Strange Content.IE5 behavior

[Eugenia]

Hi.

W98se.

My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled the
regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically named
subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.

I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the same
result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet Files /
Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists. :-(

Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are void of
temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini file.

As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary large
quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were all
which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types of
websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.

I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5 is
in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously, the
location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was where it
was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to it's
all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
kinds of techniques to fix it..

This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me with
some pointers on how I might rectify this?

Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Bill in Co.]

Eugenia wrote:
> Hi.
>
> W98se.
>
> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled the
> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically named
> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>
> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
same
> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet Files
/
> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists. :-(
>
> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are void
of
> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini file.
>
> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary large
> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were all
> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types of
> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>
> I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
is
> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
the
> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was where
it
> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
it's
> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>
> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
with
> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>
> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

When you first start out with a new clean TIF in Win98SE (like after
deltreeing), there will be four (randomly named) subfolders created, and it
will stay that way, until the TIF reaches around 70 - 80 MB or so, at which
point an additional 4 subfolders will be created - and so on. So I'm not
sure what your problem is (if any)?

 

[Eugenia]

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%235B0uG1$HHA.4324@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Eugenia wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > W98se.
> >
> > My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
> > looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
the
> > regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
named
> > subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
> > i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
> >
> > I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
> same
> > result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
Files
> /
> > Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
:-(
> >
> > Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
> > although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
> > sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
void
> of
> > temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
file.
> >
> > As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
> > assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
large
> > quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
all
> > which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
of
> > websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
> > Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
> >
> > I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
> is
> > in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
> the
> > location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
where
> it
> > was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
> it's
> > all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
> > kinds of techniques to fix it..
> >
> > This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
> with
> > some pointers on how I might rectify this?
> >
> > Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
> When you first start out with a new clean TIF in Win98SE (like after
> deltreeing), there will be four (randomly named) subfolders created, and
it
> will stay that way, until the TIF reaches around 70 - 80 MB or so, at
which
> point an additional 4 subfolders will be created - and so on. So I'm
not
> sure what your problem is (if any)?
>
>
Oh... is that so ? For some reason, I never seemed to notice that. Perhaps I
hadn't noticed this of which you speak because the most "common" reason I
had for doing a Deltree Tempor~1 was due to having a definite corruption
(i.e. - there was no history shown in IE's "web pages visited" pane -
Date/site/most visted/order). So when that was repaired by executing a DOS
Deltree, perhaps in my mirthful joy, I hadn't noticed that fact.

I will say that if what you say to be so is the case, I now feel very silly.
:-/

Well, I'll go on a 'mad dash' to millions of webpages and download 200 MB of
junk and see if I can get things back to "normal" again. lol

PS - I do wonder how my customary C:\Windows\TIF got re-located to
C:\Windows\Local Settings, all by itself though. <mystified>

Thanks Bill in Co., I appreciate your help.

 

[Bill in Co.]

Eugenia wrote:
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%235B0uG1$HHA.4324@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Eugenia wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> W98se.
>>>
>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
the
>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
named
>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>
>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
same
>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
Files /
>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
:-(
>>>
>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
void of
>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
file.
>>>
>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
large
>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
all
>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
of
>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>
>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
is
>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
the
>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
where it
>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
it's
>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>
>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
with
>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>
>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>>
>> When you first start out with a new clean TIF in Win98SE (like after
>> deltreeing), there will be four (randomly named) subfolders created, and
it
>> will stay that way, until the TIF reaches around 70 - 80 MB or so, at
which
>> point an additional 4 subfolders will be created - and so on. So I'm
not
>> sure what your problem is (if any)?
>>
>>
> Oh... is that so ? For some reason, I never seemed to notice that. Perhaps
I
> hadn't noticed this of which you speak because the most "common" reason I
> had for doing a Deltree Tempor~1 was due to having a definite corruption
> (i.e. - there was no history shown in IE's "web pages visited" pane -
> Date/site/most visted/order). So when that was repaired by executing a DOS
> Deltree, perhaps in my mirthful joy, I hadn't noticed that fact.
>
> I will say that if what you say to be so is the case, I now feel very
silly.
> :-/
>
> Well, I'll go on a 'mad dash' to millions of webpages and download 200 MB
of
> junk and see if I can get things back to "normal" again. lol
>
> PS - I do wonder how my customary C:\Windows\TIF got re-located to
> C:\Windows\Local Settings, all by itself though. <mystified>

That part I don't know about for sure.
But if you had a crash, maybe windows relocated and rebuilt the TIF over
there by default, since the regular TIF location and subdirectories were in
use at the time (and presumably somewhat corrupted).

BTW, I am not sure at exactly what point the TIF goes from 4 to 8
subfolders, but I noticed over here recently that it happened somewhere
around 70-80 MB (I check on it periodically). I currently have my TIF set
at 100 MB max, and I'm there already, so I don't expect more than 8
subdirectories (there are 8 now).

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce the
size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve up
fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)

The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows NT
versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you. Perhaps
some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
effect, but never pinned down the cause.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Hi.
>
> W98se.
>
> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled the
> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically named
> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>
> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
> same
> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet Files
> /
> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists. :-(
>
> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are void
> of
> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini file.
>
> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary large
> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were all
> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types of
> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>
> I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
> is
> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
> the
> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was where
> it
> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
> it's
> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>
> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
> with
> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>
> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I think
maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in from
the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a somewhat
larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point where
it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce the
> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve up
> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>
> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows NT
> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
Perhaps
> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Hi.
>>
>> W98se.
>>
>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
the
>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
named
>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>
>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
>> same
>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
Files
>> /
>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
:-(
>>
>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are void
>> of
>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini file.
>>
>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
large
>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
all
>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
of
>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>
>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
>> is
>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
>> the
>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was where
>> it
>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
>> it's
>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>
>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
>> with
>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>
>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Thing is, many sites force a new page, anyway. Especially the ones with any
substantial content.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I think
> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in from
> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a somewhat
> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point
> where
> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce the
>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve
>> up
>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>
>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows NT
>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
> Perhaps
>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> W98se.
>>>
>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
> the
>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
> named
>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>
>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
>>> same
>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
> Files
>>> /
>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
> :-(
>>>
>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
>>> void
>>> of
>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
>>> file.
>>>
>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
> large
>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
> all
>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
> of
>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>
>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
>>> is
>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
>>> the
>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
>>> where
>>> it
>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
>>> it's
>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>
>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
>>> with
>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>
>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[glee]

FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at 26400) for nearly
nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never saw the least difference
when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV. I always recommend a TIF value
between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up connection, and usually smaller with high speed
Internet (cable, DSL). Of course, I also usually recommend another browser than IE.
-)
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I think
> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in from
> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a somewhat
> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point where
> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce the
>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve up
>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>
>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows NT
>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
> Perhaps
>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> W98se.
>>>
>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
> the
>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
> named
>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>
>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
>>> same
>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
> Files
>>> /
>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
> :-(
>>>
>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are void
>>> of
>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini file.
>>>
>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
> large
>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
> all
>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
> of
>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>
>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
>>> is
>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
>>> the
>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was where
>>> it
>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
>>> it's
>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>
>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
>>> with
>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>
>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

Sure, but a larger cache still helps as many (most?) sites don't force load
ALL of their web contents (i.e. all the content files in the page),
fortunately. I can sure tell a big difference when I have no cache (like
just after clearing it all out), vs revisiting it.

