Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Defrag

Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
February 23, 2005 4:26:14 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy

More about : defrag

Anonymous
February 24, 2005 12:12:00 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Use at your own risk: http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security

Gimpy wrote:
> Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
> 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
Related resources
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 2:45:40 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Why is it risky ? I`ve been using it for well over a year without problems.
Regards
Kim
"PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23bar3YhGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Use at your own risk: http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>
> Gimpy wrote:
> > Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
> > 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 2:45:41 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Because it is against the licensing agreement for that web site to be
distributing MS files. You are using a pirated file in other words.

--
Regards

Ron Badour, MS MVP Windows 98
Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo

"kimbo_" <kimbo_xfakedx@xxxxxxxx.com> wrote in message
news:uhKjfZmGFHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Why is it risky ? I`ve been using it for well over a year without
> problems.
> Regards
> Kim
> "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23bar3YhGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> Use at your own risk:
>> http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>>
>> Gimpy wrote:
>> > Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
>> > 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
>
>
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:27:57 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hi pa,,,,
why are you posting something that you advisie to "use at own
risk"?
doesnt that go against the grain of 'helping'?
"i agree".

regards Jane
"PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:#bar3YhGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Use at your own risk: http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html
> --
> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
>
> Gimpy wrote:
> > Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
> > 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:27:58 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Jane,

If I give you directions to a location, but WARN you the roads are icy and
you crash, is it my fault? It's time people start accepting responsibility
for their own actions.

All the best,
--
George Aker aka SG
Google is your friend www.google.com
Anything else is just a search engine
"jane" <jane@internet.com> wrote in message
news:uJX9tCoGFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> Hi pa,,,,
> why are you posting something that you advisie to "use at own
> risk"?
> doesnt that go against the grain of 'helping'?
> "i agree".
>
> regards Jane
> "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#bar3YhGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Use at your own risk:
http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html
> > --
> > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
> >
> > Gimpy wrote:
> > > Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
> > > 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
>
>
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:27:58 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

PA is readying a hibernation, & WON'T be around to help Gimpy with the
unforeseen. That's what he means! Also, it wasn't written for Win98SE,
after all. Can it be it is quicker because it doesn't do as much?


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"jane" <jane@internet.com> wrote in message
news:uJX9tCoGFHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
|
| Hi pa,,,,
| why are you posting something that you advisie to "use at own
| risk"?
| doesnt that go against the grain of 'helping'?
| "i agree".
|
| regards Jane
| "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
| news:#bar3YhGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| > Use at your own risk:
http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html
| > --
| > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
| > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
| >
| > Gimpy wrote:
| > > Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on
windows
| > > 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
|
|
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:27:58 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Gimpy asked, I responded with information that I found freely available on
the internet. MS MVP's do not represent Microsoft nor are we shills for
Microsoft. (Well, most of us aren't. <w>)

I do not know if the file being offered at that URL is safe.

I do not know if the file being offered at that URL is WinME's defrag.exe.

I do know that if it /is/ a legit copy of WinME's defrag.exe, it's certainly
not legal.

I do know that running WinME's defrag.exe on my Win98SE machine was much
more efficient than Win98SE's version.

Use at your own risk.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security


jane wrote:
> Hi pa,,,,
> why are you posting something that you advisie to "use at own
> risk"?
> doesnt that go against the grain of 'helping'?
> "i agree".
>
> regards Jane
> "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:#bar3YhGFHA.2736@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Use at your own risk:
> > http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/tec060902.html --
> > ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
> > MS MVP-Windows (Shell, IE/OE) & Security
> >
> > Gimpy wrote:
> > > Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
> > > 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
February 25, 2005 4:27:59 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:28:07 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

>PA is readying a hibernation, & WON'T be around to help Gimpy with the
>unforeseen. That's what he means! Also, it wasn't written for Win98SE,
>after all. Can it be it is quicker because it doesn't do as much?

Here's some discussion:
http://www.mvps.org/PracticallyNerded/Windows/defrag.ht...

Note that GEODisk installs WinME Defrag and Scandisk, backing up the
Win98 versions.

--
Luke
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:27:59 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I miss Dundat. (:`+<}

PCR wrote:
> PA is readying a hibernation, & WON'T be around to help Gimpy with the
> unforeseen. That's what he means! Also, it wasn't written for Win98SE,
> after all. Can it be it is quicker because it doesn't do as much?
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:28:00 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

So do I. The man has disappeared from the face of the earth!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eWlQclvGFHA.2412@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> I miss Dundat. (:`+<}
>
> PCR wrote:
> > PA is readying a hibernation, & WON'T be around to help Gimpy with
the
> > unforeseen. That's what he means! Also, it wasn't written for
Win98SE,
> > after all. Can it be it is quicker because it doesn't do as much?
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 4:59:04 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I offered it to you gimp,
but your address wasnt valid.
you will have to search yourself

regards Jane
"Gimpy" <gimpy10@yahoo6.org> wrote in message
news:%%3Td.17845$XU3.10801@fe07.lga...
> Guess the windows me defrag is a faster product then whats on windows
> 98se ? If so, where can i get it ? TIA Gimpy
>
>
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 7:46:25 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Well, from solid earth, at least.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> So do I. The man has disappeared from the face of the earth!
>
>
> "PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eWlQclvGFHA.2412@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> > I miss Dundat. (:`+<}
> >
> > PCR wrote:
> > > PA is readying a hibernation, & WON'T be around to help Gimpy with the
> > > unforeseen. That's what he means! Also, it wasn't written for Win98SE,
> > > after all. Can it be it is quicker because it doesn't do as much?
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 7:10:15 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Uhuh. As you know, It is reported Dundat went on a sea voyage, & no one
has seen him since in his original form.

