Slow Network Transfer Rates
Jon
I have a two machine 100Mb network, machine 1 is a dual boot 98SE/XP and
machine 2 is 98SE only. With both machines running 98SE, the network
performs well (approx 2.5MB per second). With machine 1 running XP, any
file copy initiated by the 98SE machine either from or to the XP machine
also performs well (also approx 2.5MB per second). The problem is that any
file transfer initiated by the XP machine to or from the 98SE machine runs
like a lame dog (approx 0.6MB per second).
Some things that I've tried (some in desperation) after browsing Usenet that
haven't made any difference:
1) I upgraded to the latest NIC drivers.
2) I set the DefaultRcvWindow registry entry on the 98SE machine to 8192.
3) I tried using a different protocol (IPX).
4) I added the IP addresses of both machines to both hosts files.
5) I tried different network cables.
Some other facts:
1) The cable is CAT5 enhanced has been tested and verified.
2) The NIC's are set to 100Mb half dulex mode (not autosense).
3) The hub lights indicate 100Mb on each port and the NIC lights indicate
100Mb mode.
4) The NIC's are both 3com 3C905C
5) TCP/IP is the only protocol installed on both machines, both machines
have been assigned an IP address and can happily ping each other.
6) Both machines can see the workgroup and access each others shared drives.
7) The firewall is not enabled on the XP network connection.
8) I am running no AV software.
9) My hair is rapidly going grey !
Thanks in advance for any other ideas.
Jon
billy bob
it. I am thinking of getting rid of xp. maybe service pack one will fix it
when it is released, but i doubt it because MS have not even acknowledge
this problem yet.
Billy
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce382c5$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
Jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "billy bob" <kkn...@nospam.hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: Slow Network Transfer Rates
> This is an exact duplication of the problem I am having. I too am sick of
> it. I am thinking of getting rid of xp. maybe service pack one will fix it
> when it is released, but i doubt it because MS have not even acknowledge
> this problem yet.
>
> Billy
>
> "Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce382c5$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
> > Hi all
> >
> > I have a two machine 100Mb network, machine 1 is a dual boot 98SE/XP and
> > machine 2 is 98SE only. With both machines running 98SE, the network
> > performs well (approx 2.5MB per second). With machine 1 running XP, any
> > file copy initiated by the 98SE machine either from or to the XP machine
> > also performs well (also approx 2.5MB per second). The problem is that
any
> > file transfer initiated by the XP machine to or from the 98SE machine
runs
> > like a lame dog (approx 0.6MB per second).
> >
Billy,
What NIC's are you using ?
Jon
Karen
I *was* having exactly the same problem as you. One XP machine and 2 98SE
machines on a 10/100 LAN using Netgear FA-311 NICs. Transfers from 98Se to
98SE were fine at 4-5 MB/s. Transfers from XP to 98SE were much slower,
around 2.2 to 2.4 MB/s. I could eliminate the LAN hardware because the XP
machine was dual-boot with it's original 98SE. Boot to 98Se and get fast
transfers, boot to XP and get slow transfers. So my reasoning was that the
fault *had* to be with XP.
Last weekend I took one of the remaining 98SE boxes and installed XP on it.
You can imagine my surprise when during testing, transfers from XP to XP
were consistently running at 9-10 MB/s for very large file transfers (GB+
sizes) and at a somewhat slower 4-6 MB/s for transfers involving lots of
files such as a 4.4 GB directory containing 3,962 files. Just to make
certain that I wasn't dreaming, I ran more tests today. A 289 MB wav file
transfers in 28-30 seconds.
This problem has been driving me insane for months! For me at least, the
problem has been solved. I am installing XP on the remaining 98SE machine.
I don't know if this will work for anyone else but this was my experience.
Hope it helps someone save the remainder of their hair <G>.
Karen
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce382c5$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
billy bob
drivers from the manufactors sites and from MS.
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce3a957$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
Jon
"Karen" <sorce...@home.com> wrote in message
news:uXiVjNP$BHA.1344@tkmsftngp05...
> This problem has been driving me insane for months! For me at least, the
> problem has been solved. I am installing XP on the remaining 98SE
machine.
> I don't know if this will work for anyone else but this was my experience.
> Hope it helps someone save the remainder of their hair <G>.
>
> > I have a two machine 100Mb network, machine 1 is a dual boot 98SE/XP and
> > machine 2 is 98SE only. With both machines running 98SE, the network
> > performs well (approx 2.5MB per second). With machine 1 running XP, any
> > file copy initiated by the 98SE machine either from or to the XP machine
> > also performs well (also approx 2.5MB per second). The problem is that
any
> > file transfer initiated by the XP machine to or from the 98SE machine
runs
> > like a lame dog (approx 0.6MB per second).
> >
Karen
Thanks for your response. Unfortunately, upgrading the 98SE machine to XP is
not an option in this instance. I suspect that the problem lies in the XP
driver implementation for the NIC. Does anybody know enough about the inner
workings of TCP to explain how this could possibly be the problem bearing in
mind that it only occurs when the XP machine initiates the transfer request
?
Jon
billy bob
anyone does solve this PLEASE post back in this group the answer, I swear I
will worship you like a god if you can fix this.
