Registry Defragmenters

[Guest O.J. Newman]

Hello:

 

There have been a few threads recently on the use of registry cleaners.

While some people like them and have not had any bad experiences with them,

the consensus seems to be that such tools should be avoided by inexperienced

users.

 

I have also seen registry defragmenter utilities available, both as part of

commercial software, as well as shareware and freeware. Does the advice to

avoid registry cleaners also apply to registry defragmenters - that is to

avoid them?

 

Is it best simply to not touch the registry (other than using a tool like

System Restore)?

 

Thanks,

O.J.

[Guest Alan Edwards]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Yes.

 

....Alan

--

Alan Edwards, MS MVP Windows - Internet Explorer

http://dts-l.com/index.htm

 

 

 

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:26:45 -0500, in

microsoft.public.windowsme.general, "O.J. Newman"

<ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote:

 

> Does the advice to

>avoid registry cleaners also apply to registry defragmenters - that is to

>avoid them?

[Guest Norman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Does that also go for scanreg /opt /fix ?

Not really a defragmenter I'd guess, but it does get rid of wasted space.

 

Norman

 

"Alan Edwards" <edwards@southcom.com.au> wrote in message

news:55eun3l5i0ge4tpbrhr677kt2svb2lle8u@4ax.com...

> Yes.

>

> ...Alan

> --

> Alan Edwards, MS MVP Windows - Internet Explorer

> http://dts-l.com/index.htm

>

>

>

> On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:26:45 -0500, in

> microsoft.public.windowsme.general, "O.J. Newman"

> <ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote:

>

>

> > Does the advice to

> >avoid registry cleaners also apply to registry defragmenters - that is to

> >avoid them?

[Guest Norman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

I could not agree more that registry cleaners are not for the inexperienced.

I've had my share of problems, even with MSRegClean, which is no longer

supported. It would remove a key that would break your install.

Unfortunately it always ran in automatic mode, but had enough experience

(bad) that I knew what key to replace.

I now use only tools that allow me total control and automatically or

manually make backups of what is removed and allow restoring of single

entries, with one exception and that tool is

http://support.microsoft.com/download/support/mslfiles/ShareDLL.exe

 

I also use a really old one known as JV16 PowerTools, version 1.3 and

version 1.41. These were free and you may find an archive somewhere.

Also OLE Clean 1.5.

The biggest problem I've seen with such tools is they often want to remove

HKCR keys that MS installed, but may not be currently in use, such as

briefcase, UPNP, some Office keys etc. And when you turn such on via

add/remove, windows setup, or by adding or first use of Office feature, it

ends up broken.

So that is definitely a key you want to look at closely before making a

decision. Did MS put it there, or is it a leftover from something removed.

 

These tools can be very useful in locating a bad key connection, such as MS

key for mciole.dll. Registry will show it in windows and MS actually

installed it to windows/system.

Also can be very useful for fixing bad install. Too often I've had left over

keys that will not allow a good install from an updated program. One

particularly annoying has been the package on CD for an ATI card. Even ATI's

version of cleaner will not fix.

Sometimes using MS Windows Installer Cleanup has overcome the hurdle of

getting a good install, if MSI was used.

 

You could spend hours searching for a fix to your particular problem or with

tech support hoping someone there knows. And then still be faced with the

possibility of a format and reinstall. (that is just plain ugly if system

restore or a registry restore was of no help. Maybe you missed window of

opportunity or other situation).

 

So, when you are backed into the corner of only choice being format and

install, or using risky registry tools, the choice is clear to me. What have

you got to lose? Use with over caution.

Norman

 

"O.J. Newman" <ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote in message

news:uKGkVx2TIHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Hello:

>

> There have been a few threads recently on the use of registry cleaners.

> While some people like them and have not had any bad experiences with

them,

> the consensus seems to be that such tools should be avoided by

inexperienced

> users.

>

> I have also seen registry defragmenter utilities available, both as part

of

> commercial software, as well as shareware and freeware. Does the advice to

> avoid registry cleaners also apply to registry defragmenters - that is to

> avoid them?

>

> Is it best simply to not touch the registry (other than using a tool like

> System Restore)?

>

> Thanks,

> O.J.

>

>

[Guest John John]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

We call it compaction. The problem is that if you do a search for

"Registry Defragmenters" what you will mostly get will be a bunch of

returns for registry cleaners, for most parts they are are the only ones

who use the term. They may use it to describe compaction but along with

the ability to compact comes the rest of their cleaning utility which

can cause much more harm than any problems that they claim to fix!

 

John

 

Norman wrote:

> Does that also go for scanreg /opt /fix ?

> Not really a defragmenter I'd guess, but it does get rid of wasted space.

>

> Norman

>

> "Alan Edwards" <edwards@southcom.com.au> wrote in message

> news:55eun3l5i0ge4tpbrhr677kt2svb2lle8u@4ax.com...

>

>>Yes.

>>

>>...Alan

>>--

>>Alan Edwards, MS MVP Windows - Internet Explorer

>>http://dts-l.com/index.htm

>>

>>

>>

>>On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:26:45 -0500, in

>>microsoft.public.windowsme.general, "O.J. Newman"

>><ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote:

>>

>>

>>

>>>Does the advice to

>>>avoid registry cleaners also apply to registry defragmenters - that is to

>>>avoid them?

