Dual Core Windows Xp Patch

Dell Optiplex Desktop Computer, Powerful Intel 1.8 GHz Dual Core Processor, Enough Power for Today s needs and Tomorrow s Demands, 2GB DDR2 Dual Symmetric.

How to enable multiple processors on XP SP 3?

Intel s Next Gen Compute Stick Beefs Up Processing With Core M3, M5 Processors.

Hmm, I wonder which update that might be. The Windows XP machines affected are up-to-date with the latest POS Ready released updates.

Windows XP SP3 TCP/IP Patch To Increase Maximum Half Open Connection Limit

Install Linux Mint 17 16 in dual boot with Windows 8: Follow the steps below to install Linux Mint in dual boot with Windows: Step 1: Create a live USB or disk.

By default Windows XP allows a maximum of 10 half open connections at a time, this limit is implemented as a security feature to slow-down spreading of internet-worms.

News, reviews, tests : all you need for computing,new technonogies and webservices on Tom s Hardware.

Windows memory limits pm EST Tue Oct 02 2001 I was talking to some guys at college a few weeks ago. They told me that Windows 95, 98, 98SE and ME could.

Actually, 8 is a VERY LOW number of TCP connections for ANY Windows-based machine or even DOS to make upon startup, and here s WHY:

Sometimes a connection is routed through the TCP/IP stack just because it s easier to do for the programmer who wrote the old, initial OS at the time;

Other times, it only looks like they re going through the TCP/IP ports, and sometimes they really ARE, but it s to IP 127.0.0.1, which is the machine s own loopback port address, so they re really internal connections ;

Now, let s see just how many of these internal connections a machine needs to have, in order to get some very basic operating abilities, ok.

First, you need a Write-only port to the Screen, so you can see what it s doing

SO, we ve just used 1 connection so we can se what we re doing or what the machine s doing, whatever ;

Now, we need to be able to talk to the thing, so we open another connection, this one is a Read connection to the Keyboard;

That s TWO; If we ve got ANY kind of sound other than the old XT-class beep, we ll need another one or two some systems mux one connection get stereo, others will eat two connections, one for each channel; Now, if you ve worked with the modern-day fancy sound systems, you ll know that if you ve got real Stereo, you ve got everything you need to decode all channels of sound up through the 5.1 or 7.1, so those don t add anything, so that s another one or two;

And we need to have something to have the Operating System ON, which gets read into mamory cause RAM is faster than anything else in the hardware, at least for now, so we ve got either a Floppy antique or a HDD, so that s another couple of connections, until SATA, the typical ESDI-506 HDD needed two cables: 1 for Control two connections, commands responses, and 1 for Data at least one connection, but usually two, even though data only went one direction at a time, so if you really wanted to, you COULD write an OS that used ONE connection for the Data part of the HDD connections ;

With Serial ATA SATA, we still have Cmmand/Response Data-In/Data-Out, but we just have much faster CPUs, so we can either write our OS to use lots of machine cycles switching between Read/Write Cmd/Resp., or we can eat another pair per function, two for Command/Response another pair for Read Data/Write Data; I honestly don t know how it s done anymore, but we know that there are at LEAST two connections to the non-volatile data storage system, sowe have to add in at least those two;

Or however many are REALLY used nowadays; You can tell I m getting a little Long in the tooth, but I still remember the original microprocessor, the 4004 from Intel, a 4-bit chip, I ve still got a portable Ham radio that uses two of them - one to make the LCD display work, and the other to run the PLL that tells the radio the frequency I want it to stay on, when to change that for the offset - If any of that last is confusing, read The Radio Amateur s Handbook or Google W1AW, cause I m not going to eat up more space here trying to make a ham operator out of you, no offense intended

And then there s the modem, most machines have one, even if you never USE it, and that s at LEAST two to several dozen, depends on the chipset it uses

OK, you say you didn t put IN a Modem card., Great. You ll have a NIC instead, so you can connect to an Ethernet cable get your broadband DSL or whatever, you ll maybe have a WiFi card too, and each of THOSE take up almost as many connections as you can spare, depending on just how big the internal buffers are on the cards, or in the chipsets, and you ll really eat them fast, especially if you re using a laptop, or are running a big desktop-replacement laptop, the WiFi needs several for the data going in each direction, and then there s the NIC for the Ethernet, or the Modem, or both, or all 3, and each of those uses connections that are kind of dedicated, Thank goodness for IRQ-sharing.

