Jump to content

mr don

Experienced Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mr don

  1. CCleaner has a nice jumplist feature where you can "jump" straight to a function in Windows 7 when pinned to the start menu. I was wondering about adding the same feature to Defraggler. Not just Defraggler but Recuva as well. User would be able to simply select: Defrag C: Defrag D: Defrag E: etc... What do you think? CCleaner has it, & I would love it in Defraggler.
  2. So are you saying that Word 2007 cleans 2003 version fine? I wonder how the cleanup scripts compare. Wonder if whoever is in charge can verify if 2007 cleans 2003 properly, & if so, maybe use the script for 2007 & simply add it again with the title 2003? I haven't had time to compare them, so maybe someone else can clear this up for us.
  3. Muchos thank you man! I somehow did not notice that earlier. Hey now, this is cool!
  4. I am not for sure. I have been so busy lately that I have trouble checking if my head is on straight. I am in the process of moving things, so I may not be as uber up to date on things for a few weeks while moving over, but if so, I feel sure I can update things when I get settled in. Much kudos & thanks for the help. Will try to check later & see if it needs editing out. You guys rock!
  5. This would be a good idea, but it would require the addition of, in your case, 8 additional screens to show the analysis results from each drive. Unless they did something like a tab for mass analysis where it showed a block for each drive/divide the screen in up to 9 boxes for up to 9 drives at once or something... Definitely would be interesting!
  6. CCleaner 3 has a very nice "Scan for login cookies to keep?" the first time you install it IF it is a clean install. It seems to disappear after this "1 time use"... Or if it does exist, very hard to locate again afterwards. Why not add the option to let a user run the utility again under the cookies section under Options in CCleaner? I think it would be very nice to be able to let a user have the ability to scan for login cookies to keep more than just 1 time. Sometimes, especially on a clean install of Windows, this feature does not work good simply because they have not even got cookies on their computer yet! - Why not allow the option to scan for cookies to keep later on - Include a second option to allow CCleaner to save this cookie keep list to .INI file? Thanks!
  7. I like the new icons, but not as good as the old ones. They seem to have lost something. When I look at old + new side by side, the new obviously has greater detail when magnified by the thumbnail view, but it seems that the greater detail somehow causes the icon to appear darker & less CCleanery than normal when just viewed as an icon. I wouldn't say the icon is bad, per say, but the darkness seems to take away some from the gloss/glass look that makes it look so appealing. The dark look makes it seem... different somehow... _____________________________________________________________________ On a side note, I was able to have TWO CCleaner icons on my desktop. Both have the same name. One old, one new. This seems to have happened when installing the new CCleaner on top of the old version & letting the program create a new icon on the desktop. I have included a picture to show what I mean. Before you view it, I am not sure how this happens because if you were to delete one of the icons, then try to restore from the recycle bin, Windows would complain that there is already an icon named CCleaner.LNK, & are you SURE you want to overwrite it with this one? Additionally, I am NOT able to just copy both icons to a new folder on the desktop because after copying 1 CCleaner.LNK, it complains "There is already an icon named CCleaner.LNK" in the folder. _____________________________________________________________________ What causes this bug, I do not know. Please let me know if you know what does allow it to exist like this. I have also observed other files such as the same named MP3 or other files before. Windows supposedly doesn't allow duplicates, but what allows these "exceptions" to the rules? Picture posted, so view & comment!
  8. I was wondering about the Tools option in CCleaner. To me, it seems a bit backwards. Currently it goes: - Uninstall - Startup - System Restore - Drive Wiper Surprisingly, the alphabetical listing seems to make more sense: - Drive Wiper - Startup - System Restore - Uninstall Uninstall lists can take a while to load because of other trash such as startup items & tons of system restore points, etc. Why not put these "cleanup" options 1st so they can have a priority on being cleaned 1st, followed by the uninstall list? Any comments?
  9. Oh, I know it can be risky. But I try risky programs to find problems. Then I report problems to be fixed. If no-one reported problems, how would they get fixed? But I do eagerly anticipate when it comes out of beta. I have one system I keep just for testing things on, so it doesn't matter if that one crashes, heh heh! Thanks man! Will be keeping an eye open for the non-beta though!
  10. + 1 Same here. Open Defraggler & then open Windows Explorer. Rename the drive & even clicking Analyze in Defraggler fails to update the name change. It does update on relaunch. I did not experience the crash or slowness that you did, however. Test done with Defraggler 2 beta on XP.
  11. + 1 I can verify this exists in Defraggler 2 Beta under XP. - Open Defraggler & click Analyze - Click a red block of fragmented data - Click select all & hit defrag Drive map fails to update to reflect that the files have just been defragged. In fact, you can select the same red data block over, & over, & over to be "defragged" & it still appears to be "fragmented" by the map, even though the defrag sessions now take nearly no time at all due to them already being defragged. Re-Analyzing seems to update the map, but should this be necessary? Definitely needs fixing, please.
  12. I agree. I suggested moving the entire settings options to tab. If this is implemented, that setting would be under the tab as well. + 1
