Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums


Experienced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Guest_Jim_*

  1. I'm for this too. I just find it a little annoying how with both this and Defraggler you have to click on the file name instead of the line to select it. Most other programs I use aren't that particular.
  2. If that is the case, that Recuva is keeping the list of recoverable files in the RAM I'm sure that would do it. If a pc is much like my calculator that would easily do it and should have an easy fix, by simply dumping portions of the list on to the hard drive as a temp file and creating a new list in the RAM. I wrote a program on my calculator which made a list of numbers over 3,000 entries long (don't ask why, it's a long story) and would reach a Buffer Overflow error at 88% because of the constant opening, appending, and closing of the list. I simply set it to only work on a tenth of the list at a time and append each tenth on to the previous one. Not only would the program finish running this way, but would go a lot faster. True the same thing couldn't be done with Recuva because it doesn't know how many files it will find (the calculator program covered a certain range and it would be a tenth of that range at a time, not of the list of numbers it would find because it was finding them) but it could store only say 10,000 in memory at a time as an example. When dealing with over one million entries that would probably speed it up. I don't really know how this would be accomplished with computer code, but I'm willing to bet there is a way, provided that is the problem.
  3. You could try uninstalling CCleaner, restarting the computer, and then reinstalling CCleaner.
  4. How is it not a bug that some programs you tell the UAC to grant administrative permissions keep them from session to session and others don't when you do the same thing? The same actions shouldn't give different results with a computer, provided nothing has been changed. I'd say we all have issues here with our egos and ignorances of being a power user, including you Caldor. I haven't had the UAC on for months and I have had no ill effects from it. I may very well just be lucky, or I may be intelligent to avoid and circumvent problems, and only one who knows more than me about computers and knows what I've been doing can judge that. Would someone please move this thread to another forum, I generally don't think an argument about the UAC belongs in the CCleaner forum. Somebody may actually try to use this to fix a problem with CCleaner and the UAC, and right now nothing is being said that would help them.
  5. Caldor, wouldn't it be logical to trust most software programs, as it is their job to write programs? One would think that they wouldn't want anything bad to happen because of their program and would probably do things to keep third parties from making that possible. I would just like to say that I do trust that no third party has added malware to the programs I have, partially because I'm not that paranoid. Besides, how much software do we have on each of our computers that comes from a source we don't trust? If there is some software from somewhere we don't trust, then ask yourself why you even have it. Also, think about it this way, what about programs that need the administrative permissions to run period, with or without malware? You'd either have to risk harming your system to run them or allow them to do what they are suppose to do. If you know what you are doing then the UAC shouldn't be needed, and as it still has bugs (such as not remembering which programs it can let by all the time) is it worth having on all the time? The are supposed to be changes to it in SP1 so maybe that will fix it. Finally, shouldn't this debate about the UAC be moved elsewhere, like the Windows Security forum? It really hasn't got much to do with CCleaner any way, aside from it being affected.
  6. Not positive but I think I know how to fix this issue with the UAC without turning it off. By setting a program to run as administrator, which I'm pretty sure bypasses the UAC, it is added to a list of programs that can bypass it. At least, that's what you'd think. What I have observed is that the program isn't added to the list, the publisher is. I haven't had the UAC on for some time, though I probably can turn it back on, but I'm pretty sure programs like Firefox only asked about permission once whereas another program I use asked every time I ran it. The only difference between the two that I could find in Windows was that Firefox has Mozilla as its publisher but the other program didn't. Maybe the UAC requires the name of the publisher to remember or to verify what can and can't run unchecked. CCleaner doesn't give the name of the publisher. Maybe by adding that information the problem will be solved.
  7. Try turning off the Start Menu and Desktop shortcuts options, that should speed it up.
  8. Desktop Shortcuts slow it down as well, probably because it has to check each shortcut one at a time and make sure they go somewhere. You really shouldn't need it on all the time unless you've just uninstalled something and had changed the shortcuts to it. Definitely helps that 2.04 shows what it is doing.
  9. The D drive was the one with the 4GB and I don't have it set to make system restore points. There's only one program installed on it and the rest is primarily just images so I never see any point to having system restores for it (beside I need all the room I can get on that partition for the cached files there). That does seem right though, I've got eight restore points on my C partition currently and there are nine of those files, but one of them is different from the rest, much shorter name.
  10. Guest_Jim_*


    I'll try, haven't caused it for a while though. If I recall correctly colors on the screen go crazy, everything can still be seen, but the colors are messed up. The music spikes and I have to stop Media Player to get rid of the noise. I'm pretty sure explorer gets messed up as well, in that you can not open anything! You can close what you've got but nothing will open because the mouse still works. The only way I'm able to restart is to do a hard shut down. Everything is fine after it reboots. I'm not sure which version of Defraggler did it and I'm also not sure if it may have been dependent on the kind of defragging. I'm trying to duplicate it now, but I'm just defragging the files it finds, not the drive. The problem doesn't occur immediately, it takes quite a while, not sure what percentage Defraggler was at though. I just defragged the fragmented files on my hard drive, with Media Player going and nothing happened, and I don't plan on defragging the drives, unless I can be sure the temp files won't be made, to see if that's what did it In case this helps, I have a Nvidia Geforce Go 7600 with Forceware version 158.24 for 32-bit Vista for the 7-series of mobile cards. That's the best I can do.
  11. I figured out how to speed up versions 2.0 and above for me, and why those version became slower. Try turning off the Start Menu and Desktop link checks. Those were moved in after 2.0 from the registry cleaner to the regular cleaner. Noticed in 2.04 (which says what it's doing) that it was taking a while to check those, so I disabled them and now the speed is back.
  12. This feature isn't available on Vista machines and I think I know why. Microsoft moved the registry key somewhere else, but I've tracked it down. The new position is HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Classes\Local Settings\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\TrayNotify. I deleted what was in there and restarted explorer and that did the trick. Would be nice to see this fixed in future versions.
  13. Guest_Jim_*


