Clean Up or Buy New PC?

[lookout123]

Take care of it and don't get mugged. this cellar is getting a little rough around the edges.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

If you think that Task Manager supplies the answer, then you should explain what Task Manager is, and how to find it.

I did not intend to provide every little detail. I intended only three paragraphs that provide massive information. And that did not waste time with solutions. Solutions come later. Requested was information that means almost nothing to most, but creates useful replies without "it could be this or could be that".

The next time you experience this slowness ...

completely misses the point #1. Your example ignored the most important question.

What is the objective? To make it faster?

I am still only guessing to that objective. Long before trying to fix a problem, first define the objective. Something about optimizing a computer to run some undefined software?

Your example also asks for irrelevant facts such as "available memory". Third point executes a crucial.com scanner to answer that and numerous other questions. Why would anyone know that? I was not going to list 15 possible anwers provided by that scanner. 'Why' (and learning from the experience) gets answered _after_ each point is performed. Then only relevant answers are posted.

The purpose of Task Manager is to obtain CPU time and Memory Delta - important parameters. I never asked for 'total available memory"? Why did you? I asked for CPU time and Memory Delta (also called Mem Delta or Memory Useage Delta) because those numbers answer numerous relevant questions.

Problem I have with your example is also what I recently encountered with software descriptions. Each routinely forgot to cite its purpose or objective. But its text was so user friendly with all those "I", "you", and irrelevant "they" words that it was easy to read and provided near zero useful information.

First and foremost is point one: what is the objective. What is that program that runs too slow? I now assume it was FireFox or IE. But then even 600 Mhz computers runs that software sufficiently fast - at least the ones I have configured or supported. (Computer that has most difficulty also executes apparently 'less efficient' AVG software.)

Finally, the computer was defined by manufacturer and other numbers. Therefore a useful reply was possible - ie UT's memory link. Why do we fix things? To learn this stuff. No numbers means replies tend to be useless, subjective, and speculative. To obtain useful answers means one must post numbers. When numbers mean nothing to one, then those numbers often are the only reason why others will provide a useful reply.

Post 4 was the outline on how to obtain a solution quickly. Three simple paragraphs chock full of useful information. Key nouns provided so that questions could be asked or answered, or confusion eliminated using a long list of other sources. Anwers easily obtained in Windows' Help and Support, or entering "Task Manager" in Wikipedia, or entering "Task Manager" in Google, or searching for "Task Manager" in Micrsoft.com, or clicking on Help in Task Manager, or asking the question here, or ... because key nouns were provided.

Also eliminated in your example was each step numbered, so that questions could referenced the appropriate paragraph and so that each task was defined separately. There was point 1, and point 2, and point 3. Each required responses.

Finally, this is the worst English:

The next time you experience this slowness, ...

Wordy. Vague. And introduces a word that is avoided in good directions - "you".

Slowness is ..... {then defined - or the objective stated}
First identify reasons for slowness by performed all of three following tasks.

My previous complaint remains. Frustration and wasted labor is due to not answering each of the three paragraphs in Post 4.

It is an eMachine. Extra care should be observed when selecting memory. A problem also learned by spending too much time with their tech support. Just another warning.

That machine should be screaming. If the machine is as slow as subjectively implied, then it has more problems than just insufficient memory. How slow is it? Just another in a long list of question answered if all three points in Post 4 been performed or answered.

What indicates that Post 4 provides a best solution? It demands numbers. Especially numbers that mean so little to most people. Been doing this stuff for too many generations. Not decades. Generations. At the age of 13, how many televisions had you repaired? Post 4 was written using grammar and structure similar to what was read in the best instructions and service manuals. Been doing this stuff too long to be anything but blunt and honest.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Juniper

There is no need to be insulting.

The only place an insult exists is in your head. Honest people post bluntly. The only thing you will see in what I posted are facts - and all are about the computer - none are about you or what you own.

You are not insulted. In fact, you were not even considered. Considered (and insulted) was the failure that had no business making problems in your life and causing posts here. Reread that post to see your computer is the only subject. Computer that deserves comtempt like is was a GM car.

So where is this statement that you own a GM car? Does not exist. Humans are irrelevant here. Relevant is the one who is attacking you, me, and the productivity of the world. That computer that is so insulant as to fail. That is why all directions should have no "I", "You", or "Them" in it. If you want to read something into what I posted, then curse that computer with profantiy reserved only for desccribing Hitler. That is honesty. And that is the evil that we will elminate in the world.

