# Tips for system maintenance



## Cadlad (Apr 18, 2002)

Has anyone got advice on system maintenance? e.g. how to keep it running at optimum speed, increasing disk space etc. Are there any things which should be done on a regular basis to ensure systems keep running smoothly?


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

Nothing special but if you do these regularly things should be fine!

1) Delete all the files in the Temp, Temporary Internet Files, History folders in the C:\Windows folder!

2) Search for all the **.tmp, *.bak* files, delete them!

3) Do an antivirus scan and check for viruses!

4) Scandisk!

5) Defrag!


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by pvc9:_
> *
> 1) Delete all the files in the Temp, Temporary Internet Files, History folders in the C:\Windows folder!
> *


this will slow you down, it will not not speed you up


----------



## mopargirl (Sep 27, 2002)

perris,

why does it slow you down?  

just curious.  

mopargirl


----------



## deh (Sep 6, 2002)

It does and doesn't. I see where perris is coming from because hardware resources are greater than they use to be so for instance with your temporary internet files. When you go to a site files from that site download there so that when you go back you want need to download them again to view them thus the page comes up faster.


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

perris,
It'll NOT slow down the *System's Performance*. It'll only ENHANCE it!

Now, if you're talking about the internet connection and the speed at which the pages are downloaded to the browser, then I'd say YES, only that would be affected and not the system's performance! But, its always a good thing to delete the files in the Temporary Internet Files folder.

NOTE : The Temp folder is no way related to the internet files so it wont have any effect on the speed of the internet and the pages that download!


----------



## mopargirl (Sep 27, 2002)

thank you for the explanations deh and pvc9.  

best regards!


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

You're very welcome mopagirl


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by pvc9:_
> *perris,
> It'll NOT slow down the System's Performance. It'll only ENHANCE it!
> *


sorry, rediculous...deleting these files cannot possibly enhance system performance.

now, deleting anything that your computer uses to speed you up is of course, a slow down.( I can't believe I even have to point this out, it's like pointing out that water is wet)

to think that ms deliberately leaves these files for no good reason, well, there are those conspiracy theories, aren't there.

when you are doing anything common, the temporary files are accessed when proper.

the best thing to do is to simply let the OS purge these files when they become unused, (old), through the GUI,

there


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

Ok! This is neither an arguement nor a debate, can you please tell me atleast 1 **.tmp* file that we use?


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by pvc9:_
> *Ok! This is neither an arguement nor a debate, can you please tell me atleast 1 *.tmp file that we use? *


I just reread my responce, sorry, it's a little crass, Ididn't mean it to be.

re read my original post, i'm not talking about those files


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

I posted this already 

_
Now, if you're talking about the internet connection and the speed at which the pages are downloaded to the browser, then I'd say YES, only that would be affected and not the system's performance! But, its always a good thing to delete the files in the Temporary Internet Files folder. _

If its only the TIF, then its upto the user, he can leave the files as it is or delete them all. But, recently at the other forum one of the members was having few system freezes and after he deleted the files in the TIF folder everything stopped! So it was due to some Cookies and also could've been due to malicious scripts!

So, if we're concentrating only on TIF then, FOR the INTERNET SPEED the member can leave the files as it is, but for the general SYSTEM's Performance they are of NO use.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by pvc9:_
> *I posted this already
> 
> 
> ...


_

just a discussion here, sometimes my text doesn't come out so.

there is no reason to delete temp internet files whatsoever...jsut have the system purge them when old, that way you get much better internet speed, and you can keep the file as small as you want.

as far as you saying.."for system performance...no use"...far differant then saying performance enhancement.

to say they are of "no sytem performance use" is like saying any program you install for your benefit, is of no "system performance use"...it's a circular statement that means nothing.

if the system is using a file to enhance performance, the system will perform enhanced, very simple

ther is no benefit, and quite a bit of couterproductivity in deleting these files_


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

Well I guess that makes things pretty clear!

TIF needed for Internet Lets leave it there!


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by pvc9:_
> *Well I guess that makes things pretty clear!
> 
> TIF needed for Internet Lets leave it there!  *


cool, i am also talking about the history files...deleting these serves no performance purpose, there is a security issue for some, but not most.

I use my history file at least a coupla times a week...invaluable...the os will also access these files at times, for your benefit...

I would not delete these either, and I set mine to be deleted when 2 weeks old, that way, they purge, but I can alsways retrieve information, ip addresses for cacheing, etc, when I need to...this is sytem enhancement...sweet.

great discussion, pvc9


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

Ok!  LOL

Have a great day!


----------



## anglin_fool (Oct 2, 2001)

Well then, how about a happy medium? Say let windows take care of that. This article can show you how:

*Limit Cache Size*

IE caches frequently used information such as graphics and Web pages to save you download time when you're revisiting a site. But a large cache can take up a lot of hard drive space. To limit the amount of space being used by IE, select Internet Options from the Tools menu in IE5 (View menu in IE4) and click the Settings button under Temporary Internet files. Slide the bar under Amount Of Disk Space To Use to the left or enter a lower amount of megabytes in the field to the right.

PCmag.com tip of the day


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

The point becomes mute if you have a DSL or Cable modem connection... or T1/T3 connection. Then there becomes no valid reason to save the temporary internet files OR History files.

The truth of the matter is this: It's _*NEVER*_ a good idea to let an operating system get cluttered up with temporary files, cookies, etc. While potntially speeding up browsing by mere seconds, there is no need for those files to be saved.

And Microsoft DOES put the options in Internet Explorer to delete cookies and temporary internet files on exit of the browser.


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

It probably is good to clear out temp files, they take up disk space and as far as cached websites for loading faster the performance boost is almost always not noticible/

Couple more things to do for system maintenance:
Scan for spyware
Get updated versions of programs
Empty Recycle Bin
Remove programs you no longer use


----------



## plschwartz (Nov 15, 2000)

RJCE support stated

And Microsoft DOES put the options in Internet Explorer to delete cookies and temporary internet files on exit of the browser

Could you tell us how to do it I haven't found it
Thanks
Paul


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

To enable the auto-clear temp. internet files:
Goto TOOLS -- Internet Options -- Advanced Tab -- Scroll down to the bottom section (Security) and it is about the 5th option down.

Cookies are not always deleted, however, so... those will need to be deleted using the "Delete Cookies" option also in "Tools" Internet Options...OR by manually deleting them from the folders in C:\Windows\

This option exists only in IE 5 and higher... I believe, it may only be IE 5.5 and 6 though...I don't really remember, been using IE 6 and 5.5 so long now


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

or you can have all these things cleared at once...and even retain certain cookies using a batch file. Search for Batch File posts by me on TSG and you will find at least 2 threads on how to do this.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

Yes.... but the DELTREE command doesn't work for users with 2000/XP which do not keep the same directory structure.

For 2000/XP the following will help... but it still requires more work than most are willing to do.
*
rem As Windows XP has no Autoexec batch file, use this instead of deltree 
rem Add to Startup folder as text file named cleanXP.cmd or similar 
@echo on 
cd %homedrive%%homepath% 
rd /s/q locals~1\tempor~1 
rd /s/q locals~1\temp\tempor~1 
rd /s/q cookies 
rd /s/q temp\cookies 
rd /s/q locals~1\history 
rd /s/q locals~1\temp\history 
rd /s/q recent 
md recent 
rd /s/q locals~1\temp 
md locals~1\temp
*


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

Thanks for that I have spent maybe 15 minutes on an XP system.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

Heh...no problem... I have had WinXP since one of the earliest beta's. It's by far the most stable of the versions thus far, I know many don't really like the GUI changes... but those can be changed back to the default Windows-style easily.

