If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
I have a new Dell XPS 8500, with Windows 7
Professional, SP1,with Spywareblaster, Avast, and Windows firewall. 1 TB HD Intel (R) Core (TM) i7-33-3770 CPU @ 3.40 GHz 3.40 GHz Ram 12.0 GB System type : 64-bit operating system I usually check for updates and run CCleaner, Defraggler at least once a week. Yesterday while running Defraggler I noticed that my used spaced increased during the process which is something I have never seen before. When I bought the computer 2 months ago it had 60GB of used space but that number has now risen to 73.4GB! I've added some files but not 13.4GB! I keep my computer as simple and clean as I can, and no games but I don't understand why Defraggler is doing this and over time this is going eat up my HD. So my question is how can I stop Defraggler from eating up my HD and is there a way to recover the 13.4 GBG? Thoughts/Suggestions? Robert |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
From:
I have a new Dell XPS 8500, with Windows 7 Professional, SP1,with Spywareblaster, Avast, and Windows firewall. 1 TB HD Intel (R) Core (TM) i7-33-3770 CPU @ 3.40 GHz 3.40 GHz Ram 12.0 GB System type : 64-bit operating system I usually check for updates and run CCleaner, Defraggler at least once a week. Yesterday while running Defraggler I noticed that my used spaced increased during the process which is something I have never seen before. When I bought the computer 2 months ago it had 60GB of used space but that number has now risen to 73.4GB! I've added some files but not 13.4GB! I keep my computer as simple and clean as I can, and no games but I don't understand why Defraggler is doing this and over time this is going eat up my HD. So my question is how can I stop Defraggler from eating up my HD and is there a way to recover the 13.4 GBG? Thoughts/Suggestions? Robert I'm sorry but based upon all previous discussions I have to ask whey are you even using Defraggler and not just the built-in capability ? Why are you using CCleaner ? You just got the PC. -- Dave Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp-in capability |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
Paul wrote:
wrote: I have a new Dell XPS 8500, with Windows 7 Professional, SP1,with Spywareblaster, Avast, and Windows firewall. 1 TB HD Intel (R) Core (TM) i7-33-3770 CPU @ 3.40 GHz 3.40 GHz Ram 12.0 GB System type : 64-bit operating system I usually check for updates and run CCleaner, Defraggler at least once a week. Yesterday while running Defraggler I noticed that my used spaced increased during the process which is something I have never seen before. When I bought the computer 2 months ago it had 60GB of used space but that number has now risen to 73.4GB! I've added some files but not 13.4GB! I keep my computer as simple and clean as I can, and no games but I don't understand why Defraggler is doing this and over time this is going eat up my HD. So my question is how can I stop Defraggler from eating up my HD and is there a way to recover the 13.4 GBG? Thoughts/Suggestions? Robert This is a hint for you. http://www.piriform.com/docs/defragg...run-defraggler "I ran Defraggler on my Windows Vista/7 PC and now I've lost one or more System Restore points. This is a known issue with Windows Vista/7 and third-party defragmentation tools such as Defraggler. The problem occurs when the amount of disk space set aside for System Restore is too low. Advanced users can clear out old System Restore points ('volume shadow copies') to make more room using this procedure." So what that tells you, is Defraggler is triggering tracking of the file changes it is making, and System Restore is making copies of *each* defragmented file. It's true, that "clearing out the old System Restore points", will recover the space, but that is a stupid thing to do. Better to use a defragmenter, that does not have an issue with System Restore. Then, there is no mess to clean up. And no, I don't have a list of defragmenters that work right :-) Just a guess, Paul This will give you a list to work from, if you want to try some other ones out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...ation_software Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
I always thought these were better products. I
had them on the 8200 and thought I would just use them on the 8500. From your question, I shouldn't? Robert |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
According to David I shouldn't be using either Ccleaner or Defraggler but just stick with what the computer came with but I don't even know what that's called, whether its automatic or where it's located? Robert |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
I've uninstalled CcCleaner and Defraggler.