    I've noticed that if I'm listening to music when Defraggler is running it causes my system to crash. Generally, defragging should be done with no other programs running.
  14. Recuva runs fine on Vista, I've used it several times without incident. I have noticed that the files will sometime get a different name, but the extension isn't changed.
  15. Same here, the CCleaner registry cleaner doesn't go deep, just gets obvious, noncritical, entries. Primarily I get installer references and extensions popping up in the list. The references are if I had an exe somewhere, ran it, then moved it and the extensions will be replaced if I do anything with that file type again. But then, that's me, may not be the same for everyone.
  16. Have you done a disk check? It can't hurt any way.
  17. The file had an odd name, just a series of letters and numbers inside of brackets. I do think that the temp file issue might only exist on Vista because I haven't seen it happen on my XP machine. I was wondering if such a temp file might be made in the new version because they said they removed the system driver. I'm not sure, but it would seem to me that if removing that speeds up the process maybe it also removes some things, such as the temp file. I can't give you an answer about how long it will take to defrag a badly fragmented hard drive. I can tell you that it takes a lot more than an hour on my desktop with a 160GB drive to defrag the freespace (I'm not sure how long though, because I have to stop it to do other things).
  18. I finally got rid of the massive file by coping the contents of the partition to my external hard drive and reformatting the partition. I'm curious if anyone has any idea how the file was made, and if the newest version will still make it. I'm not willing to test it myself because of how hard and long it takes to get rid of the file.
  19. I can only think of two solutions. One is get a copy of Linux with a Live CD capability (I know Ubuntu has it), have the disc in when you boot up your computer so you can run Linux off of the disc. Use a partitioner (Ubuntu does have a partitioner when using the Live CD, I know because this is how I put it on my desktop to try it out) to make a new, decent partition on your hard drive. Then install Windows to that new partition (check to make sure you'll have enough room). Now your computer should boot from the new partition and give you access to everything on the original partition. This is probably the best option as it would possibily cost nothing, though I'm not sure how you're going to get a copy of Linux, as you need a computer to download and burn it to a disc. Maybe a local library can help. Here's the second idea. If you can't get it to much I suggest you get a cheap new hard drive to add to your computer or a replacement for your laptop's hard drive and a drive enclosure (make sure it can interface with the drive). What you can do for a desktop, where two hard drives are attached, is install Windows on the new hard drive, allowing you to boot your computer. You will have to make the old hard drive a slave in that case, I think but I'm not sure, and I unfortunately don't know how to do that. It shouldn't be hard to find out. For a laptop you will probably need to put in the new hard drive, which may be best done by a computer store, as that may keep from voiding the warranty (contact wherever you got it from to find out about that), and then install Windows on the new drive. Hook the old drive up to the drive enclosure, which will make it into an external hard drive. What this does for you is gives you back your computers without losing any data, though programs will have to be reinstalled on the new drives. By having the old drives hooked up you can copy all of your files to the new ones. In any case, good luck, and hopefully there is something less drastic than what I've suggested that will work.
  20. I had done it with a pdf file I no longer needed, and it opened fine each time. I'm trying to do it again now with a different file that I could put up, but it isn't working now. I swear it was opening up fine after each recover yesterday, though I can't remember if I looked after the Gutmann, but I've just been trying to duplicate the results and I can't. Even the single pass has made it unreadable. Very odd. I just downloaded the same pdf to try again with that and no luck. I guess there isn't any problem with the secure deletion. Sorry about that, I don't know why it didn't work yesterday, but today works great. I will say this however, I do believe there should be an easy way to securely delete specific files. Perhaps a Secure Cleaner for CCleaner, separate from the normal cleaner, that can have different options selected from the regular cleaner. Also, could Recuva have the ability to not show some files, like those it sees as unrecoverable, or poor quality? That would make securely deleting files faster because only those that need to be wiped would be, and not all the other files CCleaner gets, that are inconsequential, and could shrink the list in Recuva by showing only those it can definitely get.
  21. Regseeker claims to support Vista, but didn't when last I used it, and I don't plan on trying it again! It made null values in the registry which were then read and write protected, so I couldn't delete them or use a backup. It was not good.
  22. Be careful with Regseeker. When I ran it on my laptop it so destroyed the registry I had to reinstall Windows! Three times, because I didn't know Regseeker was doing the damage. I never had any problem with it on my XP desktop, but Regseeker and Vista don't get along, for me anyway. CCleaner's registry cleaner has caused any problems though, which is why I love it.
  23. I just tried that, doing a secure deletion then seeing if Recuva could get the files. It did, even the Gutman 35 pass didn't cause its status in Recuva to fall from excellent. The names were changed, so I couldn't tell what they were, but the extension didn't. Maybe Recuva can't be beaten, or CCleaner wasn't actually doing the over passes, or something else entirely, but until the issue is resolved it doesn't appear the files are made unrecoverable.
  24. With the current version when you have it defrag an entire drive it will, after defragging the files, defrag the free space.
  • Create New...