mr don

I noticed that when Defraggler is scheduled to run, it runs the commandline version of Defraggler. It does so automatically, which is a good thing. However, when it runs, there is nothing to show it is running! Harddisk activity increases, & the task manager shows DF.exe running, but other than that, nothing visually to show it is doing anything! Is there a way to add an icon in the tray to show that it is running? Perhaps an icon that shows percent complete, ie, 1%, 2%, 99%, etc, so a user can "keep track" of the fact that defraggler IS indeed running, and that it IS almost finished? Those 2 things are the most important ones I can think of right now. After all, CCleaner has an indicator icon to let people know it is running in the background. I am not asking for a full on defraggler where you can click it to show defraggler, but at least if they see a Defraggler icon & it shows percentage done, it will be much easier to know what is going on! Here is what I want in a nutshell: - Defraggler indicator icon in the system tray when it runs the scheduled scan. - Percent complete indicated on that icon. (How long do I have left to wait?) - Right-click gives user an option to pause, or even cancel a defrag (in case user gets in a hurry & has to shut down the pc, but doesn't want kill DF process because of the risk of losing data. Some people have hundreds of gigs. The ability to pause or stop would be wonderful) - Left-click gives user a message so they do not get confused & think they are running a GUI version of Defraggler. Perhaps it could be like this: "You are running the commandline version of Defraggler. DO NOT shut down the computer, nor kill this process until it is complete to avoid data loss"

You are correct. You may be able, however, to use the Windows ME defrag utility for Win 98 (Overwrite the defrag.exe with the Win ME one so when you call it up, it uses the Win ME one, or just run it "portably". Additionally, there are other scan programs that may possibly work under 98, such as Auslogics, IObit, JK Defrag, etc. Hope this helps! Although I do like Defraggler, & I wish for a version that will run under 98 myself. I sometimes have a program that I have to run (racing game with steering wheel) that will not properly install or run under XP, not even under "98 compatibility" mode. - There are a few things you can use under win 98, such as Extract Now to extract all your ZIP, RAR, 7Z, Iso, etc. - Then, there is Cornice viewer, Ria Viewer, XN View, P3do Viewer etc that you can use for an image viewer in win 98. - There is a Revolutions pack for 98 that you can install off Softpedia that lets you update 98 to have Win ME, 2000, or possibly XP icons. You can do it manually, but I believe it also includes a patch to enable true 32 bit color icons in 98, instead of 256 total colors. You can use Firefox 2.0.20 in 98, or something small like The World browser, Browzar, etc I believe. I haven't tried Chrome, Safari, or Opera to see if they work under 98, although they are good browsers too. Hope this helps!

Haha! That is funny! I am scared of using extensions check, because I believe at times, I have had CCleaner suggest ".EXE" as a great extension to get rid of. And, I certainly do not want to do that, or how will I run my programs? I just think the extension check is a little too dangerous & perhaps will stop as many computer users from having a "dead" pc after running! I am not sure if CCleaner helpfully suggests this after having removed some nasty malware from a user's computer that was responsible for killing their ability to run .EXE (but I have a fix for that as I emailed an anti-spyware company & alerted them to the damage that AVE.EXE malware (fake security software in a user's application data folder marked as a hidden file) did. They were very helpful, & even sent me a fix for EXE files. I had one already, but theirs worked even better. I am not sure if having .EXE disabled at one time caused CCleaner to erroneously suggest it or if it was something else, but, I feel like tons of problems may be avoided. Remove .EXE anyone? How about .Mp3? or, other "unused" extensions? The other two checks that cause the 2cd & 3rd most problems are the active X & shared DLL ones. But I do not see them as critical as the extension check. I usually scan with the top 3 unchecked as that kills 99.99% of registry problems you have with CCleaner registry check. Then I go back with Active x checked & then missing DLL. I inspect the entries. It is pretty easy to see what is or isn't safe on those two, but I do recommend removing the extension check, because I can imagine if users take out the ability to run .EXE, their computers are hosed!

Hey, thanks man! You are awesome! Thanks also, Willy. Yippeeeeee!!!!