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> Thing is, many sites force a new page, anyway. Especially the ones with
any
> substantial content.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I
think
>> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in
from
>> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a somewhat
>> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point
>> where
>> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce
the
>>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve
>>> up
>>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
>>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>>
>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows
NT
>>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
Perhaps
>>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
>>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
>>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> W98se.
>>>>
>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I
was
>>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
the
>>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
named
>>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in
WinXP.
>>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>
>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
>>>> same
>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
Files
>>>> /
>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
:-(
>>>>
>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
>>>> void
>>>> of
>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
>>>> file.
>>>>
>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
large
>>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
all
>>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
of
>>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>>
>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
TIF's/Content.IE5
>>>> is
>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
>>>> the
>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
>>>> where
>>>> it
>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
>>>> it's
>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite
all
>>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>
>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
>>>> with
>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Bill in Co.]

The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web page
(since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular web
searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on a
single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for the
new stuff)

And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct function of
how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you get to
wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the page content
is reloaded into the TIF).

glee wrote:
> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at 26400) for
> nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never saw the
> least difference when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV. I
always
> recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up connection, and
> usually smaller with high speed Internet (cable, DSL). Of course, I also
> usually recommend another browser than IE. -)
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> http://dts-l.org/
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I
think
>> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in
from
>> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a somewhat
>> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point
where
>> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>>
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce
the
>>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve
up
>>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
>>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>>
>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows
NT
>>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
>> Perhaps
>>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
>>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
>>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> W98se.
>>>>
>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I
was
>>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
>> the
>>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
>> named
>>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in
WinXP.
>>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>
>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
>>>> same
>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
>> Files
>>>> /
>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
>> :-(
>>>>
>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
void
>>>> of
>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
file.
>>>>
>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
>> large
>>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
>> all
>>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
>> of
>>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>>
>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
TIF's/Content.IE5
>>>> is
>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
>>>> the
>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
where
>>>> it
>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
>>>> it's
>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite
all
>>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>
>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
>>>> with
>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[glee]

As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any noticable
difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser performance and page load
speed, either on my home computers or on those at work which used dial-up for a
period of time. Again, YMMV.

I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have played a part.
http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web page
> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular web
> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on a
> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for the
> new stuff)
>
> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct function of
> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you get to
> wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the page content
> is reloaded into the TIF).
>
> glee wrote:
>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at 26400) for
>> nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never saw the
>> least difference when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV. I
> always
>> recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up connection, and
>> usually smaller with high speed Internet (cable, DSL). Of course, I also
>> usually recommend another browser than IE. -)
>> --
>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>> http://dts-l.org/
>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>
>>
>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I
> think
>>> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in
> from
>>> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a somewhat
>>> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point
> where
>>> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>>>
>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce
> the
>>>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve
> up
>>>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
>>>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>>>
>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows
> NT
>>>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
>>> Perhaps
>>>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
>>>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
>>>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>
>>>>> W98se.
>>>>>
>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I
> was
>>>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
>>> the
>>>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
>>> named
>>>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in
> WinXP.
>>>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
>>>>> same
>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
>>> Files
>>>>> /
>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
>>> :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
>>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
> void
>>>>> of
>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
> file.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
>>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
>>> large
>>>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
>>> all
>>>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
>>> of
>>>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>>>
>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
> TIF's/Content.IE5
>>>>> is
>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
>>>>> the
>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
> where
>>>>> it
>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
>>>>> it's
>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite
> all
>>>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
>>>>> with
>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go without
having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to the TIF, the
better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my TIF to 100 MB.

And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the system
longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to simply
reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't (yet) come
across an authoritative, fully documented article that spells out exactly
what size TIF that is.

Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the TIF to
50 or 100 MB, or so.

glee wrote:
> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any noticable
> difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser performance and
> page load speed, either on my home computers or on those at work which
used
> dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
>
> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have played
a
> part. http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> http://dts-l.org/
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web page
>> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular web
>> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on a
>> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for the
>> new stuff)
>>
>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct function of
>> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you get
to
>> wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the page
content
>> is reloaded into the TIF).
>>
>> glee wrote:
>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at 26400)
for
>>> nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never saw
the
>>> least difference when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV. I
>> always
>>> recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up connection,
and
>>> usually smaller with high speed Internet (cable, DSL). Of course, I
also
>>> usually recommend another browser than IE. -)
>>> --
>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I
>> think
>>>> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in
>> from
>>>> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a
somewhat
>>>> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the point
>> where
>>>> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>>>>
>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce
>> the
>>>>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages
serve
>> up
>>>>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
>>>>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>>>>
>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows
>> NT
>>>>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
>>>> Perhaps
>>>>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have
you
>>>>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen
this
>>>>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>
>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> W98se.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I
>> was
>>>>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer
resembled
>>>> the
>>>>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
>>>> named
>>>>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in
>> WinXP.
>>>>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me
the
>>>>>> same
>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
>>>> Files
>>>>>> /
>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
persists.
>>>> :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
>>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also
4
>>>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
>> void
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
>> file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which
might
>>>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
>>>> large
>>>>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders
were
>>>> all
>>>>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different
types
>>>> of
>>>>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
>>>>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
>> TIF's/Content.IE5
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
mysteriously,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
>> where
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back
to
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite
>> all
>>>>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help
me
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Eugenia]

Hello. Sorry for the delay in my returning, but unfortunately, "life just
doesn't care" about plans and all that. :-/

Yes, I have reduced the TIF maximum level, now that I've witnessed how those
Content.IE5 subfolders are created. Had as many as 20 created during my
test. lol
The problem (which obviously wasn't one, after all) is solved. Thanks Bill
in Co.

I've not installed any utility - that I can remember - in W98se of late. In
XP, I have, but nothing like those which you asked about. Nor do I recall
installing any "major application" in XP.

