Home	Forums	What's new	Resources

Internet Explorer Cache Huge?

slinga - Jan 28, 2005

		slinga		Jan 28, 2005
			Hey guys, I got my laptop back from my little sis (to hold me over until my supercomputer gets here), and I was shocked to see she had filled up 98% of my 20 gig hard drive. Even more suprising was the fact that her music and graphics file took up less than 1 gig. Digging in deeper, I realized that MS Internet Explorer cache ("Temporary Internet Files") folder was takening tons and tons of space. I tried deleting it through windows and as well as clearing it from IE itself but it would crash on both. I then resorted to a good old dos prompt and the del /s command which seems to doing the trick. It's been running well over 1 hour on a Pentium 900 mhz processor. Anyone run into something similar? And yeah yeah I know switch to Firefox, I actually had installed it for my sister but she's a bit of a tard.

		racketboy		Jan 29, 2005
			The Windows Cleanup in the Accessories menu should clear it out. And for future reference: 1) Yes, get Firefox 2) There is a limitation option on the cache size in Internet Properties

		slinga		Jan 29, 2005
			I researched more into the problem, it appears that there is a bug with IE3-5 that cuz IE to not know what's in its cache. So when you clear the cache via a normal method (like within the browser) it doesn't delete everything because its already lost track of it. Anyway I recovered a little over 8 gigs in two hours. I should of probably just formatted, but I'm just using this too hold me off until my new machine gets here with SuSE 9.2 ::

		racketboy		Jan 29, 2005
			lol a bug in IE? I don't believe it!

		slinga		Jan 29, 2005
			My concern is why isn't it fixed? My IE 5 was patched fully as far as I know.

		racketboy		Jan 29, 2005
			Non-security patches for IE aren't a high priority for MS...

		Borisz		Jan 29, 2005
			It was probably fixed, in IE5.5 or IE6.

		Alexvrb		Feb 8, 2005
			Hence them no longer caring.

		mtxblau		Mar 4, 2005
			This is a troll question, but forgive me; slinga, have you tried NLD 9? I've downloaded all the isos but have yet to install it (my 9.2 is setup just right...). But anything to get the Ximian desktop back.... ...

		slinga		Mar 4, 2005
			Actually I have tried NLD (I used to download and burn linux ISOs at my last internship like crazy, but then again when it takes ~15 minutes to download a 700 meg iso why the hell not ). It didn't strike me as anything worthwhile. The only real difference I noticed is that the default GUI is not KDE, it's Gnome. I got bored with it and didn't play around with it. I don't really get Novell's marketing strategy here, why have have two separate distros? I mean let's be honest, what home user (willingly) actually uses XP Home? I say keep on refining SuSE in a corporate environment and release tools to make admining it easier. And it's not like there are stability issues, SuSE 9.2 still uses the 2.6.8 kernel. And if you really want to go after the big corporations release something like Gentoo's "emerge -U world" which patches the ENTIRE machine and ALL packages from the web. It's really something to behold and it'll be a dramatic decrease in TCO. I know Novell has Yast but that's still a long way off from emerge\portage. To bring this thread back on topic: The same 4 year-old laptop runs great and has PLENTY of free hard disk with a SuSE 9.2 install. It's been my only OS for about one month now

		mtxblau		Mar 5, 2005
			Well, having assumed both Ximian and SuSE, and I think Ximian was purchased for Connector - it's basically just a matter of finishing out Ximian's cycle before they incorporate it directly into SuSE. Ximian is technically independent of SuSE, and was developed for Redhat and Mandrake as well before it was purchased, so my thinking is that those companies which used Ximian as desktop can do a rollout contiguous with Novell's line of thinking. I only like Ximian for the integration. I didn't like that the one for 9.0 used only 2.2 (very dated) but currently it uses 2.6 - and the integration, if it's like 2.2, is outstanding. It's much more oriented for actually getting work 'done'. In regards to Yast, I think the whole APT thing works as well as emerge, and with synaptic maybe even moreso (just two mouse clicks). An admin can easily setup the apt.conf files and not have to worry about it - though I think it's all unofficial. Did you use SuSE 9.2 personal or pro, out of curiousity?

		slinga		Mar 12, 2005
			I use 9.2 Personal.