Forums | Search | Archives

 All Forums
 Cool Edit
 Cool Edit 2.1 is really slow?
 
Author  Topic 
bberg6671


Location: USA


Posts: 4


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:54 am 

Hi All,

I installed and reinstalled CEP 2.1, and now the program is SO slow on my computer!!! REALLY SLOW, like 3 minutes to start, etc. I have Windows 98, and it just seems like there is something wrong.

Has anyone else been experiencing this?

I have about 2 gigs of free memory, and a decent size of ram, so what can it be? me?
Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 10:40 am 

a) How fast is your CPU ?
b) How much is a "decent size of RAM" ?
c) What are your "Virtual Memory" settings ?
d) Do you have any other programs running ie...Startup programs,AV..?
e) Did you previously have Cool Edit Pro 2.0 installed ?

Or, any other versions of Cool Edit for that matter.
Go back to top
ProSupport


Location: USA


Posts: 32


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 11:34 am 

Hey bberg6671,

If you are using Windows 98 you may also want to take a look at this Knowledge Base link below. This will walk you through the best ways to optimize your system for Windows 98 and for Cool Edit Pro 2.

http://support.syntrillium.com/kb/kbDetail.html?127

This should help out a great deal with problems like what you are describing.

Let us know how this works out for you.

- Pro Support
Adobe Systems Inc.

_________________

Go back to top
MusicConductor


Location: USA


Posts: 1524


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:32 pm 

3 minutes to start? Time to clean some viruses out of your computer.
Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:58 pm 

I hate it when people don't give any feedback. I was also gonna suggest a defrag, but this doesn't quite sound like that's the problem. But still, it would have been nice to know if they fixed it, and if so, what the problem was. (3 minutes?! Maybe that was a slight exaggeration.)
Go back to top
AMSG


Location: Sweden


Posts: 594


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 2:05 pm 

William Rose wrote:
I hate it when people don't give any feedback.


But he just posted today...not everybody can/wants to be online everyday. So maybe he'll post later? But I agree that it can be annoying if people don't bother to answer.
Go back to top
bberg6671


Location: USA


Posts: 4


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:16 pm 

ok, sorry for not giving feedback first. And thanks to those who are here to help.

Memory 255 MB of RAM
Virtual Memory 32-bit
I keep basics running in the background of my computer.
Pentium III
I have had CEP pro 2.0 since it was released. (pro 1.x before that)
I also like long walks on the beach (just kidding)

This is why I am puzzled.

thanks all,
brandon
Go back to top
SteveG


Location: United Kingdom


Posts: 6695


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:36 pm 

I'm with MC. Have you run a virus check on this machine? It sounds as though something running in the background is using up a staggering amount of resources, and nobbling the machine.

_________________
Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 4:25 pm 

I can't ignore the possibilty of a virus being just the culprit. Not with my recent luck. And I know as well as anyone that they can be inexplicably discriminating. TIP-> Stay away from Integrity Master. ;)

But, if and when you've been able to rule that out, try uninstalling, and then reverting back to 2.0. A limited number of users have had some trouble getting 2.1 to run as fluidly as previously installed versions.

By the way, "Virtual Memory Settings" ? Right click "My Computer", left click "Properties", left click the "Performance" tab, then hit the "Virtual Memory" button.

I still think his claim of 3 minutes must've been exaggerated. Disapprove
Go back to top
Pro_Support





Posts: 85


Post Posted - Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:39 pm 

Sometimes if you have a lot of DirectX effects on the computer, CEP will take a long time scanning for them. Is this when the delay is? Does the splash screen say "Scanning Effects..."?

If so, then this should only happen the first 1 or 2 times you run the program...

_________________
-Pro Support
Adobe Systems Inc.

Go back to top
southernitaly


Location: USA


Posts: 2


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:17 pm 

Don't know if this is the problem you are experiencing, but here's my saga:

I am using Win98SE, 512MB, AMD 1.7GHz. I had installed CEP 2.1 soon after it was released. The program started quickly like CEP 2.0. A few days later, I updated my McAfee anti virus files. Bad move. After that, I noticed that CEP 2.1 took a long time ( maybe a minute?) to open. I also noticed this with other, but not all, applications.

The fix:

I checked out the McAfee web site to see if there were any reports of similar slowdowns. Some folks did see similar behavior, but on just certain programs. McAfee's solution was to load the new anti-virus engine and try again. I was already using the latest version, but reloaded anyway. No difference.