  13. This may not happen every time, but sometimes when you use boot time defrag, the computer will enter a "Would you like to try to start the computer normally? In Safe Mode" etc options. I know I don't have it listed exactly as it is, but you get the picture. Wonder what causes it to cause the computer to think it has suffered enough of a problem to need the safe mode/repair option screen?
  14. In CCleaner, the options are accessible via tab (much easier than clicking settings on the menu bar in Defraggler). Any way to add settings as a tab? To me, this would make it much easier to access settings. Anyone else wanna comment?
  15. You are not the only one. Normally, Defraggler works good when setting a schedule on a PC. But sometimes it happens that on certain machines, it fails with that exact error. This is independent of OS, as I had it happen on 7, Vista, & XP. I am not sure what causes it, but perhaps someone else here would like to give an explanation?
  16. I would get another drive. With a drive that full, your gonna need it. Make sure you have a good system backup, then move say, 25% of your old drive to the new one to free up space to defrag. Of course, sometimes it happens that you can have a lot of system restore points. May be able to disable system restore for that drive & see if that frees up space. Additionally, I don't really think it is always good to try to use every last byte on a drive like that. Strange things can happen to your data when attempting to copy/move/delete/change things when you really don't have any space left.
  17. Try this: Open Defraggler & go to file list tab. Hit analyze & then select files to defrag. Hit Defrag, then try to drag the program around by the title bar. Voila! The buttons disappear off the screen! Man, how do you pause it now? Good program, but hope you fix the buttons soon!
  18. I am not sure which method is the default method that Defraggler uses to combine files + free space, but I was wondering about adding an additional option under the defrag custom rules for "grouping". Meaning, that the program tries to put the system files at the fastest part of the drive, followed by program files, followed by... etc. I am assuming that the current mask it uses simply find a hole & then drops files randomly into them. Not 100% for sure though. Any thoughts on this?
  19. I noticed that even with version 2 beta of Defraggler, that when you uncheck for it to check for updates, Defraggler STILL disobeys your unselection & checks for them ANY way. ______________________________________________________________ Would be very nice if it actually did obey you. CCleaner installer obeys. Recuva installer obeys. ______________________________________________________________ What's up with Defraggler? Thanks!
  20. You must be using WFS option. Edit: Removed potentially harmful advice.
  21. The find as you type helps a lot. For instance: Typing HP reveals all the HP scanner, printer, photo programs, etc. Grouping would do little to stop malware, since malware usually does NOT include an uninstaller. When they do, they usually do not work, anyway. What would be cool, however, is if there were an option to hide all programs by developer, such as Microsoft/Intel, or even all applications. Only show the newer ones that get installed after that (to prevent that you accidentally uninstall programs you like/want to keep).
  22. Yes, but ANYTHING you do on the computer "kills" it. Meaning, all programs you install/remove/defrag/rename/change take up write cycles + send your drive a few minutes further to it's MTBF grave! Harddisk drives have rated MTBF, or Mean Time Before Failure listings. You can verify to a reasonable degree with Hard Drive Health programs, what percentage gone your drive is. This is a necessary "kill" however, as just turning over a disk drive with previously personal data on it would be like, crazy. I tried CCleaner drive wiper with 7 passes & then 3 & then 7 again on a drive. It seemed that my data recovery program was unable to find anything left to recover after that, so I reckon it does pretty good. To tell the truth, I might could have gotten away with 7 passes, but I was testing other things too. I'd rather let CCleaner destroy all the private data, than to turn a drive over to someone with personal info on it & have them have a few extra hours runtime left on the drive in the MTBF log. Thanks!
  23. Although I am not 100% for sure, it could be that you are referring to password protected user accounts. I will test Recuva later to see if it can recover from those. I do know that Windows will deny access to files in password protected accounts, so it is possible that Recuva may as well. It is not impossible to get around, because I know some programs that can definitely get around that. I will test later to see what is going on. Thanks for the headsup!
  24. Long story short, yes! Ordinary cleaners that search for file extensions to remove are very dangerous. Such as .TMP for Temp files, because you may have a program using a .TMP for a calendar template (different type of TMP file). However, CCleaner does not do this & is 100% safe in the cleaning operations. Instead of searching for files by extension, it has built in instructions on the exact folders to clean of junk. This is what makes CCleaner one of the best. Also, yes, it should theoretically be safe to checkmark everything, but why try to clean FTP accounts for example, if you don't even have those? I believe this answers your question. Don Edit: The Registry cleaner part should never be used till you have to. It is the only part of CCleaner that is not 100% safe. It usually does good, but you do need to be very careful & really know what you are doing here, so that part is not recommended till you have experience under your belt.
  25. Ok, Nergal, moved it to ->: http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?showtopic=30241&st=0&p=180728&fromsearch=1entry180728
  • Create New...

Important Information

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