Jump to content

XP registry cleaners


Recommended Posts

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

I was referring to YOUR own self projection.

 

On second thought, forget it, as it's likely beyond your understanding, as

evidenced here and in several of your so-alleged (but completely

undocumented, and completely unsubstantiated), "rebuttal" posts). You have

my condolences.

 

Twayne wrote:

> lol, let's see here: You said you "predate" me. OK, several millions of

> other people do, too. And you try to use projection as a

> confrontational remark a couple times.

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

Twayne wrote:

>> "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message

>> news:%23WLZcRs1IHA.2384@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>

>>> Uhh, I think you lost it too, Bruce; the subject isn't "winXP"; it's

>>> registry cleaners.

>>

>> Actually, the subject is "XP registry cleaners."

>>

>>> I have experience back through 98, 95, 3.x, 6.22 and CP/M <snip>

>>

>> I'm pretty sure the point is that while registry cleaning may have

>> had a place in all the earlier operating systems, there is no evidence

>> supporting the premise that it is beneficial for PCs running XP. If

>> you have a link to a Web page that offers this evidence, I will be

>> happy to read it. I have used search engines a number of times, but

>> I've never been able to find such evidence. If you are able to

>> provide it, I would be interested in reading it.

>

> Actually, there is valid backing for using registry management on XP.

> It's not often needed and it usually isn't going to speed things up

> noticeably, but ... in some circumstances it is a godsend.

> I'm currently pondering whether to let brucey see some of the white

> papers and unbiased and even biased reviews in both directions yet.

> Stay tuned, I do intend to present them, just not quite yet.

>

> Call that what you want; I have a very low tolerance for misinformation

 

Then how do you tolerate some of the BS you have been spouting? Look

within, grasshopper.

Guest John John (MVP)
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

Twayne wrote:

> Do you use a C or a bar clamp on your mind?

 

Of course I do, it works way better than the "pop rivets" holding your

head together!

 

The plain and simple fact still remains that you haven't yet given us

any substantiated documentation to back up your claims and uneducated

opinions on the subject. Less than a few days ago you were claiming

that the registry could hold duplicate entries and less than a day ago

you were trying to boast about your "decades" of registry expertise by

trying to bring in Norton tools and CP/M & DOS 6.22 into the discussion.

'nough said, you're clueless about the registry and we all know it.

 

A sample of the kind of obscure but serious problems that can be caused

by registry cleaners can be seen in these articles:

 

The .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 installation fails on a computer that has the

..NET Framework 2.0 installed and that is running Windows XP, Windows

Server 2003, or Windows 2000

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951950

 

You receive a "Preparing to install" message when you try to start an

Office XP program or an Office 2000 program

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888637

 

Those are just a sample of the serious problems that can occur with

Microsoft products after the indiscriminate use of registry cleaners.

There is a slough of other Microsoft and third party applications that

can also be crippled by registry cleaners. Often these errors or

problems only pop up weeks or months after the indiscriminate use of

registry cleaners and the correlation or link to the registry cleaner is

far from obvious and one of the last thing that might be thought of as a

possible cause of the problem at hand. Those problems can baffle even

the most seasoned experts and more often than not the average users (and

seasoned expert) will find that the easiest or only way to repair the

problem is do do a repair install of the operating system, or worse yet,

a complete format and reinstall! So called experts who don't know any

better wouldn't know anything about those kind of problems because they

simply lack the proper skills and knowledge to troubleshoot these

problems, yet they feel that they are expert enough to be advising and

telling the even less informed that they should be running registry

cleaners!

 

In certain troubleshooting scenarios a registry cleaner may be a useful

tool in the hands of a knowledgeable individual, in the hands of a

clueless person or when used as a regular and utterly useless registry

cleaning routine they are nothing but an invitation for trouble.

Registry cleaners serve no useful purpose in the regular maintenance and

good housekeeping tool chest!

 

John

Guest Twayne
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

> Twayne wrote:

>

....

>

> The .NET Framework 2.0 SP1 installation fails on a computer that has

> the .NET Framework 2.0 installed and that is running Windows XP,

> Windows Server 2003, or Windows 2000

> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951950

 

Nothing to do with a decent registry cleaner. Go read it. I have also

used Norton on win2k so ...

>

> You receive a "Preparing to install" message when you try to start an

> Office XP program or an Office 2000 program

> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888637

 

And that refers to one specific, MS type cleaner which would be expected

to be buggy like any other app MS produces.