>

>

>

[Guest Heirloom]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Norman,

Isn't jv16 ver 1.41 just a crippled version of 1.3??? It's been so

long, I don't remember, but, that comes to mind. I am still using 1.3,

mainly to find leftover detritus from program uninstalls (doesn't happen

very often). I find it easier than doing manual registry searches for a

variety of files, some of which, I don't know to look for! It isn't for

everyone, I know, and the main thing is the backup!...I'll say it

again....BACKUP!!!!!

Heirloom, old and once again, BACKUP!!

 

 

"Norman" <nthums1@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:etZWrC6TIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>I could not agree more that registry cleaners are not for the

>inexperienced.

> I've had my share of problems, even with MSRegClean, which is no longer

> supported. It would remove a key that would break your install.

> Unfortunately it always ran in automatic mode, but had enough experience

> (bad) that I knew what key to replace.

> I now use only tools that allow me total control and automatically or

> manually make backups of what is removed and allow restoring of single

> entries, with one exception and that tool is

> http://support.microsoft.com/download/support/mslfiles/ShareDLL.exe

>

> I also use a really old one known as JV16 PowerTools, version 1.3 and

> version 1.41. These were free and you may find an archive somewhere.

> Also OLE Clean 1.5.

> The biggest problem I've seen with such tools is they often want to remove

> HKCR keys that MS installed, but may not be currently in use, such as

> briefcase, UPNP, some Office keys etc. And when you turn such on via

> add/remove, windows setup, or by adding or first use of Office feature, it

> ends up broken.

> So that is definitely a key you want to look at closely before making a

> decision. Did MS put it there, or is it a leftover from something removed.

> snip>

>>

> So, when you are backed into the corner of only choice being format and

> install, or using risky registry tools, the choice is clear to me. What

> have

> you got to lose? Use with over caution.

> Norman

[Guest E_Net_Rider]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Crippled in what way?

I maintain an archive sometimes with several versions until I'm certain of

newer. Sometimes it is a long time before I get around to cleanup.

Also there seems to a disappearance of some of these which seems to happen

during a Windows install or reinstall so I now try to keep them on an

external drive.

I remember at one point I had a newer version, than 1.3, that would expire

after about 30 days.

But via whatever processes, I now have 1.3 and 1.41. Oops, that magic got me

again. Went to partition holding Utilities/registry/pwr tools and only have

zipped copies. Others disappeared.

But in one of those desperation fixes avoiding format, I decided to give

1.41 a go at it after running 1.3. My thinking, which may be wrong, was that

1.41 would die after 30 days, but did not care at that point. It will

happily install to 1.3 folder but uncertain as to how well it assumes

previous backups. I strongly suggest installing to separate folder until

that is determined with certainty and as to whether it expires on you.

The interface is somewhat changed with maybe a couple of extra features

added before they went retail. Maybe they had a 1.43 that was last before

retail and expired. Only change may have been the timer. But I learned that

you did not want to allow an online update which would make any recent

version expire. I think the update no longer works.

What I have seen is that 1.41 finds many more entries of which many are

really duplicates because of the arrangement of the registry, particularly

as to HKCR and HKLM. But regardless, same cautions apply as to how you use

it.

Norman

"Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

news:eVhZ2q6TIHA.4104@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Norman,

> Isn't jv16 ver 1.41 just a crippled version of 1.3??? It's been so

> long, I don't remember, but, that comes to mind. I am still using 1.3,

> mainly to find leftover detritus from program uninstalls (doesn't happen

> very often). I find it easier than doing manual registry searches for a

> variety of files, some of which, I don't know to look for! It isn't for

> everyone, I know, and the main thing is the backup!...I'll say it

> again....BACKUP!!!!!

> Heirloom, old and once again, BACKUP!!

>

>

> "Norman" <nthums1@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:etZWrC6TIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> >I could not agree more that registry cleaners are not for the

> >inexperienced.

> > I've had my share of problems, even with MSRegClean, which is no longer

> > supported. It would remove a key that would break your install.

> > Unfortunately it always ran in automatic mode, but had enough experience

> > (bad) that I knew what key to replace.

> > I now use only tools that allow me total control and automatically or

> > manually make backups of what is removed and allow restoring of single

> > entries, with one exception and that tool is

> > http://support.microsoft.com/download/support/mslfiles/ShareDLL.exe

> >

> > I also use a really old one known as JV16 PowerTools, version 1.3 and

> > version 1.41. These were free and you may find an archive somewhere.

> > Also OLE Clean 1.5.

> > The biggest problem I've seen with such tools is they often want to

remove

> > HKCR keys that MS installed, but may not be currently in use, such as

> > briefcase, UPNP, some Office keys etc. And when you turn such on via

> > add/remove, windows setup, or by adding or first use of Office feature,

it

> > ends up broken.

> > So that is definitely a key you want to look at closely before making a

> > decision. Did MS put it there, or is it a leftover from something

removed.

> > snip>

> >>

> > So, when you are backed into the corner of only choice being format and

> > install, or using risky registry tools, the choice is clear to me. What

> > have

> > you got to lose? Use with over caution.

