2-hour hibernate failure
in [Windows XP Basics]
|
Prev: modem & AVG
Next: Just-In-Time Debugging
From: Unknown on 17 Apr 2010 11:16 Probably only one? Norton Idle Time Scan. Guessed it was Norton from the beginning. Great you found it. "William B. Lurie" <billurie(a)nospam.net> wrote in message news:%23BKLtpb3KHA.4964(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > This last set of comments comes at a funny time, namely, I believe > we have just solved the problem. First on my clone, and now on my > Master drive, I got the system to hibernate at two hours by making > what I believe are *only* two changes. > > First, Network Connections.....>>Power Options.... > Do *not* allow it to turnoff device......... > > Second, in Norton Anti-Virus, set it for 'Silent Mode' > (whatever that means) and set its 'Idle Time Scan' for the > maximum it allows, namely six hours. > > It has hibernated at 2 hours twice so far, and I intend to give it > more opportunities........ > > But that Norton 'feature' to me is something I'm going to complain > to them about. If I don't want it to scan except when I want it to, > I should have that privilege! They really do too many things that > way...you know, the 'Big Brother knows best' syndrome. > > Unknown wrote: >> You give up too easily. >> "Shenan Stanley" <newshelper(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:OJKqWTP3KHA.556(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> William B. Lurie wrote: >>>> This is a new thread. See old stuff for history. >>> Does everyone realize that at this point in the troubleshooting >>> procedure - if time is money (and for many people it is) and even if it >>> is not a *lot* of money (let's go with $1.00 / hour - U.S.) that this >>> problem has gone on long enough now to afford a replacement computer >>> with likely more CPU power, more hard drive space and a better video >>> device without all the current trouble by now, eh? ;-) >>> >>> I mean - really - this computer could be defective. >>> >>> Just throwing that out there... *grin* >>> >>> -- >>> Shenan Stanley >>> MS-MVP >>> -- >>> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way >>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html >>> >> >> >
From: William B. Lurie on 18 Apr 2010 15:09 John John - MVP wrote: > Yes, the web is a network and all your network traffic flows through > your network adapter, without it you will not be able to get on the web. > > So what happens if you keep all your Norton stuff turned off and enable > the adapter? > > Also make sure that power saving is not enabled on the adapter. Right > click on the network adapter and select "Properties" then click on the > "Configure" button for the adapter then click on the "Power Management" > tab and make sure that the "Allow the computer to turn off this device > to save power" is *not* selected. > > John In retrospect on this project, John, now that it's just about finished, I hope we all learned something from it, including people who have been watching silently. I've thought about your early comments that there are a few dozen 'services' that are active but will never be used, and wondered if it would speed things up to disable them. I could start with one of the lists you created, but I'm more inclined to say we now have it where it ain't broke, so I shouldn't fix it. And just once more: Thank you for all your efforts. Bill
From: John John - MVP on 19 Apr 2010 07:36
William B. Lurie wrote: > John John - MVP wrote: > >> Yes, the web is a network and all your network traffic flows through >> your network adapter, without it you will not be able to get on the web. >> >> So what happens if you keep all your Norton stuff turned off and >> enable the adapter? >> >> Also make sure that power saving is not enabled on the adapter. Right >> click on the network adapter and select "Properties" then click on the >> "Configure" button for the adapter then click on the "Power >> Management" tab and make sure that the "Allow the computer to turn off >> this device to save power" is *not* selected. >> >> John > > In retrospect on this project, John, now that it's just about finished, > I hope we all learned something from it, including people who have > been watching silently. > > I've thought about your early comments that there are a few dozen > 'services' that are active but will never be used, and wondered if > it would speed things up to disable them. I could start with one > of the lists you created, but I'm more inclined to say we now have > it where it ain't broke, so I shouldn't fix it. > > And just once more: Thank you for all your efforts. You're welcome, Bill. John |