Guest Bill in Co. Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner You left out db~* in your attributions below. HE wrote that. Daave wrote: > Bill in Co. wrote: (well, not really, DB wrote what's immediately below) >>> no. don't mix apples >>> and oranges. >>> >>> my machines run in >>> ultra perfection and >>> do so without your >>> crappy opinions or >>> the other trolls that >>> you enable and support. >>> >>> unfortunately, you >>> believe that the world >>> has to be exactly as >>> you believe it, otherwise >>> everyone else are maroons. >>> >>> basically, you are a >>> moron for not respecting >>> the opinions of others. >> >> Talking about yourself again? Unbelieveable.... > > Next thing he'll be getting on my case for not respecting the opinions > of the members of the Flat Earth Society. Again, lack of critical > thinking skills... And bad haiku, too. Undoubtedly!
Guest Plato Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Bruce Chambers wrote: > > Jim Brown wrote: > > I am running Windows XP Home. What is the best most reliable registry > > cleaner for this system? semi top posted, yes, you said it all. I can not argue a bit with your extensive post. Will be emailed to 20,000 readers on my list in a day or so. Thank you for taking the time to write. > The best registry cleaner is *NO* registry cleaner. > > A registry cleaner - even a safe one, should such ever be developed > someday - is, at best, an exercise in futility. There is no need for > registry cleaners, other than to provide a profit to their > manufacturers. On rare occasions, registry cleaners can be, in the > hands of a skilled technician, useful, time-saving diagnostic tools. > Otherwise, they're nothing but snake oil. > > Why do you even think you'd ever need to clean your registry? What > specific *problems* are you actually experiencing (not some program's > bogus listing of imaginary problems) that you think can be fixed by > using a registry cleaner? > > If you do have a problem that is rooted in the registry, it would > be far better to simply edit (after backing up, of course) only the > specific key(s) and/or value(s) that are causing the problem. After > all, why use a chainsaw when a scalpel will do the job? Additionally, > the manually changing of one or two registry entries is far less likely > to have the dire consequences of allowing an automated product to make > multiple changes simultaneously. The only thing needed to safely clean > your registry is knowledge and Regedit.exe. > > The registry contains all of the operating system's "knowledge" of > the computer's hardware devices, installed software, the location of the > device drivers, and the computer's configuration. A misstep in the > registry can have severe consequences. One should not even turning > loose a poorly understood automated "cleaner," unless he is fully > confident that he knows *exactly* what is going to happen as a result of > each and every change. > > Having repeatedly seen the results of inexperienced people using > automated registry "cleaners," I can only advise all but the most > experienced computer technicians (and/or hobbyists) to avoid them all. > Experience has shown me that such tools simply are not safe in the hands > of the inexperienced user. If you lack the knowledge and experience to > maintain your registry by yourself, then you also lack the knowledge and > experience to safely configure and use any automated registry cleaner, > no matter how safe they claim to be. > > More importantly, no one has ever demonstrated that the use of an > automated registry cleaner, particularly by an untrained, inexperienced > computer user, does any real good, whatsoever. There's certainly been > no empirical evidence offered to demonstrate that the use of such > products to "clean" WinXP's registry improves a computer's performance > or stability. Given the potential for harm, it's just not worth the risk. > > Granted, most registry "cleaners" won't cause problems each and > every time they're used, but the potential for harm is always there. > And, since no registry "cleaner" has ever been demonstrated to do any > good (think of them like treating the flu with chicken soup - there's no > real medicinal value, but it sometimes provides a warming placebo > effect), I always tell people that the risks far out-weigh the > non-existent benefits. > > I will concede that a good registry *scanning* tool, in the hands > of an experienced and knowledgeable technician or hobbyist can be a > useful time-saving diagnostic tool, as long as it's not allowed to make > any changes automatically. But I really don't think that there are any > registry cleaners that are truly safe for the general public to use. > Experience has proven just the opposite: such tools simply are not safe > in the hands of the inexperienced user. -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Plato Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Curt Christianson wrote: > If you want to see a more in-depth discussion, see PA Bear's link. I think You dont need an in-depth discussion. 95% of the people will never need/require, a registry cleaner. XP seemed to "fix" that. 98SE users, yes, a free registry cleaner like Easy Cleaner helped out. -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Plato Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner fix your word wrap -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Plato Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Daave wrote: > > To the OP, it should be clear that those who are familiar with this > issue are pretty much all saying that there is no concrete, objective, > verifiable evidence that registry "cleaning" is beneficial to a PC's > performance. Furthermore, although unlikely, it's possible to do some True, not in XP, but yes, sometimes in 98SE. -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Alec S. Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > just because your > configuration is > all screwed up, > doesn't mean every > one else's is. You talkin’ to me? Are you talking to me?! Check yourself buddy. I actually defended you where everybody else wants to tear your head off. There is nothing wrong with my configuration and I am a Hell of a lot more knowledgeable than you are—and I can say that not even knowing you. For the final time, there IS LITTLE to be gained for most people, in most situations by registry cleaners. Unless you have some special, secret reg-cleaner that is infallible, then there are none known to do a /proper/ job. They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help a bit in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just useless and/or harmful. -- Alec S. news/alec->synetech/cjb/net
Guest db.·.. > Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner actually, you need to defend the o.p's who have issues as a result of faulty data in their registry, but are being prevented by bad mvp's to tune it up and remove the faulty data with the program that ms created for the registry. otherwise, the next posting an o.p. will provide is that their system can no longer start because of the registry and the same people that prevented the o.p. from maintaining the registry will ignore the subsequent issue. Manipulative & Very Pathetic are those who enjoy the privilege of partaking in the microsoft MVP program and bite the hands that feeds their ego. traitors, saboteurs and trollers deserve no respect. as long as you defend the o.p.'s who are innocently requesting help with their registry and help them resolve their issues with the registry, then you are on my side and theirs. -- db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> "Alec S." <@> wrote in message news:uokDJk1DJHA.1180@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in > message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> just because your >> configuration is >> all screwed up, >> doesn't mean every >> one else's is. > > > You talkin’ to me? Are you talking to me?! Check yourself buddy. I actually > defended you where everybody else wants to tear your head off. > > There is nothing wrong with my configuration and I am a Hell of a lot more > knowledgeable than you are—and I can say that not even knowing you. > > For the final time, there IS LITTLE to be gained for most people, in most > situations by registry cleaners. Unless you have some special, secret > reg-cleaner that is infallible, then there are none known to do a /proper/ job. > They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help a bit > in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just useless > and/or harmful. > > > -- > Alec S. > news/alec->synetech/cjb/net > >
Guest John John (MVP) Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Alec S. wrote: > "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in > message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > >>just because your >>configuration is >>all screwed up, >>doesn't mean every >>one else's is. > > > [sniped] > > They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help a bit > in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just useless > and/or harmful. How funny that you should mention db's second favorite group of useless applications! http://groups.google.com/groups/search?lr=&safe=off&num=100&q=databaseben+amsn&safe=off&qt_s=Search
Guest db.·.. > Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner ps: thanks for your understanding and help. -- db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> " db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:uEVltA2DJHA.3624@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > actually, you need to defend > the o.p's who have issues as > a result of faulty data in their > registry, but are being prevented > by bad mvp's to tune it up and > remove the faulty data with the > program that ms created for > the registry. > > otherwise, the next posting > an o.p. will provide is that > their system can no longer > start because of the registry > and the same people that > prevented the o.p. from > maintaining the registry will > ignore the subsequent issue. > > Manipulative & Very Pathetic > are those who enjoy the privilege > of partaking in the microsoft MVP > program and bite the hands that > feeds their ego. > > traitors, saboteurs and trollers > deserve no respect. > > as long as you defend the o.p.'s > who are innocently requesting > help with their registry and help > them resolve their issues with > the registry, then you are on my > side and theirs. > -- > > db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> > > "Alec S." <@> wrote in message news:uokDJk1DJHA.1180@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in >> message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> just because your >>> configuration is >>> all screwed up, >>> doesn't mean every >>> one else's is. >> >> >> You talkin’ to me? Are you talking to me?! Check yourself buddy. I actually >> defended you where everybody else wants to tear your head off. >> >> There is nothing wrong with my configuration and I am a Hell of a lot more >> knowledgeable than you are—and I can say that not even knowing you. >> >> For the final time, there IS LITTLE to be gained for most people, in most >> situations by registry cleaners. Unless you have some special, secret >> reg-cleaner that is infallible, then there are none known to do a /proper/ job. >> They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help a bit >> in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just useless >> and/or harmful. >> >> >> -- >> Alec S. >> news/alec->synetech/cjb/net >> >> >