> > Norman

>

>

[Guest Heirloom]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Norman,

Mine was not a statement, but, rather, a question. I was under the

impression that the version 1.3 was the last FREE version with full

capabilities. That could very well be incorrect and it is not important

enough, to me, to do a lot of research to determine its' validity. Maybe it

was that 1.41 was a trial issue that, like you said, would expire after a

period of time or number of uses.....I really don't remember. I just know

that there was some reason that I was still using 1.3.

Heirloom, old and let me know if I am wrong

 

"E_Net_Rider" <E_Net_Rider@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23uJ0E9RUIHA.5016@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Crippled in what way?

> I maintain an archive sometimes with several versions until I'm certain of

> newer. Sometimes it is a long time before I get around to cleanup.

> Also there seems to a disappearance of some of these which seems to happen

> during a Windows install or reinstall so I now try to keep them on an

> external drive.

> I remember at one point I had a newer version, than 1.3, that would expire

> after about 30 days.

> But via whatever processes, I now have 1.3 and 1.41. Oops, that magic got

> me

> again. Went to partition holding Utilities/registry/pwr tools and only

> have

> zipped copies. Others disappeared.

> But in one of those desperation fixes avoiding format, I decided to give

> 1.41 a go at it after running 1.3. My thinking, which may be wrong, was

> that

> 1.41 would die after 30 days, but did not care at that point. It will

> happily install to 1.3 folder but uncertain as to how well it assumes

> previous backups. I strongly suggest installing to separate folder until

> that is determined with certainty and as to whether it expires on you.

> The interface is somewhat changed with maybe a couple of extra features

> added before they went retail. Maybe they had a 1.43 that was last before

> retail and expired. Only change may have been the timer. But I learned

> that

> you did not want to allow an online update which would make any recent

> version expire. I think the update no longer works.

> What I have seen is that 1.41 finds many more entries of which many are

> really duplicates because of the arrangement of the registry, particularly

> as to HKCR and HKLM. But regardless, same cautions apply as to how you use

> it.

> Norman

> "Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

> news:eVhZ2q6TIHA.4104@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>> Norman,

>> Isn't jv16 ver 1.41 just a crippled version of 1.3??? It's been so

>> long, I don't remember, but, that comes to mind. I am still using 1.3,

>> mainly to find leftover detritus from program uninstalls (doesn't happen

>> very often). I find it easier than doing manual registry searches for a

>> variety of files, some of which, I don't know to look for! It isn't for

>> everyone, I know, and the main thing is the backup!...I'll say it

>> again....BACKUP!!!!!

>> Heirloom, old and once again, BACKUP!!

>>

>>

>> "Norman" <nthums1@comcast.net> wrote in message

>> news:etZWrC6TIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> >I could not agree more that registry cleaners are not for the

>> >inexperienced.

>> > I've had my share of problems, even with MSRegClean, which is no longer

>> > supported. It would remove a key that would break your install.

>> > Unfortunately it always ran in automatic mode, but had enough

>> > experience

>> > (bad) that I knew what key to replace.

>> > I now use only tools that allow me total control and automatically or

>> > manually make backups of what is removed and allow restoring of single

>> > entries, with one exception and that tool is

>> > http://support.microsoft.com/download/support/mslfiles/ShareDLL.exe

>> >

>> > I also use a really old one known as JV16 PowerTools, version 1.3 and

>> > version 1.41. These were free and you may find an archive somewhere.

>> > Also OLE Clean 1.5.

>> > The biggest problem I've seen with such tools is they often want to

> remove

>> > HKCR keys that MS installed, but may not be currently in use, such as

>> > briefcase, UPNP, some Office keys etc. And when you turn such on via

>> > add/remove, windows setup, or by adding or first use of Office feature,

> it

>> > ends up broken.

>> > So that is definitely a key you want to look at closely before making a

>> > decision. Did MS put it there, or is it a leftover from something

> removed.

>> > snip>

>> >>

>> > So, when you are backed into the corner of only choice being format and

>> > install, or using risky registry tools, the choice is clear to me. What

>> > have

>> > you got to lose? Use with over caution.

>> > Norman

>>

>>

>

>

[Guest O.J. Newman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Hello:

 

The Pricelessware freeware web site lists v.1.3.0.195 of jv16 PowerTools as

the last uncrippled version, FWIW. It notes that "Version 1.3.0.196 expired

on 2004-01-01."

 

See:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2007/PL2007SYSTEMUTILITIES.php#3.02RegistryAndFileTools .

 

Please let me know if this is incorrect.

 

Thanks,

O.J.

 

 

"Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

news:%23LAsSzTUIHA.5816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Norman,

> Mine was not a statement, but, rather, a question. I was under the

> impression that the version 1.3 was the last FREE version with full

> capabilities. That could very well be incorrect and it is not important

> enough, to me, to do a lot of research to determine its' validity. Maybe

> it was that 1.41 was a trial issue that, like you said, would expire after

> a period of time or number of uses.....I really don't remember. I just

> know that there was some reason that I was still using 1.3.

> Heirloom, old and let me know if I am wrong

>

[Guest Heirloom]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

That's what I believe.

Heirloom, old and not hard to convince

 

"O.J. Newman" <ojn@zoominternet.net> wrote in message

news:%23qhycuXUIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> Hello:

>

> The Pricelessware freeware web site lists v.1.3.0.195 of jv16 PowerTools

> as the last uncrippled version, FWIW. It notes that "Version 1.3.0.196

> expired on 2004-01-01."

