As Microsoft slowly but surely slide down the slope of bloat, bugs, security problem one has to ask:
 
Why do I need all these services?
 
1.  File Indexing Services to report frequency of use of files -- only Microsoft care and maybe <2% known applications (this is a major HD resource hog)
 
2.  Fast User Switching Compatibility (auto) -- single user here, don't need it
 
3.   Help and Support (auto) -- yeah, like this was ever useful
 
4.   IPSEC (auto) -- nobody uses this for secure communications because it is easy to hack (SSL or something else)
 
5.   Distributed Link Tracking Client (auto) - I'm not part of a domain why is this loading
 
6.  Messenger (auto) -- yeah I don't need to send/receive alert messages
 
7.  MS Software Shadow Copy Provider (manual) -- still never will need this just filling up an already massive registry with it's entry
 
8.  Net Logon (manual) -- again not part of a domain thankfully it isn't Auto
 
9.  Net Metting Remote Desktop Sharing -- again wasted registry space
 
10.  Network Provisioning Services - again, not part of a domain
 
11.  Secondary Logon (auto) - permits alternate starting process under different credentials (aka you have an app that needs full Admin rights) - oh joy what a nice security hole.
 
12.  Smart Card (manual) - again, don't have a smart card reader
 
13.  System Restore (auto) - turn off, just don't need or care, I backup critcal data myself, this is a MAJOR resource hog
 
14.  Task Scheduler (auto) - I have no tasks scheduled why is this running?
 
15.  TCP/IP NetBIOS Helper (auto) - oh please, NetBIOS what is this circa 1988?
 
16.  Volume Shadow Copy -- what is this Take 2 from #7??
 
And these are just the services, haven't touched what is loaded in the Startup.
 
Task Manager reports 54 processes and 705 threads running after my boot up -- just sitting at the desktop with an empty systray with 780 MB committed out of 2GB physical.
 
Bloat, no wonder it takes Windows so long to load.  Mac OSX boots is a fraction of the time < 20 seconds from the time I hit the power button to a working desktop.  WinXP boot time > 2 minutes.

Some good points, and from your avatar I'm assuming your an Apple user and it seems you know a lot for a Apple user which you must agree most are complete morons.  However don't get into Windows being unsecure especially since Symantec reported Windows XP as being the most secure Operating system for the last half of 2006, with Apple's Current Version of OSX coming in 3rd.

I write software for Windows platforms cause that is the market share.  But to get things done without having to get "involved" in the OS, I use my MacPro.
 
Regardless, this isn't a Mac vs. PC thread -- it's a simple list of the services and features that Microsoft force on you so that you too can waste CPU time on these services that most people don't need and don't want.  A more efficient solution to Microslops OS is to "register" only services that are needed for that user's configuration -- every time Windows loads it has to go thru the Services list no matter what the setting is (Auto, Disable, manual) and check to see if the registered service ( executable/component) is actually where it claims to be on your system.
 
As far as security, you're kidding right?  Microsoft's biggest weakness, you can tell the OS NOT prompt me whenever any component installs on the OS.  OSX, you don't have that option, something trys to install you know about it and have to enter you admin password to permit it to do so -- NO turning this off.  And this is exactly how most spyware/viruses make it on a WinXP platform -- giving the user the choice to be flexible on security is a BIG mistake -- but on I guess they can just say "well the user let it happen" - still doesn't change the facts.
 
I find it Odd that Symantec would suggest Windows is the most secure OS -- wouldn't this be like saying "you don't need our anti-virus software" -- not really in their best interest is it?
 
Do you really wanna compare security vulnerabilities on WinXP vs. OSX?  Those daily WinXP security patches just don't happen on OSX.  Sure OSX has some security patches but no where near the frequency of any Microslop OS.
 
Anyway, back to services -- why install so many, why no intelligent registration, why handicap the majority user base for a minority of users that might use one or two of the services.  This is the Microsoft way, and reflects in Vista, build services and feature with no real value to the end user -- just slows down the end user experience.
 
