Windows loads and runs a vast number of programs behind your back. Some of them are necessary but most just slow your machine down and use up valuable RAM that would be better used running your programs.
Many of these secret ramhogs load when you start Windows. A worthwhile performance improvement (faster boot and livelier keyboard response) can be had by preventing unnecessary goodies from loading and running. Real techies can do this barehanded, but for most of us a software tool makes it a lot easier.
Reliable tool is Startup Manager V1.5 written by Brian Stowers of Creative Gaffers Software. You can download Startup Manager from the Aptiva Toolbox. This particular page offers three different programs, go to the bottom of the page and download startman.exe to obtain the software I am describing here. The program is a little old but it is still the best one out there in my humble opinion. It shows you what is loading at boot time and allows you to turn stuff off by just giving them a red checkmark.
The Startup Manager window shows a line for each piece of software that could be loaded at startup time. There is a status column (enabled or disabled). You turn stuff off by setting the status to diabled (big red X). If you change your mind, you can turn it back on just as easily, set it to enable (green checkmark).
You shouldn't have all that many programs starting at boot time. I am down to just three, the driver for the keyboard touchpad, Zone Alarm firewall, and something called kernelfaultcheck.
Which brings us to the tricky part. What can you turn off? Gotta be careful here, it is possible to turn off something needed and get all wrapped around the axle. Obviously you want to leave hardware drivers like touch pads and wireless modems running, if you still have the hardware in the machine. Naturally if you got rid of the wireless modem last month you can speed things up by not running the wireless modem driver. In fact you ought to use Add and Remove programs to clean such a driver right off your machine.
What can you get rid of? As mentioned, drivers for hardware you no longer have. "Speedup" or "helper" programs for Adobe and Office and Easyshare and Itunes and such. CTFmon.exe. Update schedulers for stuff like Java and Bios and Spybot and Adobe. I'd rather have a faster computer and just hit the "check for updates" tab inside Adobe or Spybot or Office when and if I want an update from the web.
Then there are the wierdo programs with wierdo names that mean nothing to you. If you want to really bear down on them you can google on the program name and some of the time you will get solid advice (Necessary part of Windows or Virus) and much of the time you get "This is a program that loads at startup" which means the website hasn't a clue. Conservative folk leave the unknown stuff alone. Daring folk disable it and usually everything works OK.
The column "Command" is actually the disk file name that would be loaded. The file name is often a clue as to what the software is for. The "Location" column shows from where the load and run command comes. Things marked [REG] load and run from keys stashed in the registry. This is only of interest for techies who might use Regedit to fiddle around, but things like that are not for the fainthearted. Things marked "Startup Folder" load and run from disk folders named startup.
As I mentioned, Startup Manager is a little dusty (my version is date stamped 2 Jan 2000), but it works well on XP. Before writing this post I googled around for something more up to date. There are such and I tried them all but cannot recommend any of them. Too complex, load to much adware, and support complex procedures that I'll never use, and in fact can cause real trouble. I vote for Startup Manager V1.5.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Obama to move against "speculation" in oil market
Well, I'm all against speculation. Evil it is. Last year with the stock market, mortgage backed securities, Lehman, Merrill Lynch, and Bear Stearns going down the drain, a lot of money was invested in oil futures for lack of anywhere else to put it. Which drove the price of crude oil to $144 a barrel. Which drove the price of gasoline to $4 a gallon. Those are bad things.
Of course the bubble burst that summer and the price of crude dropped to $35 a barrel. A lot of people got severely burned. Couldn't happen to nicer people.
So is there any difference between an evil speculator and Southwest Airlines buying future contracts of jet fuel ? Especially as the futures contracts Southwest buys are sold by futures traders, guys who just buy and sell futures contracts, they never take delivery of physical product, they just buy and sell paper futures.
It's generally accepted that futures markets are economically useful, they allow buyers and seller to lock in a price for future production. With a price locked in, a farmer can get a loan, an bakery can predict his cost of flour, an airline can predict the price of jet fuel.
Once we have a commodities future market anyone can play. Last summer a lot of people thought crude oil futures were a sure thing, and nearly everything else looked like a loser. So money flowed into buying up crude oil, a scarce and valuable commodity, and the demand made it scarcer and more valuable.
If Obama really wanted to crack down on speculation in commodities, he could cut off loans. Right now you can borrow money to buy commodities futures. The banks lend, and use the value of the commodity as collateral for the loan. We could pass a law preventing banks from making commodity buying loans. In fact FIDC could probably just make a regulation against it. FDIC says to the banks "Don't loan federally insured money (all the banks money is federally insured) for the purchase of commodities."