You can select multiple drives in the latest versions of Defraggler. - To select all drives, select the first drive, then hold down Shift Key, then select the last drive. - To select individual drives, hold down CTRL while clicking drives with your mouse. - To select all, but deselect a drive in the list, select the first drive, hold Shift Key down, then select the last drive. Let go of Shift Key, then hold down CTRL & unselect a drive. Defraggler will work on the drives, but one at a time, not all at a time. I agree that it is confusing to not have a stronger visual cue of what is happening. No checkmark boxes on the drives you select. I myself would love to see checkmark boxes. There is also no way to set defraggler to run multiple times, nor automatically run (it will load, but you have to click run.) CCleaner can be set to auto-run on reboot, however.

I understand the concept you are promoting, but I don't see how that example could possibly be valid. As far as I know, Google Apps is all stored online, on Google Servers. All that you have to have is an internet connection. So you are saying that cleaning the temporary internet files could somehow destroy Google Apps? Unlikely, since they are stored on Google servers, not yours! How could clearing internet trash accumulation affect Google Apps? Thanks!

Actually, Hazelnut's run doesn't work on mine, & mine is a 32 bit / x86 system. Running the exact path for ccleaner.exe & defraggler on XP will result in them running, but adding the space /debug always results in the cannot find error. You have to run the short, or relative path to get it to enter debug mode. (Defraggler /debug) Thanks!

If this is possible, it would certainly be cool. To those who decry this action because of "a user might gasp & have a heart attack if things they expected to be there weren't!", I think they could add a prompt to CCleaner where if a user was sure (they own the computer, they have say over what goes on, etc.), then I see no problem with this. I do hate when users have a lot of user accounts, then you have to clean each of them in order to defrag properly or do other tasks (some users have several gigs of internet or temp file trash, leading to performance degradation & longer defrag/program load times. I would certainly love a multi-user account cleanup on CCleaner. It seems technically possible, as using relative paths such as %programfiles%, %appdata%, %tmp%, etc, would easily enough be able to find the user account data. As I recall, there are switches using relative paths that work for other accounts. It will be interesting to see if they can do this.

In testing this on my clean XP machine, attempting to "run" the command you specified resulted in the "cannot find 'C:\Program'. Make sure you typed the name correctly, and then try again. To search for a file, click the start button, and then click Search." error. All you really need to put in the run box is Defraggler /debug This will work. Thanks!

If I recall correctly, /B is a CHKDSK command you can run to check for bad clusters on your drive. However, I also seem to remember that it would not work under the SP3 of XP. Of course, if you really need to move it, have you tried running Cedrick Collomb's Unlocker to move it? That program is marvelous. It has been able to move files that you cannot normally move in windows. Including Webroot locked definition files, or in certain cases, windows files that windows could not delete/move/open. Let me know if this helps!

Willy, could you possibly provide more information? Such as: - What OS are you using? Windows XP/Vista/7? - What version of that OS? Home/Pro/Ultimate etc? - Are you using 32 bit or 64 bit windows? - How long have you had this problem? Thanks!

This is not something that always happens, but from time to time, it happens on computers. I do not know what way to fix it just yet, & it seems to occur across all MS OS. It does not seem to matter if there are service packs, no service packs, updates, or no updates. Quite simply, it happens at times that a user simply cannot set a scheduled scan for Defraggler. I had it happen on a user machine that has Vista installed, although it has also happened on XP & 7 machines. I cannot remember the exact error, but it is similar to "Unable to set task". Right clicking & running the program as "administrator" has no effect. I am not sure what causes this to happen, although I feel sure it is something that happens with Windows relating to some file/registry key getting corrupted or missing. Is there a way to change the way Defraggler schedules scans? Because of this bug, er, well, some users cannot set a scan schedule! Would there be a way to have Defraggler either change how it set a schedule, or at least offer another option to set a scheduled scan? Such as letting Defraggler auto-start with windows, then check if it needs to defrag that particular day or not? I am sure you coding gods can figure something out! Maybe there is an easy fix for the scheduled task error that I am missing? Thanks!

I agree.

Sure. Check the content type. Music? Pictures? Documents? ---> Move to an external drive. Less files = faster defrag & performance. Also, try using folders to drop all your MP3's into a music folder, Videos into a Video folder, etc. Folders can speed up a directory browse as the file system will not have to load the properties for all the files till the folder is accessed.

I like your idea, but how would it be possible to clean password protected user accounts?