From...
The Lied and Art Song Texts Page
http://www10.overture.com/d/sr/?xargs=05u3hs9yoakFWusTD...
....phew!

Full fathom five thy father lies,
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
Sea-nymphs hourly ring his knell:
Ding-dong.
Hark! now I hear them, - ding-dong bell.

William Shakespeare (1564-1616)


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"PA Bear" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eWlQclvGFHA.2412@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| I miss Dundat. (:`+<}
|
| PCR wrote:
| > PA is readying a hibernation, & WON'T be around to help Gimpy with
the
| > unforeseen. That's what he means! Also, it wasn't written for
Win98SE,
| > after all. Can it be it is quicker because it doesn't do as much?
February 25, 2005 7:40:13 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:06:59 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

>It could be the faster processor. Also, I was running it fairly
>frequently I suppose, say once a month. You know, it's quicker with
>frequency. I did run it a few days ago. Here is a Crackup report...
>
>CRACKUP Report: Windows 95(b)
>Generated Friday, February 25, 2005 16:01:18
>
>Drive C:p  C R HARD (FAT32)
> Last scan: Friday, February 25, 2005 16:01:04
> 11383 Moveable files
> 761 Directories
> 17 Unmoveable files
> 52 Zero-length files
>
> 0 Unmovable fragmented files
> 17 Unmovable unfragmented files
> 252 Moveable fragmented files and directories
> 11892 Moveable unfragmented files and directories
>
> 3549 Moveable extra fragments (MEF)
> 0 Unmovable extra fragments (UEF)
> 70 Bounded free fragments (BFF)
> 2 Unbounded free fragments (UFF)
>
> 2042868 Total clusters (TC)
> 77768 Unmovable clusters (UC)
> 16507 Moveable fragmented allocated clusters
> 235610 Moveable unfragmented allocated clusters
> 269810 Bounded free clusters
> 1443171 Unbounded free clusters (UFC)
>
> *** Fragmentation (moveable files only): 0.7%
> *** Fragmentation (all files): 0.6%
>
>If that doesn't seem like a lot, it is because I have finally moved
>folders off C:\ & into different partition(s). That includes TIFs, OE
>Store, My Documents, My Downloads, & Installation .CABs. But I was
>getting <20 Defrags before that!

Since you showed me yours, I'll show you mine:

CRACKUP Report: Windows 95(b)
Generated Friday, February 25, 2005 14:31:58

Drive C:( None) (FAT32)
Last scan: Friday, February 25, 2005 14:31:35
21434 Moveable files
1574 Directories
91 Unmoveable files
161 Zero-length files

3 Unmovable fragmented files
88 Unmovable unfragmented files
801 Moveable fragmented files and directories
22207 Moveable unfragmented files and directories

7269 Moveable extra fragments (MEF)
20 Unmovable extra fragments (UEF)
842 Bounded free fragments (BFF)
2 Unbounded free fragments (UFF)

1571289 Total clusters (TC)
31585 Unmovable clusters (UC)
65068 Moveable fragmented allocated clusters
520160 Moveable unfragmented allocated clusters
570393 Bounded free clusters
384082 Unbounded free clusters (UFC)

*** Fragmentation (moveable files only): 0.7%
*** Fragmentation (all files): 0.7%

Last defrag was, I think, a couple weeks ago.

--
Luke
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 11:41:14 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

bobster wrote:
> Or you can get the latest version here, GEODisk2:
>
> http://www.mvps.org/PracticallyNerded/SoftMain.htm
>
>

Only used it to get the ME defragger from it, then uninstalled the
"GEODisk" program. Thanks anyway.

Nice to see the site is organized though. Hunt around, maybe there's a
version 3 out there too. :-P

MM
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 11:41:15 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

The site is also moribund. Mr. Geyde has, for several months, been
totally AWOL. Unreachable.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"Mostly Me (MM)" <fakename@fakeisp.org> wrote in message
news:eYRb1y6GFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> bobster wrote:
> > Or you can get the latest version here, GEODisk2:
> >
> > http://www.mvps.org/PracticallyNerded/SoftMain.htm
> >
> >
>
> Only used it to get the ME defragger from it, then uninstalled the
> "GEODisk" program. Thanks anyway.
>
> Nice to see the site is organized though. Hunt around, maybe there's a
> version 3 out there too. :-P
>
> MM
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 12:46:08 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> The site is also moribund. Mr. Geyde has, for several months, been
> totally AWOL. Unreachable.
>

Perhaps sitting on a tropical island somewhere, chuckling at us from afar?
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 12:46:09 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Up to his neck in cold water fish, last I heard. So, yeah, that makes
sense, <g>.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

"Mostly Me (MM)" <fakename@fakeisp.org> wrote in message
news:%23YfdGX7GFHA.2452@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > The site is also moribund. Mr. Geyde has, for several months, been
> > totally AWOL. Unreachable.
> >
>
> Perhaps sitting on a tropical island somewhere, chuckling at us from
afar?
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 2:54:43 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Yours looks good enough, too. We will never be totally unfragmented,
because Win98 stores files differently from Win95 owing to Optimization
during Defrag. But that is as it should be.

| > 17 Unmoveable files
| 91 Unmoveable files

One thing that could be bloating your unmoveables is Thumbnail View.
Each folder in which you have it turned on will have a Thumbs.db file
holding the pictures. Turn off the view, & the .db will go away. (Of
course, you may miss them.)

