Windows XP SP3 Services

I need some help understanding a few services that are running. I'm trying to see if they're safe to disable, and eventually "sc delete".

Here's my simple setup. Desktop PC with 1 external HD. MX Revolution mouse, G15 keyboard, and Canon MP980 multifunction printer. I'm trying to find out what the following services does. I've been to viper's site and microsoft but I still don't understand what they do?

1) Com+ System Application (I've never seen in used in years).
2) Distributed Link Tracking Client
3) Distributed Transaction Coordinator
4) Removable storage (I manually unplug and plug in the WD external HD via the power cord everyday and with this disabled it still works fine)?

Thanks for any input you can give.

 

Leave #1 enabled, 'automatic'.

The other three can be disabled.

'Black Viper' seems to think it's okay to disable #1 also (or set it for 'manual'), but I'd tend to disagree.
You might get down the road somewhere and have some weird issue with something on the machine, which enabling COM+ System might fix-- except that you've forgotten you disabled it and don't know that re-enabling it will fix the problem.
Know what I mean?

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

 

I would just leave them all in their default state and not mess with them. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by disabling them. In general, you're best off just leaving everything alone. I have been the Black Viper route years ago screwing with virtually every service possible, and in the end, I gained nil (well, a little ram, but that's about it, no performance gain at all). It's pretty much a waste of time.

 

I disagree: more services you disable more control of your system you have. And you can really gain RAM. I have now 9 XP SP3 services running in automatic. How many services XP has in automatic after his installation ?

 

This is nonsense. You don't have any greater control over your system. It's all in your mind. In fact, the odds are very good that you've borked something by disabling some of them.

True on the ram, that's the only advantage I can see at all, you can gain some ram by disabling services. But then again, in today's modern world with 4 gigs ram commonplace, who needs a few MB ram?

Again, it's just like registry cleaners, you're best off leaving things alone.

 

If so, you also have control over system while enabling services.

LOL. How true.

 

Another advantage is not having services run when I don't know what they are. I researched each service and determined that I didn't utilize, nor would I utilize in the future, the latter three services. SC deleted them and their associated files a while back. PC runs faster. I should've just researched them instead of posting a message here, my apologies.

 

In the days when we all had 512mb of RAM when XP first came out, tweaking services could make a noticable difference. Processors were around the gig mark and ddr was just emerging.

Today with the multi-core processors and the amount and speed of the memory, it tends to make little difference.

However, saying that someones machine will or will not quicker by tweaking services is impossible. As much as you might find for yourself that disabling services is no faster, I would disagree for my machine. You can argue the point all day long, and it will be true for yourself, but may not be for others.

That being said, the performance increases are not just magically felt. "Wow, since I disabled those 20 services, my machine is flying". Nope, not like that. More like "Wow, since I disabled those 3 services I notice much improved speed when browsing shares" or "Wow, since I disabled that one service I notice DHCP connects faster when I go to a coffee shop"

The services, just as the tweaks you can apply through settings or registry edits don't tend to fix everything at once, but affect specific areas. Some services, such as browse master, does not need to be enabled at all if only one computer in the whole network has it running. It can make a difference (although that one is hard to tell if you are not watching for it). If you have the "computer browser" service enabled, when you join the network (turn computer on, plug cable in, etc) an election is held to determine who is the "browse master". This election can cause sluggishness in the network, even if only briefly.

That is just one example of how a service, which many might not notice the performance hit, can be disabled and really no side effects but if you monitor closely, on a fair sized network you can measure the results.

I always tweak my services. But, I am looking for specific things when I do. If a service is not needed, ever, it simply does not get turned on. If it might be needed, it may go manual, even if I only use it once a year.

Another good example is the Windows Image Acquisition service. Once in awhile something I install will turn it on. I don't notice it perhaps for a long time. Then one day I turn my machine on, and it takes about 1 minute for the desktop icons to come up. Disable the NIC and it is instant. Enable the NIC and the delay is there again. Usually if I disable this service, the problem goes away. There can be other services that you don't use that can do funny things like that.

