Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

Willy2

Experienced Members
  • Content Count

    1,559
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Willy2


  1. - The current version of Defraggler (v2.21) was released years ago. The program is known to have "a few rough edges" and it seems the developers never found a good solution to get rid of those "rough edges". I fear the developers "lost interest" in trying to improve the program code (and that includes making better use of the CPU's processing power) or the developers have other priorities. And that's a pity because I use the program every day.

    - Question: Do you see a difference between a compressed file and a non compressed (video-)file when you open it with your mediaplayer ? (I never had to compress files in order to free up space)

    - I also could imagine that Defraggler could speed up the defragmenting process when it would read the files (to be physically moved) into memory before it starts to (physically) move those files. Currently that doesn't seem to be the case when I look at the resource monitor in my Windows 7 system.

    - The "heavy lifting" of moving files is done by an Windows API and I could imagine that that API has "a number of flaws" as well. Don't know what to make of it.

    (Developers of Defraggler:  Are you reading this thread/these posts ???)


  2. - Defraggler is indeed known to use a (fairly) high amount of CPU in combination with low disk I/O and low memory usage when it's performing its tasks.

    - The amount of free space on your HD is 11 GB / 660 GB  * 100% = 1.6 %. Then it's no wonder that every (Windows) copy/move/read operation involving that drive will take (much) more time. Including using Defraggler, no matter what option you choose. I fear there's no way around to move between say 30 (5% of 660 GB) or 60 GB (10% of 660 GB) of video files to another (extra) drive. Then I am convinced that every Defraggler option will perform better.

    - Having all videos defragmented doesn't automatically mean that your media player will perform better. I have the same problem with (some of) my (defragmented) large video files as well. Although I perhaps don't use the most sophisticated media player.


  3. - The KB numbers of the february 2018 "Monthly Security Rollup Update":

                      Windows 7:  KB 4074598

                      Windows 8.1: KB 4074594

                      .NET v3.5 through v4.7.1 for Windows 7: KB 4076492

    - If the user wants to find other "Monthly Security Rollup Updates" for other Operating systems and/or .NET versions, then search the "MS Update Catalogus" with the words "Security Rollup" and sort the results on the date (released).


  4. - Ouch. Did a search with the words "Security Rollup" on the "MS update catalogus" website and then a number of things showed up. It turns out that MS DID release "Security Rollups" for e.g. Win 7 and for a number of .NET software versions.

    - But the "Security Roll up" wasn't issued through the "Windows Update" mechanism. I am VERY sure of that !!!!


  5. - I took a better look at the "MS Update catalogus" website. It turns out that MS released an IE 11 update for Win 8.1 in february 2018 as well. But it has a different KB number (KB 4074736) than the update for Win 7. (Win 8.1 updates Always have - compared with Win 7 updates - a different KB number). To find that Win 8.1 IE 11 update the user must sort the list of updates on the date of release.


  6. - In february 2018 Microsoft didn't release a "Rollup Update" for e.g. Windows 7.

    - People who are still using Internet Explorer 11 (I am one of them) still can update their IE 11 browser. MS has continued to release a separate "Cumulative Update for Internet Explorer 11" every month, alongside with the "Rollup Update". And even in february 2018 MS issued another "Cumulative Update for IE 11" (KB 4088835)".

    - These IE 11 updates aren't released through the "Windows Update" feature/mechanism. Instead the user has to go to the "Microsoft Update Catalog" website and search with the keywords "Internet Explorer 11 update".

    https://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Home.aspx


  7. - Defraggler has also "a problem" when the user wants to try to specify the minimum and maximum size of files to be searched in the "Search" tab.

    - I tried to enter the number "200" (MB) and "300" (MB) in the "size" fields but DF simply won't let me do that. When I tried to enter "200", DF turned that into "20". When I tried to enter "300" DF turned that into "30".

    - It should be very simple to enter "200". E.g. clear the field, type a "2", a "0" and a second "0". But after I typed the "2" the cursor did not stay on the right hand side of the "2" but it moved to the left hand side of the "2".

    - When the field contained "20", I tried to move the cursor one position to the right, to the right hand side of the "2". I was able to do that but DF "didn't like that" and moved the cursor back to the left hand side of the "2" within a split second. Even moving the cursor to the very right hand side of the "20" is impossible. DF simply won't let me do that.

     

    (I hope this behaviour isn't caused by interference of some other program running on my computer system)


  8. - I thought PIO mode was a problem in Windows XP only ?

    - Fragmentation has already dropped down to ~ 55% and then already such an increase in speed. WOW !!!!

    - I did some additional research with DF on my own laptop. Let DF list the fragmented files, sort the list on size and then (manuallly) defragment the largest files first. That should help to increase the read & write speed the most.

    - And then run "Defrag Free space" as well (several times) to compact those files on that drive.


  9. - Fiddling with the translated version(s) of OEC Beta exposed a number of bugs in the OEC program code. (I LOVE this kind of work). No information available on when OEC v2.80 will be (officially) released. I assume it depends on how fast the work on the translations progresses.

    - Still no news on when OEC will support IMAP.


  10. - I noticed that my signature is back. Thumbs up for Piriform !!!!!!! Thanks to the moderators who applied a (little) "pressure" ?

    - Perhaps the avatar box can be become rectangular (again) ? I hate to lose a part of my ear (of my previous avatar).


  11. - No, this isn't bad. Did you perhaps install one or more (new) games recently ? That could explain the high fragmentation (64%) and the long loading/reading times.

    - Defragmenting the drive either with Defraggler or with Windows Disk Defragmentation will certainly help to decrease the read and write times and increase performance.

    - Defragment the drive and report back if defragmentation helped to increase perfromance and if so by how much.

     


  12. - In Windows XP those System Restore Points (SRPs) can be defragmented by Defraggler (DF). But in newer Operating systems (e.g. Windows 7 and later) DF is unable to defragment those files. But you can tell DF to not show those SRPs.

    - Try the following: (temporarily) disable the SRP feature in Windows, remove all SRPs, defrag as much files as possible and then turn on the SRP feature.

    - I personally I regularly (say every week) move all non-system files to the end of the drive and regularly move all system files towards the beginning of the drive. DF has a number of options/features to do that.

×
×
  • Create New...