The Southwest Airlines of the world could pay cash, but the hedge funds and the day traders would find their returns a lot lower when they had to put up real money to play the commodities market.
Of course the bubble burst that summer and the price of crude dropped to $35 a barrel. A lot of people got severely burned. Couldn't happen to nicer people.
So is there any difference between an evil speculator and Southwest Airlines buying future contracts of jet fuel ? Especially as the futures contracts Southwest buys are sold by futures traders, guys who just buy and sell futures contracts, they never take delivery of physical product, they just buy and sell paper futures.
It's generally accepted that futures markets are economically useful, they allow buyers and seller to lock in a price for future production. With a price locked in, a farmer can get a loan, an bakery can predict his cost of flour, an airline can predict the price of jet fuel.
Once we have a commodities future market anyone can play. Last summer a lot of people thought crude oil futures were a sure thing, and nearly everything else looked like a loser. So money flowed into buying up crude oil, a scarce and valuable commodity, and the demand made it scarcer and more valuable.
If Obama really wanted to crack down on speculation in commodities, he could cut off loans. Right now you can borrow money to buy commodities futures. The banks lend, and use the value of the commodity as collateral for the loan. We could pass a law preventing banks from making commodity buying loans. In fact FIDC could probably just make a regulation against it. FDIC says to the banks "Don't loan federally insured money (all the banks money is federally insured) for the purchase of commodities."
The Southwest Airlines of the world could pay cash, but the hedge funds and the day traders would find their returns a lot lower when they had to put up real money to play the commodities market.
Why the Porkulus isn't working
For one, only 11% of the $787 billion bill has actually been spent. That's only $86 billion, about the amount of money poured down GM.
A good portion of the Porkulus is tax cuts, which adds to the federal debt but don't stimulate the economy. With everyone worried about a layoff, nobody is spending any tax cuts/rebates/handouts. The money is going into peoples checking accounts and paying off bills or credit card debt. Nobody in their right mind is going to splurge on new cars, clothes, or anything but groceries with a layoff looming in the future. We aren't going to see consumer spending come back until unemployment has been licked.
You could get quite a bit of economic stimulus by just repealing the Porkulus bill. That would show people that the US government isn't completely spendthrift.
A good portion of the Porkulus is tax cuts, which adds to the federal debt but don't stimulate the economy. With everyone worried about a layoff, nobody is spending any tax cuts/rebates/handouts. The money is going into peoples checking accounts and paying off bills or credit card debt. Nobody in their right mind is going to splurge on new cars, clothes, or anything but groceries with a layoff looming in the future. We aren't going to see consumer spending come back until unemployment has been licked.
You could get quite a bit of economic stimulus by just repealing the Porkulus bill. That would show people that the US government isn't completely spendthrift.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Robert McNamara, his impact on history?
In case you missed it, Robert S. McNamara died today. He was Secretary of Defense during the Viet Nam war for those of you younger than I. I watched a lotta bloviating about it on the Lehrer Newshour tonight. None of the talking heads had a clue as to what McNamara was, what he did, and how he should be evaluated.
As Secretary of Defense, McNamara's duty was to win the Viet Nam war. He failed to do this, in fact, he lost Viet Nam big time. No Newshour talking head mentioned this ugly fact. What's worse, many years later, McNamara published his memoires and said the Viet Nam war was a big mistake and he apologized for fighting it. The lefties loved this.
Those of us who served in Viet Nam were infuriated by this. If, back in 1964, McNamara thought the war was a bad idea, it was his duty to go on TV, say the war was a bad idea and then tender his resignation to Lyndon Johnson. He failed in this duty as well as failing in his duty to win the war.
Those of us who served back then came to know McNamara as an enemy as deadly as the Viet Cong. His whiz kids cut funding, canceled needed weapons programs, and foisted turkeys like the TFX, the C5, and the M16 on long suffering troops. He micromanaged the war from DC.
As far as this veteran is concerned, McNamara was a self important bean counter whose ignorance of warfare lost the Viet Nam war. Winning a war is different from running Ford Motor Company and McNamara didn't understand the difference.
As Secretary of Defense, McNamara's duty was to win the Viet Nam war. He failed to do this, in fact, he lost Viet Nam big time. No Newshour talking head mentioned this ugly fact. What's worse, many years later, McNamara published his memoires and said the Viet Nam war was a big mistake and he apologized for fighting it. The lefties loved this.