So, I went into McAfee and disabled the anti-virus checks on the Cooledit program folder. Now CEP 2.1 starts up quickly, like before. I scanned the folder with McAfee just to be sure that there wasn't any virus contaminating the folder and everything checks out. I don't particularly like leaving parts of my disk vulnerable to viruses, but that seems to be the only way around this problem for now.
Go back to top
bberg6671


Location: USA


Posts: 4


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 4:32 pm 

Thank you!!
No viruses, but that McAfee idea may work. Could you please give me more details on how to do that? how did you go into McAfee???

thanks, and thanks to everyone who has been helping along the way.

brandon
Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 5:52 pm 

You know I'm glad you've had an epiphany here, but when, in my first reply to your post I asked "Do you have any other programs running ie...Startup programs,AV..?" the "AV" stands for Anti-Virus. And when you replied "I keep just the basics running in the backround" I sure wouldn't have thought Mcaffee AV would fall in to that category.

Anyway yeah, many anti-virus packages neccessarily consume an enormous amount of resources. All the time.

Oh, to disable Mcafee (and anything else you might like to temporarily keep from loading when you start Windows) do the following.

Left click your "Start" button, left click "Run". In the box that appears, type "msconfig" without the quotes. Click the "Startup" tab, then uncheck the Mcaffee related items, there will be more than one.

When you want to re-enable these items, do as above, and just re-check them.

Hope it works for you.
Go back to top
Matheu


Location: Netherlands


Posts: 26


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 6:13 pm 

I also had this McAfee problem, but not only in CEP2. It seems to slow everything down. After switching system scan off (the on-access part) it works fine again. Now I'm just using Download scan and Internet filter. Just have to remember to use the right mouse button and klick the "Scan for viruses" context menu when using floppy/CD/DVD/Zip disks.

Cheers,
Louis
Go back to top
southernitaly


Location: USA


Posts: 2


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 6:50 pm 

There's also a way to just disable the cooledit program from the virus scan. This is safer than not running Macafee at all. It's not too straightforward, but here's how:

I'm running version 6, so your version may have a different menu system.

Left click on the shield icon in the lower right of the screen. Select "Run". Click on "Pick a task". Click "Change my virus scan settings". Click "Configure VShield background scanning". Click "Customize your VShield settings". Make the title of the menu is "System Scan Properties". Select the "Exclusion" tab. Click "Add". Then click "Browse" and locate the CEP program directory. It's usually in "C:\Program Files\coolpro2" folder. Keep the "Include subfolders" and "File scanning" boxes checked. Click "Ok" and then "Ok". You can then close the background scanning settings menu.

Now try starting CEP 2.1 and see if things start up faster.

One note, though. I have noticed that McAfee seems to forget that I excluded the CEP folder the next time I reboot. I haven't checked this out completely. Maybe I forgot to click one more "Apply" somewhere?

Good luck!

Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 6:57 pm 

Pardon me but, Eff that. It is not unsafe to temporarily disable virus scanning. Unless you go to a bunch of warez sites and open a bunch of e-mails........Forget it. Sorry.
Go back to top
groucho





Posts: 334


Post Posted - Thu Jun 12, 2003 11:46 pm 

William Rose wrote:
Pardon me but, Eff that. It is not unsafe to temporarily disable virus scanning. Unless you go to a bunch of warez sites and open a bunch of e-mails........Forget it. Sorry.


You know, maybe I'm just a special case, but I've never seen the need for anti-virus software at all. I mean, obviously you don't open e-mail attachments from people you don't know. You watch what you download. You use your brain. I've been online for years and I've never had a virus. And after the first couple years I stopped using anti-virus software since it seemed to take up a lot of space for no real reason. Never had a problem.

Maybe I should knock on wood or something but it's my impression that viruses don't really pose much of a threat as long as you're not totally dim.

Chris
Go back to top
ozpeter


Location: Australia


Posts: 3200


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:12 am 

Good grief, Chris, you've been lucky! Current viruses (eg bugbear) can put together some very convincing emails based on what they find in those of your contacts. I've only got caught once so far - when my antivirus software hadn't been updated, needless to say - but I still open any email these days with all my fingers crossed (which makes mouse operation tricky).

- Ozpeter
Go back to top
Flingel


Location: United Kingdom


Posts: 38


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:16 am 

Quote:
Chris:
I mean, obviously you don't open e-mail attachments from people you don't know.
Take care, these guys are getting increasingly clever....

Flingel
Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:34 am 

Hey groucho, up until very recently, I would have agreed with you 100 percent. In fact, that's why I started to reply above the way I did. Old habits.

But. I had a recent run in with a virus that apparently I had ahold of for quite some time, and it kept me from opening cooledit pro 2.0
Just cooledit pro 2.0, even though it existed in dozens of files.

So slight was it's effect, I pretty much dismissed the notion that it could have been virus-related. And that cost me a lot of hours. I'm ashamed to add them all up.

