Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

marmite

Experienced Members
  • Content Count

    867
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by marmite

  1. +1 ... recurse is technically correct ... but everyone understands what 'include' means and it's also the term used by most other software.
  2. marmite

    Animations

    Wow. Hadn't seen that before ... some fantastically clever stuff !
  3. Generally I take updates to security software quickly. I've had no major issues with Avira and I'm happy to take a mitigated risk. To repeat from my last post, I would expect teething problems. No, sorry to disappoint, but I don't. The hidden objects behaviour is workable and nothing is stopping me from scanning my PC, nothing is stopping Avira from functioning. And since I have a regression path to the point before I upgraded, NO problem with Avira would have been a show-stopper. Experience. I work with software. It's my day job. I expect things to go wrong generally from time to time. I deal with it and learn by doing so. I accept the risk and one way or another I can deal with anything that crops up - as can many people here. If I'd come here ranting and moaning about 'what Avira 10 had done to my PC' I could maybe understand where you're coming from. But I didn't; I posted here to discuss the issues. Threads like this help to publicise what the issues are and understand how to address them. Maybe there are less experienced folk who'll see this and think "hmmm, I'll hang fire for a while" ... well that's all well and good if it helps to inform their choice. As hazelnut says, it's personal choice.
  4. Hmmm. I choose to upgrade to the latest version of my current AV. Does that mean I'm jumping all over it? Who's doing that? Like others I'm merely discussing its behaviour on here. I'm hardly ranting about it not working properly. And no I wouldn't expect a new AV release to have major issues, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see teething problems. But either way I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. 30 minutes and I can have my OS back to the pre-upgrade image if I wish. Jees, lay off the high-and-mighty attitude.
  5. Well we're never gonna agree there, because we're applying different criteria That explains the purists' view I use quite a lot of PortableApps' software, and I'd be horrified if one of them stored settings in the registry because I perceive a common standard that they're adhering to. But Speccy's build being described as portable doesn't give me an issue because I'm using it in the broader sense ... as fas as I know there's no 'standard' for portable applications, and in any case I'm using portable in the descriptive sense. In a PortableApps context, what standards are you working from?
  6. Ah ... sorry In that case I don't know what could cause that. Anyone else getting the same problem?
  7. So are you saying that the install date in CCleaner is different from the one in Add/Remove progams?
  8. Thanks Alan, that's a very interesting anecdote and should serve as something of a warning. There are two possible problem areas there, the installer in question and CCleaner's registry cleaner. Without knowing exactly what the flagged registry entries were it's hard to apportion blame - it may be a crap installer and/or it may be that there are some scenarios that CCleaner doesn't properly cater for. It just shows how important it is to be aware of you own machine's configuration, as you clearly are. It's also a bit of a poke in the eye for the "I want to be able to clean the registry on /AUTO" brigade. The one thing I would strongly disagree with is your headliner ... multiple profiles are not inherently "dangerous" ... it's just down to how you manage your PC! Reg. cleaning a machine multiple profiles ... now there's where the care is clearly needed.
  9. I agree with what you're asking for, I just wouldn't want someone to read your post title and think they couldn't run this version from a flash drive on multiple machines. No, it just means you need to re-apply your settings. You can quote standards at me all day long and I'm quite happy with the notion that it currently doesn't meet all the desirable criteria to truly be called 'a portable implementation of Speccy'. But there's nothing to prevent you from running it on another PC. As I said before, it's semantics. It may not be a perfect portable implementation, but it still functions. Yes I realise exactly what you're asking for ... I didn't realise the other Piriform zip builds used ini files though. As I said before, Speccy is still in Beta so maybe this will be done at a later stage.
  10. What? Yes you can. But that's not what the OP is debating anyway.
  11. I lied. It hadn't installed completely for some reason and actually ran the V9 scan. I too have the hidden objects issue that Andavari had. Bit of a pain ... need to investigate.
  12. I think Luck10 may be referring to build rather than version. Speccy is still in beta and there's only an msi and a zip. It depends how purist you want to be. It's may not meet the purist definition of a 'portable application'; but nonetheless it is portable, you can stick it on a flash drive and run it on any PC. Other Piriform software (and this may happen to Speccy) has U3 builds which presumably are true 'portable apps'. I think most users are primarily interested in the fact it will run off a flash drive.
  13. Could this be something to do with the time zone setting? The install date seems to be fixed - there's no time component. However if you change your time zone it is possible to go + or - 1 day relative to that install date. You'll probably find that at some times during the day, the install date and the actual date are the same. Edited to add: this isn't CCleaner by the way - it just picks up the install date recorded by Windows.
  14. As long as it's not the VSO Port
  15. Installed and running on XP without problems. ETA: Though considering the installer decompression routine stresses the importance of ensuring the authenticity of the package, I'm surprised that there isn't a checksum available on the Avira site, or better still that the package isn't signed.
  16. I don't call a considered decision not to implement a feature 'ignoring popular claim'. Just because 'some people want a feature' that doesn't necessarily make it 'a good thing'. Any software that automatically cleans the registry without at least forcing a backup of removed entries has to be questioned. Cleaning without knowing what you're going to remove is a bit like driving blind, you might hit something and you might not. And even if you get to the other side and the car seems fine, did you really mean to run over that hedgehog? I'd love to know how being an 'advanced' user reduces the chance of any registry cleaner removing inappropriate items if you could run it 'auto' fashion. I would tend to think it's the more experienced users that want to see what keys are potentially being deleted and that not doing this is a more head-in-the-sand approach.
  17. CCleaner makes no attempt to enumerate all of the user profiles for the other CCleaner functions so it makes sense that it's only going to do the current user. If you look at the registry scan analysis you'll see HKCU (which of course by definition is current user only) along with the other hives, but nothing for other profiles. So I think it's a fairly safe assumption. In a corporate environment this is the behaviour you would expect by default anyway - you wouldn't want to be messing around with other users profiles 'accidentally'.
  18. I don't get this from gmail. I don't have any extensions installed, like the toolbar.
  19. Yup ... it's not always crystal clear is it ... at least you're sorted now
  20. It will call the same uninstaller that Add/Remove Programs calls.
  21. I'd be surprised if the reg cleaner loaded the Local User hives for each profile. However (not /) cleaning the other LU hives isn't going to affect anything in the current user - so it's not really much to worry about. ETA: Good point by the way Miss M; many people think about running CCleaner in different profiles, but the reg cleaning behaviour is rarely mentioned.
  22. Eh? The fix is out early, as the article you refer to states. Just downloaded it for the PortableApps version More info ... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/23/fi...x_zero_day_fix/
  23. Do you mean the setup executables? If so you can delete any or all of them. You can always download an old version from filehippo, but none of the setup exes are needed for CCleaner to run. If you mean CCleaner.exe then you only need the latest version. ETA: just noticed it's your first post - welcome to the forums
  24. To avoid conflicts (which I guess may actually compromise security) the usual recommendation is that you don't have more than one software firewall running.
  25. El Reg's short article ... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/22/bi...r_dodgy_update/
×
×
  • Create New...