erlendd@makro.nhh.no (Erlend Dyrnes) (01/16/91)
>I was satisfied with this program until I used the new version 5.0 ! >This new version actually moved my ibmio and ibmsys files !!!!!!!!!!! [stuff deleted] This is *serious*! I must say I'm quite amazed about Mr.Norton in this case. Has anyone as asked the Nortons about when they're going to release a version of SpeedDisk that is actually working on all DOS-disks and all current DOS-versions. I've never dared using SpeedDisk myself after all the reports I've read about problems following the SpeedDisk operation. Stick to MACE's UNFRAGMENT is my solution. Please comment if you have any solutions on the SpeedDisk problem. erlend -- Erlend Dyrnes , Computer Science Engineer, Center for International Business at The Norwegian Scool of Economics and business administration Email : edb_erlend@debet.nhh.no, erlendd@makro.nhh.no "This is a non-WordPerfect zone"
rani@makro.nhh.no (Ragnar Nielsen) (01/17/91)
Funny, I have tested this version somewhat myself, and I have yet to find faults with its operation. The only reason for SD to behave as described which come to mind, is if SD has been configured to handle those system files as plain files. I have tried to move them out of place and fragment them (without consecutive re- boot), and SD refuses to touch them. Methinks mr. Norton ain't *that* stupid, there must be some logical explanation behind it. Regards, Ragnar Nielsen Network analyst / customer support manager ID Communication A/S rani@makro.nhh.no rani@bbb.uu.no
dpalmans@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Daniel Palmans) (01/18/91)
> I was satisfied with this program until I used the new version 5.0 ! > This new version actually moved my ibmio and ibmsys files !!!!!!!!!!! Some more info about this: We had this problem on 2 different PC's, both AT compatible (HP vectra) one running dos 3.2 the other running dos 4.01 BOTH were running sd under Norton Commander. When I called Norton support they acknowledge having problems with some tsr's When I said that sd moved these 2 system files I meant that it moved their names in the root directory, not the files themselves. I ran sd several time after that (I'm checking the location of these files carefully now) whithout problem. But each time I'm choosing the full optimization method. The first time (when I experiewnced the problem) I had choosen the default suggested method of optimization ) Daniel Palmans.
ron@vpnet.chi.il.us (Ron Winograd) (01/20/91)
Hmm, it moved your system files. Well, where they "hidden" files? I noticed that Norton SD, at least my copy, which is 5.0, will not move any "hidden" files, and those two files are usually hidden. Also, I ran ir once with the two files unhidden, and it didn't make my HD unbootable. I am not sure if they were moved or not, but it didn't stop my HD from booting. Anyway, make sure your files are hidden, because it won't touch those. -Ron Ron Winograd <Insert huge 20 line sig here> ron@vpnet.chi.il.us
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) (01/21/91)
dpalmans@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Daniel Palmans) writes: > I was satisfied with this program until I used the new version 5.0 ! > This new version actually moved my ibmio and ibmsys files !!!!!!!!!!! Uh, I've been running the 5.0 version of SpeeDisk for a while now, and it hasn't moved any of my files. Admittedly, my DOS uses MSDOS.SYS and IO.SYS, but SD still sees them with the HIDDEN attribute and refuses to move them. Are you sure you didn't unhide the files, or remove the SYSTEM attribute? It's quite possible that SD doesn't have the filenames hardcoded in; instead, it just doesn't move anything that's hidden or system. (That's actually a better algorithm, since it's more flexible and not as DOS-dependant.) -- Marc Unangst | mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | "Bus error: passengers dumped" ...!umich!leebai!mudos!mju |
dpalmans@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Daniel Palmans) (01/22/91)
/ hpcupt1:comp.os.msdos.apps / ron@vpnet.chi.il.us (Ron Winograd) / 7:59 pm Jan 19, 1991 /
> Hmm, it moved your system files. Well, where they "hidden" files?
