Slow windows explorer response

Remove the symatec products and try NOD32 or Kapersky I think they both have free trial versions.
sometimes just removing and deleting folders, and re-installing Symatec stuff helps A LOT. I'm a fan of NOD32, but there are other good choices.
I find that a truly disturbing number of poor performance issues are fixed by removing Symantec products.

Alas.. I was once a big symantic fan, but have reconsidered over the years for the reasons you cite.  Unfortunately, this is a company owned machine and although my IT department is very weak, eventually, they will coerce me to re-install.    Keep in mind that this issue only started a few months back, symantic has been on this machine for since I rolled it out. (have 4 others that my staff use that dont seem to have this problem with same config. )

I can not think of any software change or install over the last few months that I can attribute this to, other that just my collection of data getting larger.



 

yeah, like I said. just remove it, use the norton removal tool, and than re-install it. I've seen many performance issues fixed(or at least significantly better) doing this in cases where symantec is required.

you might also check that you don't have any corrupt files in the directory tree you use most often.
BACKUP before you try this.

a very easy way to find out is to cut and paste your desktop contents into a new folder. if you've got corruption it'll fail (hence the BACKUP). but at least than you'd have a point to check from. a tool like explorer2 helps with this so you can resume or skip the cut/paste operation after hitting an error.

I've never understood why Microsoft's file management is so crappy... how hard can it be to add "skip/continue" to the typical, "your screwed message" or make honest messages like "the file xxxx.txt is corrupt, and now we're going to end your operation, and not tell you where the file is bad. hahahaha"

So the general opinion is that having such a large amount of data on the desk top should in itself not cause this?

Interesting observation - the more files that are in any given directory, the slower it is.  As a test, I created a new directory with 2-3 files in it, and when I click to open it, poof.  In contrast, an existing directory with 100 files in it seems to staff for a good ten seconds or so.

Im not sure if that means anything.

to some degree this is relatively normal, any virus scanner will increase the effect. but even loading thumbnails takes a few. so each one more incrementally causes more of a pause. but usually Virus Scanner is the most noticeable culprit, it's just the price you pay for being safe, however it sounds like your describing more than "normal slowness"

Yes.. I would call this "more than normal slowness".... the thing that has me stumped is the installs and config of the machine has not changed significantly since this started.  

too many people get stuck on that "nothing changed", but the truth is obviously something changed. it could be something as simple as an update from Microsoft, or your virus scanner got a definition file that for some reason doesn't like you. it might be something complex like, your directory structure has crossed a boundary( got too many subfolders, or too long of a total path name, etc....), or perhaps you accidently shut it down while it was still writing a file and now there's a corruption.
in 99% of the cases i see, fixing it is much more important than figuring out how and why.

Hello skacines, I think you should run Power disk defragmenter for file optimization. Run Triplepass. Visit this link

I would check the drive 1st. Run chkdsk /r.
If the problem persists then remove Norton as suggested by Harel66 but test the performance before re-installing it.
If the performance is back to normal then reinstall Norton otherwise run diagnostic on the drive.
If the computer reverts back to the long delays, I believe you have 2 options to improve the performance. Try to talk some sense into your IT department or Upgrade your hardware.

Checking the hard drive is a good start.
You say there is 30+ gigs of data on the desktop?-not really a good idea!
Also is there loads of folders and shortcuts on desktop?- can cause a slowdown.
Minimise the amount of icons on desktop-dump them in reference folders to cut down the amount "litter" on desktop

Here is the status folks.....

- ran triple pass defrag
- ran chkdsk /r

Perhaps moderate improvement, but nothing to say "ahh haa" to.

Experiment:

Copied a large directory from the desktop to the root of C.  The problem occurs equally as much whether I am reading a directory from the desktop or via windows explorer in the root of C.

Optoma - yes, there is 30 G on the desktop.  Well, kinda.  I have 20 ish folders set up on the desktop with various different names - customer, product reference, HR, etc etc etc.  Within these folders there is 30G of data.  Most of what is taking up the space is CAD data and I should probably offload that anyways.  However, I do like the way the machine is set up,  

Harel66 - you are correct - "nothing changed" is not correct.  Nothing I would deem "significant" has changed.. eg: CAD installation, update to Office 2007, etc etc.  However, yes, some periodic printer installs, adobe updates, flash updates, so it is plausible something along the line is causing the issue.

I am reluctant to remove Symantic as it is a corporate edition and Id have to go back to the IT guys to have it re-installed.  The less they touch any of my machines, the happier I am.  Sorry if that offends some of you!!  But, as a for instance, they are running our corporate network as a work group (no domain) and use fixed IP rather than DHCP.  Thats just the tip of the iceburge.

Would starting up in safe mode disable Symantic?  Would doing this be useful as a test?

I could also copy the entire desktop to the root of C as an experiment.  

Thanks for all the responses!  Any further thoughts?

One thing to check is available RAM. Check the Performance tab in Task Manager. What is the PF Usage?
The only thing that can be confirmed by testing in safe mode is that if it works as it should then it is probably not a hardware issue.

PF usage is 540 MB.  This is with all applications closed.