But the above also is not as effective as the DELTREE is in Windows 9x, as well as not effective as manually going through and deleting the files from the folders where the files reside:

*C:\Windows\Temp\
C:\Documents and Settings\{username}\Local Settings\Temp\
C:\Documents and Settings\{username}\Local Settings\Temp\Temporary Internet Files\
C:\Documents and Settings\{username}\Local Settings\Cookies\
*


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by RJCE Support:_
> 
> The point becomes mute if you have a DSL or Cable modem connection... or T1/T3 connection. Then there becomes no valid reason to save the temporary internet files OR History files.


no, temp internet files will always speed the loading of pages, gifs, pics, etc A QUITE NOTICEABLE AMOUNT, no matter how fast the connection


> _It probably is good to clear out temp files, they take up disk space and as far as cached websites for loading faster the performance boost is almost always not noticible/ _


TAKE UP DISC SPACE? PLEEEZ...hardly a drop..the performance booste unnoticeable? cheesh, quite noticeable

look, the best suggestion here is to just lower the size the file can be, as has allready been suggested.

this is so obvious...if you make the file as small as you want, the os will quite natureally purge the file for you, and you will still have the performance booste

once again...there is absolutely no benefit in dleting these files, and quite a performance hit for anyone who uses the internet


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> no, temp internet files will always speed the loading of pages, gifs, pics, etc A QUITE NOTICEABLE AMOUNT, no matter how fast the connection



First of all, unless you are using dialup modem connection speeds, graphics will load just fine without temporary internet file caching. Besides that, for the few websites that you visit that you actually want/need to load quickly, there are about 50-100 others that you don't need the files saved for as they are sites you won't ever go back to. Thus the first instance of hard drive clutter.



> TAKE UP DISC SPACE? PLEEEZ...hardly a drop..the performance booste unnoticeable? cheesh, quite noticeable
> this is so obvious...if you make the file as small as you want, the os will quite natureally purge the file for you, and you will still have the performance booste
> once again...there is absolutely no benefit in dleting these files, and quite a performance hit for anyone who uses the internet



Next... either learn how to spell or get spell check working on your PC prior to posting so you actually come across intelligently. (no offense... just making a point if you want people to take you seriously)

But seriously, the above is quite wrong. In fact, the operating system does NOT purge the files as it needs to. This is why when you do a search for Temporary Files one day and get one number, and try again in a week or so the number has gone UP, not down. Also, Temporary Files have always caused problems in day-to-day operations, and this would be why Microsoft has Disk CleanUp Utility built in on Windows -- it deletes the very files we are discussing, as well as any remaining setup files and anything else that we all know clutter up your hard drive.

And as far as system performance, the following are caused (at least partially) by temporary files:

Cluttering of Hard Drive (many, many, unneccesary files -- regardless of size)
Fragmentation of Hard Drive (which causes longer seek time when trying to locate files or programs you wish it to open for you)
Memory usage (some of these files are actually using memory and this could be trouble for those with less that 128MB)
And many smaller problems...

With all of that said, I believe that anyone here with any background in setup, troubleshooting, and maintaining computers would agree that Temporary Files are more of a pain than anything else. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and anyone who chooses to save a couple seconds on page loads while browsing over the overall maintenence and stability of their PC is more than welcome to do so. But... I would strongly advise against bringing everyone else down with you. The above comments are exactly what keep computer technicians and consultants like myself making money... someone has to clean up the mess later on...


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

no...hardly any of what you've posted bears truth...first, this is too simple to even repeat...just go into the GUI, and make the file the size that you think is reasonable, if you think it takes too much disc space, make it smaller...(did I even have to say that?, again, it's like saying water is wet)

clutter up your hardrive?..you've got to be kidding, this is a non issue, that people feel like sprouting just to validate points that they want to believe...your harddrive cannot get cluttered from this file ...sheesh.

why does ms let you clean the files? is this an argument?...unbelievable you would use this as some validation for a point you are trying to make..here's a news flash, hard to believe...ms also lets you clean all your files!, you can dump the dlls if you want!!, you can compress your files if you want!!!, they even let you try to run without a page file!!!!...you know, if you want, they let you remove as much ram as you want, they let you put in a slower processor too ...they let you do whatever you want to do with this os...the fact that the function is there does not validate any point whatsoever...if you read the gui, the purpose of cleaning these files is to free disc space...I'm sorry, I haven't needed disc space 95

and finally, it does not matter how fast your connection is, there is no question you will serf faster with temp internet files, undenialble...and if you are tuning your box, then deleting these files will de tune your box, and there is no other way to look at this.

go ahead, reduce the size of it...and I will guarantee to everybody, the file will purge itself, once that you set is realized.

just In case there are those of you that don't know how to change the size of this file, just go to tools, internet options, settings...go ahead and make the file as small as 80 MB, (this should be fine, but a little bigger is better)...would someone dare tell me a file this size is not going to purge of old information when you reach 80 MB?

then got to your history settings, and make this delete after three days.

done...ths conversation has become circular...my points are self evident, if you want performance, you cannot delete these files...period


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> go ahead, reduce the size of it...and I will guarantee to everybody, the file will purge itself, once that you set is realized.
> 
> just In case there are those of you that don't know how to change the size of this file, just go to tools, internet options, settings...go ahead and make the file as small as 80 MB, (this should be fine, but a little bigger is better)...would someone dare tell me a file this size is not going to purge of old information when you reach 80 MB?



First of all, temporary internet cache is NOT just one file as you seem to be reiterating. It is a FOLDER...with MANY files in it. Cookies, graphics, htm/html files, etc... All of them are cached there.

Second, yes, you can set the size of the folder... which is fine, that isn't all that we were discussing. Temporary Files on the other hand, don't just purge out of the system as you say. Temporary Files (not to be confused with temporary internet cache) accumulate over time and these are the files which clog your hard drive and you seem to be lumping in with the temporary internet cache. I do apologize for making it sound as if I was disagreeing that option existed. Again, I was mainly talking about temporary files, not internet cache...

The thing that boggles my mind of what you claim is that by deleting the files in that folder you hurt your performance level. As I said, most cached pages and graphics come from internet site you probably won't be going back to. Most websites that are frequently used don't need to be cached because they are designed as full page graphics with layers. These sites are pointless to cache because if they update frequently the new graphics need to be downloaded everytime anyways -- filling up that cache amount twice for one site.

Also, I am not sure what "box" you are talking about "tuning"... however if you are referring to tweaking of the PC's Cable/DSL connection, to say that deleting the cache "detunes" the tweaking is ridiculous. Those tweaks are registry settings that enhance the operating system's ability to pull in packets of data and reduce the repeat packet requests from the servers. Thus, speeding up the connection speed -- resulting in even less time for downloads.

And unless you have a very worthless DSL or Cable connection, I can't see how the milliseconds lost in the redowloading of internet sites because of internet cache deletion can really be noticed. Yes, there is a slight slowdown... but the only ones who I can understand desiring to avoid that are those with dialup connections. For Cable, DSL, ISDN, and T1/T3 connections the slowdown is not noticable.

And finally, when the system "purges" the old cached internet files, it doesn't just simply overwrite them... it deletes the older stuff first to make room. So... really, comparing that slight delay with the slight delay in downloading new cache each session after deleting the files manually, I think it becomes a wash because either way you look at it... there is some sort of delay involved. Either way though it is a very minimal delay that in most instances is not noticable. So with that said I think it's basically user preference. Reactive user versus preventative user. I suppose that makes this whole conversation pointless then.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by RJCE Support:_
> *
> 
> First of all, temporary internet cache is NOT just one file as you seem to be reiterating. It is a FOLDER...with MANY files in it. Cookies, graphics, htm/html files, etc... All of them are cached there.
> *


this is circular, we've all expressed our opinion..we all believe our points of view are evident, and i can't make it any more clear that you will slow your speed down by deleting the files in question...as a matter of fact, everyone agrees, including yourself that thesefiles speed you up, I say they speed you up, and you say, yea but not that much...I say it's quite a bit, and you say it's not that much...soit's just a question of how much these files speed you up, ...so there shouldn't be a debate, yet there is... I cannot get out of my mind why on earth would you delete them these files?...oh, that's right you think they somehow "clutter up your hardrive...hehe...good one...never mind, the whole notion just boggles my feeble mind, and we are all just repeating ourselfs

...btw, of course you are correct in your description of the file versus foder, my bad.., but the obvious remains...water is wet, and deleting these files will slow you down if you use the internet( as we all have agreed), and deleting them cannot possibly speed you up...and there is no other way to look at it...

you can have the last word here,

another topic for me now


----------



## Moby (Mar 19, 2002)

So, _should_ he delete them or _not_ ?