So, I can't really trash AV in totality, but I agree. To have Mcaffee or Norton running full time is the most resource draining, performance robbing, cycle-hogging thing you can inflict on a pc. And, entirely senseless. Common sense, and a decent contained scanning utility is all you need. Personally, I have a shortcut to a scanner on my desktop, and if I download something questionable, I just drag-and-drop to the shortcut and I'm done.

But, to say there's no use for any of it is a bit of an overstatement. That's why I cut myself off. Viruses do happen. And it would be my luck to have insisted somebody shut off their AV utility, then they either forget, or don't re-enable it correctly, and then blah blah blah.......
Go back to top
ozpeter


Location: Australia


Posts: 3200


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 2:59 am 

Quote:
So slight was it's effect.......
Et tu, William?! :)

- Ozpeter
Go back to top
Graeme

Member
Location: Spain


Posts: 4663


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 3:31 am 

William Rose wrote:
To have Mcaffee or Norton running full time is the most resource draining, performance robbing, cycle-hogging thing you can inflict on a pc. And, entirely senseless. Common sense, and a decent contained scanning utility is all you need. Personally, I have a shortcut to a scanner on my desktop, and if I download something questionable, I just drag-and-drop to the shortcut and I'm done.


You can automate this further, without any real penalty. Many download managers offer the option to pass any file downloaded to your specified AV software. I use Download Accelerator Plus and it any download is so treated (it will also check any email attachments if you try and open them. If you catch these things on the way in, it can save a lot of hassle later.

Using this combination means the AV is not sitting there and consuming processing cycles until it is called for - which is exactly how it should be.

_________________
Graeme

Don't forget to join the new CEP forum at audiomastersforum
Go back to top
groucho





Posts: 334


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:20 am 

Hmm. Maybe I've been very lucky. I'm still wondering though how at risk I actually am, given my setup. I only have one e-mail account that receives attachments and that's hotmail (which has some kind of virus scan thing they offer for all downloads). My main e-mail account is a text-based, unix account which is incapable of opening attachments at all. As far as I know (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong) there is no real way for viruses to travel other than through e-mail attachments (or downloads), correct? So if one's attachment-opening is done *very* cautiously (and rarely - I have to admit I seldom open attachments from people I know, even...) then really, isn't a virus sort of a long-shot?

Chris

Go back to top
AutoGhash


Location: Canada


Posts: 48


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:46 pm 

groucho wrote:
Hmm. Maybe I've been very lucky. I'm still wondering though how at risk I actually am, given my setup. I only have one e-mail account that receives attachments and that's hotmail (which has some kind of virus scan thing they offer for all downloads). My main e-mail account is a text-based, unix account which is incapable of opening attachments at all. As far as I know (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong) there is no real way for viruses to travel other than through e-mail attachments (or downloads), correct? So if one's attachment-opening is done *very* cautiously (and rarely - I have to admit I seldom open attachments from people I know, even...) then really, isn't a virus sort of a long-shot?

Chris



Ok:

You're right about attachments. If text is all you can recieve, you can't get a virus from email unless someone sent you the binary dump of a virus, which you would then have to MANUALLY copy into a notepad, save it as an exe file, and THEN run it. So as long as you don't accidently follow that process Big Grin you're safe from your text email account.

As for hotmail, they keep up to date with McAfee virus scan. However, any virus fix can only come after the virus itself has been released, so there's always a minute chance you can get a virus from downloading an email attachment. However, the chance is as small as you can possibly get without never transferring files to your computer (since Hotmail's McAfee is going to be updated far more often than anything on YOUR computer). You'ld practically have to get the virus DIRECT from the maker.

More risky are programs that aren't viruses at all, but just contain instructions to delete certain vital system files. These are very difficult or impossible for virus scanners to pick up. However, since these ones aren't viruses, they don't spread automatically, and again you'ld have to get it straight from the maker.

Even though you're pretty safe email-wise, you can still get viruses the "old fashioned" way by downloading contaminated programs or inserting contaminated floppies into your drive. It's a good idea to have a virus scanner: at the very least, schedule it to run once a week. Most viruses don't wreck your machine immediately. This way it doesn't hog your background resources except when it's running, and you can schedule that.
Go back to top
zemlin


Location: USA


Posts: 1156


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:57 pm 

I have no antivirus software on my DAW. I don't do email on my DAW. Besides plugins, I don't install any software on it either. It is connected to a network, but all other peers on the network are virus protected. I periodically scan the DAW from another computer.