And if you plug your laptop into a port expander, that may take up from one to a zillion connections per port that it expands,

Unless you ve got a really nice hardware budget, and you got a Port Expander that takes care of its own connection-multiplying with a mux chip inside it, so it only needs a few to a dozen or so connections, depending on how many things it DOES, or lets YOU do

So far, we re up to quite a few, and if you leave out the ones for the laptop stuff anything other than Screen, Keyboard, HDD, floppy or one USB, a Printer USB or older Centronix, which are both going to be two-way connections each anyway, that s only to boot into DOS, and you can leave out the Sound and STILL easily come up with 8;

And with the sound, that s at LEAST one more likely two more, but often a sound card will use more than that, since the game controller lives on that card, if they still put those things in; I notice my newest machine s got a million USB ports ;

If your machine has a game controller port on it, that s at least two more, usally several more for different axes of a joystick or whatever

but I know I use at least two, since I use my game controller port for my MIDI-In MIDI-Out cable, which is a nice, sedentary, one-way 31.5-kHz per plug or socket connection, but it needs to feed through, so that s two, I can t get away with just one strobe it, the music wouldn t sound so good.

I ll spare you the details of all the other places things Mouse, any serial ports, Printer/USB s/etc., and just point out that if you re running anything much more than bare-bones Free-Dos, you re going to have to have quite a few connections open, just so the machine can start up run enough to put the little C: _ on the screen

Now, lets say that you re like a zillion other people, I m not trying to make any judgements or to discredit anyone here, I m one of these people myself, much as I hate to admit it, and I m just using numbers from the Trade Papers the Gov t, the Gov t doesn t lie to us, now DO they.

and we ll figure that you re running some version of Windows ;

Wow, do YOU have a LOT of things running that you probably don t even KNOW about.

I was sure surprised to see just how much stuff is going on behind MY back on this newfangled machine I ve got.

When I got this machine I m typing on right now, with 64-bit Vista Home Premium pre-installed on it, I found the entire host of services, that s computer-speak for little program-lets that let the machine take care of something it needs to, so it can work, which are ALL for a Tablet -PC, and I didn t BUY a Tablet PC, it s NOT a Tablet PC, and I m STILL finding services that run at startup that I m STILL removing to give me more room on the HDD to speed things up, since there s NO reason TO run all of those Services for the Tablet PC when it isn t a Tablet machine, so there s NO Touch-Screen or Light-Pen, etc., etc.

See how fast we got up to well over 80, which is over 10 times the 8 you say is way bad.

I agree that it s Way Bad, by all means, but that s where things go a lot of the time, and it s because coding in Assembler has gone the way of the 6502 MPU, and the ONLY way to write truly tight, efficient code is to do it in the machine s native language, which is actually 1 s 0 s, but I ll give Steve Gibson a break let his calling Assembler the machine s native language slide this time, since it DOES get translated down to the 1011001100010100 that a 16-bit CPU would understand to either mean something for it to DO, use for an address, or see as something that s not in it s table of Instruction Codes refuse to run it

In the old days, if a programmer told a 6502 to do something that it wasn t made to do, either it s lock up, usually putting pretty patterns on the screen, or it may actually DO something, which were called Undocumented Features if ALL of the chips did it; If only SOME did it, it was a fluke we didn t use it cause it wasn t reliable enough

And we ve been using 32-bit machines, mostly, anyway, for many years now, so the 16-bit example is good enough to illustrate why just about no one, except Steve Gibson, bless him., writes in Machine Language anymore

I shudder to think of keeping track of all of those 1 s 0 s in just a single 64-bit instruction or address.

That s why there are 32-bit most common, and newer 64-bit CPUs out there now, and with the Dual- core through Quad - core, up thru 8- core CPUs, it s no wonder that there s no longer any external Floating Point Co-Processor, which was called the Math Co-Proc., back in the day of the 80286/386, and I THINK 80486 ;

The Pentium was named instead of numbered because, for one of many reasons I m sure, Intel got tired of the clone -makers using their chip-numbers, which can t really be copyrighted, and went to a name, after the 486, the next would ve been 586 and 5 Penta, hence the Pentium, a name, which CAN be copyrighted, and was..

So, now you see that it s Microsoft that s opening up all of those connections, so you might as well blame them

I know the rest of us usually do. They re used to it by now. .

Dell Optiplex 745 Computer, Featuring Intel 1.8GHz Dual-Core Processor, 2GB DDR2 High Performance Memory, 80 GB SATA Hard Drive, Windows XP.

I ve got a Lenovo n100 laptop that s 3 years old. It dual boots the original Windows XP that came with it and Ubuntu, and I just now noticed that the XP installation, on the Task Manager, only shows 1 CPU.

The device manager does show 2 processors it s a core duo T2300, but it looks like one of them isn t being used. Googling showed that SP2 needed a specific hot fix to enable this, but nothing shows up on SP3, and when I downloaded the said hot fix it refuses to install, saying I have a newer solution.

Just to make things clear, I checked and it s not that Task Manager shows all CPUs in the same graph.

Does anyone know how to fix this.

Can you help. I installed Vista, as a dualboot with XP, using Daemon Tools and I am trying to follow your instructions for uninstalling the same.