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Moby : _
> *So, should he delete them or not ?*


Moby,
What do you say


----------



## DVOM (Jun 21, 2002)

As far as hard drive clutter goes, I've seen more than 450MB of temp files built up on peoples machines before. Sure made defrag take forever.

perris, what's your internet connection speed? and what's your processor speed? What you're saying was true back when we were dealing with 486 processors and 28k dialup. However with my 350mhz processor and DSL there is no difference. Especially since I've got my browser set to "always look for a new version". If you've got a fast connection and a modern processor and if what you're saying actually does speed up your internet, you've probably got problems somewhere else.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by DVOM:_
> *As far as hard drive clutter goes, I've seen more than 450MB of temp files built up on peoples machines before. Sure made defrag take forever.
> *


ok, you've brought me back here, I didn't want to, but you did ask me back...my last post, (hopefully ) on thsi topic.

950 athlon..(true clock)

512 ram

I'm a writer, and use internet on laptops across the country, from 56, dsl, t1, t3, and the fastest of all, unthrottled.

on every onnection, the cache will speed me up...yes, I've benchmarked...especially since this conversation...the differance is always noticeable, on every single connection.

now, I will give you credtit, you have FINALLY come up with a valid reason to delete the files...

thatr would be, if oyu are running fat, and you hav3e your temp files on a common partition, then yes, you will have to defrag more often.

the solution if you arre running fat, and want the fastest box posssible is to give the temp internet files their own seperate partition.

if you arre on ntfs, of course everyone knows fragmentation is no issue unless you are 85 % saturated, so no issue whatsoever

so, for the very last time;

no matter what your connecttion, if you are trying to tune your box, deleting these files will DEFINATELY DETUNE YOUR BOX, AND THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO OTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT...PERIOD.

if you are on fat, and you want to defrag as ittle as possible, then of course, this is an active file, and it will fragment, just like all of your active files...so go ahead, and delete all your active files while you're at it, since you don't feel like defragging. (of course, I'm being faceteous)

that's it..you want to run slower, as every single person here says you will, (some claim a little, some claim a lot, but all claim a slow down)...go ahead,delete the file.

you want a tuned box, leave the file.

ok, that's it, jsut repeating myself again, so that;s it

next topic for me, for real


----------



## aldiboronti (Apr 18, 2002)

It's odd that your advice conflicts with most, if not all, of the people on this site whom I can testify, from experience, know their computer and its operating system backwards, forwards and inside-out. Perhaps when you have given evidence of such expertise your opinion might carry more weight.


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2002)

Hello Perris,

Not being any sort of expert, your advice does seem to conflict with every other piece of advice I have read or have been told.
It is your prerogative to believe what you do, but not for you to rubbish every body else's views. These things can be discussed reasonably.

I will continue to clean my temporary files, etc. just because I don't want anything on the hard drive that is not absolutely necessary. 

T2.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tuppence2:_
> *Hello Perris,
> 
> Not being any sort of expert, your advice does seem to conflict with every other piece of advice I have read or have been told.
> ...


ah, finally a new point to bring up.

yes, just like everyone here repeating what they've heard, without understanding the issue, this is one of those sayings that are pure nonsense, simply repeated since those early OS days..and then, excuse repeating it yourself because everyone else repeats it is hardly admirable.

the issue is absolutely self evident, and I am not trashing everyones point of view.

EVERY SINGLE PERSONS HERE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THESE FILES SPEED YOU UP...though some say it's not much, everyone says it's something.

now, given this, it amazes me this urban legend goes forward, even among those of you that KNOW the facts...YOU JUST WANT TO HANG ON TO THESE MYTHS...(why I don't know...it's confortable to be on the bandwagon I guess)

so, the only thing left is for any discussion at all, is the alleged "clutter of your drive"...AS IF you are still using a 10 gig fat formatted harddrive that's full or something...you are not, (hopefully), and you are not, (hopefully )using fat..and those two circumstances are necessary for this myth to bear even an iota of reality.

does anyone that knows anything at all about modern OS's really believe that a file this small can possibly "clutter" your drive...it's really amazing that anyone at all would repeat this rubbish.

so. go ahead, delete your internet files...wait, better yet, why don't you just reduce the size to zero, then you will never have to delete it in the first place.

and go ahead, and repeat these long obsolete myths, because everyone else repeats it, and then you also repeat it, it must obviously continue to remain true, right?...puhleeeze


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

well, there I am, sounding all crass again...I opolgize for it again, I just get so frustrated when people repeat old advice, just for the sake of they heard it before, so to be contrite, here's some constructive advice for your temporary internet files;

if you are using fat, of course, you are partitioned, you need to create a dedicated partition for these files, then, make the temp internet files smaller then the partition, so you have room to defrag...then, the fragmentation caused by these files are easily handled

if you are using the nt file system, fragmentation is not an issue, and you need not dedicate a partition to these files, you should probably reduce the size of it from the default, buy do not make it any smaller then 80m mbs...more is better, much more will take a long time for the system to purge the file of old information.


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

This thread should be actually in the Reviews forum! As the point of deleting the files has been reviewed/debated than providing tips

Now, there is no need for anyone to call other's posts as *rubbish* or whatever, as its their OWN POINT OF VIEW(and probably experience).

perris,
I agree that the TIF files increase the speed of the internet. But, what TIF is its only a cache of the *VISITED* sites! Now I dont think there will be people who'll be visiting the same site everyday/every hour... So they surely take up some space(as per the settings in the IE Options). Moreover, the difference in the speed isnt really HUGE. Probably a few seconds difference can be observed! So what my final point is, I dont mind removing the files in the TIF folder and I've it automatically set to delete the files after I close the IE in the IE options.

Tools->Internet Options->Advanced->Security->Empty Temporary Internet files folder when browser is closed.

I know that this view conflicts with yours and probably many others too but thats what I feel!


----------



## hewee (Oct 26, 2001)

> _Originally posted by perris:_
> *well, there I am, sounding all crass again...I opolgize for it again, I just get so frustrated when people repeat old advice, just for the sake of they heard it before, so to be contrite, here's some constructive advice for your temporary internet files;
> 
> if you are using fat, of course, you are partitioned, you need to create a dedicated partition for these files, then, make the temp internet files smaller then the partition, so you have room to defrag...then, the fragmentation caused by these files are easily handled
> ...


On my old P-200 with windows 95a and a 999MB C: drive I made the swap file and the Netscape temp files on the first partitioned of the 2 nd hard drive I had. It made my PC run alot faster because of the C: drive being so small and the old PC only had 64MB of memory so it was using the swap file alot and that was all over the place on the C: drive and it would frag the drive up fast but once I moved it to the D: drive I did not have all that trouble and my PC loved me for it.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

pvc...excellant post.

and I agree with everything that you wrote, and apologize for insulting anyones opinion, 

on the other hand, what I'm repeating is not opinion, it's documented fact, these files speed you up, and everyone agrees with this.

some, like yourself feel the speed benefit is negligible, and you want to empty the folder because you feel it keeps the harddrive "clutter free"

OK, to discuss this notion;

the very creation of these files, (and any files), causes fragmentation that allegedly "clutters" your drive...

deleting these files , (and any and all files which have also caused fragmentation),does not "unclutter" your drive, 

it actually causes MORE fragmentation, and MORE "CLUTTER", not less "clutter", and thus, you have "cluttered" your drive MORE, NOT LESS, by deleting the files...

simple, isn't it....

in order to "unclutter" your drive, you have to defrag, and that's the only thing that will help if you believe "clutter" is some kind of performance issue, (which it is not).

now, if you ARE going to defrag, it does not make one bit of difference if the files are deleted or not, for the drive will then again be "UNcluttered", because you defragged... so deleting these helpfull files did not "unclutter" you drive one bit. 