>

> Those are just a sample of the serious problems that can occur with

 

NO, it's a sample of two specific issues you've located, one irrelevant

and one typical of the kind of "serious problems" almost ANY MS product

can have caused by their own products.

 

Nothing definitive there; just anecdotal.

> Microsoft products after the indiscriminate use of registry cleaners.

 

Only YOU have talked about indiscriminate use. I never have. Nor has

anyone else.

 

....

 

You're really reaching hard with the rest of that.

> John

Guest Unknown
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

That explains it then!

"Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message

news:%23cHQeez1IHA.5944@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>> If indeed you do have decades of experience with registry cleaners

>> why do you continue to tout them? Are you insane?

>

> According to my definition of "tout", I don't, and haven't here. And yes,

> I probably am a little insane. Aren't you?

>

>

>> "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message

>> news:eo27wfs1IHA.3884@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>>>

>>>> I don't need to try them to konw they're crap.

>>>

>>> Now, that's a real piece of work there!

>>>

>>> Knowing the the

>>>> registry is an indexed database, I know that there is no possible

>>>> way for a registry cleaner, even if it did remove only orphaned

>>>> entries, could have any affect upon performance.

>>>

>>> Really? You know little about databases then.

>>> It CAN, under the right circumstances, especially at boot time,

>>> make a noticeable speed improvement, but ... I never said it would

>>> always improve performance; in fact, I said just the opposite; I

>>> said it seldom would. It's just a set of text files on disk and

>>> others created on the fly from what is on disk, so it's fast to

>>> execute. But even a text file can eventually have an impact on

>>> speed, especially at boot time. Interpolate the size of your

>>> registry, then increse it ten fold and see if you don't notice some

>>> minor differences here and there. Do right and you can pretty much

>>> slow things right down. It's very easy; you obviously don't

>>> understand the structure and methodology of the reigistry even from

>>> a high level. So it's indexed; big deal.

>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>> I have decades of use/experience and occasional research behind

>>>>> me;

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> I really, really doubt that, or you'd not resort to name-calling

>>>> instead of providing some evidence that registry cleaners do any

>>>> good,

>>>

>>> Nice set of innuendo by trimming, BTW. But I guess cornered people

>>> get like that. I have right and knowledge on my side, unlike you.

>>>

>>> That's also funny because I sent you plenty of "evidence" some time

>>> ago, which you chose to ignore. At that time I just dismissed you

>>> as a black hole not liking being called out but now I know what an

>>> idiot and closed mind you are, I'm not near as polite anymore. I

>>> believe it was just before the XP release if you want a timeframe to

>>> look for my post to you. You do archive, right? An important fella

>>> like you must. Oh, I forgot, you know everything and dont' need to

>>> keep any records.

>>>> whatsoever. (By the way, if you ever do find and produce links to

>>>> any sort of independent laboratory documentation to support the use

>>>> of registry cleaners, you'll be the very first person to ever have

>>>> done so.

>>>

>>> Nice thought, but a lie. I'd love to be "first" but if it exists,

>>> which it does, by definition then I cannot be the "first", right? Duhh!

>>> I've already sent you same but you chose not to respond to

>>> it. It's your turn now. Turn this away from confrontational and

>>> initiate some

>>> factual dialog; I'll take it into account and even do further

>>> research if I feel the need. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize, but not

>>> strongly because it'll mean you've had information at hand all along

>>> that you never chose to share with anyone, let alone when you're

>>> challenged on the subject. Hell, you've never even justified how you

>>> can install an application that uses the registry and registers

>>> components and objects in the registry and not get you liver

>>> quivering. It must really kill you that your registry is in

>>> constant flux of reads/writes the whole time you're using your

>>> computer. Lots of white papers exist on the subject. Lots of reviews

>>> and

>>> comparisons exist. Lots of blogs too, but I might's well listen to

>>> you if I'm going to use most blogs for a reference.

>>>

>>> And I've asked this of every snake oil salesman that's touted

>>>> registry cleaners.)

>>>

>>> I'd say that's statistically about a 99+% chance that's: Obviously

>>> another sweeping lie. "every", "always", "never", "none", etc.; you

>>> sure like those terms, don't you? OTOH, since there is no such

>>> thing as a "snake oil salesman" that's "touted registry cleaners",

>>> the whole sentence makes no sense and just drifts into oblivion read

>>> that way. I know what you wanted me to feel you said though, so

>>> you lied. Yes, I'm calling you a liar for that and a lot of other

>>> statements you've

>>> made. I challenge you to prove your point/s. It's your turn.