Billy
Snip
>
> The most frequent causes of mixed operating systems networking
> problems involving Windows XP are:
>
> * XP Networking Wizard run when introducing a new XP computer
> into an existing network.
>
> Avoid running the wizard if you want to keep your network as it
> is and only want to integrate a new XP computer into it. Run it
> only if you accept that your network settings are restructured
> to conform to XP's ways.
>
> If you have already run the wizard, just read on. This text will
> help you to undo the unwanted actions of the wizard.
>
> * XP's built-in Firewall is accidentally activated on
> Intranet/LAN connections.
>
> To disable the XP firewall on a certain connection, select
> Start, Settings, Network and Dial-up Connections, select the
> desired connection (usually your LAN/Intranet), then select
> Properties, Advanced, and deselect the firewall.
>
> * A third party firewall (like Zone Alarm) or other third party
> software, like antivirus software scanning the network,
> interferes (one unconfirmed report cites Kaspersky Labs
> Antiviral Toolkit Pro AVP).
>
> Uninstall third party firewalls and other questionable software
> (antivirus etc.) entirely until you have your network working
> properly. Some firewall software (like ZoneAlarm) can cause
> problems even if disabled.
>
> * Access methods, access rights or passwords are not properly
> set.
>
> In Windows XP Professional, if you desire classic file sharing
> based on username and password instead of XP's default method of
> allowing only Guest access, go to Start, Control Panel, Folder
> Options, View, and uncheck "Use Simple File Sharing
> (Recommended)". Click on OK. Note that this is not generally
> required for file sharing.
>
> Conversely, if you want to access other computers from XP using
> the classic method instead of Guest access, use Control Panel,
> Computer administration, Group policies, and find the policy to
> allow access to other computers through the actual user name.
> (Please let me know the exact name of this policy, as I
> currently use a non-English system with different names, so I
> can put it in here.)
>
> To set or change the password in Windows XP, select Control
> Panel, Administrative Tools, System Tools, Local Users and
> Groups, Users. Right-click on a user name to set password. You
> also have to set permissions for all users on the shared objects
> (folders, files, printers, etc.). Usually this is done through
> groups, which contain the users. Later use this same user name
> and password to log on from other computers.
>
> Slow browsing of Windows ME, 98 or earlier versions can be
> caused by inappropriate network passwords. Use Control Panel,
> User Accounts, click on your account and select "Manage my
> network passwords". If you have any password preceded with the
> computer name of an ME or 9x computer, change it to contain the
> XP computer name and the account name you use on the XP machine,
> but add the share password you have set on the ME or 9x
> computer, if any. If there are no passwords set on any ME or 9x
> shares or printers, then you may be able to make it work by
> deleting such entries in the "Manage my network passwords" list.
>
> Windows XP Home cannot accept network accesses with user name
> and password and can only be accessed with Guest credentials
> (simple file sharing). The Guest account may have to be enabled
> for that.
>
> Windows XP Home uses autologon as the default. The first logon
> is done as owner without a password. When you then set up a user
> account and log on, you do not get the user prompt because of
> autologon. However, you are not logged on as the new user, but
> still as the owner, so you may not be authenticated as expected
> by other computers. To resolve this, use Control Panel, Users
> and disable autologon, then log off and on again as the desired
> user. Afer this you can re-enable autologon if you like.
>
> On non-XP versions of Windows the simple Windows Logon often
> works better than the Client for Microsoft Networks when the
> only problem is to connect to an XP computer.
>
> Windows XP sometimes changes passwords on other computers. If
> you have authentication problems, check and, if necessary,
> correct the passwords on the other computers.
>
> * Trying to log on to XP with an empty password.
>
> If you try to log on to XP without password, you normally get an
> error 31. To be able to use empty passwords, for example as
> Guest, use the group policy editor to disable the option, "Limit
> local account use of blank passwords to console login only". To
> get there, use Control Panel, Performance and Maintenance,
> Administrative Tools, Local Security Policy, expand Local
> Policies, Security, and double-click Accounts: Limit local
> account use of blank passwords to console login only. This is
> enabled by default. Uncheck this option.
>
> * Spaces in computer names.
>
> Remove them. Change the computer names on older operating
> systems that allow spaces in computer names.
>
> * Inappropriate DNS or WINS settings.
>
> Make sure you do not have any wrong settings in the DNS or WINS
> setup. In a small peer-to-peer network no such settings are
> needed. If you run a server with Active Directory, you need DNS
> though, but this makes little sense in a small network.
>
> * Lower case characters in passwords for connections to Windows
> 9x or ME computers.
>
> In some installations, but not in all, XP appears not to accept
> passwords from Windows 9x or ME if they contain lower case
> characters. If you cannot determine and remove the cause, you
> can, first as a test, then as a crutch, circumvent this by
> setting the passwords to all uppercase (or, for example, numbers
> only).
>
> * Non-XP computers present, no local DNS server, and NetBIOS
> over IP disabled.