Not related (?), but I do motice some peculiarities between W98se and XP (in
a dual-boot configuration, here) and that is mostly regarding the Recycle
Bin. For one thing, the "configure drives independently" setting never seems
to 'stick".
For another thing, if there are items in WinXP RB, when I return to W98se, I
see the RB icon as "full", but upon opening W98se RB, I see nothing in
there. Yet, the "empty recycle bin" command/menu item is active and might
display "Are you sure you want to delete these <x number of> items ?". There
must be some 'conflict' in how these two OS's manage or complete with such
system files/folders/namespace items, or something.

Thanks for you previous reply.

Eugenia

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:OC5z8XDAIHA.1168@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you reduce the
> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages serve up
> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the TIF
> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>
> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for Windows NT
> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
Perhaps
> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have you
> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen this
> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> > Hi.
> >
> > W98se.
> >
> > My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute. I was
> > looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer resembled
the
> > regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more alphanumerically
named
> > subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in WinXP.
> > i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
> >
> > I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me the
> > same
> > result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary Internet
Files
> > /
> > Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue persists.
:-(
> >
> > Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once rebooted,
> > although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are also 4
> > sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They are
void
> > of
> > temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
file.
> >
> > As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which might
> > assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its customary
large
> > quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders were
all
> > which were created, despite the fact that the number of different types
of
> > websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
> > Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
> >
> > I should add that normally, the stored location of the TIF's/Content.IE5
> > is
> > in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that mysteriously,
> > the
> > location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
where
> > it
> > was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back to
> > it's
> > all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists despite all
> > kinds of techniques to fix it..
> >
> > This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone help me
> > with
> > some pointers on how I might rectify this?
> >
> > Many thanks for reading this and helping.
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Angel]

Hi Everyone,
About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do anything on
the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my security to
"accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO protection. I
had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it to100. I am on their
DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use the IE. I can use
Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not used it for that long.
IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before it comes up with "page
cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT and they all had different
suggestions.
Angel

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go without
> having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to the TIF, the
> better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my TIF to 100 MB.
>
> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the system
> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to
simply
> reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't (yet) come
> across an authoritative, fully documented article that spells out exactly
> what size TIF that is.
>
> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the TIF
to
> 50 or 100 MB, or so.
>
> glee wrote:
> > As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
noticable
> > difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser performance
and
> > page load speed, either on my home computers or on those at work which
> used
> > dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
> >
> > I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have
played
> a
> > part. http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
> > --
> > Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> > http://dts-l.org/
> > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >
> >
> > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
> >> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web
page
> >> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular web
> >> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on a
> >> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for
the
> >> new stuff)
> >>
> >> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct function
of
> >> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you
get
> to
> >> wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the page
> content
> >> is reloaded into the TIF).
> >>
> >> glee wrote:
> >>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at 26400)
> for
> >>> nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never saw
> the
> >>> least difference when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV. I
> >> always
> >>> recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up connection,
> and
> >>> usually smaller with high speed Internet (cable, DSL). Of course, I
> also
> >>> usually recommend another browser than IE. -)
> >>> --
> >>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I
> >> think
> >>>> maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load stuff in
> >> from
> >>>> the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and having a
> somewhat
> >>>> larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined the
point
> >> where
> >>>> it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
> >>>>
> >>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
reduce
> >> the
> >>>>> size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and web-pages
> serve
> >> up
> >>>>> fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the larger the
TIF
> >>>>> capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
Windows
> >> NT
> >>>>> versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for you.
> >>>> Perhaps
> >>>>> some utility that you installed to guard your internet traffic? Have
> you
> >>>>> recently installed any such item? Or any other major app? I've seen
> this
> >>>>> effect, but never pinned down the cause.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> >>>>> www.grystmill.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> Hi.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> W98se.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute.
I
> >> was
> >>>>>> looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer
> resembled
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more
alphanumerically
> >>>> named
> >>>>>> subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5 that one might find in
> >> WinXP.
> >>>>>> i.e. - generally having roughly 4 alphanumeric subfolders.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me
> the
> >>>>>> same
> >>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
Internet
> >>>> Files
> >>>>>> /
> >>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
> persists.
> >>>> :-(
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
rebooted,
> >>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are
also
> 4
> >>>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They
are
> >> void
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
> >> file.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which
> might
> >>>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its
customary
> >>>> large
> >>>>>> quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4 subfolders
> were
> >>>> all
> >>>>>> which were created, despite the fact that the number of different
> types
> >>>> of
> >>>>>> websites /images/ graphics/ banners /etc should have easily caused
> >>>>>> Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
> >> TIF's/Content.IE5
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
> mysteriously,
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
> >> where
> >>>>>> it
> >>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back
> to
> >>>>>> it's
> >>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
despite
> >> all
> >>>>>> kinds of techniques to fix it..
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone
help
> me
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

I don't think your problem below is due to the TIF size.
However, one might possibly suspect a "corrupted" TIF, and that would be
different, (and you can rebuild it). But I don't see how "page cannot be
displayed" is related to the TIF size or TIF unless you have a corrupted
TIF, in which case you could try clearing it out and letting it rebuild
itself. I think a TIF setting of 1000 MB is a bit much, however.

Angel wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do anything
on
> the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my security to
> "accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO protection.
I
> had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it to100. I am on their
> DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use the IE. I can use
> Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not used it for that
long.
> IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before it comes up with "page
> cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT and they all had different
> suggestions.
> Angel
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go
without
>> having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to the TIF, the
>> better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my TIF to 100 MB.
>>
>> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the system
>> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to
simply
>> reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't (yet) come
>> across an authoritative, fully documented article that spells out exactly
>> what size TIF that is.
>>
>> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the TIF
to
>> 50 or 100 MB, or so.
>>
>> glee wrote:
>>> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
noticable
>>> difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser performance
and
>>> page load speed, either on my home computers or on those at work which
used
>>> dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
>>>
>>> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have
played a
>>> part. http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
>>> --
>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
>>>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web
page
>>>> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular web
>>>> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on a
>>>> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for
the
>>>> new stuff)
>>>>
>>>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct function
of
>>>> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you
get to
>>>> wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the page
>>>> content is reloaded into the TIF).
>>>>
>>>> glee wrote:
>>>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at 26400)
for
>>>>> nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never saw
the
>>>>> least difference when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV. I
>>>>> always recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up
>>>>> connection, and usually smaller with high speed Internet (cable, DSL).
>>>>> Of course, I also usually recommend another browser than IE. -)
>>>>> --
>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up, I
>>>>>> think maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load
stuff
>>>>>> in from the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and
having a
>>>>>> somewhat larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet determined
>>>>>> the point where it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
reduce
>>>>>>> the size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and
web-pages
>>>>>>> serve up fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the
larger
>>>>>>> the TIF capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
Windows
>>>>>>> NT versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for
you.
>>>>>>> Perhaps some utility that you installed to guard your internet
traffic?
>>>>>>> Have you recently installed any such item? Or any other major app?
I've
>>>>>>> seen this effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> W98se.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar attribute.
I
>>>>>>>> was looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer
>>>>>>>> resembled the regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more
>>>>>>>> alphanumerically named subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5
that
>>>>>>>> one might find in WinXP. i.e. - generally having roughly 4
>>>>>>>> alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving me
the
>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
Internet
>>>>>>>> Files /
>>>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
persists.
>>>>>>>> :-(
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
rebooted,
>>>>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are
also 4
>>>>>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They
are
>>>>>>>> void of
>>>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a Desktop.ini
>>>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which
might
>>>>>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its
customary
>>>>>>>> large quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4
>>>>>>>> subfolders were all which were created, despite the fact that the
>>>>>>>> number of different types of websites /images/ graphics/ banners
/etc
>>>>>>>> should have easily caused Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
>>>>>>>> TIF's/Content.IE5 is
>>>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
mysteriously,
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That was
>>>>>>>> where it
>>>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it back
to
>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
despite
>>>>>>>> all kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone
help me
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Angel]