>

> See:

> http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2007/PL2007SYSTEMUTILITIES.php#3.02RegistryAndFileTools .

>

> Please let me know if this is incorrect.

>

> Thanks,

> O.J.

>

>

> "Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

> news:%23LAsSzTUIHA.5816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> Norman,

>> Mine was not a statement, but, rather, a question. I was under the

>> impression that the version 1.3 was the last FREE version with full

>> capabilities. That could very well be incorrect and it is not important

>> enough, to me, to do a lot of research to determine its' validity. Maybe

>> it was that 1.41 was a trial issue that, like you said, would expire

>> after a period of time or number of uses.....I really don't remember. I

>> just know that there was some reason that I was still using 1.3.

>> Heirloom, old and let me know if I am wrong

>>

>

>

[Guest Norman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

1.4.1 has something called Registry Monitor. Take snapshot upon install and

at later times and then allows comparison of snapshot to what current

registry is. Lists all the deviations and allows several actions upon

individual listed items. At least that is the way I understand it is

supposed to work because it appears to have a 100,000 item limit and rolls

back starting over at zero. It continues to search and then eventually

crashes. I seem to remember trying this feature a very long time ago with

similar results. My snapshot was late December and it seems odd I would have

so many changes since that time. I remember that long ago situation where I

created a new snapshot and then it seemed to work, so it seems that part of

it would need to be run routinely.

And your questioning caused me to look more closely at the EULA for each.

Wording in both concerning purchasing a license, maybe to get support. And

wording in later expands on limitation of use and ownership. But the kicker

is the line at the bottom of the one in version 1.4.1 which says "version

1.3".

I'm not a lawyer trying to figure out the full meaning and it almost appears

they did not have one write it either.

 

Norman

 

"Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

news:%23LAsSzTUIHA.5816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Norman,

> Mine was not a statement, but, rather, a question. I was under the

> impression that the version 1.3 was the last FREE version with full

> capabilities. That could very well be incorrect and it is not important

> enough, to me, to do a lot of research to determine its' validity. Maybe

it

> was that 1.41 was a trial issue that, like you said, would expire after a

> period of time or number of uses.....I really don't remember. I just know

> that there was some reason that I was still using 1.3.

> Heirloom, old and let me know if I am wrong

>

> "E_Net_Rider" <E_Net_Rider@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> news:%23uJ0E9RUIHA.5016@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > Crippled in what way?

> > I maintain an archive sometimes with several versions until I'm certain

of

> > newer. Sometimes it is a long time before I get around to cleanup.

> > Also there seems to a disappearance of some of these which seems to

happen

> > during a Windows install or reinstall so I now try to keep them on an

> > external drive.

> > I remember at one point I had a newer version, than 1.3, that would

expire

> > after about 30 days.

> > But via whatever processes, I now have 1.3 and 1.41. Oops, that magic

got

> > me

> > again. Went to partition holding Utilities/registry/pwr tools and only

> > have

> > zipped copies. Others disappeared.

> > But in one of those desperation fixes avoiding format, I decided to give

> > 1.41 a go at it after running 1.3. My thinking, which may be wrong, was

> > that

> > 1.41 would die after 30 days, but did not care at that point. It will

> > happily install to 1.3 folder but uncertain as to how well it assumes

> > previous backups. I strongly suggest installing to separate folder until

> > that is determined with certainty and as to whether it expires on you.

> > The interface is somewhat changed with maybe a couple of extra features

> > added before they went retail. Maybe they had a 1.43 that was last

before

> > retail and expired. Only change may have been the timer. But I learned

> > that

> > you did not want to allow an online update which would make any recent

> > version expire. I think the update no longer works.

> > What I have seen is that 1.41 finds many more entries of which many are

> > really duplicates because of the arrangement of the registry,

particularly

> > as to HKCR and HKLM. But regardless, same cautions apply as to how you

use

> > it.

> > Norman

> > "Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

> > news:eVhZ2q6TIHA.4104@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> >> Norman,

> >> Isn't jv16 ver 1.41 just a crippled version of 1.3??? It's been so

> >> long, I don't remember, but, that comes to mind. I am still using 1.3,

> >> mainly to find leftover detritus from program uninstalls (doesn't

happen

> >> very often). I find it easier than doing manual registry searches for

a

> >> variety of files, some of which, I don't know to look for! It isn't

for

> >> everyone, I know, and the main thing is the backup!...I'll say it

> >> again....BACKUP!!!!!

> >> Heirloom, old and once again, BACKUP!!

> >>

> >>

> >> "Norman" <nthums1@comcast.net> wrote in message

> >> news:etZWrC6TIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> >> >I could not agree more that registry cleaners are not for the

> >> >inexperienced.

> >> > I've had my share of problems, even with MSRegClean, which is no

longer

> >> > supported. It would remove a key that would break your install.

> >> > Unfortunately it always ran in automatic mode, but had enough

> >> > experience

> >> > (bad) that I knew what key to replace.

> >> > I now use only tools that allow me total control and automatically or

> >> > manually make backups of what is removed and allow restoring of

single

> >> > entries, with one exception and that tool is

> >> > http://support.microsoft.com/download/support/mslfiles/ShareDLL.exe

> >> >

> >> > I also use a really old one known as JV16 PowerTools, version 1.3 and

> >> > version 1.41. These were free and you may find an archive somewhere.