>
> To enable NetBIOS over TCP/IP, which you need to find pre-XP and
> pre-Windows-2000 computers on the network, right-click on My
> Network Places, select Properties, select your network
> connection, right-click again and select Properties. Highlight
> the TCP/IP protocol and click on the Properties button, click on
> the Advanced button, then the WINS tab to get to the NetBIOS
> setting option. Select "Enable NetBIOS over TCP/IP" and wait a
> few minutes to let the machine rescan the network.
>
> * Adapters are set to full duplex, although the connection is to
> a hub or other device that cannot perform full duplex. (This
> sometimes leads to a functioning network, but to very poor
> performance due to a large number of Ethernet collisions. Please
> check your switch for collision indications while copying a
> large file through it.)
>
> Try to force the adapter driver to use half duplex.
>
> * Cannot access Windows ME or 9x computer because no share is
> defined on it.
>
> Should be obvious, but is sometimes forgotten.
>
> * Slow browsing of pre-XP computers from XP due to inappropriate
> computer names or passwords in XP.
>
> In XP go to Manage Passwords and delete any computer names or
> passwords for pre-XP computers. The next time you try to log on,
> you will get a password dialog box. Enter the correct password
> for the share if there is any.
>
> * Slow computer browsing due to unnecessary protocols.
>
> Remove NetBEUI and IPX unless you really need them. If you need
> IPX for local network game playing, remove all bindings to that
> protocol (use the Advanced command in network).
>
> * Slow network due to IEEE 802.1x protocol.
>
> If none of your computers uses the IEEE 802.1x authentication
> protocol, you can speed up the Computer Browser by disabling it.
> Right-click My Network Places, select Properties, right-click
> the LAN Connection, select Properties again, click the
> Authentication tab and uncheck "Enable network access control
> using IEEE 802.1x." Click on OK. If this leads to authentication
> failures, you have to reenable the protocol.
>
> * Computer Browser service not running.
>
> To have the Computer Browser start automatically, select
> Administrative tools, Services, and change the Start setting for
> Computer Browsing to Automatic. You can then reboot the computer
> or start the service manually by clicking on the Start button.
>
> * Faulty or obsolete drivers, drivers that are not fully
> compatible with Windows XP.
>
> Check and remove or replace.
>
> If you have public IP addresses, you need one of the following:
>
> * A set of well-working DNS servers, reachable over a fast
> connection, faster than modem
>
> * Your own DNS server on your subnet
>
> * A DNS proxy, which may be built into your Internet router
> (activate it)
>
> * HOSTS files on all local computers, pointing to all local
> computers. Don't forget to update these whenever any IP address
> changes.
>
> You also need a well-working firewall, or you need to safeguard
> each computer carefully to be safe from hacking attacks.
>
> Some networking problems can be resolved by right-clicking on
> the connection and selecting Repair. Some more problems,
> particularly on Windows ME and 9x, are resolved by removing all
> networking components, rebooting, then adding them again.
>
> Occasionally the webclient service or the Background Intelligent
> Transfer Service gets in the way. Try to stop these services for
> a test.
>
> An unconfirmed hint: if it still doesn't work, make sure your
> computer description is short, no longer than about 40
> characters.
>
> Occasionally a shortcut in My Network Places stops working. To
> resolve this, delete the offending shortcut, right-click My
> Network Places, use Search for Computers, and drag a new
> shortcut into My Network Places.
>
> Please see also the Knowledge Base article Description of File
> Sharing and Permissions in Windows XP (Q304040) at:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q304040
> and the article You May Be Unable to Browse the Network
> (Q294756) at
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q294756
>
> This message is not complete. There are various other potential
> causes for network problems.
>
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce382c5$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
Jon
"billy bob" <kkn...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eKzB9SZ$BHA.2192@tkmsftngp02...
> This is some of what I have tried to overcome this issue, but no luck. If
> anyone does solve this PLEASE post back in this group the answer, I swear
I
> will worship you like a god if you can fix this.
>
> Billy
>
> Snip
>
> "Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce382c5$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
> > Hi all
> >
> > I have a two machine 100Mb network, machine 1 is a dual boot 98SE/XP and
> > machine 2 is 98SE only. With both machines running 98SE, the network
> > performs well (approx 2.5MB per second). With machine 1 running XP, any
> > file copy initiated by the 98SE machine either from or to the XP machine
> > also performs well (also approx 2.5MB per second). The problem is that
any
> > file transfer initiated by the XP machine to or from the 98SE machine
runs
> > like a lame dog (approx 0.6MB per second).
> >
Something I noticed today:
Using the XP task manager networking tab I observed that when the XP machine
initiates a transfer the network utilization is around 5% and when the 98SE
machine initiates a transfer it's around 30%. Do you get similar readings ?
Even 30% seems a bit low to me !
Jon
Chris
I can only sympathise. Except that I am having the same
problem on XP when networked with a laptop running Win 2k
pro. Win Wk to XP fast, XP to Win 2k, quicker to burn a
CD copy and transfer data manully. As I use the machines
for my home business and synchronise fiels across the
laptop and the desktop and had both on Win 2k with no
problem, this is a real puzzle.
I've done all the things you have done and replaced the
network cards, installed updated drivers and gone through
Steve Winograds detailed network set up steps with
permissions and all. I mastered this on Win 2k so XP
should be a breeze but like Billy Bob I reckon its a bug
and MS aren't telling.