Robert |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
wrote:
According to David I shouldn't be using either Ccleaner or Defraggler but just stick with what the computer came with but I don't even know what that's called, whether its automatic or where it's located? Robert "How to Use Windows 7 Disk Defragmenter" http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials...-open-use.html "Open the Start Menu, and double click on to expand All Programs, Accessories, System Tools, and click on Disk Defragmenter." If you leave the computer running regularly, into the wee hours when Windows has "maintenance" activity scheduled, it can do things like defragmentation on its own. That's what the "scheduled" part of this dialog is for. On my Windows 7 machine, it would not normally be running at 3 A.M., so I miss that maintenance window. But if you just want to run the thing manually, there are buttons at the bottom. http://www.sevenforums.com/attachmen...-use-step2.jpg The method used, is entirely unique in terms of experience. Gone is the nice display with a graphical representation of files that are fragmented or not. The reason for that, is because the tool will not defragment files larger than 50MB, the display would look "ugly" when it was finished. To hide the ugliness, there is no display. There is a status that shows "passes", that seems to go on forever. It might seem a bit more efficient than what you're used to. The purpose of only defragmenting small files, is based on measurements of what is and what is not important to performance. So the built-in defragmenter is not the usual kind of "polishing" application. It doesn't seek visual perfection in terms of where the red, green, blue bars or blocks would normally be located. It seeks instead, to tidy up the parts of the disk that are important to tidy up. And nothing more. Because it doesn't defragment everything, it ends up being faster than traditional tools. Whereas I've had the WinXP defragmenter take more than eight hours to run on a volume, a more usual time for the Windows 7 one might be ten minutes. The philosophy on CHKDSK is a bit different too. And the documentation on that is hard to find. There is a claim that data structures in the file system, are checked while the system is running, meaning that fewer latent errors should accumulate in the NTFS file systems. You can still run CHKDSK manually if you want, for reassurance. And the new CHKDSK has a bad habit - it will eat all the RAM on the machine. If you have an 8GB memory on the computer, the new CHKDSK (64 bit version), will eat around 7GB of it. The way to stop that, is to obtain a 32 bit copy of CHKDSK and run that instead, as that cannot (by design) gobble more than 2GB of memory. Now, if I hadn't mentioned that, you might not have even noticed, but I think it's important to understand that flaw is present in it. People who have tried to CHKDSK four partitions at the same time, found their machine became almost non-responsive, due to the appetite the CHKDSK program has. The older versions of CHDDSK, were not as presumptuous as this. They had a smaller appetite. One way to get the 32 bit CHKDSK, is to look on a 32 bit installer DVD. I keep both 32 bit and 64 bit DVD images of Win7 and Win8 here, for precisely this reason. Any time I need a particular "flavor" of executable, I have it on hand. Since I don't do a lot of CHKDSK though, this isn't a priority with me - at the time the issue was raised, I tested it and was satisfied with my workaround (2GB limitation by using the 32 bit version). The need hasn't arisen on Windows 8 yet, for me to test it. Who knows, maybe the designers at Redmond, had a change of heart. HTH, Paul |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
wrote:
I always thought these were better products. I had them on the 8200 and thought I would just use them on the 8500. From your question, I shouldn't? Robert It's up to you what you use . |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
From:
I always thought these were better products. I had them on the 8200 and thought I would just use them on the 8500. From your question, I shouldn't? Robert If you were someone , here, answering questions and had thorough OS knowledge - no problem. However you have shown that you are not that knowledgeable and that you have a new PC a with a new OS (to you) and I don't think it is a good idea to use 3rd party software to "tweak" the OS so soon after its acquisition. -- Dave Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
David H. Lipman wrote:
From: I always thought these were better products. I had them on the 8200 and thought I would just use them on the 8500. From your question, I shouldn't? Robert If you were someone , here, answering questions and had thorough OS knowledge - no problem. However you have shown that you are not that knowledgeable and that you have a new PC a with a new OS (to you) and I don't think it is a good idea to use 3rd party software to "tweak" the OS so soon after its acquisition. There is another way you could answer this question. The OP had the 8200 running WinXP and the 8500 running Windows 7. The OSes come with an Upgrade Advisor, which you can get in advance. In this case, you would run the following tool on the 8200, to get some idea whether the software programs on the 8200 would be "compatible" when run on the 8500 with its Windows 7 OS. "Windows 7 Upgrade Advisor" http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl...ils.aspx?id=20 The compatibility rating is very rough, in that there could be cases where a software application does work pretty well on the new platform. It might be only a tiny aspect which is not compatible (something not a lot of people use in it). The database of information Microsoft collects, isn't exactly a precise review of what works or doesn't work, when a program is moved to the new OS. So while you do get a nice list, it's mainly for the amusement value. If you want to run the software bad enough, you end up installing and testing it anyway. If the old version really doesn't work, then you end up buying, installing, and testing a newer version. Paul |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
Everyone has their own forte, and I never
claimed that I was computer literate. I've tried to do my best from the advice I get here. Robert |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
It sounds as if Microsoft's version of System Tools
Scan disk, Chkdsk and Defrag)aren't that great and most people don't know this level of information or are aware of it. It seems there's allot to just maintaining the computer. I don't want to mess up this computer but at the same time I would like some maintenance programs to keep it clean. Again, I thought computers were suppose to be user friendly? Robert |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
From:
It sounds as if Microsoft's version of System Tools Scan disk, Chkdsk and Defrag)aren't that great and most people don't know this level of information or are aware of it. It seems there's allot to just maintaining the computer. I don't want to mess up this computer but at the same time I would like some maintenance programs to keep it clean. Again, I thought computers were suppose to be user friendly? Robert They work well enough for ordinary use. -- Dave Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
wrote in message ... It sounds as if Microsoft's version of System Tools Scan disk, Chkdsk and Defrag)aren't that great and most people don't know this level of information or are aware of it. It seems there's allot to just maintaining the computer. I don't want to mess up this computer but at the same time I would like some maintenance programs to keep it clean. Clean of what? Malware? Viruses? Best solution for that is to avoid browsing questionable sites. At least some browsers now have the capacity to warn you of questionable sites. Be sure to keep your anti-virus program' definitions up to date too. If by "clean", you mean a registry free of extraneous entries then my best advice to you is to just leave it alone. A bit of extra won't hurt anything. Same goes for defragging. True it may take a tiny bit more time to access something that is fragmented but that time is so small you could never measure it. Other than that, there is no reason to defragment a drive. Oh, OK, the extra thrashing might cut a bit of time off the drive's life but - again - that would be very small. Again, I thought computers were suppose to be user friendly? They are, relatively so, if you use them as a consumer. If one tries to be an IT guy without the necessary knowledge, they could be formidable. Really, Robert, the best things you can do are to make an image of the new machine once you have it set up and then to leave it (the machine) alone. Don't mess with it and things will go smoothly for you. dadiOH |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|