Jump to content

mr don

Experienced Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mr don

  1. If you want to be able to roll out a Defraggler to multiple PC's with your custom colors, here is an easy way to do it: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Open Defraggler. Go to Settings. Under Drive Map, select Custom & get it like you want it. Now, go to Settings again. Go to Options. Checkmark the box "Save all settings to INI file". Create a new empty folder on your Desktop & label it Defraggler. Copy Defraggler to this folder, along with the defraggler shortcut on your desktop. Do NOT move, right-click drag it, release, & select copy here. Right click a blank area on the desktop. Choose create shortcut, & paste in %HOMEPATH%/Desktop. Click next when it suggests name it Desktop. Right click a blank area on the desktop. Choose create shortcut, & paste in %PROGRAMFILES%. Click next when it suggests name it Program Files. Move these 2 new shortcuts that you just created into your Defraggler folder. Insert your flash drive & right click the Defraggler folder you created on the desktop. Choose SendTo -> Flash Drive. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Every time you want to "Setup" another Defraggler installation, simply: - Insert flash drive - Drag Defraggler to Program Files shortcut, & Defraggler shortcut to Desktop shortcut. The paths are relative, so it should work with XP/Vista/7! This is far fewer clicks than doing a "new install", so I think this should be much easier once you set it up!
  2. If they implement this, it should be optional. There are occasions someone would want to run it on an SSD. I would, primarily for testing reasons... Don
  3. While the above is very true, if you truly want your data gone, the best way to ensure it all gets erased is to: - Backup all your important things to another drive. - Install Windows to a new harddisk. - Format the old drive, & wipe the entire drive. That should take care of the problem.
  4. I think this is great! CCleaner is no doubt, wonderful. I just think it would be awesome if it had a few minor tweaks such as the way things are grouped. I agree... Small tweaks such as having all 3rd party apps under Applications tab, all web browsers under Internet tab, & all windows locations under Windows... It is slightly confusing to see web browsers listed on both tabs... etc... Course, this might be making a mountain out of a mole hill, but that's my 2 cents worth right now. But yeah, guess I can't really complain, cause it is a great app! * On the + side of things, it may take effort to get this implemented, but once implemented, I would think that this would make development updates easier as well, since every web browser would be under the internet tab, which would make it easier to see what you had/what needed updating.
  5. I tested Defraggler 2 final on a few 32 bit XP machines with plenty of Ram as well as a 32 bit Windows 7 machine. Normally, Defraggler shows the analysis results as well as the current state. It happens that on the current state, Defraggler fails to update the drive map & remains identical to the analysis results. I am not sure if this is after a successful defrag, then run defrag a second time shortly afterwards, or something else. It did seem to happen a lot in back to back defrags (Sorry, just had to test!) It seemed to happen across 4 computers I tested it on. Anyone else experienced this, or am I the only one?
  6. Cool! I don't have an SSD yet. To be honest, in spite of the speed increase, the negative comments concerning drive life & write operations yet scare me from trying one just yet! But nice to know... Just in case I do get one later. Thanks for the info!
  7. If it were possible, this would mean what? - I did not know if it was possible to do an on the fly drive map update. But if it was, I thought it would be cool. What would the purpose of showing/indicating what one already knows i.e. I have just "paused" or "canceled" the operation. Agreed that it would probably look better but!!!!! (just my two Penneth worth) - Purpose is that when someone does a partial defrag, they can see what is happening. Cannot see what black & white box operations mean...
  8. How true! Although, going by that logic, couldn't a user just simply input something that could wipe out, say, system32 folder if they wanted without even needing to input a recurse option? Hopefully, it is understood that if someone knows enough to edit the file, they are knowledgeable enough to not input system folder areas... That's just my 2 cents worth, but feel free to add your response...
  9. I understand your disappointment, but the program is still free. Do you feel they don't deserve any income stream? I tested & it did not seem to install the Google browser if you untick it instead of flying through the install options. Additionally, you can download a slim or portable version from here: -> http://www.piriform.com/ccleaner/builds (User above me posted the link as well.) Slim & portable both do not contain the browser. I do hope this alleviates your disappointment. Peace!
  10. I did not post this under bugs, as I did not feel it was technically a bug, since Defraggler updates the drive map after a complete analyze. I was thinking along the lines that this possibly could be considered a new feature, so bear with me here. Defraggler is really nice to use, but sometimes someone wants to do a partial analyze/defrag so they pause or stop after say, 50% analyze. What then happens, is that if a user selects all files in the files area to defrag, is Defraggler has not done a full analyze, so the blocks are still black & white! I was wondering perhaps, if it was feasible/possible to add the ability that if someone were to click the files on a partial analyze, that Defraggler could update the drive map to show only the areas it has analyzed in color? Currently, all a user sees on a partial analyze is black & white blocks if they defrag like that! Feel free to comment. I thought it would be a cool idea, so if you like it or hate it, comment away!
