Dustin wrote:
> >> I'm finding that browsing is becoming way to slow when the
> >> browser is trying to render pages containing lots of blocked
> >> domains.
> >
> > Set your DNS to manual in Services >
> > <http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm#Note>
> > A Hosts file larger than 135 kb slows down a Windows PC regardless
> > of OS.
>
> Much more so under the win9x flavors.
I believe I've read in the past that win-9x is much better able to
handle large hosts files compared to XP.
Virus Guy wrote:
> Dustin wrote:
> > > <http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm#Note>
> > > A Hosts file larger than 135 kb slows down a Windows PC regardless
> > > of OS.
> >
> > Much more so under the win9x flavors.
>
> I believe I've read in the past that win-9x is much better able to
> handle large hosts files compared to XP.
Heh.
That line from winhelp2002 that says:
"Editors Note: in most cases a large HOSTS file (over 135 kb)
tends to slow down the machine."
used to read as follows:
"Editors Note: in most cases a large HOSTS file (over 135 kb)
tends to slow down the machine. This only occurs in W2000/
XP/Vista. Windows 98 and ME are not affected."
It obviously took too much precious space to include references to
win-9x/me on the winhelp hosts-file page.
I've been running my win-98 machines for years with hosts files that
exceed 700/800 kb in size. It's only within the past year that web
browsing is really getting bogged down by site-blocking caused by hosts
blocking.
Virus Guy wrote:
> A Hosts file larger than 135 kb slows down a Windows PC regardless
> of OS.
Which we now know to be wrong because:
> That line from winhelp2002 used to read as follows:
>
> "Editors Note: in most cases a large HOSTS file (over 135 kb)
> tends to slow down the machine. This only occurs in W2000/
> XP/Vista. Windows 98 and ME are not affected."
The underlying reason (as siljaline alludes to) is the DNS client
present in Win-XP and higher, which caches DNS results. I can find no
Microsoft document putting an upper limit on the size of the HOSTS file
that is compatible with the DNS service - some non-microsoft sources put
the upper limit closer to 100kb.
Because win-9x/me never had anything similar to the DNS service, it
can't be limited by HOSTS file size - at least not for the same reason.
Virus Guy <Virus@Guy.com> wrote in news:4F181EED.EE8E684@Guy.com:
> I've been running my win-98 machines for years with hosts files that
> exceed 700/800 kb in size. It's only within the past year that web
> browsing is really getting bogged down by site-blocking caused by
hosts
> blocking.
Which only makes sense, As your machine has to read the hosts file line
by line (unless it's already cached it) every single time you enter a
domain. I don't care how fast/slow your machine is, trolling hundreds of
entries will slow it down a smidgeon.
As far as DNS services go, your win9x machine still understands what DNS
is, and will still make use of it. It can't provide DNS routing services
to other machines without 3rd party software, but it still makes use of
DNS as a client to resolve and let you surf.
With regard to running windows 98 for years, I don't see the point in
doing so from a technical perspective. You aren't more secure than an NT
box, although I realize for some silly reason you think you are. Fact
is, short of some specific NT services, your win9x box is just as
0wnable as any other machine. In some cases, much much more so. It's
easier for a virus to totally 0wn a win9x box because that machine has
poor/almost not present permissions on files. FAT32 does have drawbacks
from a security perspective, but you wouldn't know that.
A properly configured system although not 100% hackproof is still
considered secure for most purposes. Running seriously OUTDATED OS and
other apps tho, is asking for it. I know you don't believe anything I
and others tell you, but could you please do one tiny favor? Stop
proclaiming win9x is safer. it isn't.
--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too
many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and
the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts
Dustin wrote:
> Virus Guy<Virus@Guy.com> wrote in news:4F181EED.EE8E684@Guy.com:
>
>> I've been running my win-98 machines for years with hosts files that
>> exceed 700/800 kb in size. It's only within the past year that web
>> browsing is really getting bogged down by site-blocking caused by
> hosts
>> blocking.