Hi Bill,
I would not use that large TIF. I use the 100. I really did not do that
large TIF file, they also wanted me to accept all cookies. NO, I don't think
so!! Wouldn't "accepting all cookies" cause problems with Malware, etc? I do
not think that they know how to help. My Temp file has "desktop.ini" in it.
The last time I cleared it out I had a problem with my computer and had to
go to backup. I really do not want to do that again. Any suggestions?
Angel

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uGLYNkYAIHA.3848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> I don't think your problem below is due to the TIF size.
> However, one might possibly suspect a "corrupted" TIF, and that would be
> different, (and you can rebuild it). But I don't see how "page cannot
be
> displayed" is related to the TIF size or TIF unless you have a corrupted
> TIF, in which case you could try clearing it out and letting it rebuild
> itself. I think a TIF setting of 1000 MB is a bit much, however.

>
> Angel wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> > About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do
anything
> on
> > the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my security to
> > "accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO
protection.
> I
> > had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it to100. I am on their
> > DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use the IE. I can use
> > Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not used it for that
> long.
> > IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before it comes up with "page
> > cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT and they all had
different
> > suggestions.
> > Angel
> >
> > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go
> without
> >> having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to the TIF, the
> >> better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my TIF to 100
MB.
> >>
> >> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the
system
> >> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to
> simply
> >> reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't (yet) come
> >> across an authoritative, fully documented article that spells out
exactly
> >> what size TIF that is.
> >>
> >> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the
TIF
> to
> >> 50 or 100 MB, or so.
> >>
> >> glee wrote:
> >>> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
> noticable
> >>> difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser performance
> and
> >>> page load speed, either on my home computers or on those at work which
> used
> >>> dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
> >>>
> >>> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have
> played a
> >>> part. http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
> >>> --
> >>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
> >>>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web
> page
> >>>> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular
web
> >>>> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on
a
> >>>> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for
> the
> >>>> new stuff)
> >>>>
> >>>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct
function
> of
> >>>> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you
> get to
> >>>> wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the page
> >>>> content is reloaded into the TIF).
> >>>>
> >>>> glee wrote:
> >>>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at
26400)
> for
> >>>>> nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I never
saw
> the
> >>>>> least difference when I experimented with making it larger. YMMV.
I
> >>>>> always recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a dial-up
> >>>>> connection, and usually smaller with high speed Internet (cable,
DSL).
> >>>>> Of course, I also usually recommend another browser than IE. -)
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>>>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up,
I
> >>>>>> think maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load
> stuff
> >>>>>> in from the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up, and
> having a
> >>>>>> somewhat larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet
determined
> >>>>>> the point where it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
> reduce
> >>>>>>> the size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and
> web-pages
> >>>>>>> serve up fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the
> larger
> >>>>>>> the TIF capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
> Windows
> >>>>>>> NT versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for
> you.
> >>>>>>> Perhaps some utility that you installed to guard your internet
> traffic?
> >>>>>>> Have you recently installed any such item? Or any other major app?
> I've
> >>>>>>> seen this effect, but never pinned down the cause.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> >>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>> Hi.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> W98se.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar
attribute.
> I
> >>>>>>>> was looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer
> >>>>>>>> resembled the regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more
> >>>>>>>> alphanumerically named subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5
> that
> >>>>>>>> one might find in WinXP. i.e. - generally having roughly 4
> >>>>>>>> alphanumeric subfolders.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving
me
> the
> >>>>>>>> same
> >>>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
> Internet
> >>>>>>>> Files /
> >>>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
> persists.
> >>>>>>>> :-(
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
> rebooted,
> >>>>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are
> also 4
> >>>>>>>> sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew. They
> are
> >>>>>>>> void of
> >>>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a
Desktop.ini
> >>>>>>>> file.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which
> might
> >>>>>>>> assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its
> customary
> >>>>>>>> large quantity of different sub-folders, but to no avail. 4
> >>>>>>>> subfolders were all which were created, despite the fact that the
> >>>>>>>> number of different types of websites /images/ graphics/ banners
> /etc
> >>>>>>>> should have easily caused Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
> >>>>>>>> TIF's/Content.IE5 is
> >>>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
> mysteriously,
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That
was
> >>>>>>>> where it
> >>>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it
back
> to
> >>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
> despite
> >>>>>>>> all kinds of techniques to fix it..
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone
> help me
> >>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

I guess one significant point is whether or not your problem may be due to a
corrupted TIF. Others might weigh in on this.

But if you're willing, you can always clear out the TIF in IE, and then boot
into true DOS mode and use deltree down there to completely delete the TIF
(but be sure to run smartdrv first), and then have a brand new TIF after
rebooting. And I don't think you have anything to lose that way. I
assume you know the procedure.

The deletion of desktop.ini file in the root of the TIF when doing that has
never presented a problem for me, and I've done this clean TIF thing several
times.

