Login with username and password (forgot your password?)

[tslim]

tslim: supporting >4gig memory on 32bit XP is, at best, a terrible hack, and it's not something SoftPerfect even attempts. Move to a 64bit OS

I don't need it to support > 4GB but it is ridiculous to only allow a ramdisk <= 256MB on WinXP x86.
Btw, I am running Win7x64, my try on SoftPerfect is for helping someone else.

In my case, QSoft RamDisk is also stable and working find, except it does not allow multiple ram disk.

I just read through some interesting links regarding ramdisk here, particularly this one and also this one

I have decided to stay at what I am using now.

Hi f0dder,

Today I try the SoftPerfect RamDisk recommended by you in your earlier post.
It was a very disappointing experience. I try install on WinXP, guess what it only allow up to 256MB rmadisk (The machine has 8G ram, but obviously WinXP can only make use of 4G)

If I go beyond 256MB, it prompts an error. I run through their forum and it seems a problem to many.

I have firm info from Seagate engineer about their HDD. Unless you go for their high end brand, otherwise you are using sub standard HDD. I only use Western Digital HDD.

It takes a long time though. My 400GByte partition (with over 200GByte of free space) on a SATA2 drive took about 8,5 hours to complete (with Minitool partition wizard).

This can't be true. I have alter size of drives on my 500GB HDD (even on my 1TB HDD), the process normally take about 2 hours.

Sorry for dumb q :

Can Min Partition Wizard Home edition be used to align partitions on a disk with XP installed already ? Or align partitions must be done BEFORE install OS/Programs etc ?

Thanks/Ska

Yes, you can.
e.g. lets say, you have XP on C: and data on D:, just resize a bit C: (say make C: a little bigger and D: smaller or vice versa) and when the program alter the drives, it will always ensure partitions alignment are correct.
Generally speaking only the type of partition matters when doing HDD alignment.

You may also use Acronis Disk Director (latest ver is 11) to do that, but it is not a freeware like the Mini Partition Wizard Home Edition.

With regard to alignment when recovering images.
Older versions of both Norton Ghost and Acronis True Image worked the same way, if the partition was aligned when you made the image it usually restored that way, if it was not it didn't.

I can't be sure about the above claim because:

1. How an image is created matters. Norton Ghost creates image very differently with different parameters/settings. i.e. disk imaging utility normally won't create byte by byte image unless you specify so.

2. One might restore an image to a new HDD with different capacity. (bigger or smaller or even to SSD).

If a disk utility like Ghost restores an image to a HDD and manage to create all partitions with correct alignment, to me, that simply means the utility knows and have done its part in making sure alignment is right. i.e. it has nothing to do with whether the original HDD (where the image is based on) has all its partitions aligned.

As far as I know, the alignment matter is as important in the case of SSD. Misalignment can happen when one does not prepare the SSD with Windows itself during setup. That was exactly my case in the past when I transfer my Windows (originally install on a HDD) via Ghost image to SSD.

Indeed - you'll want your SSD partitions to be aligned to the SSDs erase-block size - otherwise you'll both lose performance as well as decrease drive lifetime. XP didn't align partitions properly, Vista and upwards should be doing this automatically. For HDDs, I believe alignment only matters if you've got a relatively new drive with 4096-byte sectors?

Alignment of HDD matters regardless of the sector size, the bigger the HDD capacity the worse (in term of performance) if a partition is misaligned. I remember I read an article discussing this issue.

However, so far, I have not experienced any HDD misalignment, whether I use a disk utility (e.g. a disk imaging program) or Windows itself to prepare a HDD partition.

I wonder how can HDD misalignment happen?

ERUNT for registry backup is an excellent suggestion. More people should take that to heart. If you really want to speed up your XP/2003 PC, check for partition alignment. Chances are that the partitions on your hard disk aren't. I did do this alignment on my XP PC and it does make a noticeable difference.

Reading and (mainly) writing to an aligned partition can increase the speed of your PC 5-10%. When checking numbers in Process Explorer you do notice that I/O drops (duh!) but also that you lose a lot less of resources on interrupts. Because of the drop in I/O you will also expand the longevity of your (SATA) hard disk as a bonus.

Best of all, with a free tool like 'Minitool partition wizard' you can do the alignment. There are a lot more Partition managers who offer the similar functionality. 'Minitool partition wizard' is just the software that I used for this.