IN FACT, DELETING THESE FILES HAS CLUTTERED YOU , AND NOT UNCLUTTERED YOU!!!, and it's done this quite a bit, since you've created unnecessary fragments.

now, these are facts aren't they...this is not my opinion, these are facts.

obviously, if you want to prevent the "clutter" caused by internet files, THE ONLY WAY TO PREVENT IT IS TO DISABLE THE CREATION OF FILES.

now, I've been reluctant to say that, as it might suggest to some that it is a good idea to do it so that they don't "clutter up" their drive.

and, since it's a bad idea, and will surely slow you down, I thought it would be irresponsible for me to point those facts out, seeing how a little information has already become so hamfull.

pvc...do yourself a big favor, (try this please)...just lower the size of your temporary files to about 100mb, and don't bother to delete it for 2 weeks.

you will surely notice all around improved performance on the internet.

you will also notice, that if you defrag a coupla times a week, as you are probably doing already, that there is no "clutter"

now, those of you that use ntfs, you can also defrag a coupla times a week, though it's not that necessary, it surely won't hurt, and then you will have a "clutter free" hard drive.

As far as the history...set it to 3 days...period.

now, what I've just written well known facts, it's just that some people take well known facts, and misinterpreter the affects, and come up with solutions that are counter productive.

these ill advised ideas will then repeated, time and again, and the more repeated, the more believed, to the disservice of all.

NOW, THIS IS THE IMPORTANT POINT;

when a common idea is repeated, yet the idea flies in the face of current knowledge and sense, puhleeze don't go and repeat it yourself as well...

challenge those old notions whenever you see fit...

the very fact that the idea is old probably means the issue has already been addressed, don't you think?


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

hewee, yours is an excellant post...as always, it's good to see you...all good with you?


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

perris,
First of all thx for considering that my post was so

Now, I dont care if the files fragment/defragment(which they dont) my drive as I never bother about that! I use Norton Utilities and the System Doctor will tell me when I've to defrag the drive and when not to! So I'm not really bothered about it!

I can understand when you say that for a trial I give 100 MB space and try for 2 days. And I ALSO *KNOW* that the pages will be downloaded faster. So its not that I'm going against any known rule/fact or your opinion(jk)!

Just FYI, most of us know this but the viruses/malicious scripts are downloaded from the internet through the script files which ofcourse are stored in the TIF folder and its supplementary folders!(and thats the reason why the option to clear the TIF folder automatically as I posted earlier is under the Security tab in IE options) Ofcourse the others come from the good ole' program OE

Though I've a 40 GB HDD, I cant give the TIF any space as my C drive is just 2 GB and I dont want any extra stuff there. Also I'm connected through cable and so I really dont mind to getrid of those files regularly!

To add-on, before I knew that Windows itself has a TIF  (probably 2 and half yrs back), I used a program Netsonic(www.web3000.com not sure if the site is still up)! And later, I found that all it did was the same work Caching. So removed that program and left the TIF as it is(and then I was using a 56K dialup).

So I agree that the TIF files will speed-up access to some extent and IMHO I still dont want to keep the files, not at all.

Have a great day!


----------



## pyritechips (Jun 3, 2002)

> temp internet files will always speed the loading of pages, gifs, pics, etc A QUITE NOTICEABLE AMOUNT, no matter how fast the connection





> no matter what your connecttion, if you are trying to tune your box, deleting these files will DEFINATELY DETUNE YOUR BOX, AND THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO OTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT...PERIOD


Wrong and wrong!

When I installed my 98se it automatically set my TIF folder to 1% of my HDD space: 600MB. I didn't change it at first and became quickly stuffed. I later reduced it to 20MB.

I also tweaked my registry and my cable is very fast. I clean up and defrag religiously. I have timed my connection speed on an almost daily basis and my speed did not noticeably change NO MATTER IF THE TIF FOLDER IS STUFFED TO OVERFLOWING OR DEAD EMPTY!



> we've all expressed our opinion..we all believe our points of view are evident


Conclusion: Please don't tell me that my carefully documented performance is "opinion"! Unless you want to time page-loading down to the nano-second then this entire arguement is entirely moot unless:


> What you're saying was true back when we were dealing with 486 processors and 28k dialup


 .

So please don't tell people what they are experiencing is wrong or only opinion. There is usually a difference between theory and practice.

~Jim


----------



## hewee (Oct 26, 2001)

perris, 

All you said is right in and the setting would not be the same for each of us the the reason behind would aways be the same.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

pvc, great post, and yes, I agree, if you need the space, and the space is more important then a little extra speed, of course, delete the file...great point.

hewee, good post again

pyritechips 

sorry, everything I posted is well known fact, and saying i'm wrong doesn't change that.

ok, I'm spent for real, and I know I said this before, but this time I mean it..hehe...I surely will not post on this thread again

chow


----------



## pvc9 (Jul 7, 2002)

Great!

Have a great day!


----------



## hewee (Oct 26, 2001)

You all may like to read this here.

Performance: The Need for Speed

http://www.symantec.com/techsupp/bulletin/archive/nu/1299nu.html


----------



## jett_30032 (Jan 23, 2002)

I have mine set to clear temp. internet files when I close my browser and temp is cleared on boot-up. there is no use for them (my opinion). Thank God for fast access!
I value any hard-drive space I can so if it has no use I nuke it.

So I guess it is user preference.


----------



## Monstrous Mi (Jul 20, 2002)

For jett*:

Internet Options>Advanced, scroll to the bottom for the section on Security. I have IE6.


----------



## jett_30032 (Jan 23, 2002)

(Monstrous Mi)
This is the way I want it set.

I was making a point that I don't want these files taking up space and it is not like I can't find the URL sometime later if I really need too. Once agin thank God for fast access.
Thanks for the info Mi!


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

Unfortunately, with all the debating above.... I have failed to see ANY links to the so-called "well known and documented" writings that are supposedly published backing up the opinions that NOT clearing the cache and temp. internet files speeds things up.

On the contrary, what is REALLY documented out there is how not clearing out those files once in a while CAN cause you performance problems.

The defragmentation argument is a good one... and was one of the things I stated early on in this argument. Just because those files replace each other constantly in that folder, does not mean that they won't fragment the hard drive... which NO ONE can dispute causes performance problems...even on such files as temporary internet cache files.

The Symantec link was nice, however I tend not to trust a company that now recently changed to force EVERYONE to pay for a subscription to get virus definition updates, what all others provide for FREE. Besides which, that link only tells general information. I do disagree with their suggestion for making profiles for every different type of use you have for the PC. Profiles also clutter up the PC and cause you to need to clean out files and defragment that much more. (Depending on how you partition the drive that is... )

I also must argue the fact that my posts have been grouped with those who merely HEAR things from others. No, my posts are not based upon heresy, they are based upon the knowledge that I have acquired over the past 15+ years I have been working with and supporting computers. While it doesn't serve as "proof", my website listed below (which I host myself so it may not ALWAYS be up - but mostly it is) lists the experience I have had...jobs I have held.

With that said, everyone is entitled to their opinions. I don't knock the opinions of others... even though I disagree with the few posts saying how much performance loss you get when clearing out cache. I too have cable connection and on all speed tests score higher than the 1.5Mbit ranking they give Cable Modem connections. I don't notice any slow downs and I will continue clearing my cache and letting IE delete files on browser closure. If slowdowns exist, they are so minute that they are ridiculous to even worry about.


