Get the Latest
Subscribe to our RSS feed or enter your email address below to get the feed delivered to you by email:
New! Follow Gizmo on Twitter
Security Wizard
Hot! Get our free security suggestions customized to your needs. Get started
Navigation
User login
| New: | Help keep this site independent with few ads by buying a Gizmo Cap or T-shirt or by Donating |
| Hot: | Get free personalized security suggestions from Gizmo's Security Wizard |
| Help: | Know your freeware? Then suggest a hot product or become a reviewer or moderator for Gizmos |
Best Free File Cleaner
|
In a Hurry?
|
 Go straight to the Quick Selection Guide |
|
Introduction
|
| Over time unnecessary files accumulate, which can be removed with a disk cleaner. |
|
Discussion
|
|
My first choice here is CCleaner, a product that started off as pretty basic but has continued to improve to the point where it is now very close to the best in its class regardless of price. It's very effective in freeing up disk space by removing unused and temporary files, cookies, Recycle bin entries, Windows hot-fix files, history and cache files in many applications such as Internet Explorer, Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera, Safari and hundreds of others. Note you can configure preferences for browser cookies that you want to keep during a clean (in case you don't want to delete them all), which is a convenient feature for many users. You can define custom rules to include or exclude files, folders or registry keys from cleaning (Temp folders are a good candidate to include), You can wipe free (unused) space from the disk (including MFT data), and CCleaner supports secure deletion of data (1, 3, 7 to Guttman 35 passes). There are options to extend CCleaner adding new programs for software that doesn't come with the base install. Some of these options are explained in the Documentation You can also remove options (programs) that you do not want to be cleaned from the list of available programs that can be cleaned. The options can include adding to or removed from the built in detections that come with the base CCleaner install. This flexibility I have not yet seen in any comparable file cleaning tool. CCleaner has been around for many years, and over that time it has been more actively developed than any other file cleaner software. (It's not unusual to see a new release every 6-8 weeks). Piriform release new versions to support new software when it comes out (like new versions of the major browsers) and with features to support changes to the operating system - eg. When Windows 7 was released support for cleaning "Taskbar Jump Lists", and even using "Jump Lists" and Windows 7 style progress bars in their CCleaner. Many other file cleaner products were developed for Win2000 or WinXP and haven't seen an update since. If you are running the latest OS, Browser or Office Suite etc - it is best to use software that was developed and tested with the latest software that you are using. There are some minuses: first, the CCleaner install, by default, includes the Yahoo Toolbar, so if you don't want this make sure you uncheck that option during install, or select one of the smaller downloads that has no toolbar included - and one that better meets your specific needs (like the portable or slim build). Secondly I would like to see a tutorial or wizard for first time users when they run CCleaner. Too often the complaints that CCleaner deleted something it shouldn't, turn out to be the user isn't too familiar with what the options mean or what the impact of cleaning temp files and settings from their system. Even selecting every possibly option should still not damage windows in any way - as CCleaner is very conservative in what it will remove, but for some first time users, running CCleaner can seem to be a scary step to take. However, if simply freeing up disk space is your objective then CCleaner is hard to beat. A good companion to CCleaner is Empty Temp Folders. It's not as complete a product as CCleaner and it's been a while since it was last updated, but I find that it always manages to clean more temporary files than CCleaner. That's why I suggest you use both. Another cleaner with a solid following is Steven Gould's CleanUP!. It's compact, well designed and very well maintained and is a real alternative to CCleaner. In use I've had a couple instances which caused problems on my test PC, but this may have been specific to my setup. Certainly the feedback I get from users has been uniformly excellent. In a related category is PC Decrapifier. Its job is to remove unwanted trial versions of programs and services that come preinstalled on new PCs. You can remove all this stuff manually, but PC Decrapifier does this automatically. It can't remove every bit of junk from every computer, but the list of products it will remove is quite impressive.
|
|
Related Products and Links
|
|
You might want to check out these articles too:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
2.34.1200 
Unrestricted Freeware 
95 - Windows 7
Portable version available
|
Tags
|
|
free file cleaner, free disk cleaner |
Back to the top of the article.
- Article type:
Comments
Hello!
I just installed Diskmax. It crashed some Icons in my start menue. But what really s.. is that it is not listed in the undelete list of the system. Searching for the software also brings no results. Where is it installed? How the heck can I get rid of this peace of malicious software?
Can someone please help me out? I do see absolutely no reason why this prog should be listed at top positions at any website. I wonder how it got there. best wishes
If you cannot find where DiskMax is
[ Start>All Programs>KoshyJohn.com>DiskMax ],
DiskMax installs itself into your AppData/Roaming folder.