"START, Programs, MS-DOS Prompt"
C:\>DIR C: /ASH /S /V
....snip Size
IO SYS 222,390 04-23-99 10:22p 12-15-03 RHS
DRVSPACE BIN 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 04-14-04 RHS
VIDEOROM BIN 65,536 07-30-01 6:02p 04-14-04 HS
DETLOG TXT 73,728 03-24-03 4:07a 04-07-04 HS A
....snip
Total files listed:
9 file(s) 435,831 bytes
4 dir(s) 6,461.88 MB free

Also, you will get more (& big ones), if you have turned on Thumbnails.

THUMBS DB 89,600 12-14-03 2:36a 12-14-03 HS
THUMBS DB 219,648 07-01-03 10:51p 12-16-03 HS A
THUMBS DB 48,640 06-22-03 11:08p 12-16-03 HS A

Thumbs.db appears in every folder in which Thumbnail View is turned on,
it seems. (Now, I have turned it off, & they have disappeared.)


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2ndv11l37ko96eior4u8sao3ijh5fgj71h@4ax.com...
| On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:06:59 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
|
| >It could be the faster processor. Also, I was running it fairly
| >frequently I suppose, say once a month. You know, it's quicker with
| >frequency. I did run it a few days ago. Here is a Crackup report...
| >
| >CRACKUP Report: Windows 95(b)
| >Generated Friday, February 25, 2005 16:01:18
| >
| >Drive C:p  C R HARD (FAT32)
| > Last scan: Friday, February 25, 2005 16:01:04
| > 11383 Moveable files
| > 761 Directories
| > 17 Unmoveable files
| > 52 Zero-length files
| >
| > 0 Unmovable fragmented files
| > 17 Unmovable unfragmented files
| > 252 Moveable fragmented files and directories
| > 11892 Moveable unfragmented files and directories
| >
| > 3549 Moveable extra fragments (MEF)
| > 0 Unmovable extra fragments (UEF)
| > 70 Bounded free fragments (BFF)
| > 2 Unbounded free fragments (UFF)
| >
| > 2042868 Total clusters (TC)
| > 77768 Unmovable clusters (UC)
| > 16507 Moveable fragmented allocated clusters
| > 235610 Moveable unfragmented allocated clusters
| > 269810 Bounded free clusters
| > 1443171 Unbounded free clusters (UFC)
| >
| > *** Fragmentation (moveable files only): 0.7%
| > *** Fragmentation (all files): 0.6%
| >
| >If that doesn't seem like a lot, it is because I have finally moved
| >folders off C:\ & into different partition(s). That includes TIFs, OE
| >Store, My Documents, My Downloads, & Installation .CABs. But I was
| >getting <20 Defrags before that!
|
| Since you showed me yours, I'll show you mine:
|
| CRACKUP Report: Windows 95(b)
| Generated Friday, February 25, 2005 14:31:58
|
| Drive C:( None) (FAT32)
| Last scan: Friday, February 25, 2005 14:31:35
| 21434 Moveable files
| 1574 Directories
| 91 Unmoveable files
| 161 Zero-length files
|
| 3 Unmovable fragmented files
| 88 Unmovable unfragmented files
| 801 Moveable fragmented files and directories
| 22207 Moveable unfragmented files and directories
|
| 7269 Moveable extra fragments (MEF)
| 20 Unmovable extra fragments (UEF)
| 842 Bounded free fragments (BFF)
| 2 Unbounded free fragments (UFF)
|
| 1571289 Total clusters (TC)
| 31585 Unmovable clusters (UC)
| 65068 Moveable fragmented allocated clusters
| 520160 Moveable unfragmented allocated clusters
| 570393 Bounded free clusters
| 384082 Unbounded free clusters (UFC)
|
| *** Fragmentation (moveable files only): 0.7%
| *** Fragmentation (all files): 0.7%
|
| Last defrag was, I think, a couple weeks ago.
|
| --
| Luke
February 26, 2005 10:36:20 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 23:54:43 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

>Yours looks good enough, too. We will never be totally unfragmented,
>because Win98 stores files differently from Win95 owing to Optimization
>during Defrag. But that is as it should be.
>
>| > 17 Unmoveable files
>| 91 Unmoveable files
>
>One thing that could be bloating your unmoveables is Thumbnail View.
>Each folder in which you have it turned on will have a Thumbs.db file
>holding the pictures. Turn off the view, & the .db will go away. (Of
>course, you may miss them.)
[snip]

Although I work with graphics some on the computer, thumbnail view is
not enabled. No thumbs.db anywhere. So that's not it. Those
unmoveables, give or take, have been there for I don't recall how many
years. Any other ideas?