Windows 7 offers services that start and stop as needed. This is how they should all be, at least those that aren't used consistently. I find I leave more on in win7 than I did in XP, partly due to how many you need running to have everything working. I have had a heck of a time in win7 with an annoying 15 sec pause when browsing the OS with explorer. Using Qdir has the same effects, so it is not explorer. I have not been able to determine if it is the discs spinning down or not (I don't think it is). I have turned off superfetch and indexing/search services and that has helped a LOT, but something still causes this. But there is no doubt at all, for my machine and what I do, that if I don't tweak my services, some things will be noticably slower.

It is ALWAYS wise to leave it alone if you don't know what you are doing. At least export that registry key in case you really muff it up. If you don't know what the service should affect, you will have a hard time knowing if you got any improvements and you might wind up wondering for weeks why that one "thing" no longer works. I find that when people mess with services they tend to do more than one at a time and then they get lost as to which one effected the problems they face afterwards.

Oh, and one final word about the positive side of tweaking services, it can be more secure. Anyone remember any services in XP that were enabled by default that were then set to disabled by default in the service packs? How about turning the server service to manual? How many people would that have helped who did not share anything? Personally my server service is always on manual, and I use from the run box "sc start lanmanserver" if I want to share something. I can leave my shares in place, but am GUARANTEED no one can access them nor compromise my system because that service is running.

Sul.

 

I've disabled quite a few things, and/or set to manual.

However, i've heard that malware "could" possibly tamper with the settings, and change them Any knowledge of this ?

 

I allways tweak the services. Not really a timeconsuming job and the noticable gains are a little bit speedgain and faster boot.

 

Not any specific examples, but there are multiple ways that a service can be tampered with. It would be pretty easy for a malware to mess with the services really. Remember, services have rights, so a User cannot modify them, thus malware run under User Account can't modify.

Sul.

 

Originally Posted by Sully

That's what i thought, thanks.

 

For Kerodo: this is what I meant. I use fw and HIPS, naturally, but no one is infallible.... and then, why should I run services that I know they never need to me ??

 

Hey blacknight, that's fine if that's what you wanna do. My experience in the past was that it just didn't make much difference. I still don't think it does, but to each his own as they say....

 

Ok I thought I knew what this service is but now I'm not 100%. Could someone explain it to me laymen terms?

Distributed Transaction Coordinator:

"Coordinates transactions that span multiple resource managers, such as databases, message queues, and file systems. If this service is stopped, these transactions will not occur. If this service is disabled, any services that explicitly depend on it will fail to start. "

 

Not 100% sure, but if memory serves a transaction that it refers to would be for example a database application, maybe an inventory system. When you read data from a database, there are certain locks that can be employed. These locks are put in place so that if you are viewing a record, and it gets changed by someone else while you are looking at it, things happen depending on how the locks are implemented. Perhaps they cannot modify it while you have it open, perhaps you have a disconnected recordset, which is independent that of the real data, or perhaps your data refreshes when the other user changes the data.

Message queing can work in a similar manner too I believe.

I think it refers to this sort of thing, where all clients in a system are aware of the others, especially with programs that feed data to everyone. I have always disabled it, and never had an issue.

I may be wrong on all of this, as I did not look it up, but sure seem to recall learning something about it somewhere along the way and how it did not impact what I was doing with database front ends a number of years ago.

Sul.

 

You're a home computer user, I presume? You don't need the service enabled.

DTC depends on the Remote Procedure Call and Security Accounts Manager services.
Nothing depends on the DTC service. (Meaning having it disabled affects no other XP service.)

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/899191

 

you guys should teach me how to disable these unneeded xp services..
I have everything set from out of the box.

 

The only service I ever disable is Windows Defender.

 

Do a search with Google... it's faster.