If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
My Win XP Pro does not turn off or restart even after repeated attempt
using usual Start/Turn Off Computer/ Turn off. I also tried to turn it off through Task Manager/Turn Off in vain. This problem started recently. I checked possible virus/malware infection, but apparently no such a thing exists in my computer. Can someone help? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
???????does not turn off Why?
On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 23:24:18 -0600, Beyond X wrote:
My Win XP Pro does not turn off or restart even after repeated attempt using usual Start/Turn Off Computer/ Turn off. I also tried to turn it off through Task Manager/Turn Off in vain. I suspect that is the same thing, but iirc once I could get there when I couldn't get to shutdown from the Windows logo key. This problem started recently. What else have you checked. For example, have you saved all your work, closed all your programs, and then unplugged it? What happened on restart? I checked possible virus/malware infection, but apparently no such a thing exists in my computer. Can someone help? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
You can always consider using System Restore to a point in time before this
happened, assuming you have such a restore point, and it wasn't too long ago. Beyond X wrote: My Win XP Pro does not turn off or restart even after repeated attempt using usual Start/Turn Off Computer/ Turn off. I also tried to turn it off through Task Manager/Turn Off in vain. This problem started recently. I checked possible virus/malware infection, but apparently no such a thing exists in my computer. Can someone help? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
On Sun, 5 Dec 2010 00:53:14 -0700, "Bill in Co"
wrote: You can always consider using System Restore to a point in time before this happened, assuming you have such a restore point, and it wasn't too long ago. I don't understand System Restore and that scares me. If I installed a program earlier today, and then restore to yesterday, will the program still work? Will fixing it be as simple as reinstalling? What if, say, I forget where I put it the first time and put it some place else. Aren't there other things that have been done since the restore point chosen, that I won't remember maybe, that won't work anymore, that I won't even notice? Beyond X wrote: My Win XP Pro does not turn off or restart even after repeated attempt using usual Start/Turn Off Computer/ Turn off. I also tried to turn it off through Task Manager/Turn Off in vain. This problem started recently. I checked possible virus/malware infection, but apparently no such a thing exists in my computer. Can someone help? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
mm wrote:
On Sun, 5 Dec 2010 00:53:14 -0700, "Bill in Co" wrote: You can always consider using System Restore to a point in time before this happened, assuming you have such a restore point, and it wasn't too long ago. I don't understand System Restore and that scares me. If I installed a program earlier today, and then restore to yesterday, will the program still work? Not until you reinstall it. Anything installed since the restore point will become effectively uninstalled, and you will have to reinstall it. (Think of it like restoring the registry, PLUS some (i.e. it does a bit more than just that. More on that below, but you can find some more details on System Restore, online). I'll use use SR to stand for System Restores sometimes below. Will fixing it be as simple as reinstalling? What if, say, I forget where I put it the first time and put it some place else. I don't understand what "it" is above. You mean the program? Well, as I said, you'd have to reinstall it. But NOTE: if you recently saved some newly added program file somewhere on the hard drive (and not in a designated safe (off limits to SR place), like My Documents), that program exe file would be removed too, after a System Restore rollback. Why? Because System Restore assumes such recently added files could be potentially problematic (there is no way System Restore can know for sure, so it just assumes that to be safe, and removes it). (I'm talking about something added later in time than the restore point you roll back to). Which files are monitored by System Restore, and where, etc, are all covered in the several references on System Restore online. Aren't there other things that have been done since the restore point chosen, that I won't remember maybe, that won't work anymore, that I won't even notice? Anything you have configured or added since then will be undone - yes, just like you would expect if rolling back to a previous registry - just like what happens when you use "scanreg /restore" in Win98, but plus some (as I mentioned above). System Restore does a bit more than just rollback the registry, in other words. And IF you don't have a good disk backup (clone or image), it can come in handy on some troublesome occasions. Beyond X wrote: My Win XP Pro does not turn off or restart even after repeated attempt using usual Start/Turn Off Computer/ Turn off. I also tried to turn it off through Task Manager/Turn Off in vain. This problem started recently. I checked possible virus/malware infection, but apparently no such a thing exists in my computer. Can someone help? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
???????does not turn off Why?