----------



## jett_30032 (Jan 23, 2002)

Good point RJ

Like I said before, it is user preference. If keeping these files satisfy the means then by all means Keep them. If not nuke'um to file heaven.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by jett_30032:_
> *Good point RJ
> 
> Like I said before, it is user preference. If keeping these files satisfy the means then by all means Keep them. If not nuke'um to file heaven. *


ah...I said I wouldn't post again..hehe

of course, nuke whatever you want...it's your box

nevertheless, my original post stands, deleting these files should never be suggested as some kind of performance enhancement..

it cannot possibly enhance performance to delete these files, (short on disc space of course withstand my statement), and will as everyone says with me, actually bring a performance hit, though some say it's negligeable...

and once again, so as to adderss the "clutter", (fragmentation), issue that some people seem to want to hang on to, as in that tricky blue post above, no, deleting files causes more clutter, (fragmentation), not less clutter, until you defrag... defragging with or without the files unclutters your drive just the same.

ok..gone for good


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> nevertheless, my original post stands, deleting these files should never be suggested as some kind of performance enhancement..



Okay... as I said before in the "tricky blue post above" as you call it, where is your so-called "well documented proof"? You have none... you merely have your own opinion and a few faithful followers. That's it. End of story. Whereas the majority here can site just about any technical help and support forum or site on the planet....not to mention any of those who are treated as experts in the computer support world.




> and once again, so as to adderss the "clutter", (fragmentation), issue that some people seem to want to hang on to, as in that tricky blue post above, no, deleting files causes more clutter, (fragmentation), not less clutter, until you defrag... defragging with or without the files unclutters your drive just the same.



And once again I say.... by letting the system delete files as necessary, you are still deleting files. And fragmentation happens when the SYSTEM manages disk space even more so than when you do. Besides that, defragmentation also should be done regularly.... or do you disagree that gains performance back too?

With all that said... AGAIN I say it is all a matter of user preference and perspective. The fact of the matter is every argument you have given others' opinions...can be held against you as well. You have not backed up anything with hard written evidence, and I would be willing to bet, short of making your own web page, that you will not find any suggesting the same as you say. Think what you want... but don't preach to the choir.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

ahh...faithfull followers...interesting, microsoft would be a faithfull follower of me, very interesting...if you're talking about everyone that's posted on this thread...I'm no regular hear, and only one person knows me at all...but if that's what you need to feel like you are right, ok.

this is so obvious, I thought you were being facetous to ask for documentation

if you're serious about this very obvious fact, fine, you want documentation, go to speak easy.

just do their test without deleting the files, and then again with the temp files deleted...hehe...come back here and tell eveybody how the temp files did not speed you up.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT YOU WILL NOT HAVE FASTER RESULTS IF YOU DO NOT DELETE THESE FILES, and I doubt you can even think to deny this.

every single internet test for internet speed will tell you to delete the temp files, so that the test is not spewed by the extra speed you get from these files...YOU DIDN'T KNOW THIS?...puhleeze...i'm surprised you even asked for this.

and again, you get more fragmentation from deleting files, not less fragmentation.

everything you are trying to prevent by deleting these files, you are in fact causing more of.

but as you say, it's user preferance...so go ahead, delete away, that's your box we're talking about, so just delete away

ok, gonna try real hard not to respond to your next post, and so you can have the last word

chow


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

I did the DSLreports test without temp files twice and download speed still varied by about 12 kbps without changing anything in between.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2002)

Hello brendan - Hope you keep well

Could you explain that a little more for me, please. Thanks.

T2


----------



## jett_30032 (Jan 23, 2002)

Let's just agree to disagree 

User preference OK? OK? 

OK!


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

OK I automatically clear all history cookies temps etc. I ran the test once and dont exactly remember what the result was now. Then I ran it again and there was a noticeable difference in the results without me doing anything in between. For example on TSG Chat, when I ping the chat server I usually get 330 milliseconds. If i do it again a minute later it can be 290 ms or 450 ms and its just not a reliable way to test if something speeds it up or slows it down. The only way is by observation.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by jett_30032:_
> *Let's just agree to disagree
> 
> User preference OK? OK?
> OK! *


of course, jett...you're right, and everyone can always agree to dissagree.

but what I've stated are facts that cannot be denyed.

temp files speed you up...period...they cannot possibly slow you down.

deleting temp files causes more clutter, not less clutter...period.

deleting these files cannot possibly help you "un clutter" your box.

the only thing that will help is the defrag, and deleted or not deleted, the clutter is gone.

it's user pereferance, of course it is, and whoever feels this need to delete these helpfull files, go right ahead, delete away.

all that I'm saying, and by now I'm sure everybody realizes my point, you cannot claim deleting these files will give you some performance benefit, when the fact is deleting these files will give you a performance hit.

brendandonhu

you are of course correct, these reports arr hardly reiable, but sonce someone would challenge the symple fact that temp internet files speed browsing, this was the simplest proof.

user pereferance...of course, user preferance, delete these files if you like, throw the box out the window if you like...user preferance.

and on this we surely can all agree


----------



## buck52 (Mar 9, 2001)

Howdy

If reading threads here at TSG is any indication...
clearing TIF cache certianly helps more than hurts

speed tests at DSL Reports vary like the wind (atleast for me) 

buck


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by buck52:_
> *Howdy
> 
> If reading threads here at TSG is any indication...
> ...


howdy to you too buck...glad you stopped by.

on your suggestion, as far as this site, i just deleted my temp files, and reloaded your main page...abut a second slower on my dsl.

I then again deleted the files, and came back to load this page.

then I did not delete the file, and reloaded this page..hehe..instantaneous, on a hard f5 refresh...much faster, as every website will tell you, and microsoft, and whoever else, temp files speed you up

and of course, user perception is not nearly as important as benchmarks, user perception is what creates these myths in the first place...it's quite a placebic affect, when dealing with computing, when someone says something will speed them up, if that person is percieved as an expert, guaranteed, 80% of the people will "percieve" a performance gain, even when it's a performance hit.

benchmark is the only test...perception is not.


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

But you keep saying that there is absolutely NO evidence of deleting speeding you up. Well I just read a thread today of someone who couldnt get webpages to load deleting cookies and history and it worked.


----------



## buck52 (Mar 9, 2001)

Howdy perris

I guess I should have been more specific when I said...
*"If reading threads here at TSG is any indication... 
clearing TIF cache certianly helps more than hurts "*

If *"abut a second slower on my dsl."* gives you goose bumps that good.

The fact is that for a lot of users that come here with questions...(your issue with speed not withstanding)
more problems are solved by dumping TIF files than are resolved

buck


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by buck52:_
> *Howdy perris
> 
> *


good to have another conversation with you buck, I really enjoyeds our first, way back about the pagefile....

yes buck a second on each page load does infact give me goosebumps...that's wuite a bit of time, isn't it?

please buck, tell me exactly what issues are resolved by deleting the temporary intertnet files...I don't know of any issues these files cause, so this will be good information for me.

good to see you again


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

When they get big, browsers have trouble storing more if its not set to purge them. It causes slow loading, time outs and crashes.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by brendandonhu:_
> *But you keep saying that there is absolutely NO evidence of deleting speeding you up. Well I just read a thread today of someone who couldnt get webpages to load deleting cookies and history and it worked. *


you know...to be fair, I can't figure out how deleting these files would resolve this problem, and quite honestly, I don't believe it did...as you know, sometimes we attribute results from circumstance...this is probably that case.

the only correlation might be if this gentleman is storing ip addresses, and neglected to update his file, then deleting al hi internet files would resolve his issue, but it was caused by him, not updating his cache of ip addresses...this can happen with some firewalls, for instance, the outpost firewall caches dns addresses to further speed your internet...fastnet 99 does the same thing...and let me tell you here, these programs are marvelus for speeding internet, but the ip addresses must be updated about once a week, and that was probably the issue with the gentleman ypu speek


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

The IPs would be stored in the HOSTS file not cookies/history. BTW I manually store IPs for sites I visit, and havent updated in about 4 months with no problems.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by brendandonhu:_
> *But you keep saying that there is absolutely NO evidence of deleting speeding you up. Well I just read a thread today of someone who couldnt get webpages to load deleting cookies and history and it worked.
> 
> they get big......
> ...


you know...to be fair, I can't figure out how deleting these files would resolve this problem, and quite honestly, I don't believe it did...as you know, sometimes we attribute results from circumstance...this is probably that case.

the only correlation might be if this gentleman is storing ip addresses, and neglected to update his file, then deleting al hi internet files would resolve his issue, but it was caused by him, not updating his cache of ip addresses...this can happen with some firewalls, for instance, the outpost firewall caches dns addresses to further speed your internet...fastnet 99 does the same thing...and let me tell you here, these programs are marvelus for speeding internet, but the ip addresses must be updated about once a week, and that was probably the issue with the gentleman ypu speek

as far as the file getting too big, I am no proponent of a big intenet file, and I highly recomend decreasing the size...mine is set to 1000mb.

you can probably go as low as 80m mb without noticeing a performance hit, you can go bigger then 1000mb with no problem of the file getting out of hand, but deleting the file serves only the purpose of slowing you down


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

See im special i replied to your post before you posted it!