True, but, however, perhaps it could be an option for users? I understand your logic entirely, but what happened if we also stated that "Cached web pages can be invaluable, for users on dial-up, as the increased speed of reloading the page is phenomenal." If we never removed anything, simply because it has a potential use later, wouldn't that stop us from cleaning anything? Everything has a reason, doesn't it? Cookies? Cache files? I was wondering, perhaps it could be an option? Trash is trash!

Me too

CCleaner is pretty good about most things, but I was wondering why they have a check for "Unused file extensions" in the registry? This seems pretty dangerous to me, as whenever you run CCleaner Registry Cleaner with that checkmarked (it is always checked by default, unless you uncheck it), then it always results in entries that cause problems. I think most of it should be safe to remove, but checking for unused extensions? Are you kidding me? This is one area I feel CCleaner doesn't need to touch. Most users to not know "Oh, ok, I can't remove THAT extension? I trust CCleaner! Go ahead, remove it!" This causes so many problems because for example: - User installs KM Player. KM Player becomes default used for .MP3, .WMA, .MPEG etc. - User uninstalls KM Player. Windows Media Player does not get set back for default for those file types. - CCleaner detects left over "KM Player" files, that is to say, now, nothing is being used for .Mp3 etc, so CCleaner "helpfully" suggests they are safe to remove! There are all kinds of problems that can be avoided! I like the registry cleaner in CCleaner, but I feel that the search for unused extensions is simply too dangerous, novice or expert to really be any use. I feel that CCleaner can be 10 times safer & avoid mucking up many times fewer novice computers by simply avoiding that 1 registry check alone! Removing file extensions? This cannot be safe, can it?

No. I know why. Microsoft is bloated... Hahaha! Seriously! I'm not kidding!

Yeah, but I don't really want a frequency of use. Why would I ever need to know how often a person uses a program? That doesn't offer me any help at all! Being able to see the date a program was installed really helps because on computers with hundreds of installed entries, it is hard to tell just what caused what problem on X date. Meaning, they tell you they started having problems 2 weeks ago. With no way to tell what was installed then, ummm, well, then you have to load MS Add/Remove... Sigh... Hopefully this helps you understand at least a reason why I would love to have it in there. Thanks!

CCleaner does not have a bar on the uninstaller tool that you can click to sort programs by date. I would love to have this in CCleaner, because whenever you are cleaning a computer, there are times you really need to know what was installed last so you can find out what went wrong at what date. Microsoft Add/Remove has this feature, but it takes too long to load! Would you be able to add these features? - Sort uninstall list by date - Add an option to view installed updates I know that sometimes an update gives a problem because it is corrupted, or some other problem, so, being able to view installed updates would enable us to remove ones that needed re-installing with ease! Microsoft Add/Remove has a tick box for "Show Updates". Any chance of those 2 features above? Thank you!

I am happy that you got your problems solved. Thank you for providing the information. I was requesting information earlier, because some people try to defrag with a 99% full harddisk (causing problems), etc, etc, or other weird things. If you ever need help, be sure to let one of us know. Thank you so much, & I am so glad that you figured out how to fix it!

Agi, I will try to help you, but firstly, I need more specific information to get a better handle on how to help. You stated you had XP + W2k. I need to know the following information, if you don't mind, my friend: - XP, what service pack is it? None? SP1? SP2? SP3? - What is the service pack of Windows 2,000? None? 4? - How fast is your system? What MHZ is the processor? - How much memory do you have installed? - What size are your hardisk(s)? - What percent full are your hardisk(s)? - How many harddisk(s) are in your array? - About how long have you had your current dual boot installation going? A few months? Clean install? Few years? - How many security software(s) do you have on your system, say, AVG, Norton, McAffee, etc? What anti-virus/anti-spyware programs do you have installed? - Do you have updates turned on or off in XP, & also in Windows 2,000? Please reply with the requested information above, as much as you are able, & I will try to get back with you later with a reply.