On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 23:24:18 -0600, Beyond X wrote:
My Win XP Pro does not turn off or restart even after repeated attempt using usual Start/Turn Off Computer/ Turn off. I also tried to turn it off through Task Manager/Turn Off in vain. This problem started recently. I checked possible virus/malware infection, but apparently no such a thing exists in my computer. Can someone help? Possibly corupt software . Installed any new programs ? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
From the original poster
Thanks a lot for your kind thought and time. After many trials of imaginable causes I found that for some reason the activity to download numerous bodies associated with messages in newsgroup sites using a newsreader program apparently still takes/occupies/constrains a large chank of RAM memory even after the program is terminated. I have naively believed that once an application is cancelled (confirmed by Task Manager), all memory usage by the application is completely freed for the use of other programs including the process to close Windows. Apparently this is not true because when I deleted the messages with bodies in the newsreader, I become able to turn off Windows--normally. This is a puzzling finding because the bodies were downloaded and stored in a partition completely separated from the one where the application is (the system partition), meaning the downloaded files are on the harddrive, not in memory. I checked the memory system using MS Memory Diagnostic program. The result was no errors. I did not try SR because I thought it would delete the downloaded files so that the previous conditions are restored. Am I wrong? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
Beyond X wrote:
From the original poster Thanks a lot for your kind thought and time. After many trials of imaginable causes I found that for some reason the activity to download numerous bodies associated with messages in newsgroup sites using a newsreader program apparently still takes/occupies/constrains a large chank of RAM memory even after the program is terminated. I have naively believed that once an application is cancelled (confirmed by Task Manager), all memory usage by the application is completely freed for the use of other programs including the process to close Windows. Apparently this is not true because when I deleted the messages with bodies in the newsreader, I become able to turn off Windows--normally. That sounds weird, and doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps something else was going on behind the scenes. This is a puzzling finding because the bodies were downloaded and stored in a partition completely separated from the one where the application is (the system partition), meaning the downloaded files are on the harddrive, not in memory. Right! Or at least should be. I checked the memory system using MS Memory Diagnostic program. The result was no errors. I did not try SR because I thought it would delete the downloaded files so that the previous conditions are restored. Am I wrong? SR can delete some downloaded files since the last restore point (of the monitored types, like EXEs, COMs, DLLs, etc), but shouldn't delete newsgroup messages. (But anyways, if you really wanted to play it safe and cover all bets you could always temporarily save them to another disk or flash drive (or partition that is not being monitored by SR) and bring them back, if needbe). But I've never had a problem with newsgroup files being removed. (Program and EXE files - that's a whole nother story, however). I've got SR here only monitoring the C: partition, as a simple insurance policy. But I have rarely had to use it, since I can restore a backup image or clone (for a truly clean and thorough system restore). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
Bill in Co wrote:
Beyond X wrote: From the original poster Thanks a lot for your kind thought and time. After many trials of imaginable causes I found that for some reason the activity to download numerous bodies associated with messages in newsgroup sites using a newsreader program apparently still takes/occupies/constrains a large chank of RAM memory even after the program is terminated. I have naively believed that once an application is cancelled (confirmed by Task Manager), all memory usage by the application is completely freed for the use of other programs including the process to close Windows. Apparently this is not true because when I deleted the messages with bodies in the newsreader, I become able to turn off Windows--normally. That sounds weird, and doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps something else was going on behind the scenes. This is a puzzling finding because the bodies were downloaded and stored in a partition completely separated from the one where the application is (the system partition), meaning the downloaded files are on the harddrive, not in memory. Right! Or at least should be. I checked the memory system using MS Memory Diagnostic program. The result was no errors. I did not try SR because I thought it would delete the downloaded files so that the previous conditions are restored. Am I wrong? SR can delete some downloaded files since the last restore point (of the monitored types, like EXEs, COMs, DLLs, etc), but shouldn't delete newsgroup messages. (But anyways, if you really wanted to play it safe and cover all bets you could always temporarily save them to another disk or flash drive (or partition that is not being monitored by SR) and bring them back, if needbe). But I've never had a problem with newsgroup files being removed. (Program and EXE files - that's a whole nother story, however). I've got SR here only monitoring the C: partition, as a simple insurance policy. But I have rarely had to use it, since I can restore a backup image or clone (for a truly clean and thorough system restore). Microsoft likes to remove pages that document the older OSes, and Wikipedia gives a reference here, which is stored on web.archive.org. "Frequently Asked Questions Regarding System Restore in Windows XP" http://web.archive.org/web/200802050...753.aspx#EUAAC Even with all of that info, I never feel exactly sure, what's going to get deleted. I've lost a couple big downloads, by using SR to go backwards in time. I didn't notice they'd disappeared at the time, and only noticed later. Putting user data, on a partition which has SR disabled, should be pretty safe. But how many programs store their data, off of C: ? With regard to that last paragraph, WinXP also has a habit of turning on SR again, any time the identity of a partition changes. That can happen with portable storage devices (plug them in later, and SR might be turned on again). It might also happen, if you've been using some disk maintenance tools, and some change causes the partition to be treated as new. Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
$B#W#i#n!!#X#P!!(Bdoes not turn off Why?