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by brendandonhu:_
> *The IPs would be stored in the HOSTS file not cookies/history. BTW I manually store IPs for sites I visit, and havent updated in about 4 months with no problems. *


yes, you're righe, I'm guessing thie gentleman involved in the thread you site deleted this file along with all his other internet files , as he also deleted his history, as that could surely resove his issue

and yes, mostly, you don't need to update your host file, but it's good to do it.

you really should try fastnet 99.

it's free, it automatically enters the addresses in the host file as you serf, and it will automatically update on a schedule.

it will delete double entries, it's smoothe as silk, and it doesn't even need to be running, as it's already made the entriess in the host file, so it doesn't even use ram in speeding your box...excellant proggy

this program will speed just about everybdy, so do a goolge search for it, it's free.


----------



## buck52 (Mar 9, 2001)

Howdy

*"yes buck a second on each page load does infact give me goosebumps"*

whatever floats your boat

http://forums.techguy.org/showthread.php?threadid=82163&highlight=cant+save+as+jpg

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?id=kb;en-us;Q260650

time to give this up and go work on some other issues that really matter...stacking firewood 

buck


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by buck52:_
> *Howdy
> 
> "yes buck a second on each page load does infact give me goosebumps"
> ...


really, buck, a second on every pageload is huge, I'm surprised you want to make light of that...I'm on dsl, and this represents abourt a 33% speed booste..anyway, that's floating your boat, so ok.

as far as this rare instance you've discovered, no, it was not the temporary internet files that daused this problem , it was his mucking around with some settings, which then caused this issue.

This issue can occur if you have "Do not save encrypted pages to disk" selected in Tools, Options, Advanced Tab and are loading the page over a secure connection (https)...

so, someone told him to clear his intenet files, iwhich would be a quick fix, but that's it...instead of undoing the setting that caused his issue in the first place.

and yes, off to chuvking wood for me too.

good to see you again


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

Trust me he didnt delete his hosts file. I know because I asked him if he used any sort of filtering, acceleration or ad blocking and he said no, I also led him through it pretty much step by step. and buck pointed to the KB article where Microsoft lists problems caused by over flowing temps.

Thanks for showing me fastnet 99 but I dont really need it because I use very few sites multiple times and Hostess groups my file and clears duplicates, plus when I have internet issues the first thing I do is rename it to hosts.old


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

And that thread it was NOT caused by "mucking around" in the settings. The KB article says there are multiple causes and each one has a different fix. If it was the settings problem, he would have to change the settings back but it was fixed after temps were cleared, meaning the problem was temps being too big.


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by brendandonhu:_
> *And that thread it was NOT caused by "mucking around" in the settings. The KB article says there are multiple causes and each one has a different fix. If it was the settings problem, he would have to change the settings back but it was fixed after temps were cleared, meaning the problem was temps being too big. *


if his settings were correct, and the default, he would not have had the issue, it's like, you hhit yourself with a hammer, and you needed to set your bones...you don't get rid of the bone, you make sure you don't hit yourself with the hammer.

this issue was caused by mucking around with his settings, which were neot set to the default.

as far as your friend, and his issue, what can I say, I'[m not there...all I can say is deleting the files you're talking about could not have been the resolution of that issue...there is another factor.

but even if it were, if you think deleting the file by rote is the solution to this very rare problem, then as we;ve already said, go ahead, and delete away...it's your box.

I do not know anyone who's had these rare issues, much less had them resolved by deleting the files.

so, if you think it's good practice to delete the files in order to prevent these rare instances, then by all means, do it.

personally, I'll take the extra speed, and if the rare issue arises on my box,(it won't), that's the time to resort to this, if this is really the solution...I'm not going to put my arm in a caste in order to prevent my arm from getting broken


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> temp files speed you up...period...they cannot possibly slow you down.
> 
> deleting temp files causes more clutter, not less clutter...period.
> 
> ...



You, of course are correct.... well... partially. Deleting files does cause fragmentation. However, it doesn't matter whether YOU delete them OR the operating system itself deletes them... and the fact of the matter is fragmentation is caused by the new files ADDED to the system, not just merely those deleted. In which case letting the operating system manage the TIF's is causing fragmentation. End of story.




> really, buck, a second on every pageload is huge, I'm surprised you want to make light of that...I'm on dsl, and this represents abourt a 33% speed booste..anyway, that's floating your boat, so ok.


A second translates to 33% boost on a DSL connection? Umm... where'd you go to school for math? Most DSL connections (standard ones... not additional bandwidth ones) barely graze 768 download speed and upload sits around 80-120. Either you are basing the 33% on merely being connected to the internet 24/7 or you are mistaken with the numbers. If you are worried about a precious second of your time for a page to load... that is quite pathetic. Sorry to say.

And as for the speed test sites, that is a very poor example. Those are designed for checking a rough (and I do mean rough) estimate of the speed of your connection. By not clearing out the cache (actually it is really a number of cookies that it downloads) you are skewing that number because the test is getting confused as it tries to send the file and your system shows the files exists. Thus, inaccurate information shows up on the test.

Now, the same applies for webpages... and if it is a site or sites you frequent that don't change content much, then caching is nice because you don't have to download it again. But, with the majority of sites updating daily or hourly (like Yahoo, CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc...) you don't gain anything. Why? Because those pages are done in slices... and if one thing changes on the page, it needs to be downloaded over again by the browser. And like I said before and * brendandonhu * also said, there are very few sites that you go to so frequently that you need them cached... and that don't change more frequently than you visit. Thus defeating the purpose of your caching strategy.

I won't say that caching doesn't techinically speed up web page loads, but if there are changes on the website it is going to re-download everything short of a few image files anyways. And with broadband connections the wait isn't painful...on dialup, I'd say caching probably works much better and makes more sense.




> {{* brendandonhu wrote:* }}
> And that thread it was NOT caused by "mucking around" in the settings. The KB article says there are multiple causes and each one has a different fix. If it was the settings problem, he would have to change the settings back but it was fixed after temps were cleared, meaning the problem was temps being too big.



Hey there Brendan... how goes it?
Anywho.. this is correct. I can't seem to figure out how anyone can say that after only deleting cache files and voila! Problem disappears, that the fix wasn't deleting the TIF's. First off, most novice users who are asking advice generally aren't going to do anything other than what is suggested to fix the problem. Second, deleting the cache FORCES the browser to reload the pages from the SERVER rather than your "box" as it's being described in this forum. Thus, this is the reason clearing cache or TIF's can help fix page loads and errors.

Say you have a slow latency (for those of you who don't know that term, it is your ping rate to the server or other device on network or internet), say 800ms. This means that the delay in getting the new information will be that 800ms to talk to the server, and then the delay in your connection speed to YOUR ISP server, which, in cases of broadband is minute. This means that yes, could be potential for a second... maybe two... but not enough to hurt you.

Now, also... the reason that clearing cache causes some errors to be fixed is that your computer's browser first looks to the cache for any parts of the site you are trying to get. It compares this to what is on the server and goes from there. If you receieved bad packets of information last time, those same packets will be there in your TIF's and thus will cause you to have same problem. This is also true for errors.


