Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

burtman

Experienced Members
  • Content Count

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About burtman

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0
  1. burtman

    Firefox 3 Final

    I am truly baffled! Firefox has been my rock for some time now, but after trying FF3 I'm as wary as I ever was with IE. I'm a bit late on the uptake, but I installed FF3 on my work mc today - instantly disappointed cos it reported 80% of my extensions failed to work Anyway, I thought maybe it'll take a while for the developers to update them - the main concern was my fav - IETab didn't work (no updates avail. etc.) - a lot of my work sites need IE to work properly, so I thought - bin it - re-install FF2; did so and it all crashed ...! Again, and again - only FF safe mode worked ... Somehow, I recovered FF2 (numerous reboots etc.) and was able to resume work (with FF2) and forgot about it until I got home. I had sent the link to download FF3 to my home address (before all the hoo-ha), and for some reason (morbid curiosity perhaps?) I installed FF3 and it only complained about 10% of my extensions.....WTF?? I know I have some different extensions at work & home (such as at home I like the Dilbert add-in [can't have that at work!], etc.), but most are common such as IETab (which did not complain - in fact it updated..!) What is going on?? My home mc is Vista (32 bit), my work mc is XP - why the difference??? I'm writing this now in FF3 (may sound even weirder but it is physically different looking [and not just Vista diifs.] from FF3 on my work mc) All my fav. extensions work sweet on Vista, but not on XP - huh?? Why? I can understand the other way round - what happened to FF3?
  2. bit slow on the uptake but, .... their web-site goes boogaloo with firefox (bit of an exaggeration, but...) Is it worth getting ?
  3. FYI - the PerfLib files are Windows performance files (and can - i'm sure - be safely removed) - see http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechn....mspx?mfr=true#
  4. My tupence worth, and not wanting to sound too paranoid ... Even after using some of the generic software 'erasing' software, I would be concerned about passing on hard-drives (especially in this kind of work) Although I'm sure your daughter trusts her friend, what about after? If her friend passes it on to another friend (or it gets stolen...) and so on. I know a lot of cynics will say 'so what', but I am sure that your daughter has worked with computer forensics guys who could tell her a tale or two about so-called 'unrecoverable' information..! I would, in your position (and given the information that may remain), I would replace the hard drive and incinerate the old one. Sounds drastic, but given the possible and potential information that may remain, well...! Normally I would agree with the info the guys have given above (using Eraser etc.), but in this situation you can't be too careful Let's not get paranoid tho (u talkin' to me?)
  5. The reason you may like to keep the files in the temp folder for a certain amount of time is primarily if you are installing software. Many installers need you to restart Windows constantly - if you have set CCleaner to run at restart, the temp files that the installer needed will now be erased if not set to 48 hours. I agree with pp999 that we should be able to configure this option as I would like to run CCleaner at startup, but with this option off I run the risk of corrupting installs etc., whereas if we could say 1 hour before deleted, any installs should have safely completed.
  6. Hey Hairbautt, You can add the option to open defraggler (or any .exe) to the context menu (right-clicking the HD icon) by doing the following; (admittedly it only opens Defraggler, and does not defrag the specified drive, but it works-ish) BTW - I've purposely been blunt in the info below, because if you are not familiar with the registry - DO NOT GO NEAR IT (EVER) !!! 1. Navigate to HKCR\Folder\shell 2. Add key 'Defraggler' (or whatever name u want), and add sub-key to this key called 'command' (has to be 'command') 3. Set the (Default) entry and enter the full path to Defraggler (e.g. C:\Program Files\Defraggler\defraggler.exe) 4. Close registry editor, and now when you right click the drive (C:, D:..) icon you will have a 'Defraggler' option (if you want this 'new' context menu on all folders as well, repeat the process but for HKCR\Directory\shell - although until we can specify exact contents to defrag there's not much point) Of course it doesn't automatically start defragging, etc. but hey - maybe soon
  7. If it hasn't finished by now, take a well deserved weekend break away Actually, it also depends on your machine spec - I used to have an 'older' machine with only a 180Gig internal drive and it took (on average) 15 hours to complete (not even sure if that was a deep scan or not). That said, I have a modern machine with a 320Gig external drive - still takes the guts of 8 hours to complete (that said I normally set it scanning last thing at night and it 'usually' has completed by the time I head out to work, so it may be quicker)
  8. I fourth that Actually in Vista the same is (apparently) present, though seemingly invisible. Turn it off with 'Organize | Folder and Search Options | View tab' and check the 'Always show icons, never thumbnails' - ask me no more; I'm using Vista under duress
  9. As a lot of you already know, MS Vista has come with some (I think) dubious extra security protocols. One of which is the constant, and somewhat irritating 'confirmation' of almost everything you click. Even though you may be the only user of the computer (and then by defacto you should be an Admistrator) you are actually not an Administrator ! (good ol' MS) To get round this (I know you can disable the UAC etc., but MS being MS you will never be in control - and many apps will not work correctly unless u are a 'real'l administrator) do the following; - open a command prompt - WITH elevated priveledges - find the cmd.exe program (some have said u can search for it, but I found (at least on Home Version) it cannot be searched for) - it is in the normal C:\Windows\Systems32 folder, but instead of dbl-clicking it, press ctrl-shft-enter ... this should open a prompt in 'Administrator' mode (it will have 'Admisitrator:' pre-pended in the title bar) - failing this, right-click the cmd.exe icon and select 'Run as Administrator' From this command prompt enter the following; net user administrator /active:yes and close all windows & restart. You will now have another user with full and proper admin rights to your vista machine - u might like to add a password to this account tho ! As a side note, if you have ever noticed a medium / severe slow-down with your broadband ever since using Vista you may like to try the following also; (I had a 4mb with Virgin with XP no problem; since connecting a new laptop to the same connection my download speed dropped to less than 1meg - until I did the following) As above, open a command prompt with elevated priveledges (or maybe with your new admin ac) and enter the following; netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=disabled (you can check with netsh interface tcp show global and u can of couse revert it by using =normal as the parameter above) for some reason, an ever so clever boffin in MS decided that in and out feeds should match. So, if there was an inbalance vista would try to compensate by leveling the feeds - in effect capping your download speed :-) Any questions (and I insist) ask Mickeysods
  10. burtman

    Life on Mars?

    Yea, true .. so we can wipe-out any possible life on Mars too
  11. Over the years there has been many discussions about deleting index.dat files In my experience there has been NO software applications that can truely delete / zero-fill / erase these files whilst Windows has a lock on them. Programs like Tracks Eraser and such like do not actually zero-fill the index.dat - they trick the system into thinking a zero-filled file exists, which Windows will overwrite when restarted; effectively doing the same as CCleaner (and others do) at restart. As far as I know, unless it belongs to Windows and ordered by Windows these files cannot and will not be touched during normal operating times. With regards to other index.dat files (which I know many do exist) I don't know - I assume the same applies; although some may be able to be deleted 'live' Take the example of editing a C++ program whilst it is running in real-time ... this will never be allowed to happen, nor could it happen as it could potentially & irrevocially crash the system - so it won't happen. If someone can prove that a software application can categorically delete the 'required' file for browsing in real-time, then I think they will be very rich. The simple fact is that index.dat files (on the most part) cannot be erased whilst Windows is running - no matter what claims an application makes - by any 'software' based tool.
  12. I don't know how CCleaner determines a files to be older than 48 hours, but I do know that even opening a file in Windows will change it's 'Last accessed date', but not it's created date - so I'm guessing if you opened a file (that was created many years ago) that somehow will then end up in the temp folder with an accessed date of today, this may not be deleted. If this is the case, then I would definately suggest that CC should look at the created date - although, having used CC for, oh, many decades I would have thought this would have been noticed / rectified before now.
  13. Looks like some sort of dictionary utility has gone mad
  14. I've noticed this behaviour also (although I'm now using a new Vista machine - haven't used my XP machine for a while) - even if I manually added the prefetch folder into winapp2.ini it still did not work. I had to manually delete the files (perhaps CC is treating it like the 'temp' folder & only files older than 48 hours, but in that case why report it) I'm not sure if you are correct in saying that Windows will delete the files itself - these files are used to help Windows boot faster, so I don't see it willingly delete them (I could be wrong) when it may need them later. BTW deleting them manually (with or without CC) will not harm to Windows, it just means the next boot may appear slow (as it 'prefetches' the information for next time the applications start to make them quicker) - so in essence it 'guesses' what apps you will need to use and pre-loads info. Anyway, I have seen this behaviour before but it never really bothered me too much. It would be nice to be resolved though - CC should clean what it says it will clean.
  15. With regards to updates, has anyone experienced the 'Check for updates' link in CCleaner not doing anything when using Vista? With my little experience of Vista so far, I may not be too far from the truth when I think that it nay have something to do with Vista's over paranoid 'dont do anything unless you let me' mentality, but I only get a warning / confirmation on opening CC - however, it does nothing when I click the link, and I have to manually check the web-site (which I may add is only a couple-of clicks to do) each week or so ... Anyone ever experienced this? (if the answer is on another post, I apologise - I can't find it)
×
×
  • Create New...