Angel wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> I would not use that large TIF. I use the 100. I really did not do that
> large TIF file, they also wanted me to accept all cookies. NO, I don't
think
> so!! Wouldn't "accepting all cookies" cause problems with Malware, etc? I
do
> not think that they know how to help. My Temp file has "desktop.ini" in
it.
> The last time I cleared it out I had a problem with my computer and had to
> go to backup. I really do not want to do that again. Any suggestions?
> Angel
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:uGLYNkYAIHA.3848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> I don't think your problem below is due to the TIF size.
>> However, one might possibly suspect a "corrupted" TIF, and that would be
>> different, (and you can rebuild it). But I don't see how "page cannot
be
>> displayed" is related to the TIF size or TIF unless you have a corrupted
>> TIF, in which case you could try clearing it out and letting it rebuild
>> itself. I think a TIF setting of 1000 MB is a bit much, however.
>
>>
>> Angel wrote:
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>> About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do
anything on
>>> the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my security to
>>> "accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO
protection. I
>>> had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it to100. I am on their
>>> DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use the IE. I can use
>>> Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not used it for that
long.
>>> IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before it comes up with "page
>>> cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT and they all had
different
>>> suggestions.
>>> Angel
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go
without
>>>> having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to the TIF, the
>>>> better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my TIF to 100
MB.
>>>>
>>>> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the
system
>>>> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to
simply
>>>> reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't (yet) come
>>>> across an authoritative, fully documented article that spells out
exactly
>>>> what size TIF that is.
>>>>
>>>> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the
TIF to
>>>> 50 or 100 MB, or so.
>>>>
>>>> glee wrote:
>>>>> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
noticable
>>>>> difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser performance
and
>>>>> page load speed, either on my home computers or on those at work which
>>>>> used dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have
>>>>> played a part. http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
>>>>> --
>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually gets
>>>>>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that web
page
>>>>>> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular
web
>>>>>> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more on
a
>>>>>> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room for
the
>>>>>> new stuff)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct
function of
>>>>>> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer you
get
>>>>>> to wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the
page
>>>>>> content is reloaded into the TIF).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> glee wrote:
>>>>>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at
26400)
>>>>>>> for nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I
never
>>>>>>> saw the least difference when I experimented with making it larger.
>>>>>>> YMMV. I always recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a
>>>>>>> dial-up connection, and usually smaller with high speed Internet
>>>>>>> (cable, DSL). Of course, I also usually recommend another browser
than
>>>>>>> IE. -) --
>>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on dial-up,
I
>>>>>>>> think maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to load
>>>>>>>> stuff in from the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up,
and
>>>>>>>> having a somewhat larger cache still seems to help. I haven't yet
>>>>>>>> determined the point where it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.

>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
reduce
>>>>>>>>> the size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and
web-pages
>>>>>>>>> serve up fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the
larger
>>>>>>>>> the TIF capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through it.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
Windows
>>>>>>>>> NT versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change for
>>>>>>>>> you. Perhaps some utility that you installed to guard your
internet
>>>>>>>>> traffic? Have you recently installed any such item? Or any other
>>>>>>>>> major app? I've seen this effect, but never pinned down the cause.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> W98se.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar
attribute. I
>>>>>>>>>> was looking for something in there and noticed that it no longer
>>>>>>>>>> resembled the regular appearance, where one might find 10 or more
>>>>>>>>>> alphanumerically named subfolders. It looked like the Content.IE5
>>>>>>>>>> that one might find in WinXP. i.e. - generally having roughly 4
>>>>>>>>>> alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving
me
>>>>>>>>>> the same
>>>>>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
Internet
>>>>>>>>>> Files /
>>>>>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
>>>>>>>>>> persists. :-(
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
rebooted,
>>>>>>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are
also
>>>>>>>>>> 4 sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew.
They
>>>>>>>>>> are void of
>>>>>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a
Desktop.ini
>>>>>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those which
>>>>>>>>>> might assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create its
>>>>>>>>>> customary large quantity of different sub-folders, but to no
avail.
>>>>>>>>>> 4 subfolders were all which were created, despite the fact that
the
>>>>>>>>>> number of different types of websites /images/ graphics/ banners
/etc
>>>>>>>>>> should have easily caused Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
>>>>>>>>>> TIF's/Content.IE5 is
>>>>>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
>>>>>>>>>> mysteriously, the
>>>>>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That
was
>>>>>>>>>> where it
>>>>>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it
back
>>>>>>>>>> to it's
>>>>>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
despite
>>>>>>>>>> all kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone
help
>>>>>>>>>> me with
>>>>>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Angel]

Hi Bill,
What is Smartdrv?
Angel

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ewyzqDhAIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I guess one significant point is whether or not your problem may be due to
a
> corrupted TIF. Others might weigh in on this.
>
> But if you're willing, you can always clear out the TIF in IE, and then
boot
> into true DOS mode and use deltree down there to completely delete the TIF
> (but be sure to run smartdrv first), and then have a brand new TIF after
> rebooting. And I don't think you have anything to lose that way. I
> assume you know the procedure.
>
> The deletion of desktop.ini file in the root of the TIF when doing that
has
> never presented a problem for me, and I've done this clean TIF thing
several
> times.
>
> Angel wrote:
> > Hi Bill,
> > I would not use that large TIF. I use the 100. I really did not do
that
> > large TIF file, they also wanted me to accept all cookies. NO, I don't
> think
> > so!! Wouldn't "accepting all cookies" cause problems with Malware, etc?
I
> do
> > not think that they know how to help. My Temp file has "desktop.ini" in
> it.
> > The last time I cleared it out I had a problem with my computer and had
to
> > go to backup. I really do not want to do that again. Any suggestions?
> > Angel
> >
> > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:uGLYNkYAIHA.3848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >> I don't think your problem below is due to the TIF size.
> >> However, one might possibly suspect a "corrupted" TIF, and that would
be
> >> different, (and you can rebuild it). But I don't see how "page
cannot
> be
> >> displayed" is related to the TIF size or TIF unless you have a
corrupted
> >> TIF, in which case you could try clearing it out and letting it rebuild
> >> itself. I think a TIF setting of 1000 MB is a bit much, however.
> >
> >>
> >> Angel wrote:
> >>> Hi Everyone,
> >>> About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do
> anything on
> >>> the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my security
to
> >>> "accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO
> protection. I
> >>> had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it to100. I am on
their
> >>> DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use the IE. I can use
> >>> Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not used it for that
> long.
> >>> IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before it comes up with
"page
> >>> cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT and they all had
> different
> >>> suggestions.
> >>> Angel
> >>>
> >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >>>> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go
> without
> >>>> having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to the TIF,
the
> >>>> better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my TIF to 100
> MB.
> >>>>
> >>>> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the
> system
> >>>> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to
> simply
> >>>> reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't (yet)
come
> >>>> across an authoritative, fully documented article that spells out
> exactly
> >>>> what size TIF that is.
> >>>>
> >>>> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the
> TIF to
> >>>> 50 or 100 MB, or so.
> >>>>
> >>>> glee wrote:
> >>>>> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
> noticable
> >>>>> difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser
performance
> and
> >>>>> page load speed, either on my home computers or on those at work
which
> >>>>> used dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have
> >>>>> played a part.
http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>>>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually
gets
> >>>>>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that
web
> page
> >>>>>> (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some regular
> web
> >>>>>> searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10 MB or more
on
> a
> >>>>>> single day (meaning some content is being dumped out to make room
for
> the
> >>>>>> new stuff)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct
> function of
> >>>>>> how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer
you
> get
> >>>>>> to wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait until the
> page
> >>>>>> content is reloaded into the TIF).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> glee wrote:
> >>>>>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at
> 26400)
> >>>>>>> for nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I
> never
> >>>>>>> saw the least difference when I experimented with making it
larger.
> >>>>>>> YMMV. I always recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a
> >>>>>>> dial-up connection, and usually smaller with high speed Internet
> >>>>>>> (cable, DSL). Of course, I also usually recommend another browser
> than
> >>>>>>> IE. -) --
> >>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on
dial-up,
> I
> >>>>>>>> think maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to
load
> >>>>>>>> stuff in from the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up,
> and
> >>>>>>>> having a somewhat larger cache still seems to help. I haven't
yet
> >>>>>>>> determined the point where it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.
>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
> reduce
> >>>>>>>>> the size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB and
> web-pages
> >>>>>>>>> serve up fine. More than that is a waste of space and time (the
> larger
> >>>>>>>>> the TIF capacity, the longer it takes for IE to sort through
it.)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
> Windows
> >>>>>>>>> NT versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the change
for
> >>>>>>>>> you. Perhaps some utility that you installed to guard your
> internet
> >>>>>>>>> traffic? Have you recently installed any such item? Or any other
> >>>>>>>>> major app? I've seen this effect, but never pinned down the
cause.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> >>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> W98se.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar
> attribute. I
> >>>>>>>>>> was looking for something in there and noticed that it no
longer
> >>>>>>>>>> resembled the regular appearance, where one might find 10 or
more
> >>>>>>>>>> alphanumerically named subfolders. It looked like the
Content.IE5
> >>>>>>>>>> that one might find in WinXP. i.e. - generally having roughly 4
> >>>>>>>>>> alphanumeric subfolders.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving
> me
> >>>>>>>>>> the same
> >>>>>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
> Internet
> >>>>>>>>>> Files /
> >>>>>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
> >>>>>>>>>> persists. :-(
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
> rebooted,
> >>>>>>>>>> although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created, there are
> also
> >>>>>>>>>> 4 sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get created anew.
> They
> >>>>>>>>>> are void of
> >>>>>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a
> Desktop.ini
> >>>>>>>>>> file.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those
which
> >>>>>>>>>> might assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create
its
> >>>>>>>>>> customary large quantity of different sub-folders, but to no
> avail.
> >>>>>>>>>> 4 subfolders were all which were created, despite the fact that
> the
> >>>>>>>>>> number of different types of websites /images/ graphics/
banners
> /etc
> >>>>>>>>>> should have easily caused Content.IE5 subfolders to mutiply.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
> >>>>>>>>>> TIF's/Content.IE5 is
> >>>>>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
> >>>>>>>>>> mysteriously, the
> >>>>>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That
> was
> >>>>>>>>>> where it
> >>>>>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it
> back
> >>>>>>>>>> to it's
> >>>>>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
> despite
> >>>>>>>>>> all kinds of techniques to fix it..
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone
> help
> >>>>>>>>>> me with
> >>>>>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

It's a dos-based exe program that you have in the \windows folder that
caches a lot of the dish reading and writing activity, so that the hard
drive doesn't go out and read in each file individually and separately in
time, but instead, reads in (or writes) a whole bunch of files in a cache,
for a large group (like 64K of memory's worth at a time, IIRC). Makes a
HUGE difference down there when you end up deleting thousands of small
files. Once I forgot to invoke smartdrv down there (at the command
prompt) before doing the TIF deltree, and it took perhaps 15 minutes for the
TIF to get all the files deleted, vs, perhaps a minute or two.

But before you do any of this in DOS, assuming you do, be sure to first use
IE to clear the cache first to make it even quicker (by deleting most of the
files there). Then you can reboot into true DOS and do the complete
cleanup.

Angel wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> What is Smartdrv?
> Angel
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:ewyzqDhAIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I guess one significant point is whether or not your problem may be due
to a
>> corrupted TIF. Others might weigh in on this.
>>
>> But if you're willing, you can always clear out the TIF in IE, and then
boot
>> into true DOS mode and use deltree down there to completely delete the
TIF
>> (but be sure to run smartdrv first), and then have a brand new TIF after
>> rebooting. And I don't think you have anything to lose that way. I
>> assume you know the procedure.
>>
>> The deletion of desktop.ini file in the root of the TIF when doing that
has
>> never presented a problem for me, and I've done this clean TIF thing
several
>> times.
>>
>> Angel wrote:
>>> Hi Bill,
>>> I would not use that large TIF. I use the 100. I really did not do
that
>>> large TIF file, they also wanted me to accept all cookies. NO, I don't
think
>>> so!! Wouldn't "accepting all cookies" cause problems with Malware, etc?
I do
>>> not think that they know how to help. My Temp file has "desktop.ini" in
it.
>>> The last time I cleared it out I had a problem with my computer and had
to
>>> go to backup. I really do not want to do that again. Any suggestions?
>>> Angel
>>>
>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:uGLYNkYAIHA.3848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> I don't think your problem below is due to the TIF size.
>>>> However, one might possibly suspect a "corrupted" TIF, and that would
be
>>>> different, (and you can rebuild it). But I don't see how "page
cannot be
>>>> displayed" is related to the TIF size or TIF unless you have a
corrupted
>>>> TIF, in which case you could try clearing it out and letting it rebuild
>>>> itself. I think a TIF setting of 1000 MB is a bit much, however.