Rob.

I agree I hate to get the thread going in another direction but it looks like apple is making up everything about them being so secure, and don't get me wrong microsoft isn't my favorite company either especially with making me get windows vista to utilize DirectX 10, but if I were Microsoft I would sue for slander and defamation.  Again though I hate to go in a different direction but there are alot of features that seem quite unnessecary.

Yeah, start a separate OS security thread.  This one is really about Windows OS bloat and excessive services and features that very few want or need.
 
Rob.

When I say that you don't need most of those features because you are not on a domain, do you realize that there are a lot of people who are?
 
True there is a lot of bloat but take any modern software package and you'll see that there is a lot of stuff that most users do not use. They are there for the few who use them.

Yes I know most companies (large and small) will have a domain and PC's logging into that domain.  But, the business world has long since become the minority in terms of market share as compared to the home/power user.  It is pretty rare for the largest market share (home user) to setup a domain.
 
But this is typical of Microsoft's philosophy, build features that handicap the majority to satisfy the minority.  But rather than provide intelligent defaults/options so that you can make everyone happy, they don't -- Microsoft do just enough and take the easy road to revenue.
 
How many people that use a PC even know where to go to find all these services and/or items in their startup?  Maybe some folks here, but the typical user has no clue -- they can't figure out why most of their RAM is consumed and why their PC is slow.
 
And Vista has only made this situation worse, not better.  So you can see the direction Microsoft progress (or digress) and will continue to do so until PC users finally say Ok, I've had enough.  
 
If you look at the actual processing power of even a low end CPU today, it has more than enough capability, even the low end video cards -- yet these components will appear to be dog slow on Vista.  Why is that, code bloat, poorly designed OS, layer upon layer of compatibility code, services that aren't need but loaded, etc. etc.  
 
But the typical consumer will blindly accept, "oh you want Vista, you need to upgrade your hardware" -- hey wait a minute, isn't that exactly what Apple was doing 25+ years ago that everyone revolted against and what ultimately reduce Apple's market share?
 
Vista doesn't really "do more for you", there really isn't anything in it that should need major hardware upgrades for it to run smooth.  Yet it does.  Why is that you ask?  Bloat bloat bloat, lazy, bloat, release it, revenue, bloat, more bloat, lazy, more bloat, leverage, bloat...
 
Microsoft's OS's just keeps getting fatter and fatter and slower and slower and people believe "that's just the way it is" -- no no no, it's not the way it should be.  If I wrote code as poorly as Microsoft do, I'd be out of a job.  If I designed my software as poorly as Microsoft do I'd be out of a job and/or my product would not sell.
 
Rob.

I should have realized from your icon that you are out for blood. True MS has a lot of bloat but they cater to a larger market. It is easier not only for them when they have one OS.  
 
Remember when they had 2 different kernels for the business and home markets (9x vs NT).  Things are much easier now. True OSX is a much better and leaner OS than windows but you have to admit that apple have an easier chore when it comes to hardware support and target market.

Microsoft actually have 8 Vista OS flavors 4 32bit and 4 64bit.
 
Not out for blood, just pointing out the fat in the OS and how well they've convinced and herded their market share into thinking it's "normal" to expect hardware upgrade with a new OS.  It is this very same philosophy that killed off Apple's market share back in the 80's.
 
Apple's move to Intel CPUs and Intel chipsets/motherboards is unbelievably significant for them.  It has opened up a word of flexibility in their MacPro line.  Leopard will most likely be the icing on the cake as current consumer ponder going to Vista -- Leopard = no hardware upgrades required, runs faster, does more.  Vista = hardware upgrades required, runs slower, not much more to offer.
 
I'd just wish Microsoft would open their eyes for once and stop dishing out junk and mediocrity.  Who knows, their next OS Vienna is supposed to be from ground up with no backward compatibility -- maybe this is the real Microsoft OS -- Vista is just another Windows ME.
 