> >> > Also OLE Clean 1.5.

> >> > The biggest problem I've seen with such tools is they often want to

> > remove

> >> > HKCR keys that MS installed, but may not be currently in use, such as

> >> > briefcase, UPNP, some Office keys etc. And when you turn such on via

> >> > add/remove, windows setup, or by adding or first use of Office

feature,

> > it

> >> > ends up broken.

> >> > So that is definitely a key you want to look at closely before making

a

> >> > decision. Did MS put it there, or is it a leftover from something

> > removed.

> >> > snip>

> >> >>

> >> > So, when you are backed into the corner of only choice being format

and

> >> > install, or using risky registry tools, the choice is clear to me.

What

> >> > have

> >> > you got to lose? Use with over caution.

> >> > Norman

> >>

> >>

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest E_Net_Rider]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Heirloom,

You are so right. I had not noticed the small line down in the corner saying

I had X days left. I was tinkering with that registry monitor and used a

restore point shortly after JV16 install and it still did not work. So, I'm

guessing there was a 1.4.3 that fixed it and that I long ago deleted it

knowing it would expire. Just forgot that 1.4.1 also expired.

And in process of system restore I discovered new problem. See post in

system tools group, please.

Norman

 

"Norman" <nthums1@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:O1K31QeUIHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> 1.4.1 has something called Registry Monitor. Take snapshot upon install

and

> at later times and then allows comparison of snapshot to what current

> registry is. Lists all the deviations and allows several actions upon

> individual listed items. At least that is the way I understand it is

> supposed to work because it appears to have a 100,000 item limit and rolls

> back starting over at zero. It continues to search and then eventually

> crashes. I seem to remember trying this feature a very long time ago with

> similar results. My snapshot was late December and it seems odd I would

have

> so many changes since that time. I remember that long ago situation where

I

> created a new snapshot and then it seemed to work, so it seems that part

of

> it would need to be run routinely.

> And your questioning caused me to look more closely at the EULA for each.

> Wording in both concerning purchasing a license, maybe to get support. And

> wording in later expands on limitation of use and ownership. But the

kicker

> is the line at the bottom of the one in version 1.4.1 which says "version

> 1.3".

> I'm not a lawyer trying to figure out the full meaning and it almost

appears

> they did not have one write it either.

>

> Norman

>

> "Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

> news:%23LAsSzTUIHA.5816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > Norman,

> > Mine was not a statement, but, rather, a question. I was under the

> > impression that the version 1.3 was the last FREE version with full

> > capabilities. That could very well be incorrect and it is not important

> > enough, to me, to do a lot of research to determine its' validity.

Maybe

> it

> > was that 1.41 was a trial issue that, like you said, would expire after

a

> > period of time or number of uses.....I really don't remember. I just

know

> > that there was some reason that I was still using 1.3.

> > Heirloom, old and let me know if I am wrong

> >

> > "E_Net_Rider" <E_Net_Rider@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> > news:%23uJ0E9RUIHA.5016@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > > Crippled in what way?

> > > I maintain an archive sometimes with several versions until I'm

certain

> of

> > > newer. Sometimes it is a long time before I get around to cleanup.

> > > Also there seems to a disappearance of some of these which seems to

> happen

> > > during a Windows install or reinstall so I now try to keep them on an

> > > external drive.

> > > I remember at one point I had a newer version, than 1.3, that would

> expire

> > > after about 30 days.

> > > But via whatever processes, I now have 1.3 and 1.41. Oops, that magic

> got

> > > me

> > > again. Went to partition holding Utilities/registry/pwr tools and only

> > > have

> > > zipped copies. Others disappeared.

> > > But in one of those desperation fixes avoiding format, I decided to

give

> > > 1.41 a go at it after running 1.3. My thinking, which may be wrong,

was

> > > that

> > > 1.41 would die after 30 days, but did not care at that point. It will

> > > happily install to 1.3 folder but uncertain as to how well it assumes

> > > previous backups. I strongly suggest installing to separate folder

until

> > > that is determined with certainty and as to whether it expires on you.

> > > The interface is somewhat changed with maybe a couple of extra

features

> > > added before they went retail. Maybe they had a 1.43 that was last

> before

> > > retail and expired. Only change may have been the timer. But I learned

> > > that

> > > you did not want to allow an online update which would make any recent

> > > version expire. I think the update no longer works.

> > > What I have seen is that 1.41 finds many more entries of which many

are

> > > really duplicates because of the arrangement of the registry,

> particularly

> > > as to HKCR and HKLM. But regardless, same cautions apply as to how you

> use

> > > it.

> > > Norman

> > > "Heirloom" <nobodyhome@noplacelike.hom> wrote in message

> > > news:eVhZ2q6TIHA.4104@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> > >> Norman,

> > >> Isn't jv16 ver 1.41 just a crippled version of 1.3??? It's been

so

> > >> long, I don't remember, but, that comes to mind. I am still using

1.3,

> > >> mainly to find leftover detritus from program uninstalls (doesn't

> happen

> > >> very often). I find it easier than doing manual registry searches

for

> a

> > >> variety of files, some of which, I don't know to look for! It isn't

> for

> > >> everyone, I know, and the main thing is the backup!...I'll say it

> > >> again....BACKUP!!!!!