Paul wrote:
Bill in Co wrote: Beyond X wrote: From the original poster Thanks a lot for your kind thought and time. After many trials of imaginable causes I found that for some reason the activity to download numerous bodies associated with messages in newsgroup sites using a newsreader program apparently still takes/occupies/constrains a large chank of RAM memory even after the program is terminated. I have naively believed that once an application is cancelled (confirmed by Task Manager), all memory usage by the application is completely freed for the use of other programs including the process to close Windows. Apparently this is not true because when I deleted the messages with bodies in the newsreader, I become able to turn off Windows--normally. That sounds weird, and doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps something else was going on behind the scenes. This is a puzzling finding because the bodies were downloaded and stored in a partition completely separated from the one where the application is (the system partition), meaning the downloaded files are on the harddrive, not in memory. Right! Or at least should be. I checked the memory system using MS Memory Diagnostic program. The result was no errors. I did not try SR because I thought it would delete the downloaded files so that the previous conditions are restored. Am I wrong? SR can delete some downloaded files since the last restore point (of the monitored types, like EXEs, COMs, DLLs, etc), but shouldn't delete newsgroup messages. (But anyways, if you really wanted to play it safe and cover all bets you could always temporarily save them to another disk or flash drive (or partition that is not being monitored by SR) and bring them back, if needbe). But I've never had a problem with newsgroup files being removed. (Program and EXE files - that's a whole nother story, however). I've got SR here only monitoring the C: partition, as a simple insurance policy. But I have rarely had to use it, since I can restore a backup image or clone (for a truly clean and thorough system restore). Microsoft likes to remove pages that document the older OSes, and Wikipedia gives a reference here, which is stored on web.archive.org. "Frequently Asked Questions Regarding System Restore in Windows XP" http://web.archive.org/web/200802050...753.aspx#EUAAC That's a great article. Thanks for posting it, Paul. Maybe mm and some others can check it out too, as it has a LOT of good info on System Restore. I seem to remember another Microsoft article on it that was a bit more detailed on the list of file extensions and locations being monitored or not, but maybe that has been removed, as you implied. But this article is pretty good! Even with all of that info, I never feel exactly sure, what's going to get deleted. I've lost a couple big downloads, by using SR to go backwards in time. I didn't notice they'd disappeared at the time, and only noticed later. Yeah, I learned that firsthand, after one or two episodes. After that, I started copying all recently downloaded exe's and program type files temporarily over to "My Documents", just prior to rolling back using SR. But I haven't had to use SR for some time. I have, however, made fair use of Erunt to "undo" some undesired changes made to the system after messing around with some programs, and just to play it safe (after uninstalling the experimental program first). For just minor stuff, this is simpler and faster than restoring an image, and is less invasive than using SR (but admitedly SR can be more "thorough"). Putting user data, on a partition which has SR disabled, should be pretty safe. But how many programs store their data, off of C: ? Right. I keep most of my personal user data on the C: partition, but then again, most of the user stuff like personal documents is not touched by SR, so it's not a big issue to me. With regard to that last paragraph, WinXP also has a habit of turning on SR again, any time the identity of a partition changes. That can happen with portable storage devices (plug them in later, and SR might be turned on again). It might also happen, if you've been using some disk maintenance tools, and some change causes the partition to be treated as new. Yeah, I know, and that's somewhat annoying. After some such changes, it seems SR gets turned back on again for monitoring all of the partitions, and you have to go back and decheck some of those other partitions being monitored. Still, when all is said and done, I keep SR active on the C: partition, as just another insurance policy, and recommend others do too. You never know when it might come in handy. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|