BTW, I notice on the group I originally meant to post to that the OP
installed ME defrag and is rather pleased with the time savings :-).

--
Luke
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 7:28:26 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

(1) To see them in a Find box, you'd have to...

(a) START, Settings, Folder Options, View tab.
(b) Bolt "Show all files" & UNcheck "Hide file extensions..."

(2) Well, what comes up with...

(a) "START button, Programs, MS-DOS Prompt"
(b) DIR C: /ASH /S /V > %TEMP%\HSFiles.txt
(c) "START button, Run, %TEMP%"

What is inside "HSFiles.txt"? Here is mine...

Directory of C:\
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib
IO SYS 222,390 225,280 04-23-99 10:22p 02-26-05 RHS
IO.SYS
DRVSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-26-05 RHS
DRVSPACE.BIN
VIDEOROM BIN 65,536 65,536 07-30-01 6:02p 02-26-05 HS
VIDEOROM.BIN
RECYCLED <DIR> 07-31-01 6:37p 07-31-01 HS D
RECYCLED
MSDOSS~1 FIX 1,676 4,096 11-15-99 2:24p 02-20-05 RHS
MSDOS.SYS.FIXED
DETLOG TXT 73,700 73,728 03-24-03 4:07a 02-20-05 HS A
DETLOG.TXT
MSDOS SYS 1,784 4,096 06-15-04 6:40p 02-26-05 RHS A
MSDOS.SYS
DESKTOP INI 262 4,096 02-03-04 10:18p 02-26-05 HS A
Desktop.ini
7 file(s) 434,219 bytes
1 dir(s) 446,464 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\Program Files\X-Setup
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib
DESKTOP INI 317 4,096 07-07-00 3:17p 02-20-05 HS
desktop.ini
1 file(s) 317 bytes
0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib
INSTAL~1 <DIR> 11-15-99 2:31p 11-15-99 HS D
Installer
0 file(s) 0 bytes
1 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS\All Users
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib
DRM <DIR> 11-15-99 3:42p 11-15-99 HS D DRM
0 file(s) 0 bytes
1 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib
DESKTOP HTT 1,178 4,096 12-11-04 4:35a 02-20-05 HS A
Desktop.htt
1 file(s) 1,178 bytes
0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\MSDAIPP
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib
OFFLINE <DIR> 05-03-02 11:42p 05-03-02 HS D
Offline
0 file(s) 0 bytes
1 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated

Total files listed:
9 file(s) 435,714 bytes
4 dir(s) 454,656 bytes allocated
6,691.31 MB free
7,979.95 MB total disk space, 16% in use


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:6121211hpr1vneno40gt1cnq5mqen9u04p@4ax.com...
| On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 23:54:43 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
|
| >Yours looks good enough, too. We will never be totally unfragmented,
| >because Win98 stores files differently from Win95 owing to Optimization
| >during Defrag. But that is as it should be.
| >
| >| > 17 Unmoveable files
| >| 91 Unmoveable files
| >
| >One thing that could be bloating your unmoveables is Thumbnail View.
| >Each folder in which you have it turned on will have a Thumbs.db file
| >holding the pictures. Turn off the view, & the .db will go away. (Of
| >course, you may miss them.)
| [snip]
|
| Although I work with graphics some on the computer, thumbnail view is
| not enabled. No thumbs.db anywhere. So that's not it. Those
| unmoveables, give or take, have been there for I don't recall how many
| years. Any other ideas?
|
| BTW, I notice on the group I originally meant to post to that the OP
| installed ME defrag and is rather pleased with the time savings :-).
|
| --
| Luke
February 27, 2005 2:42:41 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:28:26 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

>(1) To see them in a Find box, you'd have to...
>
> (a) START, Settings, Folder Options, View tab.
> (b) Bolt "Show all files" & UNcheck "Hide file extensions..."

Yep :-).

>(2) Well, what comes up with...
>
>(a) "START button, Programs, MS-DOS Prompt"
>(b) DIR C: /ASH /S /V > %TEMP%\HSFiles.txt
>(c) "START button, Run, %TEMP%"
>
>What is inside "HSFiles.txt"?
[snip]

I've been away from the computer. Had to work, dang it. If you're still there, here it is (line
length set at 95 characters to avoid wrapping):

Directory of C:\
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib

DETLOG TXT 6,647 8,192 12-27-04 1:18p 02-13-05 HS A DETLOG.TXT
RECYCLED <DIR> 09-19-98 2:06p 09-19-98 HS D RECYCLED
DETLOG OLD 72,633 73,728 10-27-00 9:14p 02-13-05 HS DETLOG.OLD
IO SYS 222,390 225,280 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05 RHS IO.SYS
MSDOS SYS 1,694 4,096 12-27-04 1:20p 02-26-05 RHS MSDOS.SYS
AVG6DB_F DAT 2,957,340 2,961,408 09-30-04 3:14p 02-13-05 RHS AVG6DB_F.DAT
DRVSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05 RHS DRVSPACE.BIN
MSDOS BAK 1,676 4,096 12-27-04 12:55p 02-13-05 RHS MSDOS.BAK
DBLSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05 RHS DBLSPACE.BIN
WINLFN INI 28,653 28,672 12-27-04 12:58p 02-13-05 RHS A WINLFN.INI
AVG7DB_F DAT 3,962,550 3,964,928 01-29-05 3:28p 02-13-05 RHS AVG7DB_F.DAT
10 file(s) 7,391,325 bytes
1 dir(s) 7,409,664 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\My Documents
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib

DESKTOP INI 125 4,096 09-16-98 2:01p 02-27-05 HS desktop.ini
1 file(s) 125 bytes
0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib

INSTAL~1 <DIR> 12-27-04 2:35p 12-27-04 HS D Installer
FTPCACHE <DIR> 01-02-03 7:22a 01-02-03 HS D ftpcache
0 file(s) 0 bytes
2 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS\All Users
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib

DRM <DIR> 08-16-99 9:14p 08-16-99 HS D DRM
0 file(s) 0 bytes
1 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated

Directory of C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer
File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed Attrib

DESKTOP HTT 1,092 4,096 02-11-05 11:46a 02-13-05 HS A Desktop.htt
1 file(s) 1,092 bytes
0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated

Total files listed:
12 file(s) 7,392,542 bytes
4 dir(s) 7,417,856 bytes allocated
3,773.42 MB free
6,137.85 MB total disk space, 38% in use

--
Luke
Anonymous
February 27, 2005 4:19:35 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Luke wrote <6121211hpr1vneno40gt1cnq5mqen9u04p@4ax.com>:
}On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 23:54:43 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
}
}>Yours looks good enough, too. We will never be totally unfragmented,
}>because Win98 stores files differently from Win95 owing to
}>Optimization
}>during Defrag. But that is as it should be.
}>
}>| > 17 Unmoveable files
}>| 91 Unmoveable files
}>
}>One thing that could be bloating your unmoveables is Thumbnail View.
}>Each folder in which you have it turned on will have a Thumbs.db file
}>holding the pictures. Turn off the view, & the .db will go away. (Of
}>course, you may miss them.)
}[snip]
}
}Although I work with graphics some on the computer, thumbnail view is
}not enabled. No thumbs.db anywhere. So that's not it. Those
}unmoveables, give or take, have been there for I don't recall how many
}years. Any other ideas?
}
}BTW, I notice on the group I originally meant to post to that the OP
}installed ME defrag and is rather pleased with the time savings :-).

I must say that I found the digression to "Crackup" to be most
interesting. Since you said earlier that is was an 'old' PCMag utility,
(which, to me, implies 'free public distribution channels') would it be
possible for you to email me a copy, Luke (if so, see my sig)?

Ken

--
<<< Remove the '4' to reply via email >>>
Anonymous
February 27, 2005 9:47:52 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Mine: 17 Unmoveable files
Total files listed:
9 file(s) 435,714 bytes
4 dir(s) 454,656 bytes allocated

Yours: 91 Unmoveable files
Total files listed:
12 file(s) 7,392,542 bytes
4 dir(s) 7,417,856 bytes allocated

AVG seems to make the small difference between us. The big one between
Crackup & DIR may be due to Crackup was written for Win95, where EITHER
System OR Hidden would make a file unmoveable.

DIR C: /AS /S /V > %TEMP%\HS_Files.txt
Total files listed:
9 file(s) 435,714 bytes
11 dir(s) 454,656 bytes allocated

DIR C: /AH /S /V >> %TEMP%\HS_Files.txt
Total files listed:
98 file(s) 31,622,677 bytes
31 dir(s) 31,809,536 bytes allocated