Latest version of CCleaner 2.35.1219, released a few days ago, adds support for Google Chrome, and other Chrome based browsers including SRWare Iron. Session cleaning for the browsers has also been introduced. Many other improvements are there in this version of CCleaner. More here :
http://www.piriform.com/ccleaner/download
Found this new tool CCleaner Enhancer Its an Added tool to CCleaner for cleaning othor Apps. http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2010/08/06/ccleaner-enhancer-adds-ne...
Looks useful. Users should note that the tool is not officially supported by Piriform, makers of CCleaner.
Also, CCleaner Enhancer uses the same rules to add programs, as discussed in CCleaner forum.
I found this page through my regular Google searches for references to DiskMax (a program I've been improving and supporting for more than 4 years now). For the detractors, I guess it takes a leap of faith for "knowledgeable" people to experience what DiskMax can do for them.
I'm going to address a couple of points here:
1. Deep Scan - I'll admit that it's not the best way to do it, but there is no application out there that performs this function any better. I would remove this function but user feedback strongly opposed such a move. So I resorted to putting prominent warnings against using it, and a means to recover files deleted by this function if the user wanted to go ahead anyway. I've even accounted for users who will click on Yes for anything by making the 'Yes' delete to the recycle bin instead of permanently.
2. Prompts vs. checkboxes - This was a design decision I took taking into consideration the different type of users who would be using my application. Checkboxes would be one way to do it but it would easily overwhelm novice users. I should have the prompts processed before the program starts though - and that's something for a future version.
3. Lack of choices - The things that DiskMax will delete without prompting are things that *NO* user will care about (I guarantee that). I used to have more options before, but people complained about too many options then. I can't please everyone.
And @Anupam, you claim the software is not safe based on what you think the program could do, not based on anything it has actually ever done to your system. Please run the program in a virtual machine to see what it does. See if it breaks anything. I have close to 3000 people downloading DiskMax everyday and if my software was as dangerous as you claim it is, I'm sure you would find it in internet searches. And on the contrary, there are hundreds of independent sites singing praises to DiskMax, including an 4 star editorial review by Download.com. If you actually review software on a production machine that you use regularly instead of a VM or a separate machine just for reviewing, in my hunble opinion, you are doing it wrong.
I will not be monitoring this for replies - if you would like to talk to me, you can contact me through my website.
Why isn't ATF-Cleaner even mentioned. All the best tech fora recommend using the little app and its malware free. Its seems to free up more space than ccleaner.
I use both ATF cleaner and ccleaner in a corporate environment.
ATF cleaner has one major feature that CCleaner is sorely lacking. It cleans ALL users temp files not just the active profile. VERY useful.
That said CCleaner is still the goto app.
-J
[Wipe] seems like a good cleaning program.
http://privacyroot.com/software/WIPE-info.php
Anupam, you have favourably mentioned BleachBit on the forum and it is listed as the preferred cleaner for Linux systems.
When you have time perhaps you could give a review here, including a comparison with CCleaner.
BleachBit is Dangerous:
1) It has the option to Delete the ENTIRE Prefetch Folder;
not just the old Prefetch Data like what CCleaner does.
2) If a User is Not aware and Check the Wrong Boxes, BleachBit
wrecks the entire Firefox profile (Bookmarks, Add-ons etc.).
Therefore, be careful when using BleachBit.
Average users, who lack experience,
should Stay Away from BleachBit.
In response to your comment :
1) Yes, CCleaner only deletes old prefetch data.. but BleachBit deletes all files inside the Prefetch folder, except the .ini file. Deleting these files does not have any adverse effect on the system, and these files are made again on restart. I keep this box checked, and the prefectch files are deleted by BleachBit. I did not see any adverse effect on my PC because of this, and neither did I experience any slowdown. So, its not a feature which will wreck your system.
2) Under Firefox, there is one options of "Places" that one needs to be careful about. But, when you check that box, BleachBit gives a warning that "This option deletes all bookmarks". So that is fair enough in my opinion. After that warning, its upon the user if he wants to go ahead with that. Its a safe feature. I personally do not check that checkbox.
Therefore, yes, I consider BleachBit safe.
No, you are wrong about it!
You don't obviously know how things are...
Every time you delete an application's Prefetch (.PF) file you will cripple that application's load time the next time you go to launch it.
-BUT-
Even though Windows will simply re-create that application's Prefetch (.PF) trace file, that application's optimal load time will not be restored until -After the SECOND time-
you launch that application and the system has been able to go idle and fully run the prefetch optimization.
They are never even accessed until you launch an application.
There is -Never ANY reason- to delete these files.
So, don't be that certain about BleachBit "Safety"!
Edit: Malicious comment about the integrity of site staff removed.
