File Access is slower with XP than 98SE when accessing NT. Help?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Adam Steiner, Apr 4, 2004.

  1. Adam Steiner

    Adam Steiner Guest

    Hi,

    My dad's office has an NT Server with a number of workstations attached to a
    domain. His personal computer is running Win 2K. When accessing a shared
    directory on the server,it takes the computer a couple of seconds (a
    noticeable delay) to populate the window with the list of files. However,
    on the Windows 98SE machine the window is populated nearly instantaneously.
    I upgraded one of the computers to Windows XP and it now has the same issue
    with regards to accessing the same shared folder as the Win2K computer.

    I've tried doing some searches on what may be the problem but haven't found
    any answer. Both the XP and Win2K machines are running NTFS.

    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks,
    Adam
     
    Adam Steiner, Apr 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Adam Steiner

    Duane Arnold Guest

    "Adam Steiner" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi,
    >
    > My dad's office has an NT Server with a number of workstations attached to

    a
    > domain. His personal computer is running Win 2K. When accessing a

    shared
    > directory on the server,it takes the computer a couple of seconds (a
    > noticeable delay) to populate the window with the list of files. However,
    > on the Windows 98SE machine the window is populated nearly

    instantaneously.
    > I upgraded one of the computers to Windows XP and it now has the same

    issue
    > with regards to accessing the same shared folder as the Win2K computer.
    >
    > I've tried doing some searches on what may be the problem but haven't

    found
    > any answer. Both the XP and Win2K machines are running NTFS.


    The Win 9'x O/S is a less resource using O/S than the NT based O/S, which
    makes it a faster O/S and I might add is also more of a crash prone O/S as
    well. It's as simple as that. You may look into installing more memory in
    the machine that runs the NT based O/S as the more memory the NT based O/S
    has to run in, the faster it's able to complete tasks. Other than that, the
    NT O/S is slower in something's than the Win 9'x O/S.

    Duane :)
     
    Duane Arnold, Apr 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Adam Steiner

    Adam Steiner Guest

    Duane wrote...
    > The Win 9'x O/S is a less resource using O/S than the NT based O/S, which
    > makes it a faster O/S and I might add is also more of a crash prone O/S as
    > well. It's as simple as that. You may look into installing more memory in
    > the machine that runs the NT based O/S as the more memory the NT based O/S
    > has to run in, the faster it's able to complete tasks. Other than that,

    the
    > NT O/S is slower in something's than the Win 9'x O/S.
    >
    > Duane :)


    I wish that were the case. One of the XP machines has 256MB SDRAM, one has
    512. The 98 machine has also 256MB SDRAM. There is no noticeable
    difference between the XP machine that has 256 and the one with 512. Both
    are slower than the 98 machine.

    I guess maybe it's just the OS, which really stinks...
    --Adam
     
    Adam Steiner, Apr 5, 2004
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jeff Ingram
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    709
    Leonidas Jones
    Dec 1, 2004
  2. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    481
    Willie Buck Merle
    Feb 9, 2005
  3. Lauek
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    664
    Scott K.
    Apr 5, 2005
  4. Sharon Sharp

    Dialup modem connects at slower and slower speeds

    Sharon Sharp, Oct 13, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    802
    Rob B.
    Oct 13, 2004
  5. Paul
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,344
Loading...

Share This Page