Guest Galen Somerville Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner "Plato" <|@|.|> wrote in message news:48c08109$0$4604$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com... > Curt Christianson wrote: >> If you want to see a more in-depth discussion, see PA Bear's link. I >> think > > You dont need an in-depth discussion. 95% of the people will never > need/require, a registry cleaner. XP seemed to "fix" that. 98SE users, > yes, a free registry cleaner like Easy Cleaner helped out. > > -- > http://www.bootdisk.com/ I find that EasyCleaner, written by a 15 year old in Finland, is still good for XP. It basically finds items that point to the hard drive but those locations no longer exist. For instance it will delete hundreds of entries that point to a "Temp" folder. Of course you naturally clean out the Temp folders regularly Galen
Guest Bill in Co. Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner This is hilarious. He's now thanking himself, per what's written below. > ps: thanks for your > understanding and > help. > > -- > > db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> > > " db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> > wrote > in message news:uEVltA2DJHA.3624@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> actually, you need to defend >> the o.p's who have issues as >> a result of faulty data in their >> registry, but are being prevented >> by bad mvp's to tune it up and >> remove the faulty data with the >> program that ms created for >> the registry. >> >> otherwise, the next posting >> an o.p. will provide is that >> their system can no longer >> start because of the registry >> and the same people that >> prevented the o.p. from >> maintaining the registry will >> ignore the subsequent issue. >> >> Manipulative & Very Pathetic >> are those who enjoy the privilege >> of partaking in the microsoft MVP >> program and bite the hands that >> feeds their ego. >> >> traitors, saboteurs and trollers >> deserve no respect. >> >> as long as you defend the o.p.'s >> who are innocently requesting >> help with their registry and help >> them resolve their issues with >> the registry, then you are on my >> side and theirs. >> -- >> >> db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> >> >> "Alec S." <@> wrote in message >> news:uokDJk1DJHA.1180@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> >>> wrote in >>> message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>> just because your >>>> configuration is >>>> all screwed up, >>>> doesn't mean every >>>> one else's is. >>> >>> >>> You talkin' to me? Are you talking to me?! Check yourself buddy. I >>> actually >>> defended you where everybody else wants to tear your head off. >>> >>> There is nothing wrong with my configuration and I am a Hell of a lot >>> more >>> knowledgeable than you are-and I can say that not even knowing you. >>> >>> For the final time, there IS LITTLE to be gained for most people, in >>> most >>> situations by registry cleaners. Unless you have some special, secret >>> reg-cleaner that is infallible, then there are none known to do a >>> /proper/ >>> job. They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can >>> help a bit in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly >>> just useless and/or harmful. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Alec S. >>> news/alec->synetech/cjb/net
Guest Alec S. Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner > traitors, saboteurs and trollers > deserve no respect. I’m not sure what the MVP program has to do with anything. Just because Microsoft acknowledges someone as being helpful doesn’t mean that the person becomes a Microsoft spokesperson and can only say glowing things about them. Sycophants are just as bad as “traitors, saboteurs…” > as long as you defend the o.p.'s > who are innocently requesting > help with their registry and help > them resolve their issues with > the registry, then you are on my > side and theirs. Except that very few people need registry cleaners. The fact is that registry cleaners do more harm than good for novices, and novices are exactly the kind of users that need automatic tools like cleaners. I have yet to see a registry cleaner that can actually understand different path and filename formats and thus does not flag all kinds of valid filenames as broken. -- Alec S. news/alec->synetech/cjb/net
Guest Alec S. Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner "Galen Somerville" <galen@community.nospam> wrote in message news:egcfVZ2DJHA.4528@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > > I find that EasyCleaner, written by a 15 year old in Finland, is still good > for XP. > > It basically finds items that point to the hard drive but those locations no > longer exist. Does it think that the following files are broken, or does it understand these path and filename? %systemroot%\Explorer.exe "C:\Windows\Explorer.exe" C:\Windows\System32\Shell32.dll,5 C:\Windows\System32\Shell32.dll,-123 C:\Windows\System32\cmd.exe /k cd c:\ -- Alec S. news/alec->synetech/cjb/net