Of course, when compared with an SSD it hardly makes a difference, but for the ones without the funds, alignment does make working just a bit longer with the 'old clunker' more bearable...and will leave more time to save for the real speed upgrade  

As far as I know, the alignment matter is as important in the case of SSD. Misalignment can happen when one does not prepare the SSD with Windows itself during setup. That was exactly my case in the past when I transfer my Windows (originally install on a HDD) via Ghost image to SSD.

Btw, I use MiniTool Partition Wizard Home Edition to help me align my SSD (after transfer) and AS SSD Benchmark to verify whether my SSD is aligned correctly.

I remember I read an article about how to reclaim your so called hidden partition space and I also remember the procedures are quite troublesome. I don't think that small amount of space worth the effort.

plan a better HDD partitioning scheme (assuming you don't use a SSD).

I've been trying to work out the last part of the comment, why do you make a distinction for SSD's?

Because:
1. SSD has negligible seek time.
2. You can not defrag a SSD.

Btw, I have 2 SSD, 2 (permanent) + 1 (optional plug/unplug by HDD drawer) HDDs running on my PC.
I own a license of PerfectDisk, but have given up regular storage defragmentation since long time ago.

[feels]

Disk space has never been an issue to me in relation to the registry and I do not know what you consider to be the 'practical implications'.

You are right when you refer to how it 'feels', I know a lot of people are very much against registry cleaners and I would not try to change their minds.
I also know that you can do a lot of damage with them, some more than others.

My personal view is that provided you make backups, I use ERUNT, and get to learn what you can and cannot do with a particular program you should not have any problems.

Do they actually make a difference?
On XP my answer would be yes, especially over a period of time.
On 7?
Certainly not as much but then again on the computer I have 7 installed on it would probably take quite a lot to slow it down compared to those I have XP on.

I also defrag the registries once a month, on XP that makes a very noticeable difference (on XP Mode as well), again not noticeably on 7.

I have followed this practice for years, using the same programs for most of that time, and never had a problem because of it.
Would I advise others to do the same?
Not unless they knew what they were doing and were prepared to take the time that I did to test whatever program they chose to use, as well as taking adequate precautions against the possibility of problems.

I suppose, many don't buy into it because the performance/space gain by registry cleaning/defrag does not justify the cost in doing so.

For me, I rather upgrade my hardware, uninstall programs that I really don't need or plan a better HDD partitioning scheme (assuming you don't use a SSD).

Ah! and congratulation to Stephen66515, you have found a good crap!

[Tinman57]

Tinman57: I'd agree with that back in the Win9x days - not so for NT. I honestly can't recall a "registry cleanup" having effect on speed ever since I moved to Win2k, and with a (granted, somewhat superficial) idea of the on-disk and in-memory data structures used for the registry hives, as well as caching optimizations done, I can't see why it would, either.

Now, there might be some specific situations that can be fixed which could cause slowdowns (references to network shares, system startup items that can be removed, et cetera) - but for a normal system, I'd be surprised to see any quantifiable performance effect just by removing "unused" registry keys/values. And some of the "clean up" too much for their own good.

Come on man. Let's say I am itchy and got nothing better to do and try few dozen of utilities on my Win7 directly. I play a while with them then simply uninstall them from the Window's remove program list. You should know, I probably will have quite an amount of rubbish left on my HDD and the registry... hehe...

Took a quick sweep over their feature-list, and it seems like a somewhat mixed bunch - I'm not too thrilled seeing a file/free-space wiper being combined with anything else, since it might give the impression those "other things" will also be secure wiped (i.e. IE history, removed registry keys, ...) which I kinda doubt. But I guess it makes sense from a marketing view

No, I am not specially impressed by those wiping functions.
I am saying it is a seriously done program. Try it, you won't regret.
I know what kind of user you are and I believe you will like it.
The only thing odd is their support policy, but imagine I have tried other programs like Total Privacy, CCleaner etc. I just keep going back to it...

I particularly like the details (what will be wiped) that it presents to user
[attach=1]
and it it really has taught me quite some areas that otherwise I won't know Windows leaves traces.

