Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

Digerati

Experienced Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Digerati

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

471 profile views
  1. V1.30.730 I am a bit disappointed this has not been resolved. It has been going on with every version of Speccy since I built this system in Oct 2015. Speccy reports: +3.3V 2.028 V +5V 3.367 V +12V 0.048 V CMOS BATTERY 1.524 V If my PSU was outputting those voltages, this computer would not be running. Note HWiNFO reports: +3.3V 3.305 V +5V 5.010 V +12V 12.168 V VBAT 3.048V Those voltages are right in line with my multimeter readings. Since other HW monitors report correct voltages, it is not the sensors. I mus
  2. Unchecking Recently Typed URLs under IE (my default browser) fixed it. Thanks. BTW, I tried to thank you by clicking the Like This button but it said I have reached my quota for the day. Interesting since I have given none.
  3. Thanks for your reply. I used the URLs. For example, https://www.wellsfargo.com. CC wants me to close IE to clean so I will post back.
  4. I have the Address Toolbar enabled in the Windows 10 taskbar. I like to keep links to several sites I visit frequently in the Address Toolbar but they are gone after a reboot after cleaning with CCleaner. I have added the links to the Exclude list but that does not work. What controls the links in the Address Bar? That is, is there a setting under Cleaner > Windows I can uncheck to keep those entries? Currently, none of the Advanced options are checked. Under system, only Recycle bin, Temp files, Clipboard, Dumps, Chkdsk, and Windows Log files are checked. It would be great
  5. I just ran Speccy 1.27 (with no problems) for the first time in several months then realized it had been awhile since I checked for an update. I saw an update was there so I downloaded and installed 1.28. When I ran it I almost immediately got my first BSOD ever with Windows 10 Pro 64-bit. It also reported the same error with CPU-Z as others here have noted. A quick Google search led me to this thread where I decided to add my "ditto". I am glad to see that Piriform is aware of the problem and, based on past experience with Piriform, I am sure an update with the fix will be released soon.
  6. Not happy at all. It looks like it was designed by a grade schooler. Example - look at the alignment of the tabs. They look like they were stuck there by some little kid wearing gloves. The product may work well, but it now looks totally unrefined. And considering all the animosity out there for registry cleaners, it should look totally professional. It is now far from it.
  7. My apologies for dredging up an old post, but my question seems applicable. Many of my colleagues are unhappy that CCleaner free attempts to foist unwanted add-ons on our systems if users do not select the custom install option. I personally don't have a problem with that AS LONG AS users have the option to opt-out - and CCleaner provides that opportunity (without having to wait for the Slim version). I understand and accept that developers need to feed and shelter their families too so if I have to uncheck a couple options to prevent unwanted stuff foisted on my system in order to get
  8. I have been helping (rather, trying to help) someone with a similar problem trying to delete Chrome history with CCleaner not working. If you don't mind being a Guinea Pig, please see if this works. Start Chrome, Click on the "Customize and control Google Chrome" button (the 3 line button at the top-right), Click on "Settings", Click on "Show advanced settings...", Scroll down and near the bottom under "System", uncheck "Continue running background apps when Google Chrome is closed", Exit Chrome. Now see if CCleaner cleans all of Chrome's crap. And please, post back with the results
  9. As a regular volunteer helper on many tech support forums, I often recommend CCleaner for cleaning the clutter from our systems. I use it all the time myself. It is the ONLY registry cleaner I ever recommend because (1) it is conservative, and (2) it prompts to back up the Registry. By conservative I mean it does not try to glean every last bit, but rather just the clutter. Sadly, some dedicated registry cleaner are so arrogant they don't even provide the option to back up first. Systems that have been running for a couple years may have been through a couple hardware changes, should
  10. You mean you don't like various menu options scattered across and buried within multiple menus and submenus? lol I agree. There is plenty of room next to Analyze, Defrag, and Stop buttons to add the other options. That's a good idea. Do note most of the options are available with the right-click context menu - but again, some are nestled in a sub-menu. Having said that, in terms of beta testing, all the buttons do work - so that is good.
  11. It must be noted automatic defragging would require a "real-time" presence. That is, some chunk of code would have to be loaded at every boot. I personally am concerned with all the programs that attempt to load up components at start, consuming even more precious RAM. With bad guys forcing us to load a full arsenal of anti-malware tools, and with anti-malware makers forcing bloated unneeded features on us every time we turn around, it is no wonder 1Gb of RAM is not enough anymore. It used be considered "more than we'll ever need!" And the challenge with running in the background (BTW, this
  12. Huh? I did not disagree about speed - I said defragging in normal mode is not as efficient. You having to uncheck files simply proves my point as now those files will remain fragmented. On a crowded drive, fragmented files can contribute to more fragmentation. And the fact that XP's own rudimentary defragger was able to defrag the same image in less than an hour in Safe Mode surely suggests that Safe Mode is not the problem you would have others think. I am not looking for Defraggler to be the fasted defragger around, but it should be comparable. Huh? It appears you have difficul
  13. Nope - sorry Arther but that is not a big mistake - in fact, Safe Mode is the ONLY way to ensure the maximum number of files can be defragged - for the boot drive anyway. If I have to boot normally, when all kinds of additional drivers and applets are running (with open files), that means an inefficient defrag and another problem with Defraggler.
  14. I am still very disappointed with the performance of Defraggler. I was encouraged when the Change Log for v1.01.073 listed the following: - Completely new Defrag algorithm, which is faster and better designed. - Defrag freespace now a separate option. - Updated UI. - Minor bug fixes. However, it is worse than before. I tested it on my 100Gb WD HD that has ONLY 8.4Gb of space used - that is, there is still a whopping 90+Gb of free space available. To ensure there would be minimal interference, I booted into Safe Mode, then used CCleaner (with "older than 48 hours" unche
×
×
  • Create New...