Guest Bruce Chambers Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Plato wrote: > Bruce Chambers wrote: > > semi top posted, yes, you said it all. I can not argue a bit with your > extensive post. Will be emailed to 20,000 readers on my list in a day or > so. Thank you for taking the time to write. > > >> The best registry cleaner is *NO* registry cleaner. Thank you for the kind words. You might also want to include these links to discussions of registry cleaners in that email: Why I don’t use registry cleaners http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html Mythbusting: Debunking Common Windows Performance Tweaking Myths http://lifehacker.com/5033518/debunking-common-windows-performance-tweaking-myths AumHa Forums • View topic - AUMHA Discussion: Should I Use a Registry Cleaner? http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot
Guest Curt Christianson Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner John, He has told me, quite emphatically, that he *is not* databaseben. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... -- Curt http://dundats.mvps.org/ http://www.aumha.org/ http://dundats.mvps.org/AutoIt/default.aspx "John John (MVP)" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:g9rfgs$3hq$1@aioe.org... > Alec S. wrote: > >> "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote >> in >> message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> >>>just because your >>>configuration is >>>all screwed up, >>>doesn't mean every >>>one else's is. >> >> >> [sniped] >> >> They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help >> a bit >> in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just >> useless >> and/or harmful. > > How funny that you should mention db's second favorite group of useless > applications! > > http://groups.google.com/groups/search?lr=&safe=off&num=100&q=databaseben+amsn&safe=off&qt_s=Search >
Guest Curt Christianson Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Bruce, Great links indeed, and I was in the AumHa forum when that whole thread started. I was schooled in the use of Registry cleaners back with W98, (by the two Canadian MVP's named Ron), and I've been advocating *against* them ever since. -- Curt http://dundats.mvps.org/ http://www.aumha.org/ http://dundats.mvps.org/AutoIt/default.aspx "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message news:%23Eb3bz7DJHA.5600@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Plato wrote: >> Bruce Chambers wrote: > >> >> semi top posted, yes, you said it all. I can not argue a bit with your >> extensive post. Will be emailed to 20,000 readers on my list in a day or >> so. Thank you for taking the time to write. >>> The best registry cleaner is *NO* registry cleaner. > > > Thank you for the kind words. You might also want to include these links > to discussions of registry cleaners in that email: > > Why I don’t use registry cleaners > http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html > > Mythbusting: Debunking Common Windows Performance Tweaking Myths > http://lifehacker.com/5033518/debunking-common-windows-performance-tweaking-myths > > AumHa Forums • View topic - AUMHA Discussion: Should I Use a Registry > Cleaner? > http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 > > > -- > > Bruce Chambers > > Help us help you: > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 > > They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary > safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin > > Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand > Russell > > The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has > killed a great many philosophers. > ~ Denis Diderot
Guest Curt Christianson Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Oh, and if the post "properties" say it,... -- Curt http://dundats.mvps.org/ http://www.aumha.org/ http://dundats.mvps.org/AutoIt/default.aspx "Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message news:Oc6VDu8DJHA.5600@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > John, > > He has told me, quite emphatically, that he *is not* databaseben. If it > walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... > > -- > Curt > > http://dundats.mvps.org/ > http://www.aumha.org/ > http://dundats.mvps.org/AutoIt/default.aspx > > > > > > "John John (MVP)" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message > news:g9rfgs$3hq$1@aioe.org... >> Alec S. wrote: >> >>> "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> >>> wrote in >>> message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> >>>>just because your >>>>configuration is >>>>all screwed up, >>>>doesn't mean every >>>>one else's is. >>> >>> >>> [sniped] >>> >>> They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help >>> a bit >>> in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just >>> useless >>> and/or harmful. >> >> How funny that you should mention db's second favorite group of useless >> applications! >> >> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?lr=&safe=off&num=100&q=databaseben+amsn&safe=off&qt_s=Search >> > >