>>>>
>>>> Angel wrote:
>>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>>> About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do
anything
>>>>> on the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my
security
>>>>> to "accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO
>>>>> protection. I had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it
to100.
>>>>> I am on their DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use the
>>>>> IE. I can use Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not
used
>>>>> it for that long. IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before it
>>>>> comes up with "page cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT
and
>>>>> they all had different suggestions.
>>>>> Angel
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go
>>>>>> without having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to
the
>>>>>> TIF, the better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my
TIF
>>>>>> to 100 MB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the
system
>>>>>> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than to
>>>>>> simply reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't
>>>>>> (yet) come across an authoritative, fully documented article that
spells
>>>>>> out exactly what size TIF that is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting the
TIF
>>>>>> to 50 or 100 MB, or so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> glee wrote:
>>>>>>> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
>>>>>>> noticable difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of browser
>>>>>>> performance and page load speed, either on my home computers or on
>>>>>>> those at work which used dial-up for a period of time. Again, YMMV.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may have
>>>>>>> played a part.
> http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually
gets
>>>>>>>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that
web
>>>>>>>> page (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some
>>>>>>>> regular web searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by 10
MB
>>>>>>>> or more on a single day (meaning some content is being dumped out
to
>>>>>>>> make room for the new stuff)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct
function
>>>>>>>> of how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the longer
>>>>>>>> you get to wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait
until
>>>>>>>> the page content is reloaded into the TIF).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> glee wrote:
>>>>>>>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at
26400)
>>>>>>>>> for nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I
never
>>>>>>>>> saw the least difference when I experimented with making it
larger.
>>>>>>>>> YMMV. I always recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for a
>>>>>>>>> dial-up connection, and usually smaller with high speed Internet
>>>>>>>>> (cable, DSL). Of course, I also usually recommend another browser
than
>>>>>>>>> IE. -) --
>>>>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
>>>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
>>>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on
dial-up, I
>>>>>>>>>> think maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to
load
>>>>>>>>>> stuff in from the web pages is often quite noticeable on dial-up,
and
>>>>>>>>>> having a somewhat larger cache still seems to help. I haven't
yet
>>>>>>>>>> determined the point where it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100 MB.

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
>>>>>>>>>>> reduce the size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB
and
>>>>>>>>>>> web-pages serve up fine. More than that is a waste of space and
>>>>>>>>>>> time (the larger the TIF capacity, the longer it takes for IE to
>>>>>>>>>>> sort through it.)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
>>>>>>>>>>> Windows NT versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make the
>>>>>>>>>>> change for you. Perhaps some utility that you installed to guard
>>>>>>>>>>> your internet traffic? Have you recently installed any such
item?
>>>>>>>>>>> Or any other major app? I've seen this effect, but never pinned
>>>>>>>>>>> down the cause.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> W98se.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar
attribute.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was looking for something in there and noticed that it no
longer
>>>>>>>>>>>> resembled the regular appearance, where one might find 10 or
more
>>>>>>>>>>>> alphanumerically named subfolders. It looked like the
Content.IE5
>>>>>>>>>>>> that one might find in WinXP. i.e. - generally having roughly 4
>>>>>>>>>>>> alphanumeric subfolders.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up giving
me
>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
>>>>>>>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet Files /
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> persists. :-(
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
>>>>>>>>>>>> rebooted, although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly created,
>>>>>>>>>>>> there are also 4 sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also get
>>>>>>>>>>>> created anew. They are void of
>>>>>>>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a
Desktop.ini
>>>>>>>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those
which
>>>>>>>>>>>> might assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create
its
>>>>>>>>>>>> customary large quantity of different sub-folders, but to no
avail.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4 subfolders were all which were created, despite the fact that
the
>>>>>>>>>>>> number of different types of websites /images/ graphics/
banners
>>>>>>>>>>>> /etc should have easily caused Content.IE5 subfolders to
mutiply.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> TIF's/Content.IE5 is
>>>>>>>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
>>>>>>>>>>>> mysteriously, the
>>>>>>>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings. That
was
>>>>>>>>>>>> where it
>>>>>>>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed it
back
>>>>>>>>>>>> to it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
>>>>>>>>>>>> despite all kinds of techniques to fix it..
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>> help me with
>>>>>>>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.

 

[Angel]

Hi Bill,
I am still having trouble. Thinking of deleting the Temp file. I forgot
how to do it from the Windows side. Please refresh my memory.
Angel