Service Pack 3 is computer specific. The good about SP3 is this: - An average of 10% faster performance - Slightly faster finish speeds for programs - Patches are slightly more up-to-date - Better network collaboration - Easier network administration The bad: - On some computers, they fail to boot at all, even in safe mode, after installing SP3 - Sometimes network connections stop working for a while under SP3, but uninstalling it will make it disappear. - Games, such as Crysis, work a big slower & have lag under SP3. - There are lots of software programs that are incompatible with SP3 that work fine under SP2. There are a lot of bugs, including some that I have seen personally, & some that others have seen such as AMD machines crash after SP3 install, Windows crashes, continuous reboots/blue screens, among other things. This happens whether a computer has a fresh, clean install of windows, or windows is months old. It happens on brand new high speed machines, or older machines. Per Hazel's instructions, I cannot advise you not to use SP3, as, bugs & all, it is, after all, the "latest & greatest" from Microsoft. But using SP3 is like playing the lottery. Sometimes it works on some machines & configurations, while sometimes it does not. SP2, in my experience, is far more stable & in general, just works with almost anything you throw at it. However, stick to Hazel's advice & always use the latest service pack no matter what, because that is guaranteed to be the best. I would still love to know what Hazel would have done to solve it. Let me address your following concerns above: - "If there's a driver issue then re-install" > This was using the latest Belkin wireless router driver they had... Not an option - "If there's no technical support for XP SP3 then people should switch to a different brand" > This doesn't always work? For example: Vista, even with tech support, has problems. I tried taking a Philips 1 GB mp3 player to back up the music to a 1 GB flash drive that was freshly formatted. There was only 500 mb music. Vista stalled out halfway through & complained that the flash drive was full, so it cannot copy it over. I could, however, select smaller batches & it would work. Additionally, Vista lost a host of file sorting capabilities that XP has. MS never will add those back to XP. XP also could copy the entire batch when I checked, without any problem. Why use junk just because it is "supported"? Vista is known to have a ton of bugs. Windows 7 is much better than Vista, but it still has trouble running things that work fine on XP. Additionally, XP is faster than Vista, even on newer machines. Windows 7 is better than Vista, but XP still is the fastest on certain areas. Vista also was known to be formulated based on Trusted Computing Platform, which in layman's terms, was singlehandedly one of the reasons it crashed so much initially, because they had to figure a way to integrate a hardware system of flags to prevent you from being able to display "untrusted" video sources in addition to using anything to make a backup of movies you owned, or software you owned that was in danger of being scratched up/permanently gone due to not being produced by the manufacturer any longer. Video companies, especially, struggled with this issue. Because of the TCP platform requirements introduced to control what you do on your machine, it caused early versions of Firefox to crash every few min. TCP is easy to find & google. The hardware flag was intended to operate such that if any video contained a do not copy flag, your machine will refuse to clone a disk. Effectively stripping all the power & control from you, & putting the control back into the seller's hands. You would pay for a computer, but everyone else would own it. You would pay for an OS, but the OS would control what you did. I haven't researched the TCP of Windows 7 yet to see if they got around to that, or if consumers complained enough that they learned their lesson. If you haven't, you should google TCP & Vista. Very, very interesting. And also very, very true. I am not certain if they still do it, will have to research/test more later... Another good reason to stick with XP. Windows Vista/7 also make it hard or impossible to drag the top corner of an open folder to the desktop/flash drive/other to create a shortcut to that folder. In addition to many other annoyances. I am not sure I would say stick with XP though, because Hazel just may want you to stick with Vista or Windows 7, since they are newer, & a DRM'd + TCP computer may be lots better for you than a non DRM/TCP machine. I am not certain if you even want to copy/clone movies or games. Maybe you just want a basic computer that burns regular content. Maybe you do not even play games. Or watch movies? I recommend you update to W7 to be sure that you have the latest & most patched system. I would never want to imagine what Hazel would think of me if I even suggested XP, so I recommend the latest & greatest. I am not even suggesting that the DRM is not possible to work around, or that it just sometimes causes problems that do not exist in XP. XP is not perfect, after all, but It seems stable/usable/fast to me. Not that Vista & W7 cannot run reasonably fast, but tests & games show improved response under XP. Now, you did not specify, but assuming that you just meant to switch hardware brands instead of software, this was not an option. They had paid for the router, & it was past the date they could return it for a swap. Not everyone is made of $$$ like you, my friend. - "Reverting back to SP2 is running away from the problem which may in fact have a solution if you look for it." > It may, it may! Please do show me the solution? It is running away from the problem? It may be running away, but why is it that SP2 works solid as a rock with it, but SP3 always kills it off? Clean install of XP SP3 just doesn't work properly with this particular WIFI connection, while SP2 works like a dream. Please, help me, send me the solution. I would love to know... Unfortunately, it is well documented that on some systems, SP3 wreaks havoc with WIFI & other utilities. Google is testimony to the fact that there are tons of others with the exact same problem & the fact that like me, thousands of others had their WIFI come back after a revert. But, alas, sadly, it is running away from the problem to revert to SP2, so I should really just upgrade to SP3 so my WIFI can drop every couple minutes or so.... Actually, it is my