I agree, there is no reason to delete the prefetch files, and its not necessary to delete them at all. But, it is not unsafe to delete them too. It will not cripple Windows in any way, or the applications. It will just increase the time taken for Windows to boot, and for applications to load by a few seconds.
So, I will still consider BleachBit safe.
Inexperienced users should Not run DiskMax,
as they should Not run BleachBit!
Both Apps, if Not properly used (i.e. Check the Wrong Options),
can be damaging for a System!
DiskMax is as dangerous as BleachBit is.
You recommend BleachBit,and you consider it Safe
-BUT-
you consider DiskMax Dangerous, ah?
For the sake of TSA reliabily, do Not so provocatively promote BleachBit!
You obviously have nothing useful to say, other than repeating yourself on and on uselessly. Many of your posts have been edited, for repeating, but you still go on shamelessly about it. There is no use of this fruitless, endless, and mindless discussion with you. Therefore, any further posts from you will be deleted. You have been warned enough.
You seem to "forget" that BleachBit destroys Firefox profile
when the respected option is checked.
-Do you know how many inexperienced users
corrupted their Firefox because of BleachBit?
How can you recommend such a Dangerous program?
Yawn.... another poster (Beth) recommended "you get a life" a couple of days ago and I deleted the comment to be polite. Now I wish I hadn't. Parrots are actually very good therapy for this condition because everything you say to them they repeat right back at you, again and again and again :) Should make you feel right at home. They also teach respect and responsibility because they need feeding and cleaning.
I have answered that before. BleachBit gives appropriate warning if you select that option.
Please do not post same thing over and over again. Repeated posts will be edited/deleted. You are basically trolling on the site. And this is not the first time you are doing this. You have done this for other products too, and on other articles too. This is going to achieve nothing.
I think Jason will be the guy to give a proper detailed review about BleachBit, like he did for DiskMax. But, I can give a short comparison with CCleaner though. I will try to do it soon :). I think its as safe as CCleaner... I have been using it as a complimentary software to CCleaner for sometime, and found it safe to use.
Thank you for your reply. Sorry to have stirred up a hornets nest!
I will give BleachBit a try, taking care with the points raised above.
Hi!
I'd like to suggest TSA readers a File Cleaner called
DiskMax
http://www.koshyjohn.com/software/diskmax.html
I like this App a lot!
Mr. Editor, I'd like to see your opinion about DiskMax.
Kind regards,
Joss
I downloaded and tried this software yesterday, and I would not recommend it to anyone. This software is not safe. The usage is very quirky.
First time the program starts, it ask to connect to the internet to check for update. If you choose not to check for the update, it tells you to run the program in a reduced mode(don't know what that is). I chose not to connect to internet for the update, and it did not run.
The next time I chose to update, and then the program ran and checked for update. On the next screen, it gives 4 options. I don't remember what they were. I chose the Complete option to perform disk cleaning. The programs does not show what it is cleaning, but just starts to clean away. There is no preview, or analysis screen like CCleaner has, where you can see what will be removed. The program just starts to work. There was an option to ask additional questions. I had checked that. The program kept asking whether it should delete user files, or Firefox cookies/history etc. Even when I chose NO to all these, it still kept on removing some files. When it came to deleting Windows cache, on which it paused for a lot of time, I canceled the deletion, because this software did not feel safe to me at all.
When I canceled the cleaning process, and even after saying no to all of the options... it showed that it removed 1526 MB of data... that's about 1.4 GB of data !!!!!!
How the heck can a software delete so much of data just for disk cleaning. And this is when I clean my system daily with CCleaner.
Even when I had chosen not to delete Firefox cache/cookies etc, still the program had deleted stuff, and after that I had got errors from AdBlock Plus while browsing. So, the program had deleted files related to the add-on, and what not.
I was really afraid that next time I would start my system, the system would not boot, or would be crippled, but thank God nothing happened that way.
I would strongly advise everyone to STAY AWAY from this software called DiskMax. Chances are it will cripple your system. Stick to CCleaner, which is a very very safe product.
No, no, no, man!
Sorry, but you did it ALL Wrong!
a) Did you read the 'Help File' -before- using DiskMax?
Certainly, you did not.
You selected the 'Complete' Clean Up Mode (Fourth/Last Option).
In this mode, DiskMax does everything Automatically!
If you had read the 'Help File', you should have selected the
'Detailed' Clean Up Mode (Third Option).
In this mode, DiskMax explains every Cleaning process
before proceeding to the next one.
If you had selected the 'Detailed' Clean Up Mode,
you would have been able to Skip erasing Firefox Login-Data etc.
Now, what really makes the Difference in DiskMax is that it erases
Old System Files like Log Files etc.