>
> Which only makes sense, As your machine has to read the hosts file line
> by line (unless it's already cached it) every single time you enter a
> domain. I don't care how fast/slow your machine is, trolling hundreds of
> entries will slow it down a smidgeon.
>
> As far as DNS services go, your win9x machine still understands what DNS
> is, and will still make use of it. It can't provide DNS routing services
> to other machines without 3rd party software, but it still makes use of
> DNS as a client to resolve and let you surf.
>
> With regard to running windows 98 for years, I don't see the point in
> doing so from a technical perspective. You aren't more secure than an NT
> box, although I realize for some silly reason you think you are. Fact
> is, short of some specific NT services, your win9x box is just as
> 0wnable as any other machine. In some cases, much much more so. It's
> easier for a virus to totally 0wn a win9x box because that machine has
> poor/almost not present permissions on files. FAT32 does have drawbacks
> from a security perspective, but you wouldn't know that.
>
> A properly configured system although not 100% hackproof is still
> considered secure for most purposes. Running seriously OUTDATED OS and
> other apps tho, is asking for it. I know you don't believe anything I
> and others tell you, but could you please do one tiny favor? Stop
> proclaiming win9x is safer. it isn't.
>
Thank you, and you're right - he won't believe you nor understand why
that is.
FromTheRafters wrote:
[....]
>>
> Thank you, and you're right - he won't believe you nor understand why
> that is.
>
OT - any snow there yet FTR?
Virus Guy <Virus@Guy.com> wrote in news:4F181AFF.1ACCF5C2@Guy.com:
> Dustin wrote:
>
>> >> I'm finding that browsing is becoming way to slow when the
>> >> browser is trying to render pages containing lots of blocked
>> >> domains.
>> >
>> > Set your DNS to manual in Services >
>> > <http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm#Note>
>> > A Hosts file larger than 135 kb slows down a Windows PC regardless
>> > of OS.
>>
>> Much more so under the win9x flavors.
>
> I believe I've read in the past that win-9x is much better able to
> handle large hosts files compared to XP.
You should re-read what you thought you read then, as you're wrong on this
one. Surprise surprise...
--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too
many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and
the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts
Dustin wrote:
> > I believe I've read in the past that win-9x is much better able to
> > handle large hosts files compared to XP.
>
> You should re-read what you thought you read then, as you're wrong on
> this one. Surprise surprise...
Did you not read the follow-ups to that post before replying?
Win-XP and higher has well known problems with hosts files larger than
100 - 135 kb when the DNS Client service is running. The DNS Client is
an automatic-startup service by default.
Windows 98 has no such service.
Now take your foot out of your mouth.
Virus Guy <Virus@Guy.com> wrote in news:4F18BC76.EB07BB63@Guy.com:
> Dustin wrote:
>
>> > I believe I've read in the past that win-9x is much better able to
>> > handle large hosts files compared to XP.
>>
>> You should re-read what you thought you read then, as you're wrong
>> on this one. Surprise surprise...
>
> Did you not read the follow-ups to that post before replying?
While it might surprise you, I tend to read all of your posts. They're
usually funny from a certified technician/malware research expert point
of view. You try to be witty and come off as having superior
intelligence to that of many of us here, but you fall right on your face
trying.
> Win-XP and higher has well known problems with hosts files larger
> than 100 - 135 kb when the DNS Client service is running. The DNS
> Client is an automatic-startup service by default.
Windows XP doesn't have the problem, a specific service! does. You do
realize it's one of MANY services XP can run? The hosts file was
*never* intended for the purposes you and many others use it for now.
It's a bandaid approach, imo.
> Windows 98 has no such service.
Re-read what I wrote. I didn't say windows98 had a service for dns
specifically without making use of 3rd party software.
> Now take your foot out of your mouth.
It wasn't in my mouth in the first place.
--
Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too
many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by,
and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote