another RAM tool I think you'll approve.

[slowday444]

Another point on this subject! I don't know if RAM defragers are different from optimizers (have never even tried one of them) but the numbers just don't back the theory that the defragers just move some of the process to virtual memory. I had a Subscription to Spy Sweeper and through work, Spyware Doctor. If I did a full scan with either one of those I would be left with less than 50% of my 1g of RAM. The RAM would never return all day. Then I discovered that a two minute memory scan with AVG Anti-Spyware would result in returning total RAM usage to only 20 some percent. I just enabled SD Starter Edition and scanned with it. After the scan I ended up with 46% of RAM in use and 40.1mb of virtual memory in use. I then ran a 38 second scan with RAM Def XT. After the scan I had only 27% of RAM in use and the page file in use actually went down to 39.9mb. Point is, this program didn't just move the processes to virtual memory. I suspect the MemInfo defrager and AVg do the same.

[Tarun.]

There is no refuting Mark's credentials, however, if you read many of the posts in that thread it becomes quite evident that, depending on what applications are running and how you are using the PC, Windows doesn't always do the perfect job. It is quite analogous to the "old" carburetor on vehicles. They were manufactured and tuned to work in an "average" environment. e.g. temp, humidity, elevation, etc. Also, this thread was started in relation to an application that uses Windows feature every 30 minutes (or as often as one likes), maximizing the efficiency of the Windows tool.

That's true with Windows 9x/Me. The memory management was horrific. People believed in the "AlwaysUnloadDll" registry key, even for the NT kernel. I use multiple applications that often take about half of all of my 2GB of RAM, but you can simply minimize the window and the memory is freed. Try it with Firefox or any web browser. Before you could see 272,000 K in Task Manager, but when you minimize Firefox you can watch it drop to 11,000 K - 20,000 K. In case you're wondering, I often run over 30+ tabs in my Firefox, so the memory usage is higher than most people's would be.

 

Another point on this subject! I don't know if RAM defragers are different from optimizers (have never even tried one of them) but the numbers just don't back the theory that the defragers just move some of the process to virtual memory. I had a Subscription to Spy Sweeper and through work, Spyware Doctor. If I did a full scan with either one of those I would be left with less than 50% of my 1g of RAM. The RAM would never return all day. Then I discovered that a two minute memory scan with AVG Anti-Spyware would result in returning total RAM usage to only 20 some percent. I just enabled SD Starter Edition and scanned with it. After the scan I ended up with 46% of RAM in use and 40.1mb of virtual memory in use. I then ran a 38 second scan with RAM Def XT. After the scan I had only 27% of RAM in use and the page file in use actually went down to 39.9mb. Point is, this program didn't just move the processes to virtual memory. I suspect the MemInfo defrager and AVg do the same.

They are the same. I remember AVG AS and I believe ewido 4 doing this. After doing a bit of research it was an unfortunate side effect.

[smc1979]

On vista the only time I have seen cleanmem not work was when vista was giving it rights to do the job.

 

I have it running on a my vista all day, BUT i have UAC turned off and superfech turned off.

 

if you have the uac on try this instead, go to the windows task scheduler, and you should see the cleanmem entry, right click on it and go to properties,

at the bottom should be a check to run with highest privileges put a check on that and hit apply and then ok. now right click on the entry and click run.

 

See if it works then. if so the uac is blocking it, you may have to right click on cleanmem and go to the compatibility tab and tell it to run as administrator.

 

A pain im sure. All my customers run with uac turned off. The reason being is all the uac has done is teach my customers to just click ok every time it pops up without even reading it! but I dont want to start on the uac debate lol.

 

But look, the cleanmem is free, small and there if you need it. There will be people who like it and people who dont which we have seen here. it simply a tool ive had been using for over a year and decided to share! You have my respect if you tried it but it just wasn't for you, I thank you for testing it.

 

If you tried it and plan on using it good for you, im glad I could help.

 

Shane

[Tom AZ]

I've only been using this little app a couple days now, but so far, it seems to be working great from me on my XP machine. I do a lot of audio work, which at times, can be fairly memory intensive.

[YoKenny]

YoKenny is not that kind of user.He investigates and discovers better ways are available.

I don't think he is ever finished checking things out.

davey

I don't believe in If it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

I do believe in reading then trying things out to see what happens.

 

It prevents me from getting bored out of my mind up here on the 10th floor watching seagulls fly by and looking for something good to watch on TV.

 

I did happen to find Black Adder this morning which I thoroughly enjoyed.

 

By the way, Rowan Atkinson is Mr. Bean.

[Tarun.]

I agree, YoKenny. That's why I never recommend people use any tweaking programs or anything like nLite/vLite, why they should leave their services alone and so forth. Microsoft made their OS and they obviously know what is best. Those who complain about the bloat of the OS is because they're the same ones who complain about why something doesn't work with the OS from the get-go. So Microsoft packages drivers and other necessities.

