But its better to do not delete it as it is an application of Windows. Johnny-Marshal is indeed correct that removing Internet Explorer is possible, but that doing so has its own negative repercussions.
This folder contains files that are needed to determine which version of a file has been updated previously. Interestingly, while Gooling around, I ran into this very topic here on ComputerHope. I suggest this as a way to clear up disk space: You might consider using a tool like CCleaner to help you clear out excess files and recover some disk space.
When you open CCleaner, on the main screen you will see a list of programs and files which you can clear out. Go ahead and select everything under Internet Explorer, unless you want to keep Autocomplete Form History and Saved Passwords in that case, just don't check those boxes. Select everything under System except for Windows Error Reporting, which is useful to look back on occasionally. Even if more memory is just not an option, like there's none left in the world, I would seriously advise trying to do a "clean" build, resize the primary partition as you see fit in a virtual environment of some kind, and transfer the server operations to the virtualised box.
I got 5 Dell PowerEdge servers from another agency a couple of months ago and was excited that I might be able to use those for virtualization. I contacted Dell and Intel because I supposedly could upgrade the processors, but both pointed the finger back at each other.
So, I had to drop the whole idea. I was sad. That's really unfortunate mate. If we had to do what we have here with no virtualisation, we'd be in trouble. One question that I would have, is what kind of budget do you actually have left? It probably wouldn't need a lot, though depends on what it's really doing just take a look at the usage in task manager at the peak of day , but perhaps you could migrate it's roles to another machine, even if it's only for a day or two to give you time to rebuild the original box I have a little money, but being government if it was budgeted for "X" you're not supposed to spend it on "Y".
As long as you can justify it to whatever management structure you have that it was either that or the failure of the system, would they really care? Dell have moved on to the T's now but the price is just as reasonable - I couldn't get to the US site for IP filtering but take a look here:. We upgraded the memory but this has everything that you would need apart from the Windows server license.
If you wanted to head to virtual, this would get you started. Ya, I have a T that is isolated and runs a separate network. It is an OK box, but for the applications I would need to run in a virtual environment I would use up that servers resources pretty quick I think.
My next problem would be getting the funds for the server licenses. In the event when you actually did delete this cache you can rebuild the files you need manually by extracting the files from original installation media, from patch packages etc but this is a time consuming and not that easy task to accomplish. But let me get to the point. When running this, the installer and patch packages are enumerated and unreferenced packages are considered to be safe to delete and are thereby also deleted.
Depending on the age of the system and the number of applications installed, this action can free a significant amount of disk space. But when I see that garbage folder right in the root, it bothers me. Also, that folder is different, because it's not supposed to be there , unlike the others which, while they "can" be deleted, are supposed to be there.
Agreed, I also like to have the root of the drive "clean" meaning without truly useless stuff. Can you or anyone explain the "meaning" of this folder? There you go man. Thanks s nDOk n, I am off to bed now, however I will read that tomorrow. And just for the record so that nobody will "accuse" me of asking something like: " is it safe to delete the contents of WinSxS? It has pretty much every version of every important file that your system might need.
It gets to be a bit of an overkill, IMO 7. Unless that old drive is stuffed full, it shouldn't have a significant effect on the computer's performance anyway, unless you're moving from a rpm or rpm drive to a rpm drive, or one with more cache. I regularly tell customers who are often concerned with having "too much stuff" that it doesn't matter if you have the space and you aren't loading it all into the RAM and slowing everything down.
Running too many programs at once slows down a computer, not 2 gigs of photos just sitting around on the HDD. You don't have to tell me space is relatively cheap today. The first hard drive I bought was a 13 gig "monster" and it cost me dollars at the time. It was replacing a 4 gig unit that wasn't big enough to dual boot Windows 98 and Linux comfortably enough for my liking.
Freeman wrote: Not having a computer is even cheaper still. Who said I was doing it? I'm a IT professional, and if I need more space, I purchase it. It's a business expense that pays for itself. That said, I have customers who have very little extra income and need to make do with what they have. It's not stupid to pick up nickels and dimes if there are no dollars to pick up in the first place. If a customer has already paid me for my time, I lose nothing by cleaning up a little bit and gain their appreciation by saving them the cost of a part they can make do without.
Not everyone has a "good job" with a lot of disposable income, and today, a computer has become a necessity for people to have. Please spare me the cries of "they can go to the library.
As an aside, in another thread somewhere in the forum, someone pointed out a good reason to clean up system and temp files: if you have an SSD, as they're still more expensive than God for the larger ones. Linwood wrote: Unless that old drive is stuffed full, it shouldn't have a significant effect on the computer's performance anyway This is patently false. Quote: unless you're moving from a rpm or rpm drive to a rpm drive, or one with more cache.
Which is exactly what I said. Quote: I regularly tell customers who are often concerned with having "too much stuff" that it doesn't matter if you have the space and you aren't loading it all into the RAM and slowing everything down. Also not exactly true. Quote: You don't have to tell me space is relatively cheap today. Am I supposed to be impressed? Is this some kind of appeal to authority? If you were working with drives that long ago, it would seem to me that you should know that what you're saying isn't true.
Quote: That said, I have customers who have very little extra income and need to make do with what they have. Linwood wrote: As an aside, in another thread somewhere in the forum, someone pointed out a good reason to clean up system and temp files: if you have an SSD, as they're still more expensive than God for the larger ones.
Something tells me that these customers of yours who can't afford a bigger standard drive aren't rocking SSDs. Linwood wrote: Freeman wrote: Not having a computer is even cheaper still.
Yes, what's your point? I provide service in Siskiyou County, CA. The median income in this county is barely above the U. Federal poverty line. I have a few clients that never see a service charge and receive free computers when I have a spare donation on hand.
That does nothing to change the point. I won't waste my time or a clients money engaging in the type of cleanup being discussed here. I'd sooner dig into my boneyard pile and throw a larger used drive at the situation than knock my head against a brick wall trying to bail water out of the ocean with a Dixie Cup. How so? If they're the same rpm, have the same cache, and have the same interface, how is the new one any faster?
What could possibly make an 80 gig disk slower than a 1 tb one, if they are otherwise identical? Unless you're referring to the greater areal density making for shorter seek times, you're full of shit.
0コメント