I've been using DiskMax for enough time to assure you that it
does Not wreck Systems.
Next time, use the 'Detailed' Clean Up Mode; not the 'Complete' one!
Sorry, but you used DiskMax with the wrong way.
Maybe I used the program in the wrong mode. But, when I download a program like DiskCleaner, I expect it to work without any problem, so that even an average user should be able to use it. Since, I consider myself an above-average user, and I have worked with disk cleaners before, I chose the Complete option. I expected that the way a disk cleaner SHOULD work, DiskMax would let me see what files will be deleted, before they get deleted.
Even if I had not chosen the fourth mode, Jason's post below points out the various shortcomings in the program indicating that the program is quirky, and does not behave in a way in which SAFE disk cleaners should behave. Jason has laid down the problems with the program in a detained way, indicating the shortcomings of the program.
I certainly do not intend to use the program again, so there is no question of choosing any option. I got saved once, I am not going that way again. Sorry.
The program needs improvement, if it wants users to use it, and consider it as a safe program. I have better, and safe choices like CCleaner, and BleachBit. It was stupid of me to try an unknown disk cleaner, on my working system without a virtual system. I won't repeat the same mistake again.
If you, Dear Anupam, "got saved once,"
this means that DiskMax is Not
the Dangerous software you described.
Your System was Not Crippled!
I do Not agree with Jason's worries,
because I've been using DiskMax long enough
to know that it does NOT wreck systems!
My OS (Windows 7) and my Programs have No problems caused by DiskMax.
All you need is to use the 'Detailed' mode
so that you can inspect what you are about to erase.
I use DiskMax and CCleaner without any problems.
I got saved because I checked the checkbox "Show additional options" when I used the Complete mode. Because I had checked that option, I got several irritating pop-ups, which asked me if I wanted to perform that particular option. As mentioned before, I kept saying NO to each option, but I observed that DiskMax performed delete operations sometime, even when I had clicked NO.
You are free to use DiskMax... but here on TSA, we wont recommend it. There are far better options available. There is BleachBit, which works wonderfully, and I am using it along with CCleaner. I would avoid DiskMax, and would not recommend it at all.
BleachBit literally corrupted my Firefox!
Are, you, TSA staff recommend BleachBit?
I am sure this is a false allegation, and yes, I do recommend BleachBit.
No, my friend.
You didn't read the Help file.
IF you had used
"Detailed" Mode
-and-
had checked the "Show Additional Options",
you wouldn't have experienced all that.
This is the right way to use DiskMax.
If you want to be reliable about DiskMax,
you need to use it in a reliable way, too.
Using DiskMax in the Wrong way results in the wrong idea about DiskMax.
Sorry, but your "I Do Not Recommend DiskMax" is not Objective at all!
You used DiskMax
-Just Once-
and
-in the Wrong way-,
and you easily condemn this software?
I've been using DiskMax long enough to
know if it is Dangerous or Not.
Nobody forced you to accept DiskMax here,
but be a little more careful when evaluating
software.
I mentioned in my other post, I consider myself an above average computer user. I have used many software, and I rarely needed to consult their help file. I do not expect the need to consult a help file for a software such as a disk cleaner. Why make the program in a way that to use it, you have to consult a help file first? How many of the normal users would consult a help file? Not many. The program should be designed in a way, that its easy for the end-user to operate and to understand. The program is quirky.
Jason's informative post strengthened what I had written in my post about my experience with DiskMax. The program needs improvement. Why would a program like a disk cleaner make mandatory a connection to internet for an update? That's ridiculous. Even security software do not pose that kind of restriction.
I will stick to my statement that I won't recommend DiskMax.
You can deselect that option!
Again, you didn't read the Help file.
jason is our authority on these programs here and I stand by his analysis of DiskMax 100%. This was presented in good faith based on the majority ability level of visitors to this site.
To protect the space here for other users we will not allow this to develop into a long running "yes it will, no it won't argument". We would ask that you respect this request, but if not the content of any further repetitive posts will be deleted.
MidnightCowboy
Site Manager
I used DiskMax last night - stepping through each process in turn from the Quick mode to Complete mode.
1. I agree - the "check for update or else run in reduced feature mode" after you install did not impress me.
2. The lack of visual feedback prior to cleaning - like an analyse mode, really isn't good in my opinion. Sure some users don't understand the details and wouldn't read or care if you gave them pages of file listings that showed what was about to be deleted - but the option should be there for the users who do care.
3. The step by step prompt asking permission to perform each step is rubbish. I want to set up the job beforehand ticking the boxes I want to clean. Then start the job and walk away. I don't want to be asked do you want to perform "A" (Yes) then it does that step - a minute later - do you want to perform "B" (Yes)... performs step B... Do you want to perform step C (Yes)... wait... 5 minutes later... Do you want to perform step D...
