader, and Quicktime. AV and Antispyware programs can also slow your system down as well, but turning them off in the Startups tab may possibly render them inoperable even if you turn them back on again at a later date. (Hello, Norton's AV)
Before you try any of this though, do a google search on which Windows services and Startup programs can be disabled.
Another thing that you may still be able to do is turn of desktop compositing and the Aero desktop,animated and sliding menus, etc, all of which are also rescource hogs. This will give you an old style (Win95 to Win2000) style desktop, minus the task panel that came with Win7.
_________________
When There's No There to get to, I'm so There!
Seriously? If that's true, then holy s**t... There's a reason right there to switch over to... I assume you're referring to Linux? Or Unix? I think i'm gonna have to go and look up some articles on Linux/Unix vs. Windows hardware performance, now.
_________________
It takes a village to raise an idiot, but it only takes one idiot to raze a village.
Windows always boots up quickly and smoothly for me, even with the dual-boot of Ubuntu I have installed. I would definitely recommend finding msconfig in the search menu and disabling any start up programs you can. Upgrading your hardware would obviously also help, although your mentioning of it running fine when you got it leads me to believe your hardware is fine. Also try defragmenting your hard drive.
Fogman
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,986
Location: Frå Nord Dakota til Vermont
Seriously? If that's true, then holy sh**... There's a reason right there to switch over to... I assume you're referring to Linux? Or Unix? I think i'm gonna have to go and look up some articles on Linux/Unix vs. Windows hardware performance, now.
Allow to clarify further, My setup is as follows:
SYSTEM:
Panasonic Toughbook CF-T5
1.06 Ghz Intel Centrino Duo
Intel GPU
1.5 GB System Memory
2.5" IDE/PATA HDD's
The HDD's are setup as following:
20GB Root partition
2GB Swap partition
Separate /home partition
All FS's are ext4
My only gripe about the system besides the fact that it has an IDE Drive and is essentially old hardware is that the touchscreen does not work with Linux, though as an aside when I got the system, it didn't work with it's original XP with SP3 installed either.
Drive one is loaded with SolusOS 1.3 (Essentially Debian Squeeze (current Stable) with more up to date software and the 3.3.6 kernel. I have trimmed the the desktop by getting rid of Compiz, and turning GNOME compositing off, also turned off are Printer Services and Bluetooth (Don't need them, hence I turn them off to save resources.) I also use the SLIM login manager instead of GDM3. Total desktop resources after boot/ user login is @70MB memory usage.
Drive two is setup with Crunchbang,(#!) Waldorf which is essentially a spin on Debian Wheezy (testing) with (I believe, but I may be mistaken) the default Debian testing 3.2 kernel, and Openbox WM.
Current Hard Drive usage for the Root partition of Crunchbang drive (which I am entering this post from) is 4.22GB of 20GB, whis is with the slew of usual desktop apps (Libre Office, Gimp, Opera/Firefox, etc,etc.)
Versions of Windows from Vista to current have a dist footprint of well over 10GB for the OS alone, not to mention applications that you install.
Because of it's lightweight nature, the boot time, and desktop load time of this system drive is a little bit faster than the SolusOS drive.
Both of which load faster than the WinXP Pro that was loaded on this system.
Also, my previous computer was originally loaded with WinVista, which I immediately turned into a dual boot system with the AMD64 version Ubuntu 10.10, which STILL booted faster and was faster over all than Vista, even though the FS was emulated due to the fact that it was mounted on top of NTFS.
When I formatted the HDD and ran in evolving sequence from first to last the AMD64 versions of Linux Mint 12 (horrible), Ubuntu 10.04, (blah), Debian Squeeze, (better perfomance than Ubuntu 10.04, but older kernel and software packages left a bit to be desired) and Solus OS 1.1 which is basically similar to the version of SolusOS that I currently run on the other drive, performance was better with Linux than it was with Windows.
As far as actual application performance and CPU/Bus speed performance, your results may vary, but because Linux is inherantly more tweakable and lighter on resources, you will generally get better performance from Linux than you will with Windows, provided that you avoid GNOME 3 , Ubuntu's Unity Desktop and KDE's Plasma Desktop. --You can acutally run KDE4, and get somewhat to slightly heavier memory loads than GNOME 2.xx, but you have to turn the Plasma Desktop/Compositing OFF for this to happen.
_________________
When There's No There to get to, I'm so There!
Shatbat
Veteran

Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,791
Location: Where two great rivers meet
"msconfig" no longer works for disabling Startup programs. It sends you to the task manager.
It still works for disabling windows services though, so that should help
_________________
To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day. - Winston Churchill