BUT that theory doesn't appear to pan out in my case! I have 98 Hidden
files. Neither are many of them of zero length, if that matters. Hmm.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:D 354219bsle9ibuhjijj6idsb0ftbjhdm3@4ax.com...
| On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:28:26 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
|
| >(1) To see them in a Find box, you'd have to...
| >
| > (a) START, Settings, Folder Options, View tab.
| > (b) Bolt "Show all files" & UNcheck "Hide file extensions..."
|
| Yep :-).
|
| >(2) Well, what comes up with...
| >
| >(a) "START button, Programs, MS-DOS Prompt"
| >(b) DIR C: /ASH /S /V > %TEMP%\HSFiles.txt
| >(c) "START button, Run, %TEMP%"
| >
| >What is inside "HSFiles.txt"?
| [snip]
|
| I've been away from the computer. Had to work, dang it. If you're
still there, here it is (line
| length set at 95 characters to avoid wrapping):
|
| Directory of C:\
| File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
Attrib
|
| DETLOG TXT 6,647 8,192 12-27-04 1:18p 02-13-05
HS A DETLOG.TXT
| RECYCLED <DIR> 09-19-98 2:06p 09-19-98
HS D RECYCLED
| DETLOG OLD 72,633 73,728 10-27-00 9:14p 02-13-05
HS DETLOG.OLD
| IO SYS 222,390 225,280 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05
RHS IO.SYS
| MSDOS SYS 1,694 4,096 12-27-04 1:20p 02-26-05
RHS MSDOS.SYS
| AVG6DB_F DAT 2,957,340 2,961,408 09-30-04 3:14p 02-13-05
RHS AVG6DB_F.DAT
| DRVSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05
RHS DRVSPACE.BIN
| MSDOS BAK 1,676 4,096 12-27-04 12:55p 02-13-05
RHS MSDOS.BAK
| DBLSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05
RHS DBLSPACE.BIN
| WINLFN INI 28,653 28,672 12-27-04 12:58p 02-13-05
RHS A WINLFN.INI
| AVG7DB_F DAT 3,962,550 3,964,928 01-29-05 3:28p 02-13-05
RHS AVG7DB_F.DAT
| 10 file(s) 7,391,325 bytes
| 1 dir(s) 7,409,664 bytes allocated
|
| Directory of C:\My Documents
| File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
Attrib
|
| DESKTOP INI 125 4,096 09-16-98 2:01p 02-27-05
HS desktop.ini
| 1 file(s) 125 bytes
| 0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated
|
| Directory of C:\WINDOWS
| File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
Attrib
|
| INSTAL~1 <DIR> 12-27-04 2:35p 12-27-04
HS D Installer
| FTPCACHE <DIR> 01-02-03 7:22a 01-02-03
HS D ftpcache
| 0 file(s) 0 bytes
| 2 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated
|
| Directory of C:\WINDOWS\All Users
| File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
Attrib
|
| DRM <DIR> 08-16-99 9:14p 08-16-99
HS D DRM
| 0 file(s) 0 bytes
| 1 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated
|
| Directory of C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer
| File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
Attrib
|
| DESKTOP HTT 1,092 4,096 02-11-05 11:46a 02-13-05
HS A Desktop.htt
| 1 file(s) 1,092 bytes
| 0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated
|
| Total files listed:
| 12 file(s) 7,392,542 bytes
| 4 dir(s) 7,417,856 bytes allocated
| 3,773.42 MB free
| 6,137.85 MB total disk space, 38% in use
|
| --
| Luke
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 3:54:39 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

It's DIR that's messing up. "/S" will not go into Hidden folders, where
I do have some Hidden+System files. (Crackup counts all Hidden+System
files & the swap file.)


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:eFFNJaSHFHA.3944@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Mine: 17 Unmoveable files
| Total files listed:
| 9 file(s) 435,714 bytes
| 4 dir(s) 454,656 bytes allocated
|
| Yours: 91 Unmoveable files
| Total files listed:
| 12 file(s) 7,392,542 bytes
| 4 dir(s) 7,417,856 bytes allocated
|
| AVG seems to make the small difference between us. The big one between
| Crackup & DIR may be due to Crackup was written for Win95, where
EITHER
| System OR Hidden would make a file unmoveable.
|
| DIR C: /AS /S /V > %TEMP%\HS_Files.txt
| Total files listed:
| 9 file(s) 435,714 bytes
| 11 dir(s) 454,656 bytes allocated
|
| DIR C: /AH /S /V >> %TEMP%\HS_Files.txt
| Total files listed:
| 98 file(s) 31,622,677 bytes
| 31 dir(s) 31,809,536 bytes allocated
|
| BUT that theory doesn't appear to pan out in my case! I have 98 Hidden
| files. Neither are many of them of zero length, if that matters. Hmm.
|
|
| --
| Thanks or Good Luck,
| There may be humor in this post, and,
| Naturally, you will not sue,
| should things get worse after this,
| PCR
| pcrrcp@netzero.net
| "Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
| news:D 354219bsle9ibuhjijj6idsb0ftbjhdm3@4ax.com...
| | On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:28:26 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net>
wrote:
| |
| | >(1) To see them in a Find box, you'd have to...
| | >
| | > (a) START, Settings, Folder Options, View tab.
| | > (b) Bolt "Show all files" & UNcheck "Hide file extensions..."
| |
| | Yep :-).
| |
| | >(2) Well, what comes up with...
| | >
| | >(a) "START button, Programs, MS-DOS Prompt"
| | >(b) DIR C: /ASH /S /V > %TEMP%\HSFiles.txt
| | >(c) "START button, Run, %TEMP%"
| | >
| | >What is inside "HSFiles.txt"?
| | [snip]
| |
| | I've been away from the computer. Had to work, dang it. If you're
| still there, here it is (line
| | length set at 95 characters to avoid wrapping):
| |
| | Directory of C:\
| | File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
| Attrib
| |
| | DETLOG TXT 6,647 8,192 12-27-04 1:18p 02-13-05
| HS A DETLOG.TXT
| | RECYCLED <DIR> 09-19-98 2:06p 09-19-98
| HS D RECYCLED
| | DETLOG OLD 72,633 73,728 10-27-00 9:14p 02-13-05
| HS DETLOG.OLD
| | IO SYS 222,390 225,280 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05
| RHS IO.SYS
| | MSDOS SYS 1,694 4,096 12-27-04 1:20p 02-26-05
| RHS MSDOS.SYS
| | AVG6DB_F DAT 2,957,340 2,961,408 09-30-04 3:14p 02-13-05
| RHS AVG6DB_F.DAT
| | DRVSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05
| RHS DRVSPACE.BIN
| | MSDOS BAK 1,676 4,096 12-27-04 12:55p 02-13-05
| RHS MSDOS.BAK
| | DBLSPACE BIN 68,871 69,632 04-23-99 10:22p 02-13-05
| RHS DBLSPACE.BIN
| | WINLFN INI 28,653 28,672 12-27-04 12:58p 02-13-05
| RHS A WINLFN.INI
| | AVG7DB_F DAT 3,962,550 3,964,928 01-29-05 3:28p 02-13-05
| RHS AVG7DB_F.DAT
| | 10 file(s) 7,391,325 bytes
| | 1 dir(s) 7,409,664 bytes allocated
| |
| | Directory of C:\My Documents
| | File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
| Attrib
| |
| | DESKTOP INI 125 4,096 09-16-98 2:01p 02-27-05
| HS desktop.ini
| | 1 file(s) 125 bytes
| | 0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated
| |
| | Directory of C:\WINDOWS
| | File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
| Attrib
| |
| | INSTAL~1 <DIR> 12-27-04 2:35p 12-27-04
| HS D Installer
| | FTPCACHE <DIR> 01-02-03 7:22a 01-02-03
| HS D ftpcache
| | 0 file(s) 0 bytes
| | 2 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated
| |
| | Directory of C:\WINDOWS\All Users
| | File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
| Attrib
| |
| | DRM <DIR> 08-16-99 9:14p 08-16-99
| HS D DRM
| | 0 file(s) 0 bytes
| | 1 dir(s) 0 bytes allocated
| |
| | Directory of C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Internet Explorer
| | File Name Size Allocated Modified Accessed
| Attrib
| |
| | DESKTOP HTT 1,092 4,096 02-11-05 11:46a 02-13-05
| HS A Desktop.htt
| | 1 file(s) 1,092 bytes
| | 0 dir(s) 4,096 bytes allocated
| |
| | Total files listed:
| | 12 file(s) 7,392,542 bytes
| | 4 dir(s) 7,417,856 bytes allocated
| | 3,773.42 MB free
| | 6,137.85 MB total disk space, 38% in use
| |
| | --
| | Luke
|
|
February 28, 2005 11:30:48 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 13:19:35 -0600, "Kentiguous"
<kenster4@autobahn.mb.ca> wrote:

