Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral
  1. To whom it may concern, I am running a Vista box and a Win7 box each with a WD My Book Essentials 3TB Ext HDD (WDBACW0030HBK-NESN) that also show ''Analysis Failed''. I also own the same but in 2TB drives (WDBACW0020HBK-NESN) that analyze and defrag just fine. I frequently use quick defrag: df X: /QD For the 3TB drives, I use the OS defrag: %windir%\system32\defrag.exe X: until Piriform.com gets this issue fixed. I hope it will be soon. I'm migrating to 4TB and 8TB drives soon. Thank you for your time. John Callaghan, Eng.
  2. To whom it may concern, I have used Defraggler since version 1.04 . I've been extremely happy with it (especially compared to the OS defrag). I am a Software Engineer, I usually don't complain as I understand what sometimes seems like a small enhancement can amount to a huge modification for the application programmers. However, I find I must say that I've found the defragment operation of version 2.03 to be 3 - 5 times slower than version 2.02 . There should be very little difference in speed from version to version as this is handled primarily by the OS API. Possibly it is a loop somewhere in the code that misses a limit then goes up to the language max (since it appears to be slow for each non-contiguous piece defragged). In my experience it can sometimes be a global type or value that can cause the. Or maybe object logic, not sure. Anyway, hopefully this is not asking for the world (i.e. hopefully a trivial fix for you). I've re-installed 2.02, so for now I'm a happy camper. Thank you. John Callaghan, Eng.
  3. To whom it may concern, Thank you very much for adding the setting: "Show initial results in detailed view" This is a big help ! Thank you. John Callaghan, Eng.
  4. To whom it may concern, I need to be able to SET "View Detailed Results" instead of having to constantly click the "Summary Results" each Run Time to get "Detailed Results". Previous Ver 221 and Earlier all had "Detailed Results" as it's default. Then the default just changed, with the enhancement of "Summary Results" - Without the ability to set it back. I am a computer engineer, this should be very easy to impliment. Thank you. John Callaghan, Eng.
  5. To the Developers and Forum personnel, I want to thank you very much for adding in the 'per second' TimeStamp on Registry save files I requested. This is a big help to me and hopefully others as well. Thanks again !
  6. I did get a msg back saying they thought it was a good idea and will be passed on to the developers, so I hope this enhancement is done. Since I requested this, I have accidentally overwritten a reg save. Even though I'm very careful, this would avoid any mistakes like that. Yes, I usually put a '-b' or '-2' (sometimes '-c' or '-d' -or- '-3' or '-4' -- if 3 or 4 revs are able to be done within a minute). Thanks for your input and support. Much appreciated !
  7. Please include 'seconds' in the timestamp of registry save files eg: cc_20080702_1732.reg --> cc_20080702_173259.reg Then, if you do more than one registry clean within a minute, it will timestamp the files correctly - no chance of accidentally overwriting the last registry save file -and- no need to change the save filename to make it unique. I use CCleaner many times a day on many PC's, this would a big help to me and to any tech doing the same type of work. Thank You.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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