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 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 15:18:42 -0400, "dadiOH"
wrote: 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. I agree with all you say below and just want to add one point. Clean of what? Malware? Viruses? Best solution for that is to avoid browsing questionable sites. ....and to avoid opening attachments that you receive by e-mail unless you know that the person who sent it is *very* skilled technically. Just coming from a trusted friend or relative is not good enough. Even if the sender of the attachment doesn't want to infect you, if he is infected without realizing it, his attachment may be too, and if you open it you will get infected. 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 |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
David H. Lipman wrote:
Regsitry cleaners are NOT optional. They are Snake Oil and should not be used and actually avoided. Defragmentation should be performed either manually or via Task Scheduler at least once per month (depending on use, etc). The OS built-in The OS built-in defragmentation utility is all that's needed. Albeit I don't like Vista's lack of any feedback and Win7 and Win8's minimal feedback. I prefer Win2K, XP's and Win9x/ME visual representation of defragmentation. As far as I'm concerned, they had to remove the defragmentation graphical feedback, because it would show the still-fragmented files larger than 50MB. And then there would be too many support questions to answer. The older OSes defragmented everything, so the display was "worth looking at". To see how close to perfection it could get. Paul |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
From: "Paul"
David H. Lipman wrote: Regsitry cleaners are NOT optional. They are Snake Oil and should not be used and actually avoided. Defragmentation should be performed either manually or via Task Scheduler at least once per month (depending on use, etc). The OS built-in The OS built-in defragmentation utility is all that's needed. Albeit I don't like Vista's lack of any feedback and Win7 and Win8's minimal feedback. I prefer Win2K, XP's and Win9x/ME visual representation of defragmentation. As far as I'm concerned, they had to remove the defragmentation graphical feedback, because it would show the still-fragmented files larger than 50MB. And then there would be too many support questions to answer. The older OSes defragmented everything, so the display was "worth looking at". To see how close to perfection it could get. Paul At the very minimum a histogram would is warranted. Thus you have an idea what has been done and how long since started and you have an idea what is needed to complete and one can estimate a time frame for completion. -- Dave Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
wrote in message ... I've uninstalled CcCleaner and Defraggler. Robert I personally believe that you should reinstall CCleaner and use it, EXCEPT for its Registry Cleaner. CCleaner can speed up cleaning up temp files, history, cookies, etc. Leave the Registry Cleaner alone!!!! Buffalo |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
From: "Buffalo"
wrote in message ... I've uninstalled CcCleaner and Defraggler. Robert I personally believe that you should reinstall CCleaner and use it, EXCEPT for its Registry Cleaner. CCleaner can speed up cleaning up temp files, history, cookies, etc. Leave the Registry Cleaner alone!!!! Buffalo I think he can wait a while. At least until it is a year old and he is more comfortable with the Win7 OS. -- Dave Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
I've read all your comments and I
appreciate your time and effort in responding to my questions. I'll leave the computer alone. Thank you, Robert |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
"David H. Lipman" wrote in message ... From: "Paul" David H. Lipman wrote: Regsitry cleaners are NOT optional. They are Snake Oil and should not be used and actually avoided. Defragmentation should be performed either manually or via Task Scheduler at least once per month (depending on use, etc). The OS built-in The OS built-in defragmentation utility is all that's needed. Albeit I don't like Vista's lack of any feedback and Win7 and Win8's minimal feedback. I prefer Win2K, XP's and Win9x/ME visual representation of defragmentation. As far as I'm concerned, they had to remove the defragmentation graphical feedback, because it would show the still-fragmented files larger than 50MB. And then there would be too many support questions to answer. The older OSes defragmented everything, so the display was "worth looking at". To see how close to perfection it could get. Paul At the very minimum a histogram would is warranted. Thus you have an idea what has been done and how long since started and you have an idea what is needed to complete and one can estimate a time frame for completion. -- Dave Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp Having cast my eye through this thread, ...all very interesting ! Several areas here where I'm gonna chuck in my two penny'worth ! I thought someone would have clarified offline and online defragging, and before running either, checking to make sure there are no errors in the file allocation table first. ...and to defragment system files locked in place while Windows is online, a defragger that will mark the disk as dirty, so that offline defragmentation is run on reboot to defrag. hiberfil.sys, pagefile.sys, meta files etc. ....and noone mentioned stopping Windows from resizing pagefile.sys to help prevent that being chucked around all over the hard disk. And noone mentioned retaining the necessary minimum, swapfile on the boot-drive, and the x1.5 ram main swapfile on the first partition of a 2nd hard disk, where possible for some small performance gains - to reduce heads skittering around all over boot-drive perhaps whilst loading an allication and accessing swap file on same drive etc. regards, Richard |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. - Problem with Defraggler
wrote in message ... 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 Well, I would still recommend using CCleaner for clean up tasks, EXCLUDING THE REGISTRY. Just select what you want it to remove and it can be very helpful. DO NOT USE the Registry Cleanup function. I use it to clean temporary files ( do not delete temp files if you just installed a program that needs to a reboot to complete, until after that reboot, otherwise the temp files needed to complete the installation may be deleted). internet history, etc. If used properly, it can be very useful. Buffalo |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|