friends WIFI. Instead of talking about how it is running away from the problem, would you be so kind as to post a workable solution? I will listen to it, honest. If it works, I will let you know. - "Anyway in regards to Defraggler I see no reason why SP3 should be implicated it's nothing more than a bundle of all security / bug fixes for SP2 rolled into one." > This is an intermittent problem. Defraggler works fine on some SP3 systems, while on others SP3 causes problems. Perhaps due to the way SP3 changes how XP addresses hardware & software? - "Programs crash for many reasons". > I 100% agree with you! - "usually due to unhandled circumstances such as file system"... > This happened on their machine reguardless of using Fat 32, NTFS, or a clean install, so it would not be file system errors! - "or conflicts with security / av products" > It did not matter if there were security products on the machine, or a clean install with no security products, with or without any router security passwords used. Of course, it does have a password on it, I was just testing... So no, it is not due to security product incompatibility as my clean install disk doesn't have anything integrated with XP other than the SP2 or SP3. - "incompatibility with SP3 should had created sudden death" > Service Pack 3 doesn't always make a computer endlessly loop reboots, or crash, or fail to boot up. Sometimes it just drops WIFI internet signals for no reason whatsoever. SP2 never does this. In my experience, SP2 is far more stable, while SP3 has bug fixes & is, well, buggy to boot! To sum this up, while SP2 may have fixed my problems, I still recommend you keep SP3 no matter what. If your screen freezes, hey, it could be a driver issue. Or incompatible hardware. Or SP3 bugs. Just keep SP3. Don't worry about SP2. SP2 is losing MS support, so it is automatically trash... This means that SP3 is, & always will be better than SP2. Besides, you should be able to fix any problem that SP3 may have. Should be pretty easy, I would think. Simple driver update, or perhaps a brand new router, or, try another security product, or mess with windows day after day tweaking settings & changing files till you find the culprit! Maybe it is just registry settings? Piece of cake, I mean, it can't be that hard. Fire up regedit, navigate to the software key, or use the built in search key if needed, & just mod the reg keys as needed... Once MS stops support, then you need to update to the latest windows version. Which for now, is Windows 7 with XP compatibility mode. Never trade down, always trade up. Even if some of your programs that work in XP no longer do under Windows 7. There are programs that don't even work under Windows 7, even under XP SP2 compatibility mode that work under XP SP2 genuine. Windows 7 also has a much harder to use interface to search flash or external drives for files, + the search it does have doesn't find all the files on your computer. This is trash, because if you have certain files you need to pull up, even with music, MP3 files... Windows 7 totally ignores some files! But so does Vista! Windows Vista & 7 give you the results they want you to have. Sure, I know about advanced search, & show hidden files, system files, etc, but I have used Windows 7 & Vista (not the home or the basic version, either) enough to know that basically, they just lack a lot in a lot of areas. XP search will find whatever files you have. Of course, there are free utilities to fix that, such as lightning fast Locate 32... Maybe you love having half baked features, but I don't. But I am sure that many think that W7 is the best, so use it if you like it better. Whew, this is so long! But I had to tell you it all so you can understand. Never trade down, always up. Losing programs you use are nothing. Having the latest version is always the best because MS said so & you better buy it. I heard a funny joke once about how Microsoft combined the best features of windows CE, + ME, + NT & came up with CEMENT. Hard as a rock & dumb as a brick. It seems that while stability rises through succeeding generations of Windows, that usability takes a hit for the worse. I think that joke must be coming true! Haha! I am sleepy & I had to work hard today in the heat, but I will check later to hear your reply. Of interest to me, is hearing what kind of solution you would have presented. Let me know how you would have fixed it for them using SP3 & I will be glad to try it. Please don't say by getting a new router, because they cannot afford it right now. I will check back later to see your solution. I will be glad to hear from you. Oh, yes! P.S. This was the last version of SP3 that was supposed to have some of the bugs worked out. This was not the earlier editions of SP3 that ""were not ready" at the time. This was considered official & final by MS... Don Of interest to read... > http://www.pcworld.com/article/146228/symantec_blames_microsoft_for_xp_sp3_registry_corruption.html Symantec Thursday said it was Microsoft's code that crippled some PCs after upgrades to Windows XP Service Pack 3 (SP3) emptied Device Manager, deleted network connections, and packed the Registry with thousands of bogus entries. "We finally got to the bottom of this last night," said Dave Cole, Symantec's senior director for product management of its consumer software. "All of these problems are related to the same thing, a Microsoft file that created all the garbage entries [in the registry]." http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=207600950 Within hours of its release, Microsoft's Service Pack 3 for Windows XP began drawing hundreds of complaints from users who claim the update is wreaking havoc on their PCs. The problems with XP SP3, according to posters on Microsoft's Windows XP message board, range from spontaneous reboots to outright system crashes. "My external disks are having trouble starting up, which results in Windows not starting up," complained user Michael Faklis, in a post Wednesday. "After three attempts [to install XP SP3] with different configurations each time, System Restore was the only way to get me out of deep s**t," said 'Doug W'. Another user said the service pack prevented him from starting his computer. "I downloaded and installed Windows XP Service Pack 3 Network Installation Package for IT Professionals," wrote 'Paul'. "Now I can't get the computer to boot." Dozens of other posters reported similar problems... Peace. Don't forget to tell me the solution! Night!

