Windows XP Won't Prefetch Anymore

[ilovesocks]

Before I knew that it was controversial, I followed the controversial device to delete everything in my C:/windows/Prefetch folder in hopes of getting better boot times. I also changed the EnablePrefetcher registry value to 2 for a few boots, just to compare. There wasn't much difference, and applications started slower, so I decided to change the value back to 3, and everything went back to normal--new .pf files showed up in the Prefetch folder.

I could have left well enough alone, but my meddling self decided to keep the Prefetch folder well-trimmed, and so before every shutdown, I started deleting all the files in the folder except the one for Firefox and the layout.ini file. But after I started doing that, Windows stopped creating new Prefetch files and it started taking a very long time for programs in the notification area to show up. It probably now takes twice as long as it used to to get to a desktop that's ready to work.

Even after I deleted the last two files in the Prefetch folder, it stayed empty. Anyone know why Windows suddenly decided to stop making Prefetch files and the layout.ini file? I rechecked the registry value and it's still 3. I haven't changed anything else.

Thanks in advance!

 

[jmmtn4aj]

Start treating it like an old piece of machinery that you have to kick to get the gears to engage; set to 2, restart and open a few programs several times, then set to 3 and restart again

 

[ken36]

I'm a MAC guy. What does prefetch mean.

 

[jmmtn4aj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken36 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm a MAC guy. What does prefetch mean.

When you start a program, Windows creates a cache of it in the prefetch folder, so that when you start it up again, it won't have to reload everything from the root folder

 

[ilovesocks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmmtn4aj /img/forum/go_quote.gif Start treating it like an old piece of machinery that you have to kick to get the gears to engage; set to 2, restart and open a few programs several times, then set to 3 and restart again

I've tried that, and I just tried it again - nothing. Prefetch folder is still empty and it still boots slowly. Thanks though!

 

[ilovesocks]

Any suggestions?

 

[Arainach]

Reformat. It's simple enough, easier than continuously debugging, and with Windows should be done at least once a year anyhow.

 

[lan]

Is the task scheduler service on? That's necessary for prefetch.

 

[blinx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif Reformat. It's simple enough, easier than continuously debugging, and with Windows should be done at least once a year anyhow.

that or upgrade to vista

 

[Cid]

Switch to Linux? lol

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blinx /img/forum/go_quote.gif that or upgrade to vista

No compelling reason to. Massive bloat, not as tested or debugged as XP (which, while it took 4 years, has become the first version of Windows I can truly tolerate since 3.1), and no real useful new features. If you want a pretty interface Beryl on Linux kicks the crap out of it.

 

[Computerpro3]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif No compelling reason to. Massive bloat, not as tested or debugged as XP (which, while it took 4 years, has become the first version of Windows I can truly tolerate since 3.1), and no real useful new features. If you want a pretty interface Beryl on Linux kicks the crap out of it.

Disagree completely; I've been using Vista since the first pre-public beta (technet subscriber) and it has changed from what you describe into a more stable and secure OS than XP is now - straight out of the box. Stay on 32 bit and you won't have any driver problems.

 

[slwiser]

Do you have restore operating and would it work for you?

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Computerpro3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Disagree completely; I've been using Vista since the first pre-public beta (technet subscriber) and it has changed from what you describe into a more stable and secure OS than XP is now - straight out of the box. Stay on 32 bit and you won't have any driver problems.

No one can honestly call Vista more secure than XP right now. XP's had intense public testing for just about 5 years; Vista for 2 months. Vista's main claim of "more security" comes from UAC, which more than 75% of the Vista users I know have disabled.

 

[ilovesocks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is the task scheduler service on? That's necessary for prefetch.

Ah! I recently disabled the task scheduler service! Completely forgot about that. It's back on now, so we'll see what happens . . .

As for the Linux/Vista-and-all-that-jazz debate, I've got no intentions of "upgrading" to Vista, especially because would mean spending money when I've already got a perfectly serviceable OS which I know inside and out, and because this is a laptop. My friend has this exact same laptop but with Vista and she doesn't get nearly the battery life that I do, probably because of the lighter hard drive/processor load and the software included with this one that allows me to easily shut hardware down when I don't need it. Plus I'd lose all my keyboard shortcuts for screen brightness, resolution changing, etc. As for Linux, I've got a Linux desktop that serves as media/backup storage.