Guest Curt Christianson Posted September 6, 2008 Posted September 6, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Sorry to disagree with you db, but I've yet to see a post from someone saying that a Registry cleaner solved *any* particular problem on a given machine. They are pure "snake oil", but we are both entitled to our respective opinions. -- Curt http://dundats.mvps.org/ http://www.aumha.org/ http://dundats.mvps.org/AutoIt/default.aspx " db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:uEVltA2DJHA.3624@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > actually, you need to defend > the o.p's who have issues as > a result of faulty data in their > registry, but are being prevented > by bad mvp's to tune it up and > remove the faulty data with the > program that ms created for > the registry. > > otherwise, the next posting > an o.p. will provide is that > their system can no longer > start because of the registry > and the same people that > prevented the o.p. from > maintaining the registry will > ignore the subsequent issue. > > Manipulative & Very Pathetic > are those who enjoy the privilege > of partaking in the microsoft MVP > program and bite the hands that > feeds their ego. > > traitors, saboteurs and trollers > deserve no respect. > > as long as you defend the o.p.'s > who are innocently requesting > help with their registry and help > them resolve their issues with > the registry, then you are on my > side and theirs. > -- > > db·´¯`·...¸><)))º> > > "Alec S." <@> wrote in message > news:uokDJk1DJHA.1180@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> "db.·.. > ` .. ." <))) ·databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote >> in >> message news:ei%23CPqfDJHA.2060@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> just because your >>> configuration is >>> all screwed up, >>> doesn't mean every >>> one else's is. >> >> >> You talkin’ to me? Are you talking to me?! Check yourself buddy. I >> actually >> defended you where everybody else wants to tear your head off. >> >> There is nothing wrong with my configuration and I am a Hell of a lot >> more >> knowledgeable than you are—and I can say that not even knowing you. >> >> For the final time, there IS LITTLE to be gained for most people, in most >> situations by registry cleaners. Unless you have some special, secret >> reg-cleaner that is infallible, then there are none known to do a >> /proper/ job. >> They are like memory-optimizers; they may have some effect that can help >> a bit >> in some circumstances, but for the most part, they are mostly just >> useless >> and/or harmful. >> >> >> -- >> Alec S. >> news/alec->synetech/cjb/net >> >> >
Guest Plato Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Curt Christianson wrote: > > Great links indeed, and I was in the AumHa forum when that whole thread > started. I was schooled in the use of Registry cleaners back with W98, (by > the two Canadian MVP's named Ron), and I've been advocating *against* them > ever since. I'm using/posting with a win98SE box. A registry cleaner is recommended for win98SE, preferably, EasyCleaner. Again, for XP, no registry cleaner is needed or advised, unless you got a particular hard niggle. Also again, you will waste your money and time paying for one. http://www.bootdisk.com/housecall/0035.htm#3 -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Plato Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Bruce Chambers wrote: > > Thank you for the kind words. You might also want to include these Trust me, nothing personal. I was impressed with your post, and my readers were also impressed...
Guest Plato Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Galen Somerville wrote: > > I find that EasyCleaner, written by a 15 year old in Finland, is still good > for XP. He's not 15 anymore. Hadn't been for years... :) -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Plato Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Alec S. wrote: > > Does it think that the following files are broken, or does it understand these > path and filename? > > %systemroot%\Explorer.exe > "C:\Windows\Explorer.exe" > C:\Windows\System32\Shell32.dll,5 > C:\Windows\System32\Shell32.dll,-123 > C:\Windows\System32\cmd.exe /k cd c:\ You sound like somebody who should NOT use a cleaner :) -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Guest Plato Posted September 8, 2008 Posted September 8, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner please fix your word wrap
Guest Bill in Co. Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Plato wrote: > Curt Christianson wrote: >> >> Great links indeed, and I was in the AumHa forum when that whole thread >> started. I was schooled in the use of Registry cleaners back with W98, >> (by >> the two Canadian MVP's named Ron), and I've been advocating *against* >> them >> ever since. > > I'm using/posting with a win98SE box. A registry cleaner is recommended > for win98SE, preferably, EasyCleaner. Nope. It is not "recommended" - for ANY operating system. (That doesn't mean it can't ever be useful on some occasions for a specific customization issue - IF one knows exactly what they are doing - meaning at the level of being *comfortable* working in regedit - otherwise, NO).
Guest Plato Posted September 9, 2008 Posted September 9, 2008 Re: Registry cleaner Curt Christianson wrote: > > Sorry to disagree with you db, but I've yet to see a post from someone > saying that a Registry cleaner solved *any* particular problem on a given > machine. They are pure "snake oil", but we are both entitled to our > respective opinions. registry cleaners are not for solving "problems". They are to help you, assuming you know how to use them, to help you repair systems. They are just a tool one may use to help. -- http://www.bootdisk.com/
Recommended Posts