Meanwhile, do you want to fix it now or keep struggling? I am clearly a best source for a solution because I know this stuff - obviously - and I don't waste time sugar coating (lying) the contempt for that gremblin inside your machine. But to be helpful, you must first provide information that others here don't even understand. Again, post 4.

Once you provide basic facts and numbers, then what , why and a solution follows. IOW you fix it AND you learn. Your choice. Even take things personally or appreciate that you are not the object. The only object is that 'evil' computer that will be resurrected. Amen.

[lookout123]

The only place an insult exists is in your head. Honest people post bluntly.

So do socially inept douchebags. You'll have to excuse the confusion, we're human afterall. No offense of course.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

So do socially inept douchebags. You'll have to excuse the confusion, we're human afterall. No offense of course.

Why do you add "we" in this discussion. Only subject is that computer (and a rumored gremblin that has taken up residence). Or are "you" that gremblin?

[dar512]

tw - You seem like a fairly intelligent guy with a lot of knowledge in technical areas. It's too bad that you come off as a pompous twit because you could be really helpful to lots of folks here.

[tw]

Originally Posted by dar512

It's too bad that you come off as a pompous twit because you could be really helpful to lots of folks here.

So why do you apply personal biases to posts that only provides solutions to a computer problem, ask for numbers, avoid all references to "I", "You", "We", "Me" and other irrelevant parties, and that do not lie (also called being politically correct).

Why are you posting about personalities when I am only addressing a technical problem in a way that technical problems routinely get solved? If I 'come off' some way, it is 100% based in your biases - ie how you perceive sentence structures - ie some hidden meaning you feel must be in that paragraph. I am not selling something. You are not buying something. Why then should I lie? Or do you somehow feel a person is a relevant object here?

An answer to Juniper's problem is in post #4. It was taken one step further: also defined why a solution still was not achieved. Answered so that the technically empowered can learn further from the experience - ie constant references to numbers. Why then do you introduce emotional perception into a technical discussion? IOW why do you use paragraphs chock full of "I", "You", etc when none of those words apply to a computer problem?

In short, I am challenging you to only see what was posted - and ignore those silly emotions that might rise up in your brain because of how a sentence only of fact is structured. Those emotions don't solve the computer problem.

Yes, I am challenging you to read only what was posted - not entertain how your biases add perceptions and implications. Because the three points in post 4 were not performed, then nothing has yet been solved AND frustration was encountered. All that was completely unnecessary had numbers been provided from Task Manager, crucial.com, etc.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by tw

Problem I have with your example is also what I recently encountered with software descriptions. Each routinely forgot to cite its purpose or objective. But its text was so user friendly with all those "I", "you", and irrelevant "they" words that it was easy to read and provided near zero useful information.

..

Been doing this stuff too long to be anything but blunt and honest.

You admit that my post was easy to read and user friendly. That's the point. If the writing style of your post makes it so difficult to read that nobody gets information out of it, then it's pointless to post it.

I freely admitted that I don't know much about computers and that my example might contain flawed information. Perhaps you missed that. It was the last line of my post. The purpose of my example was to show you a writing style that is more accessible to the reader. After all, that's the whole point, isn't it?

[Juniper]

I might also point out that you are conversing with someone who writes for a living. It is my business to be clear and concise. I have even done some tech writing.

And I am thankful for people like TW. People like him guarantee that I will remain gainfully employed for many years to come.

I have to apologize, TW and everyone else. I was wrong. I forgot that I did install additional memory at some point. I'm up to 768 MB right now. I'll put the new 1GB card in the 256MB slot and things should be pretty zippy. Forgive me - I probably did it about this time last year, which is when my mom died, and that time in my life is pretty much a blur.

I still don't know why I'm having trouble with IE and Firefox. They work, but scroll really slowly. I don't seem to have that problem with other apps.

BTW, the perceived insult was here:

Since anything in Task Manger makes no sense to you, then it is probably THE fact that gets a solution, when posted here.

Kind of a rude assumption, don't you think?

TW, by chance, do you have Aspergers or something? Your posts look astonishingly similar to an Aspie guy I used to know on another discussion board. That would explain a lot.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

You admit that my post was easy to read and user friendly. That's the point. If the writing style of your post makes it so difficult to read that nobody gets information out of it, then it's pointless to post it.

As a kid, I obtained service manuals for all Ford automobiles. I read every one of those manuals. What did I learn? Best written material required three to five readings. The stuff that is easily read the first time - that results in nothing new the second time - is some of the greatest trash.

To make post 4 easiest to read, I kept it short, numbered all three points, confirmed every keyword before posting it, and never confused people with things such as what Task Manager is.

