How many non-Microsoft processes and services are you running after Windows system boot up, before you manually launch any application?
Excluding drivers for display, audio, etc and EMET, only ReflectService.exe. And this poll reminds me that I was about to disable it as well.
For processes that stay running, I have 7 including Tor. Not counting batch files, there's 4 more non-MS executables that run during bootup, then terminate. I have the number of MS running processes down to 5.
Now that I have disabled ReflectService.exe, it is virtually 0. But if counting important drivers and services by hardware manufacturers, it is one... two... uh... five!
5 processes, as you can see attached. 2 each for Comodo FW/D+ & Sandboxie, and 1 for Shadow Defender. 2 Services: Comodo Internet Security Helper Service, & Sandboxie Service
Luciddream, something that I don't understand is Why, my XP computer running with all the services that it came with and not disabling any, the memory usage in my XP is less than in yours. The only service that I disable in XP is Adobes Flash updater. I would disable Windows remote management in XP like I do in W7 but that service is not installed in my XP. Bo
I run two services (Macrium Reflect and HP SI service) and two programs (Classic Start Menu and Launchy).
Ah... just looked at an old Taskman screenie I posted in here long ago, and my Commit Charge at boot was 81. Not sure what caused the dramatic change. Back then I didn't use Shadow Defender, or have Sandboxie set to autostart. Also I think it may have been after a fresh reformat, whereas I haven't done that in quite some time now. Those could be reasons too. Also I admit I don't really understand too well what Commit Charge really is in comparison to cached memory.
I just realized that Commit Charge is actually the Pagefile, so that has nothing to do with physical memory. And after looking back at those old screenies I posted again I realized that wasn't the only thing that changed. My physical memory usage has increased dramatically too, even though basically nothing has changed on my setup since then, except... the amount of RAM that I have. And came to the conclusion that that must be it. Because I remember it happened before: I remember back when my physical memory (cache) at boot was like 116,000 when I had only 1 GB of RAM. Then when I upgraded to 2 GB it raised. And now at 4 (3.25), did again. Nothing else on my setup has changed in that time. In fact if anything it was heavier back then, as I used a real-time AV and a few other anti-spyware apps (S&D & Spyware Blaster). And have even learned more tweaks to trim dead wood since then. So I can only surmise that when you give your apps more RAM, they use it... like having more room to breath. I think it's a good thing though, as it actually makes them more responsive. This takes me back to an argument I was having with a guy (who knows much more about computers than I do), who told me using a low system cache total was a poor measurement for performance. Turns out he was right in light of this. Obviously programs can get by with less, because I remember having this XP setup run, and run pretty well even back when I had only 512 MB of RAM. I bet my system cache was REALLY low then at boot. But it runs much better now given more room for those apps to breath. I used to think that just because my setup ran fine with only 512 MB, with some to spare, that there was no use adding more RAM. But I was wrong. Add more, and your apps will use more, and be even more responsive. So that could be it, if you have less than 4 GB of RAM. Or because like I said before, I hadn't rebooted in a long time and ran a lot of apps to skyrocket that cache. Or because we confused commit charge for physical memory. Or some of -or- all of the above. And it makes sense that the pagefile increased too since I make it 1.5X the amount of physical RAM.
I more so ask myself "How many non-MS, open source processes are you running?" and then get very, very stupid paranoid. I'm honestly not sure, maybe over 5. Because I always ran under spec'd junk machines growing up- it always made me obsessive over getting only the essentials to run to increase performance. That mindset paid off.
Probably more now, 126 total processes and nothing much changed from default in terms of Windows processes. Only extras apart from startup are Chrome with one tab open and Windows Explorer separate process for folder windows.