  11. Hey, thanks for clearing this up, guys! I didn't have 2003 to test with, so I was just taking a guess. Thanks for taking the time to clear this up for the guy! Hey, if you see the above posts & they help you, let us all know!
  12. Most sites agree that if an SSD drive is nearly full, up to a 30-40% write (not read) increase could be possible. This is very, very different from saying 917,382,624%. In fact, that is roughly 22,934,565.6 times more... I am thinking that perhaps he may be referring to "lite" operations, such as a method to enable TRIM or other things on either OS/SSD without that support, & thus the "optimizations". I am kinda thinking he probably never meant a full defrag, or operations that would drastically shorten the life of the drive. It is possible that I could be incorrect, however. This seems to be a concern of a lot of people, that there could/should be things that can be done to SSD drives. Seeing the plethora of information available, it is no wonder...
  13. Alan, is there any way to post or send me the scripts you use for that? I am primarily interested in comparing it to things I have done & to also check certain SFX parameters. No biggie if you can't, but if you can, it would be great!
  14. Thanks man. I normally do try to keep on topic, but, it is so weird! How does Windows allow 2 icons of exact same name to be in the same .Zip folder? I just didn't know if anyone had answers to that! Totally weird!
  15. Not necessarily. I frequently have 2 to 800 tabs open on firefox (or more). I also tend to test a lot of programs (leaving a lot of files in temp directories). It just depends on what you do on the computer!
  16. Have you tried Defraggler Beta 2 to see if the problem still exists?
  17. Any drive can be sent to an early grave with defrag. I think what he is asking for here, however, is not necessarily a full defrag, but a defraggler that will auto detect an SSD type drive, then implement SSD type functions that will help improve performance.
  18. Instead of skins on CCleaner, wouldn't it be a lot simpler & take up almost no extra space to add support to change CCleaner color? You could change the color on Windows Media Player by simply dragging a slider bar! Black, green, red, blue, etc. How about support to just allow all Piriform products to have an adjustable slider to change the color? Include an eyedropper tool to exact match another color on the screen! Program would save the new color to .ini file. Maybe support color/contrast of the color/fade support. Anyone else like this idea? This would not need any new skins, & people could change colors on the fly to match things!
  19. Instead of skins on CCleaner, wouldn't it be a lot simpler & take up almost no extra space to add support to change CCleaner color? You could change the color on Windows Media Player by simply dragging a slider bar! Black, green, red, blue, etc. How about support to just allow all Piriform products to have an adjustable slider to change the color? Include an eyedropper tool to exact match another color on the screen! Program would save the new color to .ini file. Maybe support color/contrast of the color/fade support. Anyone else like this idea? This would not need any new skins, & people could change colors on the fly to match things!
  20. I disagree. Support for other icons & themes should not take too many lines. If a user decided to keep the default, it would still be about the same size. Size only increased if they chose to use a skin, & even then, it would be minimal impact.
  21. You must have a slow computer. It doesn't seem to ever take more than a few seconds mostly on my computer. Unless I have a lot of things open. Even then, no more than 10 to 15 seconds max. Have you tried checking how much RAM you have in use as opposed to how much you have on the computer? P.S. Do not forget when calculating, that other things such as a lot of computers these days will commonly have 128 MB "shared" video that takes it from your system mem & will skew your numbers...
  22. I user 2007 at the moment, & I no longer have 2003 to test it with. I am going to take a guess & say that it is probably this key that is causing the problem when erased: RegKey2=HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Common\Open Find\Microsoft Office Word\Settings\Save As\File Name MRU Test this by making sure Office 2003 settings are like you want. Then go to start/run & type regedit & hit enter. Navigate to HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Common\Open Find\Microsoft Office Word\Settings Right click the key & choose export. Next time you run CCleaner, double-click the registry key you just exported to re-import the old settings & see if Office still has the same problem. If this fixes it, you can use this as a stop-gap measure till it gets fixed. Alternatively, if this is the right key, you can automate the run CCleaner/re-import the registry key silently via a few options using .bat files or WinRar SFX. If this does help with your problem, please post back here so I can know it helped. Thanks!