>

>

>

Guest John John (MVP)
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

Twayne wrote:

> Nothing definitive there; just anecdotal.

 

Yes, it's long been known that Microsoft is the habit of posting

"anecdotal" fixes for "anecdotal" problems in its Knowledge Base,

happens all the time. Luckily we have experts like you to sort these

things out...

 

John

Guest Twayne
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

> Twayne wrote:

>

>> Do you use a C or a bar clamp on your mind?

>

> Of course I do, it works way better than the "pop rivets" holding your

> head together!

>

> The plain and simple fact still remains that you haven't yet given us

> any substantiated documentation to back up your claims and uneducated

> opinions on the subject. Less than a few days ago you were claiming

> that the registry could hold duplicate entries and less than a day ago

> you were trying to boast about your "decades" of registry expertise by

> trying to bring in Norton tools and CP/M & DOS 6.22 into the

> discussion. 'nough said, you're clueless about the registry and we

> all know it.

....

 

Well, lies about things will never get you anywhere. I won't give you

any of the white papers but here a only a few of the links and excerpts

that are useful for such purposes. I'm using excerpts where you might

not be able to find the information buried in other good information. I

think most, excepting those with closed minds, will find this useful:

 

Note: I do not recommend nor encourage the use of any of these products,

I do not need nor want additional registry software over & above what I

currently have. These are simply a few of the resources I *might* use

if I were in the market for such things. Some are good, some are

unbiased, some not so. But they are informative. I will not post white

papers; you can go get those yourself:

=====================================================

 

http://www.bmighty.com/hardware_software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201400014&pgno=2

 

---------------------

You are here: silicon.com > Resources > White Papers > Silicon > White

Papers

 

White Papers White Papers

4 Myths about Windows XP Registry Cleanup

a.. Tags:

b.. maintenance,

c.. registry,

d.. tasks,

e.. points

Overview A proper approach to the registry maintenance and the most

essential registry care aspects are outlined in this article,

highlighting the key points the user should consider when choosing the

registry maintenance software and its usage plan. The article also

advises on what to look for in a reliable registry cleaner, and

clarifies the essence of registry maintenance tasks, unveiling pitfalls

the user might face. Intended for users of various qualification levels,

from beginners to advanced professionals.

 

Further White Paper Details Publisher AMUST Software File Format PDF

Date Published November 2005

Format White Papers

Topics N/A

 

--------------------------

 

http://www.bmighty.com/hardware_software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201400014&pgno=2

 

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=Registry+cleaner&i=50360,00.asp

 

http://www.regcure.com/media/regcurewhitepaper.pdf

 

 

 

-----------------------

 

Portable Registry Clean Expert 4.52

 

2007-09-16 09:13:00

 

Registry Clean Expert will clean your Windows Registry with ease and

boost your system performanceThe Windows registry is a database

repository for information about a computer's configuration. The

registry keep growing when you use Windows.As it does so, it attracts

obsolete and unnecessary information, and gradually becomes cluttered

and fragmented. With the growing of the registry, it can degrade the

performance of the whole system and cause many weird software

problems.Registry Clean Expert scans the Windows registry and finds

incorrect or obsolete information in the registry. By fixing these

obsolete information in Windows registry, your system will run faster

and error free.The backup/restore function of the tool let you backup

your whole Windows Registry so you can use itto restore the registry to

the current status in case you encounter some system failure. Besides

above, the startup and BHO organizer feature let you manage your startup

and IE BHO items with ease, and you c...

 

More About: Registry , Portable , Regis

 

-----------------------------

 

http://fileforum.betanews.com/review/1100194579/1/view

 

http://www.free-registry-cleaners.biz/ <==== looks OK but I never trust

..biz sites. MO

 

http://www.iobit.com/advancedwindowscare...

 

http://www.ccleaner.com/

 

http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?d...

 

http://www.pcfixreview.com/blog/category/registry-fix/

 

http://www.techweb.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=Registrycleaner

 

 

Now, I could add to that a rather long list of my own experiences and

use of registry cleaners on XP, some good, some not so, none destructive

because unless I know it's OK I won't run it, and 4 white papers, which

I won't share because you have to be a member to get them, else pay for

them. I think I referenced one above but I don't have that one; it's

also newer than the ones I have but two of mine reference XP.

In addition to that, I have a repair log that contains the records of

the use of a few different registry cleaners, none of which ever caused

any damage of any kind to any of the systems they were used on; all but

two of those systems are still in use today, the other two having gone

to Vi$tá.