Hazel, that is fine. But I advise you to please read here: http://forums.techarena.in/windows-update/963816.htm Additionally, I was just at a friends house tonight, as of July 18, 2010 / 2:30 PM EST & I witnessed their internet cutting out. A lot. They had it run through a wireless Belkin USB receiver in the other room. My friends mom stated that it happened after she had to replace the old one because it died. So, I personally checked their system. No malware to be found, clean system, clean start-up, etc. Latest drivers, latest Firefox, still had internet outages. They were not using any peer to peer programs, just surfing their regular Myspace pages, Photobucket, etc. online. I checked their system properties & found they had SP3 installed. I requested permission to remove SP3 & revert back to SP2. After I uninstalled the service pack & rebooted, the internet that had been going out every few minutes, suddenly it became rock solid. I was there & just got back around 10 PM & they still did not have a single internet drop on their receiver. Reverting to SP2 fixed their internet connectivity problems & all was well. Additionally, I was testing a program just yesterday that did not work at all under SP3. It is fine not to tell people to go back to a prior SP if that is what you wish, but however, SP3 is known to have internet connectivity bugs & if you will Google a little, you will find that this is something that plagues a lot of people after an SP3 update. I am not saying all users suffer from it, but a lot do. If I advocated them sticking with SP3, they would still be with sporadic internet that works a few minutes at the time. I am aware that SP3 is supposed to be the latest, greatest Service Pack for XP. I am also aware that SP2 is far more stable in wireless internet connectivity in addition to compatibility with far more programs. I have programs right now that do not work with SP3 that work fine in SP2. I have not advised anyone here to switch since the warning you gave me, but I was just wondering why you are so vocal about having SP3 installed when it causes problems for many users? I am well aware that SP2 may be ending the support life cycle of MS, but that isn't the end of the world is it? If it is, maybe no-one should use anything that isn't "in the MS support cycle..." (including CCleaner?) Just wondering. I will read your reply later. Right now, I am very sleepy, as I had some people I helped earlier over at my place. Thanks, Hazel! Have a good night! Have a good night, I am sleepy! P.S. While I was fixing their problem, your words rang in my head, "DO NOT EVER ADVOCATE ANYONE SWITCH BACK TO SP2 AS A WAY TO SOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS". Of course, I do highly respect your opinion, but in this case, since this was a close friend.... And they were a few miles from me down the road... A simple revert to SP2 solved every one of their wireless internet problems. Internet just stayed on, no conking out after a few minutes, or opening a 2 or 3 tabs on Firefox, etc... My last thoughts before I left were.... Wow, that sure did work good, but boy, if Hazel were here in real life to oversee fixing the connection, I can't imagine how angry she would get if anyone removed SP3... This is not the first time I have seen SP3 knock out wireless. Have seen it on laptops as well. Hazel? LOL! I sure am glad you don't live close to me, but at the same time, I wonder how you would have fixed the same problem? Since SP3 is known for bugs like that? If you wouldn't take off SP3, what is there left to do? Would really love to know your suggestion/solution. Sincerely, Don