I went with win8.1 on a new build and have a couple of questions? ANyone willing to take ...

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
I installed Win 8.1 on a new build with an intel i7 CPU.  WIn 8.1
seems to have a hundred programs lurking in the background taking up
resources.  Is this normal?

Then I couldn't use the computer like I wanted because no real task
bar so I installed an after market task bar.

My question is , how do I get back to the screen with all the running
charms on it???  Shows weather....stock tips....all kinds of info in
real time?  I followed someting on line that showed me how to make the
desktop my primary screen and set it up so I'll always boot into it.
But I want to make sure I have alll those damn real time programs
closed.   I can get to the list of programs with the "WINDOW KEY" + C
but that is not the s c reen I mean.   I want to make as many
rescources avalible for use for what I want to do not what windows may
think I want to do.   Can someone help me?

On the plus side, I do think MicroSoft succedded.   My $4000 computer
is more like a cell phone then any other computer I ever had.


Re: I went with win8.1 on a new build and have a couple of questions? ANyone willing to take a min for me?

Erricalongnest@Whatsurwhim.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Have you looked at Task Manager ? (Control-Alt-Delete or right-click the
Task Bar at the bottom of the screen...)

It shows CPU usage. When the Metro tiles are running
their little animations, switch back immediately to the
desktop. What does Task Manager say ? Close to zero CPU usage
would be my guess.

The Metro applications like to sleep. Even when a Metro application
is "dismissed", the system can still give it some resources so it
can be re-opened faster. But in general, the idea is, those Metro
applications aren't supposed to be bogging down the system.
(An App from the App Store, could be another matter entirely.
Just the wasteful decorations on Win8, should knock it off when
you're not looking at them.)

If your new i7 has a ton of RAM (like my 16GB machine put together
this August), then the impact of the OS isn't that great. When
the OS is "fully inflated", the Resource Monitor shows 1GB of RAM
allocated to the OS. If you launch a memory hungry program, the OS
will eventually start paging (the page fault count will start to go up),
and  the OS will "shrink" to 350MB. This is comparable to the resident
memory of some of the previous OSes. It's still tremendously
wasteful, but not really much worse than some others.

The initial version of Win8, would run in as little as 128MB.
I know, because I tested it here in VirtualBox. But the OS
"put on weight" as it approached RTM, and it is no longer
all that slim. It's just comparable to the others.

There have been some tablets for sale at Walmart, with
hardware-limited soldered-into-place 1GB of RAM, and they're
running Windows 8. Which means the OS spends most of its
time "deflated".


I'd offer you a user manual (I know of a couple), but
they're pretty lame. And I don't think they'd really
teach you all that much.

On OEM machines, when the machine starts for the first time,
there is a presentation on the screen that highlights the
sensitive corners and sides of the screen.

New with 8.1, you get a "X" in the upper right of an opened
Metro tile, which is a "dismiss" or "quit" button. This is
better than 8.0, where there were Youtube videos of old people
stuck in a Metro tile, unaware of how to use the sensitive
parts of the screen to "escape". If you look at the ancient
list here, alt-F4 is listed, and it still works in Windows 8.
And that's how I was "escaping" until the 8.1 update came along.
(Using alt-F4 in Metro, will close a tile that occupies the
whole screen. If you're in the desktop, click the desktop
surface, then type alt-F4, the OS will offer to shut down.
So the key combo has two functions.)


Now that escaping from Metro is fixed, if you're on Windows 8.1,
you can explore and learn without getting stuck.

The division between Metro and Desktop apps, changes with
monitor configuration. My other machine has a 1440 wide screen,
and that just barely meets the requirements for a new mode.

1024x768  - minimum screen resolution (Metro would take the whole screen)
1366 wide - a Metro window and the desktop can be opened at the same time.
             The Metro windows is a slim column, that isn't all that useful
wider     - when you have more than one monitor, more than 1366 width
             and so on, you can have even more stuff open. Not nearly
             as restrictive as Windows 8.0 was. So if you can afford two
             LCD monitors, you can have Metro completely on one screen,
             Desktop completely on the other. Or a couple slim Metro windows
             and so on.

Rather than insult your intelligence, now that Win 8.1
doesn't have any brain-teaser "traps", you can just
explore it like you explore any other OS.

For your Taskbar question, try this material as a starting
point. I have just the one monitor on each Win8 machine, and
my Task Bar is always present by default. If you have two monitors,
you could set things up so the second monitor has no Task Bar.


Windows 8.1 appears to still have an "Auto-Hide" option for
the Task Bar.


There is a picture here of the Windows 8 Task Bar
configuration. It's a lot more complicated than the
Windows 7 one.



Re: Re: I went with win8.1 on a new build and have a couple of questions? ANyone willing to take a min for me?