[smc1979]

Sorry I dont agree that microsoft knows best. They release there OS's in a default setup and leave it to admins and such to change things as needed, this is why micosoft has so many tools to do this. nlite/vlite simply takes the microsoft tools and puts them in a easy interface. Microsoft even release tools to change the setups of windows. Some common tools are sysprep, tweakui and others. how about in xp pre sp1 remeber how ms had the messaging service on by default and spammers went crazy with it?

 

With 1000's of different hardware systems out there there is no way ms can make things perfect. MS takes care of its corp customers before the home users, this is a common fact. In a corp environment the messaging service is a good service but for home users?

 

So fine tuning the OS is always a option, Why fix what ain't broke? Simple to make it more efficient.

 

But being a Computer admin for 14 years to hear MS knows best just about made me bust a gut. If it wasnt for Microsoft I wouldnt have a job.

 

Now this isnt bashing just my 2 cents.

 

There is always 2 sides to an issue. Now for most the default of windows is fine. But for people who want things perfect, like myself, MS provides tools for you to make things better, so even MS knows the default isnt always best.

[Humpty]

I think in order for Firefox to drop it's mem usage whem minimized you need to have or add the config.trim_on_minimize to about:config.

FF Tweak Guide

config.trim_on_minimize [boolean] (False) *Create - This setting only works in Windows, and determines whether Firefox - much like other Windows applications - reduces its memory usage when minimized to the Taskbar. If set to true (the default), it will use less memory when minimized, which is useful for systems with low RAM and multiple open applications. However if set to false it will speed up minimizing/maximizing Firefox, as it will not constantly attempt to reduce and reclaim RAM, and this can also increase stability - thus I recommend a setting of false for most people.

Also setting both pipelining entries to true within about:config can speed up browsing quite a bit.

 

Back to windows and I have used vLite and nLite to create unattended install disks where I start the install, walk away for 20 odd minutes then come back and there's the desktop with my drivers and half my tweaks installed.

 

Then with XP I go over to Bold Fortune's? slimming XP guide and mainly get rid of the larger files/folders that I deem unnecessary for my setup.

 

One such folder I delete the contents of is the system32 dll cache which is used for backup purposes.This folder contains near on 2,500 files at around 400 meg.

 

Now why would I want to delete the contents and slim XP/Vista?Mainly because I use Ghost Images as backups and it means that Ghost has less data to backup improving performance not to mention that any defrags and security scans are way faster due to less data there is to defrag/scan.

 

But we are all different and I have a good/bad habit (which ever way you want to look at it) of ripping a system to pieces to see how it works and I have had to use my Ghost Images to get me out of the manure on quite a few occassions.

 

I also store Ghost Images on usb drives where I can hook up any hard drive, boot from Ghost floppy and restore any image in under 5 minutes.This also saves a full install, tweaking, slimmimg and activation.

 

My slimmed down Vista Ultimate install on an old 120 gig drive.

[davey]

I think in order for Firefox to drop it's mem usage whem minimized you need to have or add the config.trim_on_minimize to about:config.

FF Tweak Guide

 

 

 

But we are all different and I have a good/bad habit (which ever way you want to look at it) of ripping a system to pieces to see how it works and I have had to use my Ghost Images to get me out of the manure on quite a few occassions.

 

I also store Ghost Images on usb drives where I can hook up any hard drive, boot from Ghost floppy and restore any image in under 5 minutes.This also saves a full install, tweaking, slimmimg and activation.

 

My slimmed down Vista Ultimate install on an old 120 gig drive.

 

Thanks Humpty for clarifying the matter about ripping the guts out.

 

NEW USERS ADVICE

As you can see there are many ways of customizing a system for a specific users needs.

Keep in mind that most users have an enjoyable time with their PC by sticking to Windows as provided.

It is the best setup for most users.Especially the default settings.

The same holds true for many products that you use such as CCleaner.

If you are not knowledgeable enough yet don't try to use tools or Registry "fixers" that are only needed for very specific reasons.

 

Your PC will work fine for you if you clean out the junk every now and then.Defrag your hard drive only when Windows Disk Defragmenter says you need to.Use your firewall enabled and install simple to use Security programs and such.You also need a simple to use Back up program to back up your data and your most important system files.More advice can be found by a "seaerch" for 'NEW USERS ADVICE".You can also start at this link and get yourself and your PC in good basic shape.

http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=102905

 

Good luck to all,

davey

[YoKenny]

But for people who want things perfect,

 

If I wanted perfect I would become a Tibetan monk and move to Costa Rica and open up a retreat where birds, butterflies and people could migrate to and news would come by paper once per month.

[DJpailo]

I agree with Tarun. These programmes don't do anything. It may feel faster, but actually, it probably does more harm then good. Just use CCleaner and defraggler and your PC will run smoothly. If they don't work, then a RAM upgrade is needed.

