CleanUp! deletes Office 2003 files

For discussion about the latest beta software for CleanUp! 4.5. Since this beta test program is now over, this forum has been locked. It will be kept here for a short time for reference purposes.

beta 4.5

Postby ego » Tue Jul 05, 2005 8:12 pm

Thanks again Steve.......
I have installed your beta and it performs quite well, with one exception that you already pointed out, that is ANY program (Word, Excel, PP) in Office 2003 must reinstall a file that CleanUp removes.........
Haven't been able to ascertain which that is yet, but I keep trying.
Ed
ego
Active - 10 posts
Active - 10 posts
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:13 pm
Location: SW Washington State, USA

Re: beta 4.5

Postby sgould » Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:46 pm

Thanks Ed. I believe the file(s) that cause you to have to re-install are in the *.bak files somewhere beneath the ...\Documents and Settings\All Users\ directory. If you - or anyone else - can validate this, then that would be a huge help. :)

Thanks,

Steve
sgould
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Dallas, TX, USA

.bak file

Postby ego » Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:19 pm

Steve......
Went to C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Microsoft\Office\Data and located this file..... OPA11.BAK
While I had this window open I ran CleanUp Beta and saw this .bak file removed. Then I opened Word again, let it reinstall the missing file, and this OPA11.BAK file reappeared.
I performed this same test on Excel and PP and this same file was removed by CleanUp and reinstalled by those programs.
Does this help?
Ed
ego
Active - 10 posts
Active - 10 posts
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:13 pm
Location: SW Washington State, USA

excluded files

Postby ego » Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:42 pm

Steve.......
In your constant endeavors to make CleanUp Beta better and better may I make a suggestion:
In Options make a new tab that might say "Excluded Files."
That way we can insert those *.bak files we want left alone? Or any other files for that matter.
Just an idea.......
Ed
ego
Active - 10 posts
Active - 10 posts
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:13 pm
Location: SW Washington State, USA

Postby sgould » Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:01 pm

I've considered providing this functionality but it would incur a huge performance penalty that I don't think most users would be willing to accept. Essentially before deleting each and every file, CleanUp! would need to check the filename against the list of "excluded files". So, I'm leaning more towards a better solution that provides a similar result but without the performance hit.

Which beta release have you been using?
sgould
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Dallas, TX, USA

Postby ego » Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:15 pm

Steve.......
I am using CleanUp 4.5 Beta 4
Ed
ego
Active - 10 posts
Active - 10 posts
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:13 pm
Location: SW Washington State, USA

continued problem with Office 2003

Postby ego » Thu Jul 07, 2005 11:30 am

Steve.......
I tried to trick Office.....renamed that .bak file to .old but to no avail.
Office just reinstalled the .bak file.
Any other ideas I might attempt???
Ed
ego
Active - 10 posts
Active - 10 posts
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:13 pm
Location: SW Washington State, USA

excluded files

Postby Martian303 » Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:32 am

:) 'Howdy!
I wanted to post a thought about ego's suggestion -

"In Options make a new tab that might say "Excluded Files."
That way we can insert those *.bak files we want left alone?"

Steve said it would incur a huge performance penalty -
My concern is - I am not knowledgeable enough to know what files to put in an area like that - Although I can see where you are coming from.

:?
At the same time, I am not knowledgeable enough to know what to do if I ran CleanUP! and it deleted files that it shouldn't.
I am concerned that CleanUp! will become too complicated for basic computer users. Once it has too many settings that have to be plugged in by the user, unexperienced computer users will stop using the program.
Cris
Martian303
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:05 am
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

.bak files

Postby ego » Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:54 pm

Steve........
Would I be defeating the purpose of CleanUP by removing the .bak selection from Options, Temporary Files??? What other important .bak files does CleanUP remove???
This would be a temporary fix to the problem of MS Office 2003.
Ed
ego
Active - 10 posts
Active - 10 posts
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:13 pm
Location: SW Washington State, USA

Re: .bak files

Postby sgould » Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:32 pm

ego wrote:Steve........
Would I be defeating the purpose of CleanUP by removing the .bak selection from Options, Temporary Files??? What other important .bak files does CleanUP remove???
This would be a temporary fix to the problem of MS Office 2003.
Ed


Not at all! That was my point in making it an option. :D

The .bak extension has for years been commonly used for temporary "backup" files that could safely be removed. The Microsoft Office 2003 team seem to have gone against this practice - something that causes problems for CleanUp! and other similar utilities. The good news is that with CleanUp! you have the option to modify its behavior.

Steve
sgould
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Dallas, TX, USA

Programmatic Solution

Postby Krantz » Sun Oct 23, 2005 12:59 pm

sgould wrote:I've considered providing this functionality but it would incur a huge performance penalty that I don't think most users would be willing to accept. Essentially before deleting each and every file, CleanUp! would need to check the filename against the list of "excluded files". So, I'm leaning more towards a better solution that provides a similar result but without the performance hit.


Hi Steve,

I have not programmed since the DOS days, and oh how I miss them at times. :) I am with you on taking a performance hit, that is definate. One thing I did when I wrote a very large POS Database and Tracking system I found a lot of assistance with assembler search routines that sped up my system significantly. Another option would be to instead of having a "excluded files" Tab, have an "excluded directorys" tab. Yes the performance issue will still be there, but less intense. Specific Directory(s) only...no wildcards. Those that need this option know where the problem is. New Users at least the ones I work with everyday already know what a directory is and what it is for, so this would not be an issue. File Exclutions though, I would not add that in, that can get way to confusing for the New User and to strenuous for the program.

Just my thoughts .... have a great day!

-Tom
Krantz
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: Dearborn, MI

Postby riserman » Sun Oct 23, 2005 6:37 pm

Hi,

I've been watching this discussion about CleanUp! removing OPA11.BAK from Office 2003 with some puzzlement since not every cleaning program has this problem. For example, "File Cleaner," which is one program in the jv16PowerTools 2005 package, removes *.bak files without touching OPA11.BAK. And it's very fast. Can someone explain how they do this?

Bob
riserman
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 10:39 am

Postby Krantz » Sun Oct 23, 2005 9:35 pm

riserman wrote: I've been watching this discussion about CleanUp! removing OPA11.BAK from Office 2003 with some puzzlement since not every cleaning program has this problem. For example, "File Cleaner," which is one program in the jv16PowerTools 2005 package, removes *.bak files without touching OPA11.BAK. And it's very fast. Can someone explain how they do this?


My assumption is that the OPA11.BAK file is hardcoded into the program to do just that, skip the file.
Krantz
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: Dearborn, MI

Postby sgould » Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:29 pm

Krantz wrote:My assumption is that the OPA11.BAK file is hardcoded into the program to do just that, skip the file.


I don't know for sure how they do it but I'd say they've had to "code around" it somehow. I've had to "code around" this in CleanUp! 4.5.

Steve
sgould
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Dallas, TX, USA


Return to CleanUp! 4.5 Beta

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron