eBoostr Beta Program Forum » Tag: netbook

eBoostr Beta Program Forum » Tag: netbook - Recent Posts http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/tags/netbook Beta Testers Forum en-US Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:28:22 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 <![CDATA[Search]]> q http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/search.php Twist on "Eboostr with Netbook and SSD" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/eboostr-with-netbook-and-ssd#post-1151 Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:35:58 +0000 Twist 1151@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ I read a bit in this forum but it seems you do not have many netbook users besides me. The Laptop I write this on is an MSI Wind U100 netbook Following Config: 2GB Ram Intel Atom n270 1.6gh Intel Postvill G2 40GB SSD with newest Firmware (Trim support) Win7 Ultimate 32bit 512mb Ram Cache Eboostr 200mb dataram Ramdisk used for temp,tmp,ie cache, firefox cache. Average system speedup is reported as 46% I mostly use this netbook for Firefox, Thebat, Adobe Lightroom (only if I am on Holidays) and some java apps. the look an feel of the system is very pleasing. And I think it helped the battery runtime a bit. I am over 8 hours on my 9cell with wlan and bluetooth. I did try ebooster and ramdisk on my main system too....but it isn't as noticeable. Seems like Win7 is using the 8gb ram and raid0 raptor harddisks with the 4gb usb cache allready very effectively. If you want me to run some tests, even some time consuming ones, tell me which and I will do it.....just give me a full-licence ;-) Zorro_ARG on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-927 Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:36:12 +0000 Zorro_ARG 927@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ Hi again. I was testing beta version build 544. I made some tests and problems repeated. Cause my english is poor, i will reproduce steps here. Something to take into account, i haven't had problems with eboostr using 8 gb pendrive (ocz rally2). System is Windows 7 x64, 6 GB DDR2-800, Q6600 Intel processor. Problems reappear after enabling SYSTEM MEMORY for cache. Also, I have no problems with eboostr deactivated or when using it with the pendrive. Also memory is ok, several hours of testing with memtest and orthos. 1. Enabled SYSTEM MEMORY, assigned 1 GB of it. 2. Reboot 3. After logging in, skype error and myphoneexplorer too. 4. Copy SKYPE.EXE to desktop. 5. Removed SYSTEM MEMORY CACHE from eboostr, leaving pendrive only. 6. I made a binary comparison, skype filesize is 25626408 bytes total. Differences found at these locations: Range 1: 001e4c00-001fffff // Range 2: 005e4c00-005fffff // Range 3: 007e4c00-007fffff // Range 4: 009e4c00-009fffff // Range 5: 00de4c00-00dfffff // Range 6: 00fe4c00-00ffffff // Range 7: 013e4c00-013ffffff // Range 8: 015e4c00-015ffff. I hope it helps to locate the problem. Bye. mradr on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-918 Sat, 12 Dec 2009 09:58:38 +0000 mradr 918@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ So your saying to delete the cache and rebuild? Zorro_ARG on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-912 Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:35:46 +0000 Zorro_ARG 912@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ Hi. I was testing an earlier version of eboostr 4 beta, about one month ago. I had also problems when it was enabled. The problems I had were related to errors when programs were loading, for example, during boot. I took as an example skype.exe. Sometimes it loaded with errors during boot. At that time, I saved a copy of SKYPE.EXE, then uninstalled eboostr and rebooted. After that, i used a software for binary comparsison, and the two versions of skype.exe were different!! If I can remember well, differences appear in blocks of data, for example at E400 1E400, filled with 00. I can´t remember the block size, sorry. But maybe there is a problem over there. I´m using readyboost right now, since then, one month or so, and I never saw a problem like the one described again. Also same hardware and software. Windows 7 x64 edition, 6 gigas of ram. Using RAM or USB pendrive, or a mix of two for testing. I will try again with build 544 and see what happens. Greetings. mradr on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-868 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:19:50 +0000 mradr 868@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ Np, to bad I couldn't help solve your issu. Um, maybe try to see what happens if you uninstall the other program and use eboostr when you get some free time tho. If it still happens, then yea its eboostr. tolisbak on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-862 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 10:05:30 +0000 tolisbak 862@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ With windows XP 32-bit, on the same hardware I had frequent crashes with itunes. In some instances in vista x64 (after the installation of a nvidia vga card) there were also some blank screens. On the other hand, there is a lot of programs loaded with windows. Still, after the unistallation of eboostr the system hasn't crashed yet. I' ll wait for the next beta release. mradr on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-859 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:31:35 +0000 mradr 859@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ Very strange, it could be a combination of the two, but I wounder if it isn't something else in play..., If nothing, I would have to say its the cfospeed thats maybe causing the issure here. TCP/IP was mess up and cfospeed uses the TCP/IP sys... As for the ntoskrnl.exe, from what I get from the web is that, it could be a number of things from RAM to burning software. tolisbak on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-857 Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:03:17 +0000 tolisbak 857@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ 21 times this "On Thu 26/11/2009 7:28:07 μμ your computer crashe This was likely caused by the following module: ntoskrnl.exe Bugcheck code: 0x1000007E (0xFFFFFFFFC0000005, 0xFFFFF80002E61F30, 0xFFFFFA60019DB448, 0xFFFFFA60019DAE20) Error: SYSTEM_THREAD_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED_M Dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\Mini112609-03.dmp file path: C:\Windows\system32\ntoskrnl.exe product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System company: Microsoft Corporation description: NT Kernel & System The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect, possibly the culprit may be another driver on your system which cannot be identified at this time. " 3 times this: On Mon 9/11/2009 7:13:20 μμ your computer crashed This was likely caused by the following module: tcpip.sys Bugcheck code: 0xD1 (0x40, 0x2, 0x0, 0xFFFFFA6000F193CB) Error: DRIVER_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL Dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\Mini110909-01.dmp file path: C:\Windows\system32\drivers\tcpip.sys product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System company: Microsoft Corporation description: TCP/IP Driver The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect, possibly the culprit may be another driver on your system which cannot be identified at this time. 2 times this: On Sun 8/11/2009 7:34:58 μμ your computer crashed This was likely caused by the following module: cfosspeed.sys Bugcheck code: 0xD1 (0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, 0x2, 0x8, 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF) Error: DRIVER_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL Dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\Mini110809-01.dmp file path: C:\Windows\system32\drivers\cfosspeed.sys product: cFosSpeed Driver company: cFos Software GmbH description: cFosSpeed Driver Maybe it's the combination of eboostr and cfospeed that causes the problem. Now I am using Readyboost and the system hasn't crashed yet. mradr on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-854 Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:20:14 +0000 mradr 854@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ Crash, as in like BSOD, or just frezz-crash? If it's a BSOD, could you upload the minidump? This can be found in: c:\windows\minidump\*the date/time/log file* tolisbak on "Vista x64 crashes" http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/topic/vista-x64-crashes#post-841 Sun, 29 Nov 2009 05:56:42 +0000 tolisbak 841@http://beta.eboostr.com/forum/ If it is enabled, Version 4.0.0.543 makes my system crash after logging in. On next boot (thankfully) it is disabled. Then it will make vista crash within 3 hours after enabling it. I had far fewer crashes with older versions. At least it works great on my netbook.