Will let you know if I get a solution. Took me two days
to sync files acros the network at first so this is
really a problem for me.
Chris
>.
>
billy bob
of a 100M lan connection, but it rapidly falls to a 1% constant when xp
initiates the transfer. I tried xp to xp the other day and got 6 Mbs WOW.
Looks like XP networks differently to previous versions. So I may have to go
back to 98 to get full speed. But i like Xp, so will try it again after SP1
is released. I am amazed that the big corporates are not screaming about
this but they tend to upgrade all pc to the same version of windows so maybe
that is why they are quiet about it.
I cannot upgrade my network to XP because the older machines are below
minimum requirement for XP.
Bah
Billy
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce523c1$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
Jon
"Chris" <ch...@changenavigators.co.uk> wrote in message
news:471901c1fdd7$1b1f0be0$b1e62ecf@tkmsftngxa04...
Can Karen and Chris state what NIC'c they're using ?
I logged this problem with Microsoft and got the following reply last
night - I'll look into it over the weekend:
"Thank you for requesting support for Microsoft Windows XP. My name is Nick
Ward and I will be working with you to resolve this issue.
In your case you have indicated that you are experiencing Network Traffic
problems when file copying is initiated from a Windows XP Machine
Initially I would recommend that you perform a Network Monitor Trace so that
we have more information to work with.
To install Netcap the Windows Support tools are required. To install Windows
Support Tools follow the steps below:
1. Insert the Windows XP CD-ROM in the drive.
2. Double-click My Computer, right-click the CD-ROM drive, and then click
Explore.
3. Go to Support\Tools, and then double-click Setup.exe.
4. When the Windows Support Wizard starts, click Next.
5. Click I agree on the End User License Agreement.
6. Type your name and organization and click Next.
7. Click either the Typical or Complete installation type, and then click
Next.
8. Verify the installation location, and then click Install.
The article Q306794 describes how to use the Network Monitor Capture Utility
It would be useful if you could identify the IP addresses and names of both
machines. I would also recommend that you Ping your own IP address before
and after the file copy procedure so that it will identify the network
traffic in the Trace Information that you capture.
To be on the safe side I would also recommend setting the Netcap Buffer size
to 4 MB, although this can be stopped sooner should it be required.
We appreciate that sometimes the advice we give, by necessity may be quite
complex, so if you feel that you need any assistance in working through the
troubleshooting steps given, do not hesitate to call our Telephone Support
Centre on 0870 60 10 100 (Customers phoning from Ireland should dial 706
5353 for technical support.), where a technician will be pleased to help
you."
Karen
Currently I have 3 systems networked on my LAN (a 4th system is off-line for
upgrades). All the systems use the Netgear FA-311 10/100 Ethernet Adapter
and are connected to a Linksys BEFSR41 EtherFast Cable/DSL Router with 4
port switch using CAT5 cabling. The latest software has been installed for
both the adapters and the router. As I stated in a previous message, 2 of
the systems are running Windows XP Home and the other uses Windows 98SE.
Jon, your last post reminds me of when I was starting the same thing with
Microsoft as you are. We beat our heads against the wall for 6 weeks before
I finally gave. This is *not* to say that you should not make the effort.
Perhaps you will be more fortunate than I was.
One of the things that I was asked to try by Microsoft was the use a
different Ethernet Adapter. For that experiment I removed the FA-311s and
used the on board RealTek 10/100 adapter that came with my motherboards. It
made no difference what so ever.
As things currently stand, I may leave the system currently running 98SE
with that operating system as it has only a small need for file transfers
and the 2-2.5 MB/s that I get when transferring to an XP machine will be
adequate. All my other machines are going to XP Home. I am still marveling
at being able to transfer a 4 GB file is roughly 6 minutes or so!
If you need any further input about my system or the investigation that
Microsoft and I under took, please feel free to email me.
Best Regards,
Karen
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce63c18$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
Kent W. England [MVP]
source of this problem.
Note that if the problem is only when starting the Windows Explorer view
of the remote share, then there is the "NameSpace" registry key that can
be removed to stop the XP machine from searching for Scheduled Tasks on
the 9x machine. Also note that if network performance in general is
poor, this could be due to auto-sense problems on the hubs and switches,
bad cabling or other L1/L2 issues.
This KB article is specific to XP and 2K, not XP and 9x, but it gives a
hint that may be applicable.
Slow Performance Copying Files to Windows 2000 Domain Controller:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q321098
"Symptoms
If you copy files from a Windows 2000-based or a Microsoft Windows
XP-based client computer to a network share on a Windows 2000-based
domain controller, network performance is slower than if you copy the
same files to a Windows 2000-based member server. You may notice this
problem if you copy many small files; however, you may not notice this
problem if you copy a few large files. This problem only occurs if you
either use Microsoft Windows Explorer to copy the files or if a Windows
Explorer window is open and connected to the target server. However, if
you use Xcopy.exe to copy the files and all of the Windows Explorer
windows are closed, you do not experience this problem.