 

Since I've also posted info on a lot of different regcleaners here I

feel I also need to add that cleaning the registry isn't really needed

the vast majority of the time. The registry is nothing but a text file

and can be read very fast even on slower machines; it's normally in the

order of single-digit megabytes of information.

Always be certain a cleaner can undo its changes in case you do

something stupid, and exhaust other possibilities for a problem first,

before reaching for the cleaner. BUT, when it's needed, a good cleaner

will make short work of getting a trashed or corrupted registry entry

back into working condition. There definitely ARE instances where a

regcleaner is a great thing to have. The best actual registry

protection for XP is actually to back up your System State; then you are

much less likely to ever need the cleaner OR to try to manually hack

your registry as the denizens here want you to do.

OTOH, there is nothing wrong with removing unused entries left behind

by uninstalls and deleted files either. Every added bit/nibble/byte of

information added to a disk drive is another location that can be

corrupted or accidentally used at some point in the future. And if at

boot time you're going throught several 20 second timeouts while the

system waits for something the registry or an ini said it wanted, but

it's been deleted, or corrupted by malware, whatever, it can have great

impacts on shortening boot times. Three times like that makes a full

minute of wasted time during boot.

It's not bad that slow boots happen; usually once it boots, all will

be fine. But, excessive boot times are indications of a problem and

problems in an OS should be looked into, IMO. The registry is as prone

to corruption as any other file on the disk drive of an equivalent size.

If you want to know the approximate size of your registry, back up a

System State. The registry is a large part of that system state, and

you can even look at the files IN the system state, to see what they

are. Which, by the way, is a good way to trash the backup if you open

it in editors, so use an old one if you aren't sufficiently experienced

to guarantee you won't change it in any way. Only use pure text editors

or hex editors for such things. Hex editors are freely available all

over the 'net too.

 

http://ezinearticles.com/?Windows-XP-Registry-Files-Revealed-Structure-And-Location&id=763552

 

http://www.billslinksandmore.com/win__xp_registry_info_.html

 

http://www.annoyances.org/exec/show/registry

 

http://www.theeldergeek.com/windows_xp_registry.htm

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry

 

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=263

============

 

 

Hex Editors: EXTREMELY DANGEROUS programs; be VERY careful!! RTFM!!

 

http://www.chmaas.handshake.de/delphi/freeware/xvi32/xvi32.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hex_editor

http://www.mh-nexus.de/hxd/

http://www.sweetscape.com/010editor/

http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~prewett/hexedit/

http://www.hexworkshop.com/

http://www.hhdsoftware.com/Products/home/hex-editor-free.html

 

 

ANYone could have looked any of these link up the same way I did. It's

not rocket science. If I didn't have the process automated, I wouldn't

have done this much but I wanted to make sure any links I provided were

working links w/o having to check each one. And in order to provide

both sides of the stories I did not read every link; so have fun with

the data and references.

 

Well, the lawn needs cutting, so think I'll go run the lawn tractor for

awhile. This is beginning to get boring now.

 

Twayne

Guest John John (MVP)
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

Twayne wrote:

> Well, lies about things will never get you anywhere. I won't give you

> any of the white papers but here a only a few of the links and excerpts

> that are useful for such purposes.

>

> ...and idiotic spam!....

 

Are you stupid or what! Posting SPAM and hype from the companies and

hucksters who sell these programs and suggesting that it is valid

research is about as dumb as one can get! Are you a retired tobacco

company executive or what? I can go through the research provided by

those tobacco companies in earlier days and by their research I can

assure you that cigarettes do not cause lung cancer. As a matter of

fact they are completely benign and even good for you, they help you

relax and they help you keep your weight down, an absolutely marvelous

product that should be used by anyone and everyone who has frayed nerves

or weight problems! And if I consult Ford advertising from days gone by

I can assure you that the Ford Pinto is a perfectly safe car that can

withstand any rear end collision! Fears about exploding Pintos are just

misguided opinions from GM customers... or GM executives! Ford says so,

so it must be true, after all would they ever sell cars that explode in

rear end collisions?

 

Geez, any fool would certainly know that there is little truth in

advertising and that companies will say anything to deflect criticism

away from their products and bolster their claims that their products

are worth buying, but only idiots would try to use advertising material

and attempt to present it as bona fide and trustworthy research! White

papers my ass! Looks more like toilet paper!

 

John

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

John John (MVP) wrote:

> Twayne wrote:

>

>> Nothing definitive there; just anecdotal.