[snip]
>I must say that I found the digression to "Crackup" to be most
>interesting. Since you said earlier that is was an 'old' PCMag utility,
>(which, to me, implies 'free public distribution channels') would it be
>possible for you to email me a copy, Luke (if so, see my sig)?

It would be easier, and faster, for you to download it here:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,41450,00.asp

Enjoy!

--
Luke
February 28, 2005 11:36:10 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:54:39 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

>It's DIR that's messing up. "/S" will not go into Hidden folders, where
>I do have some Hidden+System files. (Crackup counts all Hidden+System
>files & the swap file.)

That may be it. Pokin' around I don't find many H+S files in H
folders, but that doesn't mean much :-). Aren't files in use also
considered unmovables? Do I have (a lot) more things running than you?
BTW, the version 1.0 of Crackup I have (and still available) was
written November 3, 1998, so I assume mostly for Win98, and Crackup
help says defrag counts all H+S files, but not directories, and any
..swp file as unmoveable.

--
Luke
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 3:47:37 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

That is the same version I have, Crackup v.1.0. Files "in use" wouldn't
matter, as Crackup doesn't actually do the Defrag. It's docs say
unmoveables are the swap file & all files marked both S+H. It's tough to
see what is S+H inside hidden folders, as "/S" won't go inside. I know
I've seen some, but haven't looked inside all 31 hidden folders I've
got...

C:\>dir /s /ahd
....snip
Total files listed:
0 file(s) 0 bytes
31 dir(s) 6,691.40 MB free

You must have more than I, perhaps in an AVG folder. Anyway, I guess you
are OK. You are not horribly fragmented, even though Defrag must
pussyfoot around S+H.

To see those, you must first CD the hidden directory...

C:\>cd system.sav

C:\system.sav>dir /ahs /s
Directory of C:\system.sav\WINDOWS
SYSTEM DAT 3,325,984 12-01-99 4:09p SYSTEM.DAT
USER DAT 155,680 12-01-99 4:09p USER.DAT
2 file(s) 3,481,664 bytes


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:gfo721lqmjilq9095nagi42ngcsghr4lge@4ax.com...
| On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:54:39 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
|
| >It's DIR that's messing up. "/S" will not go into Hidden folders,
where
| >I do have some Hidden+System files. (Crackup counts all Hidden+System
| >files & the swap file.)
|
| That may be it. Pokin' around I don't find many H+S files in H
| folders, but that doesn't mean much :-). Aren't files in use also
| considered unmovables? Do I have (a lot) more things running than you?
| BTW, the version 1.0 of Crackup I have (and still available) was
| written November 3, 1998, so I assume mostly for Win98, and Crackup
| help says defrag counts all H+S files, but not directories, and any
| .swp file as unmoveable.
|
| --
| Luke
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 4:40:57 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Here is how to see Attributes in Explorer, in case you don't know...

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Adv
anced
ShowAttribCol 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD. Value data: 1
ShowSuperHidden 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD: 1
PersistBrowsers 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD: 1

ShowAttribCol See Attributes listed in Explorer
ShowSuperHidden Well, I think I saw my first .htt after setting that.
PersistBrowsers An open folder will remain open after a reboot.