Rob.

 
Would you recommend me disabling all of the above services?

 
Yes but the base kernel is the same (actually 2 versions for 32 bit and 64) makes developing drivers much easier. Surely you can see beyond the marketing "8 flavour" talk. Specially since you develop software for windows.  
 

 
You sir are out for blood. If you really are a software developer you should realize how much easier it is to program when you have a concrete idea of the hardware your programs are going to be run on other than for a generic system. Note I am not putting down leopard. If I wasn't into games  so much Apple would be a viable choice. Of course the better choice would be to install linux and recompile the kernel but I guess not everybody is capable of that.  
 

 
Nothing is as bad as windows ME (except maybe for Steve Job's turtle tops)   . From where did you get this news. If they do that they would be loosing their biggest advantage i.e. supported applications. I hope that they do not do it.

You obviously don't program professionally as this statement:

doesn't really make any sense.
 
1.  A programmer does not encompass all that is software -- just too much to know for any single programmer, even more so with any Windows based development efforts.
 
2.  Programmers come in many disciplines just as doctors do.
 
3.  8 versions, I need to know the difference in ALL of them because they affect some of the decisions I make with what I can and can't rely on in my software.
 
4.  Hardware is only relevant for anyone who wants to produce device drivers, beyond that application/game programmers call the device drivers and use it accordingly.
 
Lets stick to Windows inefficiency -- really don't want to do the Apple vs. PC debate again.  
 
Actually, if someone would bring all the Linux components together into a single package (or target packages) that is end user friendly, they would have a winner.  Red Hat and other's just have NOT done a good job at that.
 
Scarslilpyro,
 
No, you'll need to know what other games/apps need.  If you're not in a networked environment then you can disable 2,5,6,8,10,15.  If you're not worried about slow Add/Remove load times then you can disable 1.  4,9,13,14 is probably safe to remove for home users.  13 - you have no restore points so if you need to restore from a bad install, you can't do it easily.  Regardless what service you disable, just remember what you have now (take a screen shot) and you can also re-enable later if you find you need it.
 
Rob.

You're not part of a domain... But I'm willing to bet you're using XP Pro, which is designed for a Domain.
 
Home doesn't offer a lot of those services.
 
So basically, STFU on the domain portion when you're using software that is designed to run on a domain.
 
Of all those services you listed, there are maybe 4 that I don't use at work on a domain.

 
Um, the largest market share is still the Corporations. I don't have a clue where you're getting your information from.
 
Lots of home users have Windows.. but they're not all running up to date version of Windows, say 2000 or higher. That cuts your "market share" down.
 
Now lets move to who is using XP and up. Your market share was just cut down even more.
 
Now, more into companies running 2000 and/or XP and that's the vast majority of any medium sized company and run. Small companies would be using maybe ME or 98, but most likely 2000 or higher.
 
Get your facts down before you go about ranting without backing your claim up.

STFU pretty much relegated you to ignore status.
 
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/R [...] 88E00.html
 
But hey go find your own numbers.  If you look at the diagram, small, medium, large business still combine to be less than Home.  Also, NOT all businesses (especially the smaller ones) use a domain either (we don't and were a small business).

Actually, if someone would bring all the Linux components together into a single package (or target packages) that is end user friendly, they would have a winner.
 
They'll never overcome the market share problem.  It doesn't matter how fast, secure, easy to use, cheap, or whatever it is.  The installed base of Windows is just far too large, and people are resistant to change.
 
It doesn't matter how good any other operating system is until one comes along that runs current software written for Windows natively and flawlessly.  When that happens it'll be worth noticing.
 
Is your point that XP is bloated?  Ok, you win, it is.  Is your argument that OSX is functionally a better operation system?  Ok, you win, it is.  
 
The salient point is that it doesn't matter.