[davey]

I agree with Tarun. These programmes don't do anything. It may feel faster, but actually, it probably does more harm then good. Just use CCleaner and defraggler and your PC will run smoothly. If they don't work, then a RAM upgrade is needed.

You need to do a lot of reading of this thread and many others.Including the links provided by Tarun.

He understands where we are coming from.

 

davey More RAM helps until you run out of RAM and ports to put it in.

P.S. There really is no agreement or disagreement on this subject.We don't believe in magic pills either.If we did this thread wouldn't be so long.

Edited June 15, 2008 by davey

[CTskifreak]

You need to do a lot of reading of this thread and many others.Including the links provided by Tarun.

He understands where we are coming from.

 

davey More RAM helps until you run out of RAM and ports to put it in.

 

Or until your OS doesn't support any more RAM .

32Bit OS's = around 3.25 GBs

64 = A LOT MORE

 

 

AJ

[TeeJay3800]

I would like to try this useful-sounding program, and it seemed to install successfully, but when I check it's status in Scheduled Tasks, it says "could not start." This is on a XP SP3 system that is otherwise working properly. Does anyone have any suggestions for getting this program to run?

[slowday444]

I would like to try this useful-sounding program, and it seemed to install successfully, but when I check it's status in Scheduled Tasks, it says "could not start." This is on a XP SP3 system that is otherwise working properly. Does anyone have any suggestions for getting this program to run?

I'm sure the author can help!

[smc1979]

Right click on the scheduled task and click properties, in there put a check mark on run only when logged on.

 

When windows xp is using an account without a password the tasks cant run so you have to tell xp to run it only when logged on.

 

I just updated my setup an hour ago to make the run only when logged on as default.

 

So hopefully no more people will run into this problem.

 

Shane

[TeeJay3800]

That seems to have fixed it. Thanks!

[TeeJay3800]

I'm trying to get this tool to work on my Windows 2000 machine, and I'm getting the same "could not start" error. The task properties window looks different from how it does in XP, and I don't see a "only run when logged in" check box. How do I get this running under 2000?

[davey]

I'm trying to get this tool to work on my Windows 2000 machine, and I'm getting the same "could not start" error. The task properties window looks different from how it does in XP, and I don't see a "only run when logged in" check box. How do I get this running under 2000?

Hey TeeJay,

You are going to get the full story at the authors site. http://www.pcwintech.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=14

Please post your question there.

Good luck,

davey

[TeeJay3800]

Thanks for the link Davey, but the author does not provide any solution for getting the program to run under Windows 2000 using the task scheduler. The solution for XP is simple, but that check box does not exist in 2000. The program works if I run it manually, but it does not start using the task scheduler...

[davey]

Thanks for the link Davey, but the author does not provide any solution for getting the program to run under Windows 2000 using the task scheduler. The solution for XP is simple, but that check box does not exist in 2000. The program works if I run it manually, but it does not start using the task scheduler...

OK understood.

More members here with a possible solution or alternative scheduling method.

davey

[DennisD]

 

If I wanted perfect I would become a Tibetan monk and move to Costa Rica and open up a retreat where birds, butterflies and people.....

 

Don't forget the Dust Bunnies Ken.

 

I've been using this from a Quick Launch shortcut since it was first posted, and a quick click after browsing for any length of time works for me.

[TeeJay3800]

I've been using this from a Quick Launch shortcut since it was first posted, and a quick click after browsing for any length of time works for me.

That's a good idea. I've had no luck getting the automated task to work on Windows 2000, so I just added a shortcut to the Quick Launch bar and click it every so often.

 

After running it, should I be seeing the Mem Usage in Task Manager drop? So far, I really haven't seen much of a difference.

[davey]

That's a good idea. I've had no luck getting the automated task to work on Windows 2000, so I just added a shortcut to the Quick Launch bar and click it every so often.

 

After running it, should I be seeing the Mem Usage in Task Manager drop? So far, I really haven't seen much of a difference.

I would say it depends on how often and when you run it.

That's what it is for to keep down a build up over time.Must be doing the job for you.

davey

[DennisD]

That's a good idea. I've had no luck getting the automated task to work on Windows 2000, so I just added a shortcut to the Quick Launch bar and click it every so often.

 

After running it, should I be seeing the Mem Usage in Task Manager drop? So far, I really haven't seen much of a difference.

 

As davey says, it depends on what you're doing.

 

Note Opera in this before screenshot:

 

 

After using Cleanmem:

 

 

I'd already knocked Windows Explorer down from over 30mb to 3.4mb.

 

So with just 2 processes I've gained over 120mb of memory. Of course Opera will creep up again, but in this instance it never came anywhere near half what it was.

 

I'm not sure if I could notice any benefit, but thinking about it logically, and not knowing the technicalities of this so I may get shot down here, with only 512mb memory to play with, I imagine I'm using my page-file less.