CAUSE
This problem occurs because server message block (SMB) write operations
to a Windows 2000-based domain controller may experience a delay of up
to 200 milliseconds between file copies. "
My suggestion to discover whether this is afflicting you would be to
test a Windows Explorer file transfer versus an FTP or xcopy.exe file
transfer. If only the Windows Explorer file transfer(s) is/are slow,
then I would suggest that this problem is affecting you.
The KB article describes modifying the TCP ack timer which might not be
a bad idea on a small network, but is a bad idea on a large network as
it could cause the network to go unstable.
My suggested fix would be to install and use IPX or NetBEUI as local
transport instead of TCP/IP. Disable NetBIOS on TCP/IP. This would avoid
using SMB directly on TCP/IP and might avoid this problem altogether.
As I said, I just found this article and I haven't gotten any
confirmation that my suggested fix works. Perhaps you would like to be
the first?
--
Kent W. England, MS MVP for Windows XP
(Please respond only in the newsgroup)
Karen <sorce...@home.com> posted the following:
Karen
Thanks very much for posting the link and the article. When I was doing my
testing, both with and without Microsoft's help, I always used a single,
large file as test data. Also I practically never used Windows Explorer. I
was doing this *so* often that I had setup a special profile in the backup
program I used (Flexible Backup) which copied the source file to the
destination file. Even if I were encountering an SMB issue, it would only
be at the start of the copy and the 200 msec penalty would probably not be
perceptible in a multi-minute copy. Thanks again!
Karen
"Kent W. England [MVP]" <k...@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:Om6rV1n$BHA.1864@tkmsftngp04...
Chris
got a little confused with the recent traffic and lost
the linking message somewhere along theline but have
included a copy of it below.
I have been trying to sort out the porblem by
reinstalling the networ across the desktop and laptop.
Everything that Steve Winograd's article suggested i have
tried.
also removed the AV software and am running without for
the moment.
Some more facts before I try the suggestion from Nick Ward
the network is a simple one connecting via a
Realtek RTL 8139/810x and an NetVin NEC Compatible
network card in the Win 2k laptop.
both machine have IP addresses assigned automatically as
that's what was suggested by Steve Winograd.
Both run all other network functions and Internet
Connection sharing fast and reliably.
After much waiting I managed to sync my working files
across the two machines and they now syc files reliably
and relatively quickly.
I would hate to have to redo all that again as it took
almost 12hours.
I removed NetBEUI as Steve's article said it wasn't
needed and both machines use only TCP/IP.
File sharing is no problem andaprt from the usual fun a
games remembering about permissions I can see the network
from each machine no problem.
I will now try Nick's suggestion and play around with
Chris
got a little confused with the recent traffic and lost
the linking message somewhere along theline but have
included a copy of it below.
I have been trying to sort out the porblem by
reinstalling the networ across the desktop and laptop.
Everything that Steve Winograd's article suggested i have
tried.
also removed the AV software and am running without for
the moment.
Some more facts before I try the suggestion from Nick Ward
the network is a simple one connecting via a
Realtek RTL 8139/810x and an NetVin NEC Compatible
network card in the Win 2k laptop.
both machine have IP addresses assigned automatically as
that's what was suggested by Steve Winograd.
Both run all other network functions and Internet
Connection sharing fast and reliably.
After much waiting I manged to sync my working files
across the two machines and they now syc files reliably
and relatively quickly.
I would hate to have to redo all that again as it took
almost 12hours.
I removed NetBEUI as Steve's article said it wasn't
needed and both machines use only TCP/IP.
File sharing is no problem andaprt from the usual fun a
games remembering about permissions I can see the network
from each machine no problem.
I will now try Nick's suggestion and play around with
>> Newsgroups: micÍ
{ wÀ " ô= #ôm # ²ê ì rosoft.public.windowsxp.network_web
Jon
"Karen" <sorce...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:#RCw7l#$BHA.2308@tkmsftngp02...
> Hmm, let me think for a minute. Okay, here is the list of what I
remember.
> Please bear in mind that the system with XP on it also had 98SE in a dual
> boot configuration which helped immensely in keeping Microsoft from
initally
> saying it was the hardware.
>
> 1. Change the Ethernet Adapter
> 2. Take the Linksys Router out of the loop.
> 3. Replace the cable.
> 4. Direct connect the source and destination systems (Refused due to cost
> and practicailty)
> 5. Installed software the MS Tech sent me and ran a capture of the source
> network.
> 6. Ran a capture of the receiving network machine
> 7. Ran a capture at both source and receivng machines simultaneously.
>
> Those are the biggies that I remember. Finally I just gave up. In the
last
> few days I sent the tech I was dealing with an email relating what
happened
> when both the source and target machines were running XP. According to
him,
> he has talked to a number of people at Microsoft and no one has a clue.
> Hope this helps.
>
> Karen
>
>
> "Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce8b587$1...@news.zen.co.uk...> > news:uODOeam$BHA.2200@tkmsftngp02...
> you
> > tried ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jon
Thanks for the input Karen - I've tried everything above with no success :-(
One thing that noticed earlier is that when the dual boot machine is running
98SE, file transfers in either direction initiated from either machine
produce network collisions (indicated on the hub) even though the transfer
rate is good. With the dual boot machine running XP, I see no collisions
whatsoever in either direction. Can you confirm if you get similar results ?