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

Excellently Put


----------



## perris (Apr 21, 2002)

rjce, good post, and on this post, I for the most part agree, (except of course the spots that you take shots at me, but I guess I earned those, didn't I)

and I also am enlightned by your take on how deleting the temp files helped brendans friend.

so, good points.

as far as making light of a full second on every page downloaded, well, I can't argue with you, if you think this is not huge, then for you it's not...of course, for me, this time savings is huge...I do have a.d.s. you know.

33% is based on the generalized page download of about 3 seconds without temporary internet files, versus about 2 seconds with the files...it was just off the top, as to demonstrate that for me, this is a huge differance...for you, and buck, I guess this is a neglegeable savings...for those like me, huge.

now, to address the points made, where these rare occasions arise, that the temp files are the cause of an issue.

the are times when one of your sticks of ram go bad...you don't run without a stick of ram in this slot, simply because the stick went bad, you get a new stick...that's a nice analogy.

here's another example;...do you know there are programs that cannot run with the speed of todays processors?...true...so, if I run across one of these programs, I will underclock my cpu when the time arises...I will surely not run underclocked all the time, for the very few times excess clock speed is an issue.

same thing here

your point about the same thing for web pages loading, well that's the whole point of this discussion...the speedier experience on the internet is what we're talking about

so, we've reached common ground, haven't we...good, twas getting hot.

now again, of course, we both agree, a defrag regiment is a fine idea, and as you know, deleted or not, the temp files are uncluttered by virtue of defrag, they are not uncluttered by virtue of deleting them...that will clutter more, not less.

and my real point, when asked "what can I do to speed my box?", deleting temporary internet files does not go on that list.

I will make the point for you though, that when someone wants to clean up their box, go ahead and put this on the list, as long as the defrag follows the deletion...not before.


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

OK thats fair. You keep your 1 second per page, ill keep my temp clearing batch file.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> rjce, good post, and on this post, I for the most part agree, (except of course the spots that you take shots at me, but I guess I earned those, didn't I)
> 
> and I also am enlightned by your take on how deleting the temp files helped brendans friend.
> 
> so, good points.



Hehe... My apologies if you took offense, my "shots" are subtle and meant only to make points.

Anyways, I appreciate your comments and compliments on my post. Also, glad I could enlighten you some on the issue of how it helped brendans friend. I wanted to say earlier but forgot -- about the HOST file -- You don't *ever* delete the file unless you want to go back to the default file loaded by Windows when you first install it. Normally, you also shouldn't need to edit this file either, but occasionally it is necessary. 




> as far as making light of a full second on every page downloaded, well, I can't argue with you, if you think this is not huge, then for you it's not...of course, for me, this time savings is huge...I do have a.d.s. you know.
> 
> 33% is based on the generalized page download of about 3 seconds without temporary internet files, versus about 2 seconds with the files...it was just off the top, as to demonstrate that for me, this is a huge differance...for you, and buck, I guess this is a neglegeable savings...for those like me, huge.



I guess I can honestly see where you are coming from, though I still consider aDSL or iDSL fast enough connections that I wouldn't worry much about such delays in page loading. But, that as we all agreed is user preference there.

As for your numbers... I suppose I see where they came from, I'm not sure I agree completely though just by the fact that DSL is still a pretty fast connection. But again, if it's a big savings to you... I'm not going to argue that 




> your point about the same thing for web pages loading, well that's the whole point of this discussion...the speedier experience on the internet is what we're talking about
> 
> I will make the point for you though, that when someone wants to clean up their box, go ahead and put this on the list, as long as the defrag follows the deletion...not before.



I understand your point... however, the point was made earlier that in many cases the temporary internet files cause more problems than they are worth. And as I said before, you are in some ways adding more seeking time to page loads by caching temp. files because your browser has to decide whether to download new content or not. But when it comes right down to it, as long as you have a dialup connection, caching becomes a savior of sorts. I don't think it really makes much difference beyond that... but as we said, that is a matter of preference.

So... with that said... it's been fun debating with ya'll. I just would like to now say....


GO BROWNS!


----------



## henderson (Feb 23, 2004)

you have been very helpful. thank you, thank you, thank you.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

Glad I could help -- Wow, this is a flash back... did you find this post by searching or something? Hehe... just wondering. Been a while since my last post here.


----------



## iaavagent (Jan 11, 2004)

On dial up comments missing was the time consumption of scans for 2nd opinions on the net and regular too!

You would be surprised at those who fail to check delete all off line content in IE! {ME FOR ONE!} 11000+ files had accumulated in Content IE. Scans had to do those too!
Finally realized this and got rid of them and gained about 300mb. Pute been running so much better cleaned up of junk and scans cut by 1/3rd the time! 
Best to all


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

On at least IE 5.5+ you can alter the amount of space taken up by the temporary files/content saved. But, yes... that is an unchecked option by default under the ADVANCED tab, to empty the temp folder on exit.

I generally remove all temp files and cookies every week or so at least and defrag every 2-3 weeks (depending on what activity I've had on my drive to warrant a good defrag after cleaning off the clutter)


----------



## Fidelista (Jan 17, 2004)

When I was using Windows ME , after long use, it began to run poorly and eventually I had a problem. Norton anti-virus scan would freeze on a certain file, don't remember which one , but it was always the same file, something like the 27,000 file scanned. I was thinking about reinstalling my anti-virus when an IT person where I work, told me to delete all Temp files {*.TMP} Temp internet files ect. When I followed his advice--Norton scans worked, and my system definitely ran better. I wasnt looking for speed, just trying to make my machine run. 
Since then, I have always deleted these files. Never really figured out what happened , but deletion seemed to work. It is possible that my system simply "sorted itself out" like happens sometimes, but I really believe my problem was with a temp file --of some type.


----------



## Fidelista (Jan 17, 2004)

Also--- it may have slowed web surfing, but not enough so that I noticed. The only drawback at all, was re-typing all my internet passwords. 
Has anyone experieced something like this?. Just curious.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Fidelista:_
> *Also--- it may have slowed web surfing, but not enough so that I noticed. The only drawback at all, was re-typing all my internet passwords.
> Has anyone experieced something like this?. Just curious. *



Yes, you would lose all stored internet site passwords as those are stored in cookies (generally). But yeah, the slowing of web browsing is not noticible on most connections, with the exception of _maybe_ dial-up connections.

That's what makes those download accelerators and new "10 times faster web browsing" ISP deals so attractive. But the key to those is just what this whole thread was discussing... caching the pages for views at a later time...so you aren't downloading all the images everytime unless they change. The other thing that those ISP deals do is that the images are reduced on the ISP's server so when they are sent to you as a dial-up customer, the images take far less tiem to download --- but, the sacrifice is quality.

Just something to think about if anyone out there is thinking about getting one of those dial-up accelerator ISP deals instead of broadband. Cable and DSL connections are still FAR superior to the dial-up ISP deals out there from Earthlink, NetZero, etc. And you won't suffer the quality hits in images and other things. Also, downloads aren't accelerated at all by those new ISP services... so, you'll still be taking that 2 hours to download that large file you wanted.


----------



## kathyn (May 22, 2003)

..this may be a very dumb question, but I have to ask. What is it then that _does_ make a computer run slower as time goes on??


----------



## iaavagent (Jan 11, 2004)

Everything! Wear and tear,{heat, dust, friction, worn parts, power variances, etc} also file corruption,too many junk files.memory overload, fragmentation, improper use,smoke,hackers,adware,spyware and list goes on. Even buggy updates,downloads{ poorly written programs} and everybody scrambling to keep their programs up to date with the never ending changes by M$!! 

Then there are those that you never figure out and have to wipe clean and start all over and thats no guarantee if it was a physical issue.

You get about 3 yrs of normal use with a new computer{on average} if you're lucky before major problems start up. With all the inexpensive units now selling we are headed into even worse times. Just read this and other forums! Look at all the time and money going into the maintanence of computers by the "LAYMAN"! What did we do in the past with all that= we saved it so we could spend it on computers when they came out!