Who the hell thought that was a great idea?
4. Deep Clean. Sure there is a warning saying don't do this unless you have read the page in the help file. I would add - don't do this unless you want to have programs drop left right and centre. If you do run it - there is an option to move the files to the recycle bin instead of deleting them (obviously the developer knows this is on risky ground). If you want to chance this "Deep Clean" use the recycle bin - then afterwards open the recycle bin to check the files you are about to nuke. Each system will be different (obviously) but check the "Folder" column where the files came from - Beyond the "Temp" folder lots of the files it finds really should be left alone. In any case the files are mostly small - so deleting them isn't going to free up enough space to make the risk worthwhile.
Lots of other cleaner apps have such a feature of "delete all files with extension XXX" where XXX is a file type determined by the developer (after rigorous testing) to be a worthless file. Don't trust such a list. Even as my testing found - such a "Deep Clean" would've nuked the working function of my Adobe CS4 install.
Oh and to top it off - you cannot exclude a filetype from the developers "Deep Clean File Extension" - you just get the lot. The same goes for drives - Deep Clean just went ahead and cleaned every one of my drives too (including 4 USB Hard Drives).
For people who love such a feature because it frees up another 100MB in these days of expensive disk storage - programs such as CCleaner also has the capability - but the difference is you have to set it up from the options - and you get to specify the file extensions and you can restrict them to particular folders. Just that little bit of extra functionality of being able to choose takes the feature from a generalised one size fits all disaster - into something that can be very useful in situations where it is needed - on specific files and folders as required to meet different users needs.
In summary - this just a program that deletes stuff. They are a dime a dozen - many do the same thing (There is no magic in just deleting files etc). What is needed to elevate such a program into the elite or best choices is for some real thought into the design - I've posted several comments before on this and a program isn't a better program because it deletes an extra 50MB than the competition (this is just because it is deleting from other areas - good or bad, many can be selected from options). In my opinion - a great program is more than just WHAT a program does - just as important (or more important) is how it does it. How can the software be used - has the developer really thought about the user - is the developer making wrong assumptions. When it comes to deleting files from your computer you really want to be in control and know beforehand just what you are deleting. For some users, this is all "geekspeak" - and they don't understand the logs and wouldn't read them - but to not have such features AT ALL is not going to make experienced users want to consider the software.
Some day - someone will write a file cleaner with one button that says "Trust Me".
Quick reply to Jason:
1. The check for updates is to ensure that the user is always using the latest version, and to let me keep a running tally of which operating systems users have, so that I can eventually dump support for XP.
2. Analyse mode. Most users don't care for it, I've received over 500 e-mails relating to DiskMax and not one has requested for such a mode. The effort required to code that in, vs. the actual utility of that to end-users does not warrant that I include it. Remember that I'm doing all this for free.
3. Agreed. They should all be done before anything starts and that's something I'm working on. The reason why they are not currently that way is to modularize the application and allow me to modify profiles without much effort, and maybe eventually let users create their own profiles.
4. Warning for Deep Scan are prominently displayed and what it does is sufficiently detailed in the help file. I'd remove it to keep users who click on Yes without reading anything safe (I've accounted for that by making the default behavior delete to recycle bin), but a sizable number of the user base oppose such a move. Their argument is that it's completely optional, and there are enough warnings - and I'm inclined to agree with them.
And the bottom line is, the users who have actually used DiskMax love it. There are many things it does that no other application in the market (including paid ones) do. And it's safe, as some 300,000 downloads testify, as do the hundreds of sites that recommend it (do a quick google search for DiskMax). The only thing potentially unsafe is the Deep Scan and I'll repeat myself again - it is completely optional, well documented, has a fail safe, and sufficient warnings are displayed. The only thing that would win your approval would be if I removed the feature, but other users who actually use it will complain.
1. The check for updates is to ensure that the user is always using the latest version, and to let me keep a running tally of which operating systems users have
Comment: A more user friendly method is to make the check for a latest version an option, where to decline doesn't incur a penalty. Telling the user that "if they choose not to let the program phone home, the program will degrade some features" sounds like something along the lines of extortion. Let the user say, "No Thanks, I'll check myself when it is convenient - don't ask me again".
2. Analyse mode. Most users don't care for it, I've received over 500 e-mails relating to DiskMax and not one has requested for such a mode. The effort required to code that in, vs. the actual utility of that to end-users does not warrant that I include it. Remember that I'm doing all this for free.
