[WDSCI-L] Re: Client Access and Win 2000 (poor performance)

[MichaelQuigley@xxxxxxxxxx]

   Perhaps this is more of a general Win2000 issue than a CAX issue.  Win98
   is a DOS operating system.  It provides limited memory address checking.
    Win2000 on the other hand provides extensive memory address checking.  As
   a result it takes more to handle things.  We run Win2000 and see no
   significant delays.

   Also, there are some sights you can look at to help configure the services
   which Win2000 starts.  (e.g., http://www.blackviper.com/)  Many services
   started by default are not needed.  By disabling these (do so by your own
   evaluation and at your own risk), you can see significant reduction in
   memory utilization and improved system performance.

   date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 08:22:59 +1000
   from: Frank.Kolmann@xxxxxxxxxx
   subject: [WDSCI-L] Client Access and Win 2000 (poor performance)

   I must beg to differ.  I have 2 PCs beside each other.
   We are on an 825 V5R2 and I have up to date versions on CAE.
   The 825 has more capacity then we use. It is not the cause.
   The CPU usage mostly is <10% rarely goes to 60% (dual processor).
   The CAE on Win2000 PC suffers periodic delays of about 1-3 seconds
   , the same function on Win98 has negligible delay.
   The delay is not consistant.  There will be say 3 or 4 good reponses
   followed by the delay. It is very annoying and not an urban myth.

   Frank Kolmann

   >date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 20:03:44 -0500
   >from: "Reeve" <news@xxxxxxxxxx>
   >"Client Access has poor performance under Win2000"?  Not as far as I know
   or
   >have experienced; I think this is an urban legend.  Make sure you apply
   the
   >current CAX service pack.