> > >> Heirloom, old and once again, BACKUP!!

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> "Norman" <nthums1@comcast.net> wrote in message

> > >> news:etZWrC6TIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > >> >I could not agree more that registry cleaners are not for the

> > >> >inexperienced.

> > >> > I've had my share of problems, even with MSRegClean, which is no

> longer

> > >> > supported. It would remove a key that would break your install.

> > >> > Unfortunately it always ran in automatic mode, but had enough

> > >> > experience

> > >> > (bad) that I knew what key to replace.

> > >> > I now use only tools that allow me total control and automatically

or

> > >> > manually make backups of what is removed and allow restoring of

> single

> > >> > entries, with one exception and that tool is

> > >> > http://support.microsoft.com/download/support/mslfiles/ShareDLL.exe

> > >> >

> > >> > I also use a really old one known as JV16 PowerTools, version 1.3

and

> > >> > version 1.41. These were free and you may find an archive

somewhere.

> > >> > Also OLE Clean 1.5.

> > >> > The biggest problem I've seen with such tools is they often want to

> > > remove

> > >> > HKCR keys that MS installed, but may not be currently in use, such

as

> > >> > briefcase, UPNP, some Office keys etc. And when you turn such on

via

> > >> > add/remove, windows setup, or by adding or first use of Office

> feature,

> > > it

> > >> > ends up broken.

> > >> > So that is definitely a key you want to look at closely before

making

> a

> > >> > decision. Did MS put it there, or is it a leftover from something

> > > removed.

> > >> > snip>

> > >> >>

> > >> > So, when you are backed into the corner of only choice being format

> and

> > >> > install, or using risky registry tools, the choice is clear to me.

> What

> > >> > have

> > >> > you got to lose? Use with over caution.

> > >> > Norman

> > >>

> > >>

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest Norman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

one spirit."

 

77Gen. 4:7. "Unto thee shall be his desire."

 

78Office for Holy Saturday. "Which won for us a Saviour."

 

79Office for Good Friday. "Which won for us God's hallowed members to

embrace."

 

80Hymn Vexilla regis. "Worthy God's hallowed members to embrace."

 

81Luke 7:6 "I am not worthy."

 

821 Cor. 11:29. "Who eateth unworthily."

 

83Rev. 4:11. "Thou art worthy to receive."

 

84Office of the Holy Virgin. "Make me worthy."

 

[85]Matthew, 7:7, "Ask and it shall be given you."

 

86Is. 45:15.

 

[87]John 8:30-33. "Many believed on him. Then Jesus said: 'If ye continue...

then ye are my disciples indeed, and the truth shall make you free.' They

answered him: 'We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man.'"

 

88Rev. 22:11. "He that is righteous, let him be righteous still."

 

[89]Circumcidentes cor. Rom. 2. "Circumcision is that of the heart."

 

901 Cor. 15:33. "Evil communications corrupt good manners."

 

91"What they have found by their curiosity, they have lost by their pride."

Quod curiositate invenerunt, superbia perdiderunt. St. Augustine, Sermon

cxli.

 

921 Cor. 1:21. "Which... by wisdom knew not... it pleased God by the

foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."

 

93St. Bernard, Sermones in Cantica Canticorum, lxxxiv. "The better one is,

the worse one becomes, if one attributes the cause of this goodness to one's

self."

 

[94]Ibid. "Meriting blows more than kisses, I fear not, because I love."

 

95John 11:33. Et turbarit seipsum. "And he troubled himself."

 

96Matt. 26:46. "Let us be going."

[Guest Norman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

so often provoked, and who can justly destroy us at any time; in

recognising that we can do nothing without Him, and have deserved nothing

from Him but His displeasure. It consists in knowing that there is an

unconquerable opposition between us and God, and that without a mediator

there can be no communion with Him.

 

471. It is unjust that men should attach themselves to me, even though they

do it with pleasure and voluntarily. I should deceive those in whom I had

created this desire; for I am not the end of any, and I have not the

wherewithal to satisfy them. Am I not about to die? And thus the object of

their attachment will die. Therefore, as I would be blamable in causing a

falsehood to be believed, though I should employ gentle persuasion, though

it should be believed with pleasure, and though it should give me pleasure;

even so I am blamable in making myself loved and if I attract persons to

attach themselves to me. I ought to warn those who are ready to consent to a

lie that they ought not to believe it, whatever advantage comes to me from

it; and likewise that they ought not to attach themselves to me; for they

ought to spend their life and their care in pleasing God, or in seeking Him.

 

472. Self-will will never be satisfied, though it should have command of all

it would; but we are satisfied from the moment we renounce it. Without it we

cannot be discontented; with it we cannot be content.

 

473. Let us imagine a body full of thinking members.

 

474. Members. To commence with that.--To regulate the love which we owe to

[Guest E_Net_Rider]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Jesuits have not made the truth uncertain, but they have made their own

ungodliness certain.

 

Contradiction has always been permitted, in order to blind the wicked; for

all that offends truth or love is evil. This is the true principle.