Comment: "Most users don't care for it" - users don't ask for it? Because users who would understand and appreciate such a mode probably use something else that provides such a feature. I cannot comment on your personal situation or time restrictions - but to develop the analyse mode can be the same as a delete mode - except instead of deleting the file, it is displayed on screen. The selection of the files and incrementing totals should be common to both.
The delete mode is "identify files, increment totals, delete file".
The analyse mode is "identify files, increment totals, display file details to screen".
Obviously I am simplifying it here but only to illustrate that an analyse mode is nothing but your existing delete mode - with the delete turned off.
Otherwise we revert to the "close your eyes and hit the button marked 'Trust Me'".
4.
Comment: I would suggest three things to improve the deep clean beyond what you have currently.
1. Allow users to specify which drives and/or folders should be included in the clean.
2. For each drive/folder - allow the user to specify file extensions that can be considered safe for deletion.
3. Have Disk Clean to be not available unless selected as an Advanced feature from an Options menu. (Don't prompt the user if they want to do a deep clean - have them specifically go to turn such a feature on - so by default there is no deep clean or mention of such a feature unless they select it from an options menu or similar).
Also note that using the recycle bin as a "review area" for files that were deep cleaned - the program needs to mention that if the recycle bin gets full, the oldest recycled files will be lost when new ones are recycled (On a smaller drive or a drive with a manually sized recycle bin - this has the potential for data loss).
The recycle bin should not be used as a holding area for files that you need to recover. A true analyse mode for the deep clean would improve this - and by users being able to specify drives, folders and file types - both the analyse and deep clean could complete in less time than is currently required.
I have not suggested that removal of Deep Clean is the only option - the feature could be useful if designed differently. In particular - deep cleaning every single drive (including all USB drives) with a fixed list of file extensions that cannot be changed, and no way to (reliably) preview the list of files prior to deletion. It is that inflexibility that makes the difference between average software that users just learn to live with the limitations, and a piece of software that safely works the way each user wants it to.
Finally I don't want to put down your obvious pride in 300,000 downloads, but I downloaded it twice, and have no intention of using it until perhaps the next version comes out and I might have to download it a few times for testing once again. One download doesn't equal one happy and loyal user. Lots of users window shop, downloading to install and try out and often take it no further. Please don't try to convince others that each download (or a majority) results in a happy user. And for each of these happy users, a new release of the software will probably result in one or more downloads again, with users keen to see bug fixes and new features. Counting downloads is a false metric that doesn't relate to something like "how many Big Macs have McDonalds sold".
How does having 300,000 downloads make something safe? RegSeeker for instance has 130,000 downloads recorded at Softpedia and yet this has killed more machines than I can count. ThreatFire will also have accounted for a substantial number, especially some of the earlier versions, and look how many times that's been downloaded.
"Beyond the "Temp" folder lots of the files it finds really should be left alone. In any case the files are mostly small - so deleting them isn't going to free up enough space to make the risk worthwhile."
No, Jason.
The large amount of Files deleted comes from LOG and OLD Files;
not Temp files!
Believe me, I have used the most aggressive options in CCleaner
by using the special 'winapp2.ini' from the CCleaner Forum.
Even by these settings, CCleaner canNot find as much as DiskMax finds.
I use CCleaner with DiskMax.
CCleaner removes some particular Application traces
(due to the 'winapp2.ini' file),
whereas, DiskMax finds more OS Junk than CCleaner
and Optimizes better the Prefetch Folder.
Like I wrote, I use them Both (CCleaner and DiskMax) without problems.
Thanks a lot for this Jason. As MC said, really well informed, and exposing the shortcomings of the program. I just love what you wrote in the last paragraph... very true!!
Further on the "Deep Clean" feature of DiskMax- the help file reads:
------------------------------
Deep scan (prompt) goes through all the folders on your system locating junk files. Files found with the following standard file extensions are deleted (with some exceptions):
· old
· prv
· chk
· gid
· wbk
· tmp
· dmp
· nch
· log
· bak
Log files that are named install.log or setup.log are not deleted because you will need them when you uninstall the application that created them during its install. OPA*.bak files are not deleted because they are required by Office to verify its install state.
WARNING: Deep scanning your system can be a useful feature only if you know what you are doing. It is highly recommended that you choose to delete files to the recycle bin when prompted so that you can restore files selectively if you find that an application requires any of them.
The files with the extensions listed above are by definition temporary files. Any application that attaches anything more than a passing importance to these files are simply badly written. But badly written applications do exist, and therefore, this warning.
------------------------------
That last comment really annoys me - "Any application that attaches anything more than a passing importance to these files are simply badly written."