I'm not the original poster but your response seems very well written
and very knowledgeable.  Needless to say I was impressed - more so
since I have a limited computer knowledge.  Throw in  the fact that I
have a laptop, a table and a cell phone all trying to talk to each
other and I feel like a dyslexic person trying to do a crossword
puzzle in a language I cannot speak.  And being dyslexic, I can tell
you that it is rough.   But if you could spare another moment of time
I have a question.
When I do things with Agent v6.0, my newsgroup reader, it seems to
always take a long time.  If I delete a message that has a body it
takes longer then I think it should.   When I look at the files they
range in size from a few megs to a couple of hundred megs so I'd guess
that taking and deleting a file out of the middle of that could be
timely.   But my question is, why, if it is so slow and takes so long,
does my CPU Use Bar  show very little usage?   I would think if an
action took a long time to perform, my CPU Use would be @ 100 %. With
Agent, it may be less then 10% but take 1-3 minutes to perform some
Agent is running on an INTEL CORE  i-5 3450 CPU @ 3.10Ghz with 8 gigs
of Ram.
I'm not sure if any of what I wrote made sense.  So to rephrase, A
computer program (Agent in this case) is taking a extended amount of
time to execute a task ( and I know that taking a long or short time
is relative).  Why does the CPU usage show low use?  I would think the
computer would use more CPU instead of taking longer to run a task.
Maybe the problem is with the ram, but I have free ram and I though
anything being done in ram is usually very quick.

Well, so, a boring question no doubt that I am neither you nor anyone
else would care to tackle.  But should you get an urge to try and
teach those less knowledgeable, or should anyone get the urge, please
help me out.
Despite the fact that my computers get faster and faster, it seems
like Agent is doing its best to slow them down.  
If someone could recommend a better program then Agent, heck, I'd be
willing to give it a try.
Well, the GF has said I've exceeded my DIQ (Daily Internet Quota) so I
must be off.  I'd like to thank anyone in advance who took the time to
read this far and a double thanks if you have tried to answer the
Again Thanks

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: I went with win8.1 on a new build and have a couple of questions? ANyone willing to take a min for me?

BonniePeebles@noemail.Com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well, Bonnie, you know as much as I do on this one.

Virtually any machine with Intel 3GHz, should perform well.
There's no excuse for what you're seeing. Even my Intel CPU
with the puny cache inside it, does well.

And I see this all the time, and I have a pretty expensive home-built
piece of crap. I do a command, no CPU usage, no disk usage, it just
sits there. Not everything is like that, but I have definitely seen
what you're talking about. I haven't managed to figure it out.
It's certainly counter-intuitive.

The thing is, when the machine is not doing anything, would
ProcMon catch any details ? Or would the details be boring there
as well. The thing is, if there is a deadlock or a timeout situation
(loss of handshake in some protocol, recovered by timeout or watchdog),
as end users we'd be hard pressed to find this.

ProcMon (records a great many machine primitives in real time)
         (It can see around 200 registry accesses per second when
          the computer is nominally idle - and these don't hurt anything)



The last Windows OS to have adequate file system caching
was Win2K. On that one, if the OS reads a file, and there
is "slack RAM" available, the file is just kept there
for a rainy day. The next time you reference the file,
the disk light doesn't come on, and the file references
are answered from RAM. One place this used to speed things
up, was Windows Search commands. Once the hard drive had
been scanned from end to end in a first search, subsequent
searches would be a lot faster. The directory information
was being stored in slack RAM.

Later Windows OSes have this feature too, but there
is a lot more "cache invalidation" and "please don't
use the cache for my next access" type commands. This
ruins the effectiveness of the thing.

To give an example on another OS, I happened to read
a huge file, and it got cached in RAM. I forgot
I'd done that, and later issued a command, and
it *screamed* along at 3.1GB/sec. That's what a cache
can do for you. Yet, Windows chooses to negate that
feature in so many situations.

If your copy of Forte Agent had opened a mail box file
for example, unless you read a lot of other files and
flush the discretionary file cache, the file should
still be there. And opening it a second time should
be a lot faster. On Win2K you'd be suitably impressed.

So I guess this means we all go back to Win2K ?
I'm hopeful. Only problem with my copy of Win2K, is it
is limited by the license, to two cores, so processors
with more cores than that, the excess cores are not

Unfortunately, I don't have any debugger tools, that
can tell me why the OS is just sitting there, pending
command in hand. If I knew of something, I'd tell you.

You may have noticed, when the OS starts, it is very
busy at first. It looks like Windows Defender likes to
do some OS scanning at startup. If you notice the desktop
is practically non-responsive, that's the reason. Even if
you disable Windows Defender "real time scanning", it
still does that scan. Because Father Microsoft knows best...


Site Timeline