1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Windows explorer.exe using alot of memory.

Discussion in 'Software' started by ErisDS, 3 Aug 2005.

  1. ErisDS

    ErisDS What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 May 2004
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi There,

    I recently formatted my pc, and installed XP with sp 2.
    My machine had done the usual and been gradually getting slower.
    However since i re-installed xp my pc has seemed slower than i expected it to be. I have been checkingTaskManager to see what is going on, and constantly find explorer using 60,000K+ of memory. I know its a big process, but is this kind of memory usage normal? I dont think so.
    My pc takes ages to become usable once it has booted (i cant run applications for quite sometime as all the start-up processes take priority). I havent got anymore programs running on it than i did before, yet it seems to be slower than pre-format.
    I have thought about replacing explorer with another shell, I guess it would be fun, but I'd rather solve the problem than avoid it.
    Any ideas?
    Thanks,
    Eris
     
  2. ErisDS

    ErisDS What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 May 2004
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well i searched the net high and low for an answer to this.
    I found several people on different forums complaining of the same problem, and all of them getting no replies like I did.

    So I used filemon and regmon from sysinternals.com to track down the error.
    I found that every 60 seconds Explorer.exe is looking in around 10 locations 2 or 3 times for "netshellicon" and coming back with a "NOT FOUND" error. I didn't know whether this was the issue or not, but i downloaded microangelo on display (there are other progs that do this like tune up utilities) and used the "rebuild icon cache" feature. Automatically Explorer.exe reduced the amount of memory it was using and is now at a normalish level.
    Doing this at anytime reduces the memory Explorer uses.

    However, my computer is still searching for netshellicon in locations like the following:
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\netshellicon
    C:\WINDOWS\system\netshellicon
    C:\WINDOWS\netshellicon
    C:\WINDOWS\System32\Wbem\netshellicon
    and also in:
    C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\Common\Tools\WinNT\netshellicon
    Thinking that Visual Studio might hold the key I have uninstalled it. I have cleaned up my registry using 3/4 different tools and have manually deleted references to netshellicon (from windows search assistant?) and to visual studio.
    Explorer still does its search and fails every minute. A google search turned up nothing on "netshellicon", any ideas anyone?
     
  3. John Cena

    John Cena What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    1 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    818
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nice. Just a question, whats your explorer ram usage now?
     
  4. ErisDS

    ErisDS What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 May 2004
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still quite high around 40K, but thats better than 60/70.
    The difference is very noticable. Im stll hoping someone will come up with some other ways to reduce it as well.
     
  5. Dngrsone

    Dngrsone What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    94
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a new one on me... it sounds like a malware thing, but explorer.exe is not a program easily modified or simulated... i searched my Win2K machine for that library and it is not found.

    Try running in Safe Mode and see if Explorer continues to search for that .dll. I'm thinking you have some form of malware using explorer to do some of the dirty work and part of it (the malware) is missing (ie netshellicon.dll).
     
  6. John Cena

    John Cena What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    1 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    818
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mine is around 15K right now on a system that has been up for 2 days (Win2k3).

    A few things to keep in mind:
    Explorer.exe GETS HUUUGE if you view folders with lots of images. This is because it has to cache the thumbnail views etc.

    Also, any utility that attaches to explorer.exe (including context menus) take up memory.
     
  7. ErisDS

    ErisDS What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 May 2004
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mine is always above 30K.
    Its really annoying me, I feel that there is something somewhere stopping me from getting the most out of my pc.
    I have tried loading up in safe-mode. Explorer is only around 15K when in safe-mode but i cant check to see if it is looking for "netshellicon" cos FilemonNT wont run.
    I have tried turning off all of the start-up programs in msconfig and restarting my pc, but Explorer still searches for this elusive file!

    I am lost as to what I can do. This is the first time i've ever had sp2 on my pc, and it seems to slow it down alot. Im tempted to do a reinstall of XP, but I hate the fact that Format and Reinstall seems to be the only answer everytime I have a problem. :waah: I hate XP... but I am useless at linux...
     