For starters what can be stored in files that are private to an application = eg log tmp dmp bak files, is really up to the application and in some cases, up to the user. The developer of DiskMax recognises that not all log files are safe to delete because some log file can affect the ability to uninstall software - yet there are many types of log files on most systems - some are important because of issues related to stability for windows, others might be useful for diagnostics, others could be important for application software - there is no rule that says all log files are safe to delete. Same with any other extension.
I feel if DiskMax wasn't so badly written it would give users the option to add or remove file extensions from the list, and apply the list only to folders or drives specified by the user.
And then allow you to analyse before deleting - rather than delete to the recycle bin, and analyse that...
If the developer of DiskMax thinks that all other software is badly written if his assumptions don't fit with how they use file extensions - needs to realise that how a file is used and its internal data structure really doesn't matter if the file is used only by that application. (tmp and log are perfect examples of files that despite being sometimes considered 'temporary' doesn't mean that the owning application considers the file content 'unimportant').
...is simply badly written? Pot, Kettle, Black.
Well, this is Not the case, as it seems...
Check Post 54659
Thanks very much for this jason - just the sort of informed advice we all needed to see.
I would urge potential users of this software to research the comments associated with it around the internet first. Some of the issues highlighted may be beyond the average person's ability to deal with or correct.
Some Testimonials I found on the author's page:
http://www.koshyjohn.com/software/diskmax/testimonials.html
If anyone finds more,please, share...
The testimonials on the site making the software itself, are going to be always good, and not bad. Those don't really matter if you want to find out about a software. If there are any independent testimonials, lets hear them.
Let me give you my Testimonial.
After using CCleaner for two (2)years,I found DiskMax.
The first time I used it,
DiskMax removed 55MB of Junk files that CCleaner had overlooked!
I scared! "This must be another Aggressive File Cleaner
that ultimately wrecks Systems," I thought.
However, this was not the case:
For the last three (3) weeks I've been using DiskMax,
I show a -Noticeable- System Performance Improvement.
DiskMax has offered me No Problems at all!
I urge the TSA Staff to evaluate DiskMax.
This is an Application I fully recommend!
I ran the software, and its not safe. I have posted my experience above. Any further unnecessary mentions of this software, or glorifying posts will be deleted.
No, you used the program in the wrong Mode.
I can only assume that you must be the developer or in some way connected.
Only a while ago, the warnings displayed by this program were being re-written by the developers to include things such as "don't do this unless you've read the help file" and "Deep scanning your system can be a useful feature only if you know what you are doing". The fact is that 99% of users won't read the help file first, and the biggest majority will also not be able to interpret deep scan results effectively, or choose what to do with them safely.
Over the period when I was involved with paying customers, more serious issues were caused by the use of this type of software than malware infections. IMO if you really feel the need and can't resist pushing buttons then CCleaner has always been the most reliable option.
No, man! I'm just a DiskMax user!
I am Not John Koshy; the Developer of DiskMax!
You'd lend yourself some credibility if you didn't resort to anonymous tags. And my name is Koshy John. But thanks for the support in which ever posts you are responsible for.
I would like to no aboght these Two.
[1] Wipe
http://privacyroot.com/software/WIPE-info.php
[2] BleachBit
http://bleachbit.sourceforge.net/
Thanks
Really , what about thees two above.
-What about these two (2)?
1) TFC - Temp File Cleaner by OldTimer
http://www.geekstogo.com/forum/TFC-Temp-File-Cleaner-OldTimer-file187.html
2) Quick Clean
http://www.thewindowsclub.com/clean-junk-files-in-windows-7-vista-with-quick-clean
Dear Editor,
Any Comment of the above two (2) programs?
I'll not be wetting my pants in excitement over either(at least reading the published description of features on their websites).
Firstly TFC - does nothing essential that would be required by users, that cannot already be done by CCleaner.
The requirement to kill explorer.exe (ie. the desktop shell), followed by a system reboot after the clean really seems overkill. Especially considering that the temp folders will start to populate again with files as programs are loaded during the reboot. I would suggest that if you wanted to go down that road, it would be better to also stop (prior to the clean) all other running apps, and non essential windows services.
Cleaning is never absolute - even windows files and some services generate temp files during a reboot/startup. For me, requiring a full reboot after cleaning my temp folders would just be an unnecessary annoyance.
-
The other program "Clean Junk Files" - Not only is it questionable in what it is trying to achieve - but it's design (usability) is amateurish to dangerous at best (The design works ok when you are writing software only for yourself - but distributing the software to users, needs a bit extra before it passes inspection).
Programs that give you a list of file extensions and announce that these are all "safe to delete" obviously never came across some of the PCs and applications that I have. There is no contract that all developers sign to say that a tmp is temporary and not template or "tax master portfolio". The same goes for *.sik or *.$$$ files that could also be critical data files in applications most people have never heard of (perhaps developed in house - that everything depends on).