YES ! They were hidden. I have a standard system without anything special or
fancy.dpalmans@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Daniel Palmans) (01/22/91)
> Uh, I've been running the 5.0 version of SpeeDisk for a while now, and > it hasn't moved any of my files. Admittedly, my DOS uses MSDOS.SYS > and IO.SYS, but SD still sees them with the HIDDEN attribute and > refuses to move them. > > Are you sure you didn't unhide the files, or remove the SYSTEM > attribute? It's quite possible that SD doesn't have the filenames > hardcoded in; instead, it just doesn't move anything that's hidden or > system. (That's actually a better algorithm, since it's more flexible > and not as DOS-dependant.) YES I'm absolutely sure these files were hidden and marked as system. When I called Norton On-line support (after A VERY LONG WAIT....) they acknowledge problems with *some* TSR's.... As mentionned before the only tsr running at that time was Norton Commander ! Daniel Palmans
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (01/23/91)
In article <51050004@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com> dpalmans@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Daniel Palmans) writes: >YES I'm absolutely sure these files were hidden and marked as system. >When I called Norton On-line support (after A VERY LONG WAIT....) they >acknowledge problems with *some* TSR's.... >As mentionned before the only tsr running at that time was Norton Commander ! > Personally, I wouldn't run ANY disk optimization program with ANY TSR's loaded. Just my $.02 worth. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) (01/28/91)
dpalmans@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Daniel Palmans) writes: > acknowledge problems with *some* TSR's.... > As mentionned before the only tsr running at that time was Norton Commander ! While I'll acknowledge that it would seem that Norton could at least support their own TSR programs, it's fairly common knowledge that you shouldn't run TSRs when you run things like SpinRite or SpeeDisk. I once tried it with the QuickCache disk cache loaded...Good thing I had recent back-ups. -- Marc Unangst | mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | "Bus error: passengers dumped" ...!umich!leebai!mudos!mju |
yow@magic.Berkeley.EDU (Billy Yow 283-4009) (02/05/91)
> I don't agree. At least disk cashe will speed up the process a lot. And >mouse drivers and other TSRs will all be handy if the optimizer is compatible. >With PC-Tools Compress can run with all PC-Tools programs, including PC-Cache >PC-Shell... I would hope that PC-tools would work with each other. But if you use some of the Norton Tools while PC-Cache, Smartdr or any other cache program is running you are bound to have some type of problem. I turn off all of my TSRs when I have to use any of the Norton or PC-tools that make direct changes to the disk. Also the PC-Tools backup program destoried the install disk that came with it. I installed the program and it just started writting to the install disk saying it was doing a speed test. THE DISK WAS WRITE PROTECTED! Has anyone had this happen to them? Bill Yow yow@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov
vandevek@fergvax.unl.edu (James M. VandeVegt) (02/05/91)
In article <1991Feb4.103824@magic.Berkeley.EDU> yow@magic.Berkeley.EDU (Billy Yow 283-4009) writes: >> I don't agree. At least disk cashe will speed up the process a lot. And >>mouse drivers and other TSRs will all be handy if the optimizer is compatible. >>With PC-Tools Compress can run with all PC-Tools programs, including PC-Cache >>PC-Shell... > >I would hope that PC-tools would work with each other. But if you use >some of the Norton Tools while PC-Cache, Smartdr or any other cache >program is running you are bound to have some type of problem. I turn >off all of my TSRs when I have to use any of the Norton or PC-tools that >make direct changes to the disk. > Bill Yow >yow@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov Not that I recommend it, but I have been using Microsoft SmartDrive that comes with Windows with Norton 4.5 SpeedDisk and PC-Tools 5.1 Compress with no problems. | James M. VandeVegt | University of Nebraska | | vandevek@fergvax.unl.edu | Computer Science and Engineering | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | Insert standard disclaimer here. |
bxw@ccadfa.adfa.oz.au (Brad Willcott) (02/16/91)
tporczyk@na.excelan.com (Tony Porczyk) writes: >In article <1991Feb4.034224.1@acfcluster.nyu.edu> jqg9462@acfcluster.nyu.edu writes: >>In article <1991Jan22.213923.10877@sj.ate.slb.com>, poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) writes: >>> Personally, I wouldn't run ANY disk optimization program with ANY TSR's >>> loaded. >> I don't agree. At least disk cashe will speed up the process a lot. >>With PC-Tools Compress can run with all PC-Tools programs, including PC-Cache >>Jun >I run COMPRESS almost daily (lots of stuff installed and uninstalled all the >time) with SMARTDRV.SYS (2048) and a bunch of networking software. It never >hurt my system, but I usually do reboot afterwards. I don't have much >experience with SD because it is so unbelievably slooooooow..... Anyone out >there used a different optimizer that would be faster than COMPRESS and have >a similar organization scheme (to standard on compress)? Something that >would optimize BIG drives? >Tony >. I am a frequent user of Norton's SD. Iuse it _because_ it is reliable and safe. If there should be a power failure, then I don't loose anything. In fact, I even get it to do a "verify after write". To me, the security of the data on my HD is of greater importance than saving 10 or 15 minutes. Besides, one can always find something else to do, whilst waiting. Just to put this time factor into perspective, I tend to be a VERY impatient computer user. If I have to wait for the computer to catch up to me, then I get somewhat peeved. However, data security is MORE important to me. I am currently using Norton 5.0. I am very pleased with the enhansements in this version. A point I would like to make about disk cache programs (eg: Smartdrv.sys). Thet operate by keeping a copy of the latest data read from and/or written to a drive being cached. The cache is checked first when data is required off of a cached drive. If it is not there, then the drive is read directly. The reason I mention all this, is to point out the verify process of a program such as SD, would be of no use, as it would simply be verifying the data currently stored in the cache. Therefore, I recommend the following: a) Turn off the cache facility for the drive(s) to be unfragmented. b) Use a program such as Norton's SD which does NOT rely on storing the shuffled data in memory. Shaw it will take longer than the other type of program, but what value do you place on you data? c) Use the "verify after write" facility of that program. Again, data security. d) Turn on the cache facility, and reboot the computer. Now for the disclaimer: I am NOT in anyway connected to the developers/ destributors of Norton Utilities. This advice is given freely from my experience as a PC Consultant. PS: Turn off the cache when ever you are doing software repairs to ant disk drive. Otherwise, you want be aware of any write faults. Brad. -- Brad Willcott, ACSnet: bxw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz Computing Services, Internet: bxw@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au Australian Defence Force Academy, UUCP:!uunet!munnari.oz.au!ccadfa.oz!bxw Northcott Dr. Campbell ACT Australia 2600 +61 6 268 8584 +61 6 268 8150 (Fax)