_________________

Karl Zemlin - www.cheap-tracks.com
Host of the World Wide Cool Edit Collaboration Procedural Debate
Go back to top
VoodooRadio


Location: USA


Posts: 3971


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 2:52 pm 

Quote:
I have no antivirus software on my DAW. I don't do email on my DAW. Besides plugins, I don't install any software on it either.
Same here. FWW, I wouldn't dream of running "our" internet computer (in the house) without virus protection. Shy

_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
Go back to top
ozpeter


Location: Australia


Posts: 3200


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 5:07 pm 

What spooked me recently was when someone put some html code in a post here that had floppy drives chattering all over the world. What else can be hidden in a simple forum post?

- Ozpeter
Go back to top
William Rose


Location: USA


Posts: 467


Post Posted - Fri Jun 13, 2003 5:46 pm 

As a sidenote, aside from viruses, another risk for networked computers, in addition to pc's surfing the web (which is very much a network)is remote manipulation.

My ISP is MSN, and their DSL service comes with a default-enabled NAT firewall. Immensely secure. The IP addresses assigned to me exist in one of five regions set aside for private networks, making my very existence virtually undetectable to anyone trying to find me.

However. Surfing the web, a company called Xupiter, without my consent, altered my registry, changed my homepage(repeatedly), added a full length toolbar to Internet Explorer, created a folder in my root directory, and installed an application and startup item.

Those capabilities are extremely powerful. Or at least, their potential, is unlimited. And there's no way a novice would have any idea how to get rid of it.

I think, Norton or Mcaffee would have caught something like this. So, chalk one up for those guys, I guess.
Go back to top
jonrose


Location: USA


Posts: 2901


Post Posted - Sat Jun 14, 2003 2:23 am 

A friend into systems strategy pointed out to me that even HTML can be a problem...

---------------------------------

<html>
<form>
<input type crash>
</form>
</html>

---------------------------------


This can crash IE with the following error:

"Unhandled exception in iexplore.exe (SHLWAPI.DLL): 0xC0000005: Access
Violation"

It's appears to be a null pointer overwrite, so it's not easily exploitable...

But this HTML can also crash Outlook, Frontpage, and all the Microsoft programs that use the shlwapi.dll library to render web code.

So apparently, plain HTML is a dangerous language!
Heh-heh! Big Grin

Best... -Jon

_________________
Go back to top
AMSG


Location: Sweden


Posts: 594


Post Posted - Sat Jun 14, 2003 3:56 am 

Yes, zonealarm is a good firewall.

It's also good to have a program that scans for spyware. That can also be very irritating.

I for one do have antivirus, firewall and I do scan for spyware now and then.
Sometimes the program finds some spyware in the registry. Very annoying! I looked up what it was and it was something from a bigger site which offered guestbooks and so on. Nothing illegal or so...
I think this is annoying. That even more reliable ones start to do this...

And to the ones without a virusprogram. You've been lucky:) But the fact is that in sweden lots of computers get contaminated without the owner ever realizing it at first. But then little problems start to show up and they wonder what's happening. The problem is that normal sites can get hacked too and replaced with a virus. This happened to a friend of mine. His bandsite got hacked and got replaced by some other code.
Go back to top
AutoGhash


Location: Canada


Posts: 48


Post Posted - Mon Jun 16, 2003 1:46 pm 

William Rose wrote:
As a sidenote, aside from viruses, another risk for networked computers, in addition to pc's surfing the web (which is very much a network)is remote manipulation.

My ISP is MSN, and their DSL service comes with a default-enabled NAT firewall. Immensely secure. The IP addresses assigned to me exist in one of five regions set aside for private networks, making my very existence virtually undetectable to anyone trying to find me.

However. Surfing the web, a company called Xupiter, without my consent, altered my registry, changed my homepage(repeatedly), added a full length toolbar to Internet Explorer, created a folder in my root directory, and installed an application and startup item.

Those capabilities are extremely powerful. Or at least, their potential, is unlimited. And there's no way a novice would have any idea how to get rid of it.

I think, Norton or Mcaffee would have caught something like this. So, chalk one up for those guys, I guess.


The reason that this happens has nothing to do with your ISP's security: if you can view webpages, you're at risk to certain bits of code. The fact is that innocent code can be used in harmful ways (like making an infinite loop of prompt boxes, or the input type="crash" example given by jonrose). If you can view the code, your computer will follow the instructions... there's no way around it.

Get a firewall and get a virus scanner, but most importantly, get a brain. It's the only thing that will protect you... you learn to spot the sites that are going to give you trouble.

[edit: "get a brain" is not directed at anyone in particular... it's just general advice Cool ]
Go back to top
SteveG


Location: United Kingdom


Posts: 6695


Post Posted - Mon Jun 16, 2003 3:54 pm 

AutoGhash wrote:

[edit: "get a brain" is not directed at anyone in particular... it's just general advice Cool ]

Not even realcooledit? Surely it must apply to that d***head!

_________________
Go back to top
   Topic 
Page:


Powered by phpBB 2.0.11 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group