To just scan through your hard disk blindly deleting all files that match a pattern is asking for big problems.
As for the usability - the program doesn't permit you to pick which patterns you want to include or exclude. You take the entire list whether you like it or not. You cannot exclude folders (or drives?) from the deletion - you get the lot.
There is no analyse to show you a list of files will get nuked, or for that matter - there is no status showing you the progress with an option to abort prior to deleting. It seems (I didn't get much further than this) once you click on the big button and proceed beyond the warning screen, you are a passenger along for the ride - blindfolded with no turning back.
Neither program will have a lasting home on my hard drive.
First of all,
TFC,
which is listed in several Malware Security Fora,
finds much more Temp files than CCleaner. Just Try it.
Second,
Quick Clean is recommended by the Windows Club
http://www.thewindowsclub.com/clean-junk-files-in-windows-7-vista-with-quick-clean
Dangerous at Best?
The author has "taken extreme care in selecting which files to include in the list to delete."
http://forum.thewindowsclub.com/downloads-windows/30444-feedback-quick-clean-windows-7-vista.html#post149999
As I mentioned in my previous post - CCleaner can be easily configured to delete files matching set criteria (eg file extension) from the Options->Include->Add screen - then select "Custom Files and Folders" on the main screen. The extra control CCleaner can provide allows you to delete files with far more confidence and safety.
If you still want to use TFC or Quick Clean, then don't let my opinion stop you. I'll not recommend them for the reasons I have explained in my original comment.
My sole objection was for TFC
by OldTimer who has been a Malware Removal expert.
I also use CCleaner, but TFC does a better job for Temp files.
Nobody forced you to recommend these programs.
Don't be that aggressive...
When are you going to update this article?
The articles are updated as time permits, this article has been updated twice in the past month. (Ignore the posted date at the top, it doesn't change each time the article is updated).
I use to use this program called "Sweepi" and recently i made a switch to Comodo System Cleaner...well it is a fairly good software, but it didnt work out for me so i went with CCleaner and now i'm quite happy with it.
Fcleaner,good copy of CCleaner without registry cleaner.
http://www.fcleaner.com/
I had been using both CCleaner and Glary utilities regularly, but yesterday I installed and used Comodo System Cleaner. It left me breathless, super fast and found over 300 registry items to delete. It holds back-ups and checks to see if the unit has issues after a reboot. Worked fine in my case.
http://system-cleaner.comodo.com/
This review doesn't look at "Registry Cleaning" as we are comparing performance of file cleaners only.
I'm not surprised that other registry cleaners are prepared to delete more than CCleaner as its registry cleaner is more conservative than several other tools.
Don't think that "finding more registry items to delete" is like "finding more socks around your house" because you looked harder. Generally other tools "find more" because the rules they apply for "what is considered safe to delete" or "what is considered broken" are less restrictive. Of course by being less fussy on deciding what is safe to delete and what potentially might cause problems, increases the risk in using such a registry cleaner.
Another way of looking at such comparisons - one tool might only suggest to delete registry items if it is 98% certain that doing so will not cause problems. The second tool suggests more items because it will consider deleting registry items if it is 90% certain.
Obviously the risk to brick your PC goes up as the number of items (or actually the more risky categories you select) to erase from your registry.
The only thing safer than doing a full registry backup prior to a registry clean - is not using a registry cleaner at all.
I would just add (maybe unnecessarily) that a registry cleaner killed my OS some time back and unfortunately i did not have a backup. Caution is advised with such things. I never use 'em now.
It looks like CCleaner softened one of its initial cleaning settings. It no longer has the risky "saved form history" option checked by default (for both IE and Firefox though they have different names).
I guess too many angry, average users complained about having to remember their passwords and type them in! This will help tech support people remember that many users have no clue about all the password threats and free programs out there for handling passwords more securely. CCleaner, from this perspective, had a bit of a strong initial setting.
For some reason it also doesn't have "compact databases" for Firefox initially checked. I wonder why? That was the only one of the Firefox options I wanted to have always checked!
How about Free Window Sweeper. It does the same thing as CCleaner only faster, but minus CCleaner's registry cleaner.
Moderator's Comment: Direct download link removed. No homepage so you'll have to google it if you want it :)
FindSth Software, based in Shantou, China, their site - http://www.findsth.com/sweeper/free_window_sweeper.htm
Not much to say about it just yet - looks like a clone of a very old copy of CCleaner. Best part of their site - they have a list of many freeware file cleaners all together. http://www.findsth.com/freeware/wincleaner-1.htm
Post new comment