>

> Yes, it's long been known that Microsoft is the habit of posting

> "anecdotal" fixes for "anecdotal" problems in its Knowledge Base,

> happens all the time. Luckily we have experts like you to sort these

> things out...

>

> John

 

ROFL!!

Guest ANONYMOUS
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

 

The only good registry cleaner is your Windows XP CD. You can reformat

your HD and do a clean install of WinXP and your registry will be as

clean as possible. In fact one would go further to say that your

Registry can't be cleaner!

 

You can then IMAGE your HD for future "cleaning".

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

 

 

Paulo Roberto wrote:

>Hi, can you recommend good free windows xp registry cleaners?

>

>

>

>

Guest Twayne
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

> Twayne wrote:

>

>> Well, lies about things will never get you anywhere. I won't give

>> you any of the white papers but here a only a few of the links and

>> excerpts that are useful for such purposes.

>>

>> ...and idiotic spam!....

>

> Are you stupid or what! Posting SPAM and hype from the companies and

> hucksters who sell these programs and suggesting that it is valid

> research is about as dumb as one can get! Are you a retired tobacco

> company executive or what? I can go through the research provided by

> those tobacco companies in earlier days and by their research I can

> assure you that cigarettes do not cause lung cancer. As a matter of

> fact they are completely benign and even good for you, they help you

> relax and they help you keep your weight down, an absolutely marvelous

> product that should be used by anyone and everyone who has frayed

> nerves or weight problems! And if I consult Ford advertising from

> days gone by I can assure you that the Ford Pinto is a perfectly safe

> car that can withstand any rear end collision! Fears about exploding

> Pintos are just misguided opinions from GM customers... or GM

> executives! Ford says so, so it must be true, after all would they

> ever sell cars that explode in rear end collisions?

>

> Geez, any fool would certainly know that there is little truth in

> advertising and that companies will say anything to deflect criticism

> away from their products and bolster their claims that their products

> are worth buying, but only idiots would try to use advertising

> material and attempt to present it as bona fide and trustworthy

> research! White papers my ass! Looks more like toilet paper!

>

> John

 

said the poor fool who can't read or comprehend anything. You're really

afraid of losing control, aren't you? lol, you can't control thinking

people, idiot.

Guest Twayne
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

> John John (MVP) wrote:

>> Twayne wrote:

>>

>>> Nothing definitive there; just anecdotal.

>>

>> Yes, it's long been known that Microsoft is the habit of posting

>> "anecdotal" fixes for "anecdotal" problems in its Knowledge Base,

>> happens all the time. Luckily we have experts like you to sort these

>> things out...

>>

>> John

>

> ROFL!!

 

Obviously you didn't read it; or you wouldn't be rofl wetting your pants

over it. If you can't read you need to crawl back under your bridge.

lol, and pull the dirt in over you.

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: XP registry cleaners

 

Twayne wrote:

>> Twayne wrote:

>>

>>> Well, lies about things will never get you anywhere. I won't give

>>> you any of the white papers but here a only a few of the links and

>>> excerpts that are useful for such purposes.

>>>

>>> ...and idiotic spam!....

>>

>> Are you stupid or what! Posting SPAM and hype from the companies and

>> hucksters who sell these programs and suggesting that it is valid

>> research is about as dumb as one can get! Are you a retired tobacco

>> company executive or what? I can go through the research provided by

>> those tobacco companies in earlier days and by their research I can

>> assure you that cigarettes do not cause lung cancer. As a matter of

>> fact they are completely benign and even good for you, they help you

>> relax and they help you keep your weight down, an absolutely marvelous

>> product that should be used by anyone and everyone who has frayed

>> nerves or weight problems! And if I consult Ford advertising from

>> days gone by I can assure you that the Ford Pinto is a perfectly safe

>> car that can withstand any rear end collision! Fears about exploding

>> Pintos are just misguided opinions from GM customers... or GM

>> executives! Ford says so, so it must be true, after all would they

>> ever sell cars that explode in rear end collisions?

>>

>> Geez, any fool would certainly know that there is little truth in

>> advertising and that companies will say anything to deflect criticism

>> away from their products and bolster their claims that their products

>> are worth buying, but only idiots would try to use advertising

>> material and attempt to present it as bona fide and trustworthy

>> research! White papers my ass! Looks more like toilet paper!

>>

>> John

>

> said the poor fool who can't read or comprehend anything. You're really

> afraid of losing control, aren't you? lol, you can't control thinking

> people, idiot.

 

Now he shows his true colors.

×
×
  • Create New...