|
|
Our Hot Pick: Rising Antivirus 2006 - Certified by TUV & Checkmark! Get 10% discount by entering this coupon code: ONDISCOUNT10
I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure "luck",
is it really that way?
Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
manner without breaking something.
Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more stable
|
|
Using at least one appendage, the entity known in this space-time continuum
as k17 <sam[ at ]sam.de> revealed in news:mn.4a9f7d773ac73de3.77693[ at ]sam.de:
[Quoted Text] > I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
> encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure "luck",
> is it really that way?
Unfortunately, yes
>
> Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
> manner without breaking something.
Not automatically, whatever the hype. By all means run one, but the only
way to have a reasonable chance of fixing something is to pick and choose
from the "errors" reported - And you'd better be damn sure you know what
the consequences would be. Even then, touch nothing without a full backup.
Best stick to relatively safe options like broken startup links
>
> Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
> cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
>
Best left alone. Tough, but there it is. I've reinstalled Windows too
often, for too many friends who installed some neat whizzo cure-all from a
magazine cover-disk, and allowed it to "fix" all "problems". No more. I get
the call, I install Linux or advise them to go to a computer shop. Less
free beer, but less aggravation
|
|
There's no need or reason to use a so-called registry cleaner. This is
such an old argument that it doesn't need to be repeated again. There's
plenty for you to read in the newsgroups and the web. It comes down to
this: You can believe what you want to believe, or you can believe the
facts.
On what basis do you say "Microsoft should do something to make registry
a bit more stable"? Please include specific examples.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est
k17 wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
> encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure "luck",
> is it really that way?
>
> Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
> manner without breaking something.
>
> Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
> cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
>
> I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more stable
>
>
|
|
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:15:21 +0530, k17 <sam[ at ]sam.de> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
> encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure "luck",
> is it really that way?
In the sense that sometimes using a registry cleaner results in a
problem, and sometimes it doesn't, yes, it's really that way. The risk
of its causing a problem is always there.
> Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
> manner without breaking something.
No. There is always a risk of breaking something. Moreover there is
*no* advantage to cleaning the registry. Leave it alone.
> Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
> cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
>
> I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more stable
Stable? There is no issue with registry stability.
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0306_01C7C222.3AF26830
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
there are NO intelligent registry cleaners.
the best you can get is one that scans correctly and reports what it =
finds.
then you have to interpret the results and make your choice on what to =
do.
Ccleaner is one that is often recommended for doing this.
I use it and read the results and then decide what I want/need to do to =
correct what it thinks it finds that is questionable.
mikeyhsd[ at ]comcast.net
"k17" <sam[ at ]sam.de> wrote in message =
news:mn.4a9f7d773ac73de3.77693[ at ]sam.de...
I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not=20
encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure "luck", =
is it really that way?
Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient=20
manner without breaking something.
Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry=20
cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more =
stable
------=_NextPart_000_0306_01C7C222.3AF26830
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-15">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>there are NO intelligent registry=20
cleaners.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>the best you can get is one that scans =
correctly=20
and reports what it finds.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>then you have to interpret the results =
and make=20
your choice on what to do.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ccleaner is one that is often =
recommended for doing=20
this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I use it and read the results and then =
decide what=20
I want/need to do to correct what it thinks it finds that is=20
questionable.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<P> </P>
<P><FONT color=3D#ff0000>
<MARQUEE scrollAmount=3D2 scrollDelay=3D9 behavior=3Dalternate =
width=3D"35%"=20
bgColor=3D#ffff00 height=3D22><A=20
href=3D"mailto:mikeyhsd[ at ]comcast.net">mikeyhsd[ at ]comcast.net</A></MARQUEE></=
FONT></P>
<P> </P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"k17" <<A href=3D"mailto:sam[ at ]sam.de">sam[ at ]sam.de</A>> wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:mn.4a9f7d773ac73de3.77693[ at ]sam.de">news:mn.4a9f7d773ac73de3.7=
7693[ at ]sam.de</A>...</DIV>I=20
have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not=20
<BR>encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure =
"luck",=20
<BR>is it really that way?<BR><BR>Is there any product out there that =
can do=20
it in the most efficient <BR>manner without breaking =
something.<BR><BR>Any=20
reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry =
<BR>cleaners of=20
anykind (freeware/shareware etc)<BR><BR>I feel Microsoft should do =
something=20
to make registry a bit more stable<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0306_01C7C222.3AF26830--
|
|
Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:15:21 +0530, k17 <sam[ at ]sam.de> wrote:
>
>> I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
>> encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure
>> "luck", is it really that way?
>
>
>
> In the sense that sometimes using a registry cleaner results in a
> problem, and sometimes it doesn't, yes, it's really that way. The risk
> of its causing a problem is always there.
>
>
>> Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
>> manner without breaking something.
>
>
> No. There is always a risk of breaking something. Moreover there is
> *no* advantage to cleaning the registry. Leave it alone.
>
>
>> Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
>> cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
>>
>> I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more
>> stable
>
>
> Stable? There is no issue with registry stability.
I'll bet all these folks asking about registry cleaners don't really
understand what the registry is and how easy it is to screw it up.
Furthermore, they are probably confusing a cluttered and fragmented hard
drive (that is cluttered with temporary files) with a "cluttered"
registry. Most of us know that a registry "cluttered" with leftover
orphan entries has virtually no impact whatsoever on the performance of
a PC, but a newbie doesn't realize the distinction.
Further confusion no doubt comes from good (well, good in the event a
newbie refrains from using the registry cleaning function!) programs
like Ccleaner. Someone who uses Ccleaner (both the temp file cleaning
*and* the registry cleaning) and then notices an improvement in
performance can mistakenly conclude that is because they cleaned the
registry. Of course, the improvement is from the cleaning of the temp
files! Furthermore, the registry cleaning part of Ccleaner should be
avoided by newbies because they don't necessarily know what they're
doing!
I wouldn't recommend a registry cleaner to anyone unless they show an
active interest in understanding the nuts and bolts of the registry. And
here are the prerequisites:
1. Don't mess with it at all until Step 6.
2. Study the registry. There are books and Web pages that have good
information on it.
3. Learn to make backups of the registry JUST IN CASE.
4. Back up the registry!
5. Use regedit to the point of proficiency.
6. Don't use general all-purpose registry cleaners. Rather, use one like
Jouni Vuorio's RegCleaner (and oldie, but goodie), which automatically
backs up the entry changed for an easy undo.
|
|
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 19:07:26 -0400, "