Ah! I just recall this, it also allows me to create my own wipe list and multiple setup of wiping schemes (see the top right area) of the below
[attach=2]

The only problem is, actually it is a universal problem to computer world, as at this minute of writing, there isn't any utility that can wipe SSD on a per file basic. It just can't be done... sigh!

For me the most missing feature on a ram drive software is 'Allow multiple ram drives'. The one I use doesn't offer this.

You know why I can remember the freeware I just mention? Because I use one of the r-tools company product, their R-Wipe&Clean. Man, you should try that, they are very serious in their product. Compare to R-Wipe&Clean many other competitors looks just like toys.

Hi f0dder,

Is the SoftPerfect Ramdrive actually install like a drive/device, I mean like when we install a physical drive where all inf file is involved. Or it just run like a program which create a virtual drive after windows bootup.

Ya, I have to admit the one I am using is really poor at the way they publish their product. They even take the trouble to deliver program on a per user basic. I mean if I leak my copy to the public, because of each copy has a unique blueprint, I couldn't deny my fault...

However the program works and is very stable, I have been using it for quite some years, if my memory serves me right, I have used it since XP time. The author also is quite responsive when I write him for help.

You have convinced me, I will try TrueCrypt. I find myself always a bit stingy in giving up another drive no.  Currently I have 14 drive number used up and each one has it special meaning to me. e.g. R for RamDrive, V for Virtual drive, B for Backup. In fact I know another similar freeware (for home use) long ago, but I don't know how good it is compare to TrueCrypt.

[else]

OK, that gives some protection against the residual plaintext problem. But are you sure your RamDrive product uses nonpageable memory? Otherwise you might be (slightly - depending on ramdisk size) increasing the risk of residue in the pagefile.

I am not knowledgeable enough to see whether the ram drive memory is subjected to Windows paging system, but I can show you this:
[attach=1]

Now, #2 is questionable practice, but #3 by itself is enough that I'd recommend people to stay the heck away from this program. It's insecure design, and if something as basic as this isn't done right, one has to guess what else isn't in order.

Man... you have scared me...

I think I come across another software site similar to the Folder Protect (the name of the program is also similar) the other day when I create my initial post in this forum.

The biggest problem I have on both is I can't clearly understand the actual difference between several different products they both offer. I don't even bother to try because I simply have no idea which one is my real interest.

The web sites should have provided a product comparison table and explain the difference...

What I am currently doing is to temporarily place a confidential file which is yet to be encrypted on a Ram Drive and when I am done with my work on that file, I move it into my confidential.rar

I do the above because when my machine is off, I don't even need to worry about temp file left by program or whatsoever.

I just browse through the folder protect program mentioned by dr_andus on their web site, it seems that the program is doing encryption and decryption on-the-fly and not simply a block to the access of the folder.

I just wonder what happen if I add a folder protected by Folder Protect to my Outpost firewall files & folder locks section. Could there be a crash when both program are attempting to take their control over the same folder, may be I should try that.

Afaik RAR uses AES256 encryption - if you use a strong passphrase, the RAR archive should be safe enough (given that they haven't made any stupid security bloopers). This workflow means that you'll be extracting the files temporarily, working on them, and RAR'ing them back up - that would make the data very easy to retrieve if somebody stole the machine or its harddrive.

I assume you mean that someone that stole the machine will try to look for decrypted temp files left by program(s)that work on a decrypted copy of my confidential files, am I right?
I have been think the same thing, may be I can create a temp folder for all those programs and had that temp folder wiped by a wiping utility periodically.

I know this isn't what you want to hear, but: use TrueCrypt or don't bother at all.

Pretty much anything else won't be anything but a false sense of security. And if you only want a half-hearted solution, why bother doing anything at all?

Absolutely agreed.

I really don't understand what both of you are trying to tell me?
Why don't elaborate about what you really think?

Sincerely, I won't mind even if you tell me that my intention is stupid.

Treat me a newbie and tell me  whatever you think I should be aware in term of keeping something confidential on my PC (which of course is linked to the outside world with internet)

Thanks dr_andus, I am interested in that.

Pretty much anything else won't be anything but a false sense of security. And if you only want a half-hearted solution, why bother doing anything at all?

Currently, my confidential data files are encrypted in a WinRAR file. Let's say someone stole it, it is really that easy to decrypt it? I mean, no matter what password I use?