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u%23K%23HujAIHA.4712@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> It's a dos-based exe program that you have in the \windows folder that
> caches a lot of the dish reading and writing activity, so that the hard
> drive doesn't go out and read in each file individually and separately in
> time, but instead, reads in (or writes) a whole bunch of files in a cache,
> for a large group (like 64K of memory's worth at a time, IIRC). Makes
a
> HUGE difference down there when you end up deleting thousands of small
> files. Once I forgot to invoke smartdrv down there (at the command
> prompt) before doing the TIF deltree, and it took perhaps 15 minutes for
the
> TIF to get all the files deleted, vs, perhaps a minute or two.
>
> But before you do any of this in DOS, assuming you do, be sure to first
use
> IE to clear the cache first to make it even quicker (by deleting most of
the
> files there). Then you can reboot into true DOS and do the complete
> cleanup.
>
> Angel wrote:
> > Hi Bill,
> > What is Smartdrv?
> > Angel
> >
> > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:ewyzqDhAIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> I guess one significant point is whether or not your problem may be due
> to a
> >> corrupted TIF. Others might weigh in on this.
> >>
> >> But if you're willing, you can always clear out the TIF in IE, and then
> boot
> >> into true DOS mode and use deltree down there to completely delete the
> TIF
> >> (but be sure to run smartdrv first), and then have a brand new TIF
after
> >> rebooting. And I don't think you have anything to lose that way.
I
> >> assume you know the procedure.
> >>
> >> The deletion of desktop.ini file in the root of the TIF when doing that
> has
> >> never presented a problem for me, and I've done this clean TIF thing
> several
> >> times.
> >>
> >> Angel wrote:
> >>> Hi Bill,
> >>> I would not use that large TIF. I use the 100. I really did not do
> that
> >>> large TIF file, they also wanted me to accept all cookies. NO, I don't
> think
> >>> so!! Wouldn't "accepting all cookies" cause problems with Malware,
etc?
> I do
> >>> not think that they know how to help. My Temp file has "desktop.ini"
in
> it.
> >>> The last time I cleared it out I had a problem with my computer and
had
> to
> >>> go to backup. I really do not want to do that again. Any suggestions?
> >>> Angel
> >>>
> >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:uGLYNkYAIHA.3848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >>>> I don't think your problem below is due to the TIF size.
> >>>> However, one might possibly suspect a "corrupted" TIF, and that would
> be
> >>>> different, (and you can rebuild it). But I don't see how "page
> cannot be
> >>>> displayed" is related to the TIF size or TIF unless you have a
> corrupted
> >>>> TIF, in which case you could try clearing it out and letting it
rebuild
> >>>> itself. I think a TIF setting of 1000 MB is a bit much, however.
>
> >>>>
> >>>> Angel wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Everyone,
> >>>>> About TIF file size, I have had problem going to my IE to do
> anything
> >>>>> on the web. I called ATT and one of the techs told me to set my
> security
> >>>>> to "accept all cookies" and to set my TIF to 1000. This means NO
> >>>>> protection. I had it set at 50 before this problem and I reset it
> to100.
> >>>>> I am on their DSL. Have had problems for over a week trying to use
the
> >>>>> IE. I can use Outlook Express for a long while, I think. I have not
> used
> >>>>> it for that long. IE can be used for about 5 to 10 minutes before
it
> >>>>> comes up with "page cannot be displayed".I talked to 3 techs at ATT
> and
> >>>>> they all had different suggestions.
> >>>>> Angel
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:u1qp#UMAIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> I use Cache Sentry Pro too. But as I said, the longer I can go
> >>>>>> without having to wait for the page data to be brought in again to
> the
> >>>>>> TIF, the better. (well, up to a point, as I've limited my
> TIF
> >>>>>> to 100 MB.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And as has been noted, there may be a point at which it takes the
> system
> >>>>>> longer to search thru the TIF to see if its in there already than
to
> >>>>>> simply reload in the page (even on dial-up). Although I haven't
> >>>>>> (yet) come across an authoritative, fully documented article that
> spells
> >>>>>> out exactly what size TIF that is.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Although, as has been suggested, many seem to recommend limiting
the
> TIF
> >>>>>> to 50 or 100 MB, or so.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> glee wrote:
> >>>>>>> As I said, I had it set to 50MB with dial-up and did not see any
> >>>>>>> noticable difference from having it set at 100MB in terms of
browser
> >>>>>>> performance and page load speed, either on my home computers or on
> >>>>>>> those at work which used dial-up for a period of time. Again,
YMMV.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I also used the Cache Sentry utility on my system, so that may
have
> >>>>>>> played a part.
> > http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry/index.html
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:ucsy82KAIHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>> The difference is noticeable because the TIF contents eventually
> gets
> >>>>>>>> replaced, and then you really notice it when you go back to that
> web
> >>>>>>>> page (since it has to reload it all in again). Just by some
> >>>>>>>> regular web searching I can easily get the TIF size to go up by
10
> MB
> >>>>>>>> or more on a single day (meaning some content is being dumped out
> to
> >>>>>>>> make room for the new stuff)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And how long it takes to reach that point in time is a direct
> function
> >>>>>>>> of how large your TIF is meaning, the larger your TIF, the
longer
> >>>>>>>> you get to wait! before you reach that point (of needing to wait
> until
> >>>>>>>> the page content is reloaded into the TIF).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> glee wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> FWIW, I was on a very slow dial-up connection (usually maxed at
> 26400)
> >>>>>>>>> for nearly nine years, and always had my TIF set at 50MB max. I
> never
> >>>>>>>>> saw the least difference when I experimented with making it
> larger.
> >>>>>>>>> YMMV. I always recommend a TIF value between 50MB and 100MB for
a
> >>>>>>>>> dial-up connection, and usually smaller with high speed Internet
> >>>>>>>>> (cable, DSL). Of course, I also usually recommend another
browser
> than
> >>>>>>>>> IE. -) --
> >>>>>>>>> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
> >>>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/
> >>>>>>>>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news:u1hx%23qGAIHA.4496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>>>> Probably generally a good idea, except for those of us on
> dial-up, I
> >>>>>>>>>> think maybe 100 MB is a bit better. The time it takes IE to
> load
> >>>>>>>>>> stuff in from the web pages is often quite noticeable on
dial-up,
> and
> >>>>>>>>>> having a somewhat larger cache still seems to help. I haven't
> yet
> >>>>>>>>>> determined the point where it doesn't, but I've stayed at 100
MB.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> If you have more than four of those sub-folders, I suggest you
> >>>>>>>>>>> reduce the size limit on the TIF folder. I use the figure 64MB
> and
> >>>>>>>>>>> web-pages serve up fine. More than that is a waste of space
and
> >>>>>>>>>>> time (the larger the TIF capacity, the longer it takes for IE
to
> >>>>>>>>>>> sort through it.)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The Local Settings folder indicates some application meant for
> >>>>>>>>>>> Windows NT versions (NT4, XP, 2K3 or Vista) decided to make
the
> >>>>>>>>>>> change for you. Perhaps some utility that you installed to
guard
> >>>>>>>>>>> your internet traffic? Have you recently installed any such
> item?
> >>>>>>>>>>> Or any other major app? I've seen this effect, but never
pinned
> >>>>>>>>>>> down the cause.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> >>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> "Eugenia" <noneofyour@beeswax.non> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>> news:OvlCF50$HHA.5360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> W98se.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> My Content.IE5 Folder and subfolders took on a peculiar
> attribute.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I was looking for something in there and noticed that it no
> longer
> >>>>>>>>>>>> resembled the regular appearance, where one might find 10 or
> more
> >>>>>>>>>>>> alphanumerically named subfolders. It looked like the
> Content.IE5
> >>>>>>>>>>>> that one might find in WinXP. i.e. - generally having roughly
4
> >>>>>>>>>>>> alphanumeric subfolders.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried everything: DOS Deltree - which still ends up
giving
> me
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the same
> >>>>>>>>>>>> result - and then simply deleting those folders (Temporary
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Internet Files /
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cookies / History) from another operating system. Same issue
> >>>>>>>>>>>> persists. :-(
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Even after performing the Deltree of Tempor~1 in DOS, once
> >>>>>>>>>>>> rebooted, although Index.dat and desktop.ini are newly
created,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> there are also 4 sub-folders within Content.IE5 which also
get
> >>>>>>>>>>>> created anew. They are void of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> temporary files, with the exception that each contain a
> Desktop.ini
> >>>>>>>>>>>> file.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> As a test, I browsed multitude of webpages (including those
> which
> >>>>>>>>>>>> might assist me) to see if I could get Content.IE5 to create
> its
> >>>>>>>>>>>> customary large quantity of different sub-folders, but to no
> avail.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 4 subfolders were all which were created, despite the fact
that
> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> number of different types of websites /images/ graphics/
> banners
> >>>>>>>>>>>> /etc should have easily caused Content.IE5 subfolders to
> mutiply.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I should add that normally, the stored location of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> TIF's/Content.IE5 is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> in C:\Windows, but eventually I noticed (much later) that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mysteriously, the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> location had somehow changed to C:\Windows\Local Settings.
That
> was
> >>>>>>>>>>>> where it
> >>>>>>>>>>>> was when I first noticed the 4 subfolder anomaly. I changed
it
> back
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to it's
> >>>>>>>>>>>> all-time normal location of C:\Windows. The problem persists
> >>>>>>>>>>>> despite all kinds of techniques to fix it..
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> This is a new problem I've never before encountered. Can
anyone
> >>>>>>>>>>>> help me with
> >>>>>>>>>>>> some pointers on how I might rectify this?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Many thanks for reading this and helping.
>
>