Jump to content

Willy2

Experienced Members
  • Posts

    1,825
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    The moderators know

Recent Profile Visitors

8,543 profile views
  1. - Users of OEC shouldn't check the "Minimize OEC to system tray". Then OEC will start to show some very "irregular behaviour" after a while and then OEC requires a restart. The developers are aware of this bug but it seems that fixing this bug is not the most pressing issue for them. - For those who use the program: there are more of this (very) small and "non lethal" bugs. The program still needs more "polishing". - The developers are working to implement "a better integration with GOOGLE". No, no more details because the developers didn't want to share more of what they are up to. We'll just have to wait and see what the future will bring. But this information above does sound promising.
  2. - OE Classic (PRO version) has advanced to version v4.7.
  3. Translation (from dutch): I would like to remove the last 3 months worth of updates. Who can help ? Reply: What kind of updates ? Windows updates ? CCleaner updates ?
  4. Yep, that's one of the remaining "weak spots" in the program code. I have experienced the same thing many times over. I don't know whether or not there is a solution for this. And whether the developers are willing and able to fix this "weak spot" in the program code. One also has to keep in mind that there multiple programs (including Windows itself) that also regularly read and write data from/to disk. And that can/will interfere with Defraggler as well.
  5. - OE Classic has advanced to version v4.6.1. https://www.oeclassic.com/
  6. @smc1979 Perhaps we can give some some suggestions for software programs that need "more development" ? including some software here from the "CCleaner company" ? I certainly do have some suggestions ................ I understand that Windows Repair was a REAL burden because every time Microsoft issued a new version of their Operating system the program had to be improved (ASAP when possible).
  7. - The users of OE Classic who have installed version v4.5 should remove that version (with the "removal tool" that comes with the program) and go back to version v4.2. There were still too much bugs in the program code of version v4.5. In v4.5 the user can choose which rendering engine is to be used, like e.g. the MS Edge rendering engine (recommended). - Version v4.2 still has some "stability issues" that need to be resolved in a future new version of OEC. When this issue wil be resolved depends on the decisions made by the developers of OEC. It seems that these issues can be avoided by unticking the box called "Minimize program to system tray". - The developers are still looking for translators for a few languages (see the information provided in a previous post in this thread).
  8. - Problems again with the combination of REAL Player (RP) and CCleaner. REAL Player kept crashing and I was forced to re-install the program. And here CC started to report that there were A LOT OF files generated by RP. I again see a connection between the MSEdgeView.exe of MS Edge. This seems to indicate that CC is here not to blame. See also the pictures for more information.
  9. That post only says "under review". Or is this a different way of saying "no more new improved DF versions" ?
  10. If CCleaner has decided to stop the development of Defraggler then they should make an announcement here on the forum and pin it.
  11. Perhaps the bugs, flaws and "weaknesses" in the program code are still too complicated to be solved in a reasonable time ?
  12. No, this news is new for me. It's a REAL REAL REAL pity.
  13. - Does it matter that I have a program called CLEANMEM installed on my Windows system. It regularly reduces the amount of "in use" memory. That memory is then moved to the "Standby" part of memory. Would that interfere with DF ? Would that throw DF "into disarray" ? It shouldn't matter because then the memory management should take the information from the "Standby" part of the memory instead. I'll exclude DF from being cleaned by CLEANMEM and see what happens next. Fingers crossed.
  14. - Yep, it happened again. I used the (simple) "Defrag files" option to defrag a number of *.mp4 files. And then DF moved a number of defragmented files to the beginning of the drive AS WELL. Then I had to MANUALLY move these files to the end of the drive again. - An analysis of the files that were moved didn't provide a clue what the logic was behind this moving.
  15. - This is a follow up for the post from february 2022. Defraggler keeps "annoying" (to put it friendly) me. - I think (!!!!) I found a pattern in the program why DF keeps moving files towards the beginning of a drive without my consent. - Firstly, I have the default Window defragmentation utility turned off. Secondly, I moved all the *.mp4 files (even the "......... . mp4.lnk" files) to the end of the drive as much as possible. - Then I added a few .mp4 files to the drive. REAL PLAYER allows me to download these *.mp4 files from e.g. YouTube. These *.mp4 files were stored in fragments scattered around the drive based on the whims of Windows. Then I ran Defraggler to defragment these newly added *.mp4 files by using the "Defragment files" option and NOT the "(Defragment &) move to end of the drive" option. - Here is it where it was getting interesting. It seems DF took a number (10 ??? 20 ???, I can't remember) of defragmented *.mp4 files (only *.mp4 files ????) which were NOT (!!!) selected by me in DF and moved them to a spot on the drive as close as possible to the beginning of the drive (without my consent). - The odd thing is that when I used the "(Defragment &) Move files to the end of drive" option then I was able to move A LOT OF / tonnes of files to the end of the drive without DF moving a SINGLE file towards the beginning of the drive (without my consent). In other words: this "un-approved" moving of files towards the beginning of the drive only seems to happen when the user uses the (simple) "Defragment files" option. - Why did do / is doing DF this ? It looks like DF in this case (with the "defragment files" option) creates an "internal list" of files to be moved (& defragmented) and that DF somehow adds one or more files (only *.mp4 files in this case ???) to that list and treats those newly added defragmented files as though they were not defragmented at all. Perhaps when the user selects say 10 (e.g. *.mp4) files then DF add an 10 additional (e.g. *.mp4) to that "internal list" ? But it remains unclear WHY DF is doing this and what the logic is behind this "moving files wihtout my consent". - Well, the developers of DF should start improving the program code of DF right away. But I fear that improving DF is NOT (very) high on the list with priorities of the developers of CCleaner's development team.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.