Thanks again
Jon
JT
Your comment about tech support at Microsoft... "talked to a number of
people at Microsoft and no one has a clue" is absolutely appalling! If
Microsoft scanned through this newsgroup they would find a small book of
documented issues regarding slow network transfer rates. Different PC's,
different routers/hubs, items tested, software loaded....it goes on and on
and on. I even recall one user here making a comment that he was a beta
tester for XP and documented this issue. His post sounded like he was very
upset that Microsoft didn't do something about this issue when it was
reported by him during beta.
WOW...I'm really glad I gave up on XP and "downgraded" my OS. If Microsoft
wants to pretend this issue doesn't exist so be it! I do not have the time
nor money to beta test released versions of operating systems for Microsoft.
Not to mention the disrespect Microsoft is giving its users by not knowing
about an issue as critical as this.
JT
> Karen
>
>
> "Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce8b587$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
> >
> > "Karen" <sorce...@home.com> wrote in message
> > news:uODOeam$BHA.2200@tkmsftngp02...
Karen
Please od not take what I wrote the wrong way. When I said that Microsoft
didn't have a clue, I meant that they didn't have a clue as to how to
resolve the problem, NOT that they didn't know about the problem itself. If
my original post was unclear and led people to the wrong conclusion then I'm
sorry and will try to be clearer in future posts.
Actually, now that my LAN speed problem is fixed (yes, I know that not
everyone would find my [articular fix acceptable) I am very pleased with XP.
It is far more stable than my old 98 SE system and once I got used to its
quirks, very easy to use. In fact, I like it so much that I just upgraded
my main system to XP Pro and moved that vopy of XP Home to my on-line backup
system.
Now if you *really* want to talk about Microsoft being clueless about
something we could discuss the procedures involved in de-activating a copy
of XP Home from one machine in order to move it to another. I did that
yesterday morning. It *only* involved 11 calls to Microsoft (4 to the
Activation Center,3 to the Sales Department, and 4 to Tech Support).
What I finally discovered was that the people at the Activation Center seem
to believe that the copy of XP to be moved must be de-activated first by a
highly secret and very arcane procedure which they were can only be done by
Tech Support. What is this secret, arcane procedure? Well in the end it
turned out to be "format the disk". Apparently, the phrase "tech support
had me format the disk" is the equivalent of Abracadabra to the people at
the activation center since once I used it it was very easy to get a new
activation key. All in all, an interesting morning exercise! <G>
Karen
"JT" <jstr...@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:ONDH1RGACHA.2296@tkmsftngp05...
Chris
Can't help but agree, however I understand from a day or
so back someone in Microsoft is trying to deal with it.
However what isreally bugging is that I moved to XP from
Win 2k where networking and permissions was the
impenetrable bit. Having mastered this I cannot get
anyone to recognise that XP file transfers are a real
issue, given that in all other respects the network I have
is performing better and more reliably with XP.
The upshot is that until slow file transfer rates are
resolved I will not be migrating any other of our business
machines to XP from Win 2k.
I wait the solution with baited breath and don't propose
spending more cash moving everything to XP because this
issue is not being fully recognised by Microsoft.
Chris
>> > > different Ethernet Í{ wÀ Z tu± ´-?At³^
ìã Adapter. For that experiment I removed the FA-311s
billy bob
hint how it was fixed, please dont say you went back to 98.....
Thanks
Billy
"Karen" <sorce...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ed5$4WKACHA.1208@tkmsftngp02...
Karen
I would hesitate to call what I did a fix though it did indeed correct the
problem I was seeing. All I did was to migrate my remaining system to XP.
That's it. No patches, no weird configurations, no arcane startup
procedures. As soon as my main XP machine is talking (either sending or
receiving) to another XP machine, my LAN through put sky rockets! Where I
was seeing 2 to 2.4 MB/s, I am now seeing rates up to 10 MB/s for very large
files. Obviously, the smaller the file size the less through put you will
see since the house keeping of opening and closing files and what not will
increase.
The first test case I was using was a 4 GB video file which transfered at
around 10 MB/s. The second test case was a 4 GB directory containg 3,927
files which transfered at around 5 MB/s.
As I said previously, this is not a solution that everyone can use but it
did work for me and so I posted my experiences. Hope this helps.
Karen
"billy bob" <kkn...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:erjVtyXACHA.1632@tkmsftngp05...
Chris
I have been trying to sort out a similar problem on XP to
Win2k network.
What concerns me is that migrating both machines to XP
seems an expensive option given that XP is supposed to
build on Win 2k.
However I am beginning to think it might be the only one
and it dissapoints me about Microsoft.
If you have any other solutions that at least improved
file transfer times from XP I would love to hear them.
Currently file transfer time for a 20 meg file is close to
45 minutes from XP to Win 2k and 25 seconds the other way.
It is seriously affecting my business productivity.
Chris
>> > activation key. All in all, an interesting mÍ{ wÀ |
ãp&ü.t&¬©^ ìü orning exercise! <G>
Chris
I have followed this debate with interest as I have a
major problem with XP to Win 2k network. Up to 45 minutes
for a 20 meg files XP to Win 2k and less than 20 secs from
Win2k to xp.