Sorry, it's not all that grim but they do take a lot. The above didn't include the learning process either. If you got the time and money go for it, if not, just keep it simply, use it and call the repair man when needed! You can really get caught up in these things and if you do, one day you may look back and ask yourself WHY? did I , what else could I have done,or you even know and kick yourself for not doing the other things instead! YOUR CHOICE! Think, Look and Listen!

Ok now, do you want to join us??


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> _Originally posted by kathyn:_
> *..this may be a very dumb question, but I have to ask. What is it then that does make a computer run slower as time goes on?? *



iaavagent is correct, but... the most common causes for computers running sluggishly after even a period as short as 6 months is because of poor maintenance of the contents in your hard drive.

This includes (but is not limited to) lack of cleaning off temporary files (not merely temp internet files), defragmenting regularly -- and even more often when installing/uninstalling software because just merely installing or uninstalling programs causes disc fragmentation. Other issues are downloaded files and just unkempt drive clutter with files and such all over, and also the programs downloaded and installed (like shareware stuff) which all clutters up the registry and leaves files all over as well.

I personally end up wiping and reinstalling my computers cleanly about every 6-8 months... especially when I have done a lot of installing/uninstalling or working on major projects taking up lots of disc space. With doing it that way, I am generally never bogged down by a sluggish system.


----------



## Bold_Fortune (Jan 3, 2003)

This could have been a really great thread had it not gotten into that long dispute. 

I would have really enjoyed seeing suggestions, and personal methods and preferences posted. 

I think we could have all learned from that kind of thread.

Maybe someone can start a thread that's really about "System Maintenance" 

I would...but I don't want to start any arguments...LOL.

Seriously, though, it would be nice. 

Or maybe a well-meaning Moderator could edit out the dispute on this thread, and then remake a new thread that really is about System Maintenance. One that is worth reading through.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Bold_Fortune:_
> *This could have been a really great thread had it not gotten into that long dispute.
> *


 You are so very correct. 

The bottom lines in this thread are as follows:
*1) Always clean out Temp Files, Temp internet files, as well as any other clutter on your hard drive.

2) Defragment often... say every month or so at least, more frequently if you've done a good amount of installing/uninstalling of programs recently.

3) Run a utility such as AdAware or SpyBot S&D to remove any unwanted spyware, adware, or registry entries along those lines which can cause undesirable effects.

4) As always, keep both your Spyware removers and Virus Scanners up to date and run them frequently.*

If anyone wishes to re-visit the "performance gain" from not clearing out the temp internet files, let me just address that briefly.

Yes, technically that speeds up your internet experience regardless of internet connection. This is the theory all those hi-speed dialup services are banking on people believing. The truth is, unless every page you go to is STATIC (not dynamic in any way), the caching will be worthless. This only turns your computer into a proxy -- which saves a mere snapshot of most frequently visited pages to speed up page load times. Again, this only works for STATIC pages which are never or almost never updated. Keep in mind the page is being loaded from your own hard drive instead of the internet in that case, so you may not see any updates or changes which have since been posted to that specific page.

Hardly worth the few seconds it saves, but...as has been pointed out previously, it is all user choice. The above 4 things will, however, accomplish the goal of keeping a system running efficiently for a longer period of time.


----------



## Bold_Fortune (Jan 3, 2003)

Agreed, RJCE Support. 

It's settled. We are adopting these intelligent views on Temporary Internet Files as the norm, and if anyone wants to disagree...tough! We want some great tips on this thread, not arguments.

Let's keep those great System Performance Tips coming, and make this thread what it was intended for.


----------



## iaavagent (Jan 11, 2004)

Bold Fortune been trying to reach ya. Please go to this thread
http://forums.techguy.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207645

Thanks just need your expertise!


----------



## Bold_Fortune (Jan 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by iaavagent:_
> *
> ...just need your expertise! *


My wife told me that just the other day. She said, "I just need your expert advice...do you think it would be a good idea for you to take the trash out since it's overflowing?"

I answered you on that thread. Hope you better understand that particular setting now.

I told you there about PopUpCop...which is an example of "a good" third-party browser extention. But there are many "bad" third party browser extentions out there that can attach themselves to your browsing.

So, if not for needing this enabled for PopUpCop, I would most definately disable it.


----------



## RJCE Support (Oct 6, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Bold_Fortune:_
> *
> It's settled. We are adopting these intelligent views on Temporary Internet Files as the norm, and if anyone wants to disagree...tough! We want some great tips on this thread, not arguments.
> *


Agreed 100% mate. Hehe... Wish ya would have been here earlier in the thread


----------



## Bold_Fortune (Jan 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RJCE Support:_
> *Agreed 100% mate. Hehe... Wish ya would have been here earlier in the thread  *


I been on other threads where that guy starts an argument. You should ask him about the pagefile sometime...OMG!

I remember this guy when he first started out with XP. He somehow talked his way into becoming a moderator at some site...and since then, he has been coming up with some very strange stuff.

For fun...read through this thread, it should tell you and others reading his crap, just what this guy doesn't know, but insists he does....

http://www.bit-quest.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2767


----------



## Bold_Fortune (Jan 3, 2003)

I have three folders I placed in my Start Menu Program:

Temp File Cleaning Tools

Registry Tools

Internet Security.

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Within the Temp File Cleaning Tools folder...

I have a shortcut to Internet Options.

A file cleaning program called HDValet. 

Along with the usual temp files it removes by default, I also have it configured to remove for me...

C:\WINDOWS Log Files

Files left by Kazaa in C:\Program Files\KaZaA Lite\db

C:\WINDOWS\system32\CatRoot2 for removing, .log, ,txt and .chk files.

I also have it set to remove the backups my registry cleaners create.

I also have in the Temp File Cleaning Tools folder a wonderful little batch file created by zephyr, I dubbed zephyrTempzap.bat. 

I modified it somewhat to fit my needs. I also have it remove UserData from C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\UserData.

You can insert your username into the path if you chose it use this.

echo y | rd/s "C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Recent\"
echo y | rd/s "C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\UserData\"
echo y | rd/s "C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Local Settings\Temp\"
echo y | rd/s c:\temp\
echo y | rd/s c:\windows\temp\
md "C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Recent\"
md "C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\UserData\"
md "C:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Local Settings\Temp\"
md c:\Temp
md c:\windows\Temp
echo y | del c:\*.tmp /p /s
del c:\*.tmp /p /s /f /a:h


I also have a little EXE application, windows-xp-prefetch-clean-and-control.exe

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the exception of cleaning my Prefetch, (which I only do occasionally, and then only when I have made some major changes...because I have Prefetch to Monitor Boot File Launch Only, and not Applications Launch), I run through these processes, just before I defrag, and then backup my system... 

With the shortcut to Internet Options, I will delete Cookies, Delete Files and Clear History.

Then I run HDValet.

Then I run zephyrTempzap.bat.

Then I defrag.

Then I backup.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll do the above "always" just before backing up. Sometimes, though, I will run my registry cleaners, and also Spybot...checking first for any updates. And I also check for updates for Spyware Blaster.

I am not running an Anti-Virus program right now...and I'm certainly not recommending you don't...but when I do run an Anti-Virus program, I'll also search for it's updates at this time.

Then, too, occasionally, I will run chkdsk...but I like to do it in the Recovery Console by typing in chkdsk /r. 

Once in a great while, too, I while run Spider to create new index.dat files.


----------



## kathyn (May 22, 2003)

Sorry it took so long to respond, didn't get a moment too! Anyway, thanks for the info, I didn't realize that wear and tear does such a number on a computer! I try to maintanence my computer as much as possible, I use it quite often. I seen some new "clean up chores" listed in this post that I am going to try.....anyway, I am insanely interested in computers!!..but, I believe I have alot to learn ahead of me, so if my questions are a little "amateurish" please bear with me.

Peace!


----------