One primary intent here - which is the #1 reason why we fix things - was to teach. Ever see the movie Paper Chase? What is necessary before going to class? Homework. Profession Kingfield required each to come to class with facts and numbers. Without numbers from Post 4 - if the homework is not first done - then I can teach nothing useful. IOW had numbers from post 4 been first provided, then I could have identified the suspects AND explained what and why is happening. No numbers? Nothing as required in post 4. Well then Juniper was struggling with wild speculation - it could be this or could be that.

Why am I "being a twit" as it was described? There is also a larger lesson here. "I" "You" "We" etc has no place here. I can only be a 'twit' if one personalizes what is only a technical discussion.

Numbers are always essential to solving technical problems. Never short your help of facts. Never add anything personal in what is only a technical solution. Never try to first solve a problem; always first collect facts and identify the suspects long before trying to fix anything. Follow the evidence; ignore wild speculation. And the best service manuals, technical solutions, science papers, etc require multiple rereads to comprehend - are that chock full of facts.

Post 4 was a perfect example of so much information in so few words. Post 4 would have avoided wasting time with McAfee / AVG solutions - also called wild speculation.

When do we move on the only problem here - that computer? When facts request by three point in post 4 are provided. Notice how many wasted posts and so many emotional people only because those numbers still are not provided.

(I am also entertained that so many got emotional over what is simply a technical problem. I did not even have to cry, “Fire” in a theater to create a riot. How easily so many let their emotions rage – and those numbers from post 4 still are not provided.)

[glatt]

tw, you forget that this is not a user manual. You are having a written conversation with a person.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

the #1 reason why we fix things - to teach.

I would venture a guess that some, if not a vast majority of people would fix things because they were broken. But hey, thats just me.
The learning part is a huge bonus though!

[tw]

Originally Posted by Juniper

I forgot that I did install additional memory at some point. I'm up to 768 MB right now. I'll put the new 1GB card in the 256MB slot and things should be pretty zippy.
...
TW, by chance, do you have Aspergers or something? Your posts look astonishingly similar to an Aspie guy I used to know on another discussion board.

Now what does the crucial.com scanner report? What you believe exists is best confirmed by what the scanner also reports. Why? I have something like seven unresolved questions about that additional memory as well as the routine procedure of confirming everything.

No aspergers. But having done this stuff for numerous generations (not decades - generations), I have long learned to eliminate and ignore all personalization when attacking a technical problem. Again, some of the best problem solvers (like some of the best written manuals) eliminate what has no place in technical discussions and solutions - "I", "We", "You", etc. Those words only appear when things such as personal speculations or human interaction are relevant to the subject.

When I choose to personalize, well, I read others ask if I am the same person. When personalizing, my posts are different because the necessary thinking process is completely different. This is a technical discussion which means "I" and "you" are removed from every paragraph whenever possible. (well I slipped there a little and brought religion into it. I apologize for letting god apply some input.)

Again, does not matter whether you ordered UT's memory or not. Post 4 still required the crucial.com scanner because, well, without doing homework before coming to class, then you have no place in the classroom. As I stated before, based upon the subjective posts, I do not believe insufficient memory is the only problem. I can say nothing because - your help remains shorted (stifled) of necessary facts.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

tw, you forget that this is not a user manual. You are having a written conversation with a person.

I am the technical manual. For all practical purposes in this thread, I am nothing more than an interactive service manual. My posts are nothing but technical responses to technical problems. Again, the reason why words such as "I", "You", etc must be eliminates as much as possible. If anyone sees anything different, well that is their personal biases being read into what I did not write.

But again, we are wasting time by avoiding the subject - that enemy of all mankind - a failed machine.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by dar512

tw - You seem like a fairly intelligent guy with a lot of knowledge in technical areas. It's too bad that you come off as a pompous twit because you could be really helpful to lots of folks here.

Originally Posted by glatt

You admit that my post was easy to read and user friendly. That's the point. If the writing style of your post makes it so difficult to read that nobody gets information out of it, then it's pointless to post it.

Outstanding - Well put and easily read and understood.

Originally Posted by tw

~~~ eliminate what has no place in technical discussions and solutions - "I", "We", "You", etc. Those words only appear when things such as personal speculations or human interaction are relevant to the subject.

This a board where humans interact and communicate with one and other. It is impossible to remove the interaction of humans - that what we are doing - Interacting. When problem solving with another human the interaction part is a requirement too and therefore germane and integral to achieving the final desired result - getting the problem solved.