Surely if XP is based on the tested Win 2k technology
there must be a patch to resolve the issue.
Going to XP on all my machines seems an expensive fix
which dissapoints me about microsoft XP.
If there is something you tired that at least speeded up
file transfer times I would be grateful to hear it.
The network is so slow that it is seriously affecting my
productivity and my business.
While this is not your problem I would welcome advice and
hope Microsoft is looking in.
Chris
>> > activation key. All in all, an interesting mÍ
{ wÀ # ¼ø R¤, R ts ì orning exercise! <G>
Karen
From all of my research into this type of problem, it seems to fall into one
of the sort of related groups.
The first group is those who are experincing problems related to browsing a
remote system. I have seen several "fixes" talked about but I don't know if
they work because I never had the problem.
The second group is composed of people who are encountering slower than
normal file transfer across a LAN. This is the type of problem I was
seeing.
The last group seems to be a subset of the second, that is, people who are
seeing extremely slow file transfer. This is different from my problem. I
was seeing transfer speeds cut by around 50% over what I getting with a pure
Win 98 SE environment. While my speeds were lower than in 98 SE, I was
still seeing transfer rates in the 1-2 MB/s range. The people in this group
are finding snail's pave transfer speeds. What used to be MB/s has now drop
to KB/s. It sounds like this is your problem.
I can offer two suggestions. First look in this newsgroup for this thread
"Solved my SLOW file sharing problems between two XP Pro PC's". Someone has
posted some interesting new information. I don't know if it is relavent to
your problem. My second suggestion is to simply that your Win XP install
disk and use it to create a 2nd XP system as a test and see if that fixes
your problem. That is what I did. The test system will function for 30
days which should be more that enough time to see if this is the right way
to go. Just don't activate windows on that system.
I can certainly understand your feelings about spending money for a second
(or third etc) XP system, but I had reached the point where I simply wanted
the problem to go away and I really didn't care very much how it got there.
Looking back in hind sight now, things actually worked out extremely well.
My LAN is twice as fast as it ever was before. It is actually fast enough
now that it is quicker to move a 4 GB+ video file to my basement on-line
storage system and access it from there during the process of adding chapter
points and such and making a DVD image than it is to do it from a local
drive. Accessing it remotely instead of from a local drive elimnates a lot
of head repositioning that slowed things down quite a bit.
I really hope that this helps you in some way because I completely
understand what you are going through.
Best Wishes,
Karen
"Chris" <ch...@changenavigators.co.uk> wrote in message
news:57bb01c20198$b1897e70$37ef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA13...
Karen
>> > activation key. All in all, an interesting mﾍ{掫ﾀ |
縣&�t&ｬｩ^ ��orning exercise! <G>
JerryS
PC (Pentium 3, 1gHz) connected to a Netgear MR314 Cable/DSL Wireless
Router/4 port switch with CAT 5E and out to a Cisco 678. I consistently see
download speeds of 15-19 kbps. Also on the network, using wireless, is an
old Toshiba Pentium 2-266 laptop running Win2000. It consistently downloads
files at 60-80 kbps. Qwest came over to help troubleshoot, and connected a
Win98 laptop to the Netgear. It also saw download speeds of around 65 kbps.
Naturally, I want my PC to download files as fast as the laptops do.
On the PC, I have tried changing the NIC (integrated Intel Pro 100 VE to a
3COM 3C905C), editing the registry per KB article Q315237, changing the
metric in the connection properties, removing the router, and changing
cables. Nothing helps. All current WinXP updates have been applied.
This is a real nuisance. Any ideas for a fix will be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks,
Jerry
"Jon" <an...@anon.co.uk> wrote in message news:3ce382c5$1...@news.zen.co.uk...
Karen
I have never run into this particular problem. There is a handy little
program I use which gives me access to a number of network parameters. The
program is called iSpeed and can be found at http://www.hms.com/ispeed.asp.
Don't know if it will help you but it might be a place to start.
Karen
"JerryS" <Jer...@21stCenturyServices.com> wrote in message
news:acg98...@enews3.newsguy.com...
JerryS
Thanks for the suggestion. I downloaded the trial shareware version of
iSpeed, ran the tests, and accepted the suggested changes in settings. After
a reboot, I reran the tests. No change. Darn!
I'll keep monitoring this thread for other suggestions.
Thanks again,
Jerry
"Karen" <sorce...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:#$YzJhaACHA.2044@tkmsftngp04...
Chris
Thank you for your response. While I don't really need to
transfer large files a respectable speed on my LAN would
do. I will keep a look out for more info on the newsgroup
but I have my own IT specialist on networks who installs
large networks on XP and win 2k servers and he can't get
Microsoft to respond on this one.
Perhaps I should call it quits and just migrate the lot to
XP. what i have found is after two years with 2k I
thought it was just all graphics and marketing on XP.
however it feels more like WindowsME when it comes to
networks, not transparent and not stable, unless it is
working with itself.
Steve Winograd suggests that XP always tries to force the
network to its settings unless you disable some ofthe
default settings. I eventually got files to sync by
forcing it to accept settings from my laptop administrator.