  8. K.I.T.T.

    K.I.T.T. Hasselhoff™ Inside

    Joined:
    1 Jan 2005
    Posts:
    624
    Likes Received:
    1
    i have a feeling that 'netshellicon' i something rather untoward (no very good) cause i have performed a cpmplete search of two operatrional installs of xp sp2 and have found no reference to 'netshellicon'.....i would go with the idea of it being a virus of some sort
     
  9. ErisDS

    ErisDS What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 May 2004
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Media Player 10?

    I just uninstalled it, and now my computer doesnt seem to be searching for that dumb file anymore.
    I also can magically play videos. I was having a problem where in both media player and winamp my videos were appearing all yellow, too bright and just...yuk.

    My explorer is still using a ridiculous amount of memory though around 50MB. Rebuilding the system cash always reduces it to around 35, but thats still...ridiculous. Most computers are around 15-20???
     
  10. SteveyG

    SteveyG Electromodder

    Joined:
    23 Nov 2002
    Posts:
    3,049
    Likes Received:
    8
    Mine's at around 36000K with SP2, and pretty much always is around that kind of size. Before SP2 it was always around 15000K :(
     
  11. Blademrk

    Blademrk Why so serious?

    Joined:
    21 Nov 2003
    Posts:
    3,988
    Likes Received:
    86
    just checked mine and it's running at around 26k
     
  12. ElThomsono

    ElThomsono Multimodder

    Joined:
    18 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    3,405
    Likes Received:
    713
    14,500 here, SP1 rules :)
     
  13. specofdust

    specofdust Banned

    Joined:
    26 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    9,571
    Likes Received:
    168
    Sp1 and 22k which is fine for a dual desktop.

    Stripping all the crap from your install probably helps abit, along with never ever under any circumstances installing SP2.
     
  14. dom_

    dom_ --->

    Joined:
    4 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    8
    mine is usually 15-19K sp2 too.

    you thought about changing, if it bothers you that much?

    litestep for example
     
  15. hitman012

    hitman012 Minimodder

    Joined:
    6 May 2005
    Posts:
    4,877
    Likes Received:
    19
    Mine's ~30K SP2. I can't remember what it was before, but I'm sure it was less...

    Windows runs like a charm though considering what crappy hardware I have.
     
  16. Cthippo

    Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

    Joined:
    7 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    102
    And people wonder why I cling so doggedly to my WinME. Tell me again what the advantages of XP are?
     
  17. ErisDS

    ErisDS What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 May 2004
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    I installed win 98 on an old (ancient) lappy the other day, and was amazed...everything loaded so fast.
    AVG took up next to no resources, and ran so fast on boot u missed it if you blinked. Im almost tempted to use it on my machine :eeek:

    I have considered both getting rid of SP2, and changing explorer for another shell. Some advice on other shells would be cool.
    However, I cant do any of that til I get a new spare HD to back all my files onto (fiance owes me one) so for now im sitting tight.

    I have swapped my AVG 7.0 for a trial of Norton Antivirus. AVG was using alot of memory.. but it loaded much faster than Norton, and Norton seems so controlling. I have to turn off most of the features to be able to post on forums and play online games...

    Hardware keeps getting faster and more efficient, but software seems to go the other way and i wonder if we're really getting anywhere...
     
  18. specofdust

    specofdust Banned

    Joined:
    26 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    9,571
    Likes Received:
    168
    It doesn't suck as much as ME? I would say 2000 would be the OS of choice if you don't like XP, no ME.
     
  19. John Cena

    John Cena What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    1 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    818
    Likes Received:
    0
    Windows 98 was so fast for me too.

    Then i tried to play a dvd, open a program, and surf the web at the same time. It crashed.
     
  20. Cthippo

    Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

    Joined:
    7 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    102
    Sad to say that I'll probably end up with Win2K on my next machine as I want multiple processors and ME doesn't support them. I did get a primitive linux box up and running just before I went on vacation and guess what? Linux natively supports multiple processors and 64 bit processors as well. For now, I'm going to stick with ME and try to learn linux, and if I can't get that figured out by the time I'm ready to build the next box, then I'll go ahead and get 2K.

    I really want to print a computer ad just so I can put at the bottom "Cthippo recomends ANYTHING except Microsoft Windows XP"
     
Tags:

Share This Page