Those of us who served in Viet Nam were infuriated by this. If, back in 1964, McNamara thought the war was a bad idea, it was his duty to go on TV, say the war was a bad idea and then tender his resignation to Lyndon Johnson. He failed in this duty as well as failing in his duty to win the war.
Those of us who served back then came to know McNamara as an enemy as deadly as the Viet Cong. His whiz kids cut funding, canceled needed weapons programs, and foisted turkeys like the TFX, the C5, and the M16 on long suffering troops. He micromanaged the war from DC.
As far as this veteran is concerned, McNamara was a self important bean counter whose ignorance of warfare lost the Viet Nam war. Winning a war is different from running Ford Motor Company and McNamara didn't understand the difference.
Eugene Volokh on Flag Burning
Eugene Volokh is a University of Tennessee law professor whose blog, "The Volokh Conspiracy" is a good read. He usually makes a good deal of sense.
He had a piece in the Wall St Journal the other day on the legality of an anti flag burning law.
Some how I just wonder at the need for such a law, and the need to devote any thought to it. Now I don't hold with burning the American flag, but I hardly think we need burden the statute books with a law agin it. If you burn a flag in most places a large number of rough people will take great offense. In fact they will be offended sufficiently to take action right then and there.
Which is why very few flags are burned in public.
I am surprised that Eugene doesn't seem to understand this and wastes his time on a non issue.
He had a piece in the Wall St Journal the other day on the legality of an anti flag burning law.
Some how I just wonder at the need for such a law, and the need to devote any thought to it. Now I don't hold with burning the American flag, but I hardly think we need burden the statute books with a law agin it. If you burn a flag in most places a large number of rough people will take great offense. In fact they will be offended sufficiently to take action right then and there.
Which is why very few flags are burned in public.
I am surprised that Eugene doesn't seem to understand this and wastes his time on a non issue.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Whither Sarah Palin ?
Just to set the record straight, I like Sarah Palin. Anyone who can work up from PTA to state governor, raise an big family, and manage a husband who races snow mobiles has got to have something on the ball.
Her announcement of resignation on Friday was a total surprise, and I have no idea what it means. It might be that the relentless media assault on her and her family is just to much, either for Sarah or for the family. I'm sure if Sarah decided that her children were at risk due to her political career, she would retire from political life. Mark Stein sees it this way, and laments that a real citizen in politics has been driven out by a vindictive MSM. He says this leaves us with monomaniacal single minded Clintons and Obamas, old party hacks like Biden or McCain, or dynasties like the Bushes and the Kennedys. If this is the case it's a shame.
Or, she might have decided that there are better platforms for a presidential bid than governor of Alaska. She is enough of a celebrity now to get plenty of national coverage doing anything. I hope this is the case, but what do I know?
Well, I know more than George Will does. George was opining on ABC this morning that Sarah might do well in Iowa but won't stand a chance in New Hampshire. I got news for you George. Everyone up here loves Sarah Palin. She is our kind of people. Men like her, women like her, kids like her, and we like her family too. Everyone who stepped into our Littleton HQ during the election was a huge Sarah Palin fan.
Anyhow, I wish Sarah well and I hope she stays in national politics. We need her more than we need the MSM.
Her announcement of resignation on Friday was a total surprise, and I have no idea what it means. It might be that the relentless media assault on her and her family is just to much, either for Sarah or for the family. I'm sure if Sarah decided that her children were at risk due to her political career, she would retire from political life. Mark Stein sees it this way, and laments that a real citizen in politics has been driven out by a vindictive MSM. He says this leaves us with monomaniacal single minded Clintons and Obamas, old party hacks like Biden or McCain, or dynasties like the Bushes and the Kennedys. If this is the case it's a shame.
Or, she might have decided that there are better platforms for a presidential bid than governor of Alaska. She is enough of a celebrity now to get plenty of national coverage doing anything. I hope this is the case, but what do I know?
Well, I know more than George Will does. George was opining on ABC this morning that Sarah might do well in Iowa but won't stand a chance in New Hampshire. I got news for you George. Everyone up here loves Sarah Palin. She is our kind of people. Men like her, women like her, kids like her, and we like her family too. Everyone who stepped into our Littleton HQ during the election was a huge Sarah Palin fan.
Anyhow, I wish Sarah well and I hope she stays in national politics. We need her more than we need the MSM.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Fourth of July
Got up at 6 AM to go down to the church pancake breakfast. Mixed pancake batter until 10 AM. The luck of the republic is fleeting up here, it rained most of the day. Made five pounds of potato salad for a 5 PM cookout. Hopefully the rain will back off by five.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)