Trouble is I can't bear to be beaten. i'll keep searching.
Thanks for your trouble, wish Microsoft was as helpful
without charging the earth.
Chris
Original Message-----
>45 minutes from XP to Win 2k and 25 seconds the otherÍ
{ wÀ ÔûJ8äþJ8Ì" ì way.
Chris
I don't know if you have resolved your issue but I have
been contacted by Kent England MPV who has asked for more
details about the problem and he is going to get an
engineer to run tests specifically on the slow file
transfer rates I am getting between XP to Win 2k.
I'll let you guys know if there is any progress and any
fixes that appear but i don't know how long it will take.
Chris
>.
>
Jon
I haven't resolved the problem yet, it's getting incredibly frustrating, I'm
not used to the machine getting the better of me ! If you need me to run any
tests or try things out please let me know. It would be great if the joint
knowledge and efforts of people participating in this thread and group could
resolve the problem before this thread dies. Somebody must have a low enough
level of understanding of networking to suggest what might be going on here
!
Jon
"Chris" <ch...@changenavigators.co.uk> wrote in message
news:729a01c202a3$d885fe20$19ef2ecf@tkmsftngxa01...
chris
Copying files to Windows 200 Domain controller" Kent
England MVP put on the Community Newsgroup 18th May
http://communities.microsoft.com/NewsGroups/previewFrame.a
sp?
ICP=GSS3&sLCID=US&sgroupURL=microsoft.public.windowsxp.net
work_web&sMessageID=%253COm6rV1n%2524BHA.1864@tkmsftngp04%
253E
What I did was firstly disabled TCP/IP on both machines
and installed IPX on them both. The files then
transferred across both machines at high speed.
Initially ICS did not work so I then enabled TCP/IP on
both machines again and both the ICS works fine as does
the file transfers across both machines at the usual fast
speed. Whether simply installing and enabling IPX
without disabling TCP/IP first and then re-enabling after
the network has established the IPX link I do not know.
While I just work across a simple peer to peer network
without using a domain the fix worked fine.
I will place a message on the newsgroup to this effect
but I don't know if this would be a fix for 98SE or other
windows versions that have had the same problem.
However I am happy to give you more details if it will
help others, but the fix was ultimately as simple as that.
Chris
I tried it and sent you an emai las well.
It works.
I have just worked through the article "Slow Performance
Copying files to Windows 200 Domain controller" you put
on the Community Newsgroup and firstly disabled TCP/IP on
both machines and installed IPX on them both. The files
then transferred across both machines at high speed.
Initially ICS did not work so I enabled TCP/IP on both
machines again and both the ICS works fine as does the
file transfers across both machines at the usual fast
speed. Whether simply installing and enabling IPX
without disabling TCP/IP first and then re-enabling after
the network has established the IPX link I do not know.
While I just work across a simple peer to peer network
without using a domain your fix worked fine.
I will place a message on the newsgroup to this effect
but I don't know if this would be a fix for 98SE or other
windows versions that have had the same problem.
However I am happy to give you more details if it will
help others, but the fix was ultimately as simple as that.
Many thanks
Chris
>> with Microsoft as you are. We beÍ{ wÀ # µÙRO sR"%
p ì$ at our heads against the wall for 6
chris
You may have seen this alredy but I got a fix and this is
it, but I don't know if you can work it, as I don't know
if you can use IPX on 98SE. If not check out Kent
England MVP who gave me the article below. Maybe
something similar will work for you but check him out on
his response to my posted message today .
I have just worked through the article "Slow Performance
Copying files to Windows 2000 Domain controller" Kent
England MVP put on the Community Newsgroup 18th May
http://communities.microsoft.com/NewsGroups/previewFrame.a
sp?
ICP=GSS3&sLCID=US&sgroupURL=microsoft.public.windowsxp.net
work_web&sMessageID=%253COm6rV1n%2524BHA.1864@tkmsftngp04%
253E
What I did was firstly disabled TCP/IP on both machines
and installed IPX on them both. The files then
transferred across both machines at high speed.
Initially ICS did not work so I then enabled TCP/IP on
both machines again and both the ICS works fine as does
the file transfers across both machines at the usual fast
speed. Whether simply installing and enabling IPX
without disabling TCP/IP first and then re-enabling after
the network has established the IPX link I do not know.
While I just work across a simple peer to peer network
without using a domain the fix worked fine.
However I am happy to give you more details if it will
help you, but the fix was ultimately as simple as that.
>.
>
chris
>.
>
Jon
How are your Internet download rates on the client machine compared to the
server machine i.e how is the TCP/IP LAN connection now performing ?
Jon
"chris" <ch...@changenavigators.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6c3c01c20313$1621c8d0$37ef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA13...
chris
I am getting the same rates from both machines, no
apparent problem.
They weren't very fast to begin with as I use only a 56K
DUN on the "XP" machine. when networked the client
machine connects using ICS from the XP machine. No cable
in my area yet.
TCP/IP works fine. I needed it to be enabled to get the
ICS working.
chris
>> eachÍ{ wÀ D O áE"ÀËED%µ
> ì other.