Interesting - I am writing you this on a personal laptop and the PF usage is only 203MB.

Are we perhaps on to something?

Not if it still slow at that usage. It should be okay unless your display adapter is taking a big chunk.

Select the Processes tab and click on CPU twice to bring the highest CPU usage to the top.
Open one of the directories that takes a long time to appear. Watch the processes list and see if any of them come to the top.

When I do that.. exporer.exe blows right to the top of the list at 39,964K.    

I dont see anything else moving in the list

I didnt think of this before, but I do have a near exact close of this machine that doesnt have the issue.  The "clone" is the same chassis (NW8440) with a pre-issue ghost image of the machine on the hard drive.  

This is my back up should disaster strike.

When I do the same thing on the "clone", the same thing happens but explorer.exe is only 23,054K.  

PF on the the clone is 505 MB.  <sigh>

Note - when I say "same thing happens", I mean movement of explorer.exe in the list.  The "clone" does not have the delay issue.

Select the Performance tab again, Click View and check the Show kernes times.
Open the directory again. Does the CPU usage max out? If so, is it just the green or is it both the red and green?

Results of the edbedd test:

Problem machine -

CPU usage graph goes to 42 percent.  Both red and green.

<havent played with this before, not exactly sure what I am looking at>

Clone machine -

CPU usage graph only goes to 12 percent.  Both red and green.


FYI: The "clone" machine is running a disc image of the problem machine from August of this year.

<they dont like to be on the network together at the same time... -grin-, wireless and wired NIC currently disable on problem machine>

Any significance to this?

at risk of being too simple, why don't you move your new files over to the clone and use it?

Hare66 -

I have actually been thinking about migrating to the clone.... however, that is indeed the brute force method.  The disc image on the clone is about 3 months old and it would take some effort to make sure I got everything updated.

It is a possible solution however....

If we cant resolve this, Ill toss in the towel and migrate over to the clone.

Alas, sometimes one has to resort to that and sometimes it is actually quicker.  I had a nasty jump into the machine about a year ago and after several hours of trying to exorcise it, the end solution was to re-image the drive and call it a day. <the experts here actually gave up - only to say "wow, thats a bad one!>

The red line going up along with the green one means that it is a dll kernel using the CPU.
To find out which one it is you will need Process Explorer. You can get it here.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx
You use it the same way, watch the CPU while you open a directory. Should be pretty easy to find the process responsible.

Once you do all this I am pretty sure that you are going to confirm that it is your anti virus software. If it is, switching to the clone is not likely to help because once the AV gets all updated it will probably suffer the same problem.

Thanks edbedb - I am calling it a night, but will do as you suggest tomorrow morning.

Even if I identify what it is, but can not solve it, it is still helpful information.  Not to mention I have learned a thing or two along the way!

I will report results tomorrow morning.  Thanks a bunch for the attention!

Hey guys.. I lied .. I became so curious that I popped down into the basement to fiddle some more.

I am not sure exactly what I am looking at, but I think I may have found something...

<what is the significance of the purple, brown, blue and red bars?>

While fiddling around opening and closing directories, I noted that two lines in process explored would go "red".  I presume red = bad.  :)

Both "pop" up during the stall as red and then go away.

I havent been quick enough to catch one of them, but it pops up under the explorer.exe section.

The other is "acrordinfo.exe".

Dont think thats supposed to be in there.... eyh?

Virus - eyh?

Got it... with a quick finger on the print screen key..

The second entry to go "red" is verclsid.exe.  This is rather quick.

I think this one is supposed to be there.

Here is the order of events:

Open explorer window....
explorer.exe - goes to about 40 percent
window stalls
verslsid.exe pops up quickly, bar goes red
acrordinfo.exe pops up,bar goes red
verslsid.exe disappears
acrodinfo.exe hangs around red for a spell
the explorer window unfreezes
after a short bit, acrordinfo.exe disappears

Hmmm... are we now onto something?  <grin, fingers crossed!>

Don't know what acrodinfo.exe is.
Vercslid.exe is a legit process

Run process explorer again:

1-In it ,hit options and select "verify image signatures"
Then hit view,select columns and check "verified signer"

2-Hit options again and select "difference highlight duration" and set it to nine seconds

Get a screen shot of process and attach images in a folder attachment here

Meant acrordinfo.exe!

Im a bit torn on this one......

Have a look, it shows as "un able to verify".....

It is gray in this screen shot, and eventually goes away, but when the stall occurs, it is red...

Thoughts?

process-explorer-Nw8440.doc

Hmmm.. Just FYI... acrordinfo.exe is not on the clone... I just searched the machine and it is not there....it is only resident on the problem machine.  Both problem machine and clone have adobe acrobat reader 7.

Could you create a restore point.
Then uninstall reader 7 and install latest reader
http://get.adobe.com/uk/reader/ -uncheck to install Mcafee scanner/google toolbar

Actually.. what I think Ill do is create a disc image - that way I can hack away....

Alas, this will be tomorrow.. thanks for hanging around this eve......

No prob :)

Thanks - I learned a lot on this one!

No prob!