"ShowAttribCol" has no space in it's name, although it seems that way
with this font. (None of them do.) Type a "1" in "Value Data". It won't
look like a simple "1" in the right pane. If the column doesn't appear
immediately in Explorer, then re-boot.

1. "START button, Run"; Type "RegEdit" & Enter.
2. Click the plus (+) signs in the left pane starting at
"HKEY_CURRENT_USER" & ending at "Explorer".
3. Finally, click the key "Advanced" in the left pane.
4. In the right pane, R-Clk an empty area; point to "new"; select
"Dword value"; type or paste "ShowAttribCol" & Enter.
5. R-Clk "ShowAttribCol"; select "Modify", enter "1" in Value Data, &
click OK.
6. Do the other two, as desired, from step (4).
7. Close RegEdit & reboot, if it doesn't already show in Explorer.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:uwEE1HiHFHA.3332@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| That is the same version I have, Crackup v.1.0. Files "in use"
wouldn't
| matter, as Crackup doesn't actually do the Defrag. It's docs say
| unmoveables are the swap file & all files marked both S+H. It's tough
to
| see what is S+H inside hidden folders, as "/S" won't go inside. I know
| I've seen some, but haven't looked inside all 31 hidden folders I've
| got...
|
| C:\>dir /s /ahd
| ...snip
| Total files listed:
| 0 file(s) 0 bytes
| 31 dir(s) 6,691.40 MB free
|
| You must have more than I, perhaps in an AVG folder. Anyway, I guess
you
| are OK. You are not horribly fragmented, even though Defrag must
| pussyfoot around S+H.
|
| To see those, you must first CD the hidden directory...
|
| C:\>cd system.sav
|
| C:\system.sav>dir /ahs /s
| Directory of C:\system.sav\WINDOWS
| SYSTEM DAT 3,325,984 12-01-99 4:09p SYSTEM.DAT
| USER DAT 155,680 12-01-99 4:09p USER.DAT
| 2 file(s) 3,481,664 bytes
|
|
| --
| Thanks or Good Luck,
| There may be humor in this post, and,
| Naturally, you will not sue,
| should things get worse after this,
| PCR
| pcrrcp@netzero.net
| "Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
| news:gfo721lqmjilq9095nagi42ngcsghr4lge@4ax.com...
| | On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:54:39 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net>
wrote:
| |
| | >It's DIR that's messing up. "/S" will not go into Hidden folders,
| where
| | >I do have some Hidden+System files. (Crackup counts all
Hidden+System
| | >files & the swap file.)
| |
| | That may be it. Pokin' around I don't find many H+S files in H
| | folders, but that doesn't mean much :-). Aren't files in use also
| | considered unmovables? Do I have (a lot) more things running than
you?
| | BTW, the version 1.0 of Crackup I have (and still available) was
| | written November 3, 1998, so I assume mostly for Win98, and Crackup
| | help says defrag counts all H+S files, but not directories, and any
| | .swp file as unmoveable.
| |
| | --
| | Luke
|
|
March 2, 2005 5:33:52 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 01:40:57 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:

>Here is how to see Attributes in Explorer, in case you don't know...
>
>HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Adv
>anced
>ShowAttribCol 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD. Value data: 1
>ShowSuperHidden 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD: 1
>PersistBrowsers 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD: 1
[snip]

Thanks. What also seems to work is: Explorer -> View -> Folder Options
-> View Tab, tick "Show file attributes in Detail View." Except for
"PersistBrowsers" :-).

Do you know, is there a way to show file attributes in Start -> Find
-> Files or Folders?

--
Luke
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 4:54:09 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hmm. I don't have that box to check in Folder Options. You must have
downloaded something for that.

I too regret Attributes will not show in a Find box.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
"Luke" <luke@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:p 9cc21d7lelqc1ave7prumi62bfb2manu4@4ax.com...
| On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 01:40:57 -0500, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote:
|
| >Here is how to see Attributes in Explorer, in case you don't know...
| >
|
>HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Ad
v
| >anced
| >ShowAttribCol 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD. Value data: 1
| >ShowSuperHidden 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD: 1
| >PersistBrowsers 0x00000001 (1) <<--DWORD: 1
| [snip]
|
| Thanks. What also seems to work is: Explorer -> View -> Folder Options
| -> View Tab, tick "Show file attributes in Detail View." Except for
| "PersistBrowsers" :-).
|
| Do you know, is there a way to show file attributes in Start -> Find
| -> Files or Folders?
|
| --
| Luke
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 6:09:38 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Luke wrote <5bo721hi3ppjisd3l0nsej1ue8qs5j4spf@4ax.com>:
}On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 13:19:35 -0600, "Kentiguous"
}<kenster4@autobahn.mb.ca> wrote:
}
}[snip]
}>I must say that I found the digression to "Crackup" to be most
}>interesting. Since you said earlier that is was an 'old' PCMag
}>utility,
}>(which, to me, implies 'free public distribution channels') would it
}>be
}>possible for you to email me a copy, Luke (if so, see my sig)?
}
}It would be easier, and faster, for you to download it here:
}
}http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,41450,00.asp
}
}Enjoy!

Thanks, Luke.

Ken

--
<<< Remove the '4' to reply via email >>>
!