  23. Ok, to add to the confusion here, here is what I did: I checked the All Users desktop. There was a CCleaner icon, but I deleted it. After I deleted it, it deleted it from the other user desktop, leaving me with 1 CCleaner icon. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ However, then I clicked undo delete & it "restored" the CCleaner icon to the desktop. What I mean by restored is, the NEW CCleaner 3 is the only one installed. But when it restored the icon, it brought it back to the All Users desktop + the current user desktop. Then, it gets weirder. The icon on the All Users is the one for CCleaner 3. The icon it showed for the second CCleaner shortcut on the other user desktop was "restored" as the 2.36 version icon where it was previously the 3! So, I then deleted the All Users desktop CCleaner shortcut, & this time, it left the icon on the other desktop. So now, I have 2 CCleaner shortcuts that are the exact same name, exact same location on the same user desktop. Guess what? I can right click them both, send to a ZIP file no problem. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ So to keep from losing the double desktop shortcuts, I opened a new user & pasted a shortcut from CCleaner to the new user desktop so as not to ruin my test environment. There was only 1 CCleaner shortcut, so when I try to copy from the zip file, perhaps one of them will complain that the file already exists, but the other should copy over fine, right? But it did not matter which shortcut I selected from the ZIP file. EITHER one of them complained that the icon was already still there! I don't know how this happened, so I figure the best way for you all to see what I am talking about is to just post the ZIP containing 2 identical seeming shortcuts to CCleaner! Feel free to download the file & see if you can explain this mystery! I am stumped! (P.S. Note that Windows will not normally let you add 2 of the same file name to a zip either. If you don't believe it, try to copy 1 of the files to 1 folder, then the 2cd to another folder. Create a new Zip file & add the 1st file back. Now try to add the 2cd! You can't! It "already" exists! CCleaner.zip
  24. When I run Defraggler, it seems like it runs pretty slow under "Full Defrag". What I mean by slow is, if I select all the files under Files list for defrag (& defrag those instead of files + free space), then it seems to complete LOTS faster. Consolidating free space afterwards ("Full Defrag") doesn't seem to take as long because the files are already defragged. All it has to do is consolidate. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I could be wrong, but in watching the process, it appears that Defraggler tries to defrag + consolidate on the fly as it is working on each individual file(s). If this is so, would it not be much faster to separate the processes? That is to say: When a user selects full defrag, then it will: - Defrag all files first (by the custom or default filter depending on what is selected) - Consolidate all files secondly By utilizing this method, it will alleviate stress on the CPU & harddisk too because Defraggler will be focusing on 1 task at a time, instead of Defrag a file or two, consolidate, then defrag another set of files, then consolidate. Wouldn't it just be better & faster too if Defraggler does all the defragging in a process, then follow it up by consolidation? ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ It is a known fact, for instance, that if you try to copy a 5 GB file to one drive from your main harddisk, then copy another 5 GB file to another drive that it will take more time than to just copy a 10 GB file to 1 drive. Sure, Windows can load balance, but then the drive has to double work as it switches between files to send to each drive. If your computer is so fast that you don't really notice, just try letting your CD or DVD drive copy content to multiple places at a time & listen to the stutter as opposed to how fast it is on a straight copy to 1 device. Although Defraggler is good, if this would help speed it up, hey, I always love extra speed! Let me know what you all think & correct me if I am wrong about how Defraggler operates. I am just making an estimation based on trials with Defraggler & utilizing the visual map that it presents as it is working. Feel free to comment. Thanks!
  25. Just delete one of the two icons if you like. Just make sure they both link to the same .exe program launcher. You can simply rename one of the two icons so they won't have the same name and moving them to a folder together won't be a problem. Anyway they are just shortcuts so renaming them won't make them invalid. I know about that, but it is so weird because normally windows will NOT allow you to have 2 icons of the same name in the same folder. _________ Are you saying you want to keep one of the icons??? Hmmm, I sort of like both of them, but it is so weird how both were somehow allowed to have the same exact name on the same folder (desktop folder) without windows throwing a fit! _________ And one trick of restoring an item from the Recycle Bin to a location different from where it was originally deleted from is to simply, open the Recycle Bin, choose the item/s you want to restore, right click and Cut and then Paste to another location so they won't be restored to a location where they might have existing duplicates. Yeah, that works good, but what I meant is, there are 2 icons of the same exact name now on the desktop. What is weird is if you try to recycle one of them, then bring it back, Windows will say it cannot do this unless it overwrites one because they are the same name. No problem, it can be renamed, but just wondering why Windows allowed it in the first place? I almost had to laugh. I mean, the bugs we find in Windows sometimes! Weird! _________ So if you deleted one of the two CCleaner icons, you can just right click and Cut the one that was sent to the Recycle Bin to another location besides the Desktop where another icon(shortcut) is currently in place. Its as simple as that. That is very good, man, but I was just wondering if anyone knew how/why Windows allowed that in the first place. Normally, it won't allow 2 files with the exact same name, so why does it allow 2 shortcuts of the exact same name & location (one from the old CCleaner & 1 from the new). They are exact except for the icons used because you can right click/properties to see their location/name/extensions... Anyone know? I might be interested in doing some cool stuff with this "bug" if someone knows why/how Windows allows it!
  • Create New...

Important Information

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