 

903. All religions and sects in the world have had natural reason for a

guide. Christians alone have been constrained to take their rules from

without themselves, and to acquaint themselves with those which Jesus Christ

bequeathed to men of old to be handed down to true believers. This

constraint wearies these good Fathers. They desire, like other people, to

have liberty to follow their own imaginations. It is in vain that we cry to

them, as the prophets said to the Jews of old: "Enter into the Church;

acquaint yourselves with the precepts which the men of old left to her, and

follow those paths." They have answered like the Jews: "We will not walk in

them; but we will follow the thoughts of our hearts"; and they have said,

"We will be as the other nations."

 

904. They make a rule of exception.

 

Have the men of old given absolution before penance? Do this as exceptional.

But of the exception you make a rule without exception, so that you do not

even want the rule to be exceptional.

 

905. On confessions and absolutions without signs of regret.

 

God regards only the inward; the Church judges only by the outward.

[Guest Norman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

of the stoutest, sturdiest devil in hell, it would be nothing

to withstand or endure it.

 

The bow of God's wrath is bent, and the arrow made ready on the string,

and justice bends the arrow at your heart, and strains the bow, and it

is nothing but the mere pleasure of God, and that of an angry God,

without any promise or obligation at all, that keeps the arrow one

moment from being made drunk with your blood. Thus all you that never

passed under a great change of heart, by the mighty power of the Spirit

of God upon your souls; all you that were never born again, and made new

creatures, and raised from being dead in sin, to a state of new, and

before altogether unexperienced light and life, are in the hands of an

angry God. However you may have reformed your life in many things, and

may have had religious affections, and may keep up a form of religion in

your families and closets, and in the house of God, it is nothing but

his mere pleasure that keeps you from being this moment swallowed up in

everlasting destruction. However unconvinced you may now be of the truth

of what you hear, by and by you will be fully convinced of it. Those

that are gone from being in the like circumstances with you, see that it

was so with them; for destruction came suddenly upon most of them; when

they expected nothing of it, and while they were saying, Peace and

safet

[Guest O.J. Newman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

other.

 

360. What the Stoics propose is so difficult and foolish!

 

The Stoics lay down that all those who are not at the high degree of wisdom

are equally foolish and vicious, as those who are two inches under water.

 

361. The sovereign good. Dispute about the sovereign good.--Ut sis contentus

temetipso et ex te nascentibus bonis.48 There is a contradiction, for in the

end they advise suicide. Oh! What a happy life, from which we are to free

ourselves as from the plague!

 

362. Ex senatus-consultis et plebiscitis...

 

To ask like passages.

 

363. Ex senatus-consultis et plebiscitis scelera exercentur. Seneca.

588.[49]

 

Nihil tam absurde dici potest quod non dicatur ab aliquo philosophorum.50

 

Quibusdam destinatis sententiis consecrati quae non probant coguntur

defendere.51

 

Ut omnium rerum sic litterarum quoque intemperantia laboramus.52

 

Id maxime quemque decet, quod est cujusque suum maxime.53

 

Hos natura modos primum dedit.54

 

Paucis opus est litteris ad bonam mentem.55

 

Si quando turpe non sit, tamen non est non turpe quum id a multitudine

laudetur.56

 

Mihi sic usus est, tibi ut opus est facto, fac.57

 

364. Rarum est enim ut satis se quisque vereatur.58

 

Tot circa unum caput tumultuantes deos.59

 

Nihil turpius quam cognitioni assertionem praecurrere.60

 

Nec me pudet

[Guest Heirloom]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

in regard to others as those who

have a watch are in regard to others. One says, "It is two hours ago"; the

other says, "It is only three-quarters of an hour." I look at my watch, and

say to the one, "You are weary," and to the other, "Time gallops with you";

for it is only an hour and a half ago, and I laugh at those who tell me that

time goes slowly with me and that I judge by imagination. They do not know

that I judge by my watch.

 

6. Just as we harm the understanding, we harm the feelings also.

 

The understanding and the feelings are moulded by intercourse; the

understanding and feelings are corrupted by intercourse. Thus good or bad

society improves or corrupts them. It is, then, all-important to know how to

choose in order to improve and not to corrupt them; and we cannot make this

choice, if they be not already improved and not corrupted. Thus a circle is

formed, and those are fortunate who escape it.

 

7. The greater intellect one has, the more originality one finds in men.

Ordinary persons find no difference between men.

 

8. There are many people who listen to a sermon in the same way as they

listen to vespers.

 

9. When we wish to correct with advantage and to show another that he errs,

we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that side it is

usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to him the side on

which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he sees that he was not

mistaken and that he only failed to see all sides. Now, no one is offended

at not seeing everything; but one does not like to be mistaken, and that

perhaps arises from the fact that man naturally cannot see everything, and

that naturally he cannot err in the side he looks a

[Guest Alan Edwards]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

so great wisdom, equity, and judgement, that

the most ancient legislators, Greek and Roman, having had some knowledge of

it, have borrowed from it their principal laws; this is evident from what

are called the Twelve Tables, and from the other proofs which Josephus

gives.

 

But this law is at the same time the severest and strictest of all in

respect to their religious worship, imposing on this people, in order to

keep them to their duty, a thousand peculiar and painful observances, on

pain of death. Whence it is very astonishing that it has been constantly

preserved during many centuries by a people, rebellious and impatient as

this one was; while all other states have changed their laws from time to

time, although these were far more lenient.

 

The book which contains this law, the first of all, is itself the most

ancient book in the world, those of Homer, Hesiod, and others, being six or

seven hundred years later.

 

621. The creation of the deluge being past, and God no longer requiring to

destroy the world, nor to create it anew, nor to give such great signs of

Himself, He began to establish a people on the earth, purposely formed, who

were to last until the coming of the people whom the Messiah should fashion

by His spirit.

 

622. The creation of the world beginning to be distant, God provided a

singl

[Guest E_Net_Rider]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

sense of her own exceeding sinfulness

continued increasing from Thursday till Monday and she gave this account

of it: That it had been her opinion, till now, she was not guilty of

Adam's sin, nor any way concerned in it, because she was not active in

it; but that now she saw she was guilty of that sin, and all over

defiled by it; and the sin which she brought into the world with her,

was alone sufficient to condemn her.

 

On the Sabbath-day she was so ill, that her friends thought it best that

she should not go to public worship, of which she seemed very desirous:

but when she went to bed on the Sabbath night, she took up a resolution,

that she would the next morning go to the minister, hoping to find some

relief there. As she awakened on Monday morning, a little before day,

she wondered within herself at the easiness and calmness she felt in her

mind, which was of that kind she never felt before. As she thought of

this, such words as these were in her mind: The words of the Lord are

pure words, health to the soul, and marrow to the bones: and then these

words, The blood of Christ cleanses from all sin; which were accompanied

with a lively sense of the excellency of Christ, and His sufficiency to

satisfy for the sins of the whole world. She then thought of tha

[Guest O.J. Newman]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

of the glory of God's truth and other perfections, that she

said, it seemed as though her life was going, and that she saw it was

easy with God to take away her life by discoveries of Himself. Soon

after this she went to a private religious meeting, and her mind was

full of a sense and view of the glory of God all the time. When the

exercise was ended, some asked her concerning what she had experienced,

and she began to give an account, but as she was relating it, it revived

such a sense of the same things, that her strength failed, and they were

obliged to take her and lay her upon the bed. Afterwards she was greatly

affected, and rejoiced with these words, Worthy is the Lamb that was

slain! She had several days together a sweet sense of the excellency and

loveliness of Christ in His meekness, which disposed her continually to

be repeating over these words, which were sweet to her, meek and lowly

in heart, meek and lowly in heart. She once expressed herself to one of

her sisters to this purpose, that she had continued whole days and whole

nights, in a constant ravishing view of the glory of God and Christ,

having enjoyed as much as her life could bear. Once, as her brother was

speaking of the dying love of Christ, she told him, she had such a sense

of it, that the mere mentioning of it was ready to overcome her.

 

Once, when she came to me, she said,-that at such and such a time, she

thought she saw as much of God, and had as much joy and pleasure, as was

possible in this life; and that yet, afterwards, God discovered Himself

far more abundantly. She saw the same things as before, yet more

clearly, and in a far more excellent and deligh

[Guest Heirloom]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

Sibyls and

Trismegistus, and so many others which have been believed by the world, are

false, and found to be false in the course of time. It is not so with

contemporaneous writers.

 

There is a great difference between a book which an individual writes and

publishes to a nation, and a book which itself creates a nation. We cannot

doubt that the book is as old as the people.

 

629. Josephus hides the shame of his nation.

 

Moses does not hide his own shame.

 

Quis mihi det ut omnes prophetent?112

 

He was weary of the multitude.

 

630. The sincerity of the Jews.--Maccabees, after they had no more prophets;

the Masorah, since Jesus Christ.

 

This book will be a testimony for you.

 

Defective and final letters.

 

Sincere against their honour, and dying for it; this has no example in the

world, and no root in nature.

 

631. Sincerity of the Jews.--They preserve lovingly and carefully the book

in which Moses declares that they have been all their life ungrateful to

God, and that he knows they will be still more so after his death; but that

he calls heaven and earth to witness against them and that he has taught

them enough.

 

He declares that God, being angry with them, shall at last scatter them

among all the nations of the earth; that as they have offended Him by

worshipping gods who were not their God, so He will provoke them by calling

a people who are not His people; that He desires that all His words be

preserved for ever, and that His book be placed in the Ark of the Covenant

to serve for ever as a witness against them.

 

Isaiah says the same thing, 30.

 

632. On Esdras.--The story that the books were burnt with the temple proved

false by Maccabees: "Jeremiah gave them the law."

 

The story that he recited the wh

[Guest Heirloom]

Re: Registry Defragmenters

 

are ready to wonder that their reasonings seem to make no more

impression. Many fall under such a mistake as to be ready to doubt of

their good estate, because there was so much use made of their own

reason in the convictions they have received; they are afraid that they

have no illumination above the natural force of their own faculties: and

many make that an objection against the spirituality of their

convictions, that it is so easy to see things as they now see them. They

have often heard, that conversion is a work of mighty power, manifesting

to the soul what neither man nor angel can give such a conviction of;

but it seems to them that these things are so plain and easy, and

rational, that any body can see them. If they are asked, why they never

saw thus before, they say, it seems to them it was because they never

thought of it. But very often these difficulties are soon removed by

those of another nature; for when God withdraws, they find themselves as

it were blind again, they for the present lose their realizing sense of

those things that looked so plain to them, and, by all they can do, they

cannot recover it, till God renews the influence of His Spirit.

 

Persons after their conversion often speak of religious things as

seeming new to them