Trimming fat off Win7

There's a very good reason he's called QuackViper. His "tweaks" do nothing, aside from setting your system up to be potentially unstable. If you feel you have no issue's consider yourself lucky...but you've gained nothing from his site. Not in performance or stability.

On several enthusiast forums, people were warned once, then banned if they suggested his site. Yes, it was that bad. He's mellowed out on his advice because of the backlash....but the point is still there that nothing can be gained from his site. It should be avoided, and you'd be helping people out by not suggesting it.

The mere suggestion of changing Windows services is proof positive he has no idea how the OS works, and is in no position to make recommendations. His credibility is completely gone. Not to sound like I'm putting you down, but if a person follows his advice...it's proof they don't understand Windows 7 enough to be attempting to tweak it, either. Windows 7 isn't Windows XP and shouldn't be treated like it. The best tweaking advice for Windows 7 is to leave it alone. If QuackViper bothered to learn about Windows 7, he'd realize how pointless his advice is.

Warlockz said:

The Only problem I see, and it has nothing to do with BlackVipers site either, is too many Newbs without a clue are using these tweaks without any real knowledge about which services they are disabling, so they go and disable something that their apps may depend on, get a Problem? Re enable the service nothing more nothing less.

I really can't believe this still needs to be discussed (but I guess I shouldn't complain...my rep soars each time I mention it). You are missing the very basis of the reason NOT to change services. Dependencies. It isn't always as easy as just re-enabling the service...because you likely don't know which one needs to be re-enabled. That's a level of troubleshooting that no one in their right mind would willingly take on.

On top of all of that, it boils down to basic common sense and rational thinking. If shutting off the "unneccesary" services yields absolutely nothing in return...no performance gain whatsoever....then why bother? No, that's not debatable...that's a proven fact, and has been for years. Why bother? That's the simple question. Why take risks with your stability for absolutely no return?

Common sense, plain and simple common sense. We're hear to help people get the most out of Windows 7...not increase their chances of instability.

If you read through his website...you are presented with one and only one question. What's the point? If there's nothing positive to be gained...what's the point? Would you willing bash your forehead into a brick wall? Nothing positive can happen...but would you still do it?

your reasons are null, I know what I am doing

Then you shouldn't need me to tell you that you're wasting your time chasing non-existent performance gains. Glad we agree.

Warlockz said:

I found this Cleanup Winsxs after Windows 7 SP1 install maybe this will help?

This is the kind of stuff I was talking about. Thanks Warlockz. Mine is a SP1 build so I will try this (for I see little reason to go back to the original build and if so - screw it - I'll wipe the drive and install from scratch).

Didn't mean to start a pissing contest between you and Deacon - you both obviously know what you're doing and have strong opinions about how you go about doing it. So as a matter of respect, agree to disagree and drop the discussion. My feeling is that you can both learn something from each other on this subject.

Enlighten each other and see where that takes you for what you're doing know serves little purpose here.

The reason I started this thread is because I know MS and their penchant for expansion room as HD storage spaces swell - so have they. Sure some things need more code writing, better drivers and neater thrills. Don't use widgets and have turned off aero since day 2 - all for the sake of performance.

A little about me, I don't rely on the OS to woo me. That's what the programs I install are for. Wish MS would get that into their heads, but alas Win8 seems to have continued with their misguided tradition.

Why don't they just build a stripped down OS - like a NASCAR version. Sure the outer shell represents a road worthy production model vehicle - but this ain't your dad's Chevy or Ford. My prediction is I'm blowing smoke up my own ass on that pipe dream, brothers.

Since my days with Win3.22, there has always been fat to trim off this OS and that's the reason I'm here chatting with you fine gentlemen (and ladies, though I have yet to come across one - screennames are so misleading).

With that said - anybody else have any other suggestions?

Performance-wise, I consider Win7 stripped-down compared to past Windows. It is featherlight and instantaneous with adequate hardware. What more can you ask if you're the consumer except possibly better hardware?

Black Viper was useful in XP and early Vista, until Win7 became the Black Viper by setting all Services not needed at boot to Manual on fast triggers.

I heard your question about editing the OS for size, and recall that when we were experimenting with that during early beta here and elsewhere, it was concluded that V-liting for performance was a waste of time strewn with unintended consequences. However editing for size on netbooks was considered useful.

So if someone can find one of those old threads (since I'm sitting in an MVP Summit seminar on Skydrive right now) you may have what you need. I'll look if no one else posts - I believe Jacee was involved back then.

This thread was started so I may free up storage space on a 120gB SSD. Noticed that my Windows folder was a whopping 21gB in size (over 15% of my drive). So I was wondering what the brains here at Sevens knew about it.

Thanks to Warlockz suggestion I freed up 3.2gB already.

As for performance - I'm up for tweaks to reduce extraneous crap running in the background - but short of rewriting my registry - I'll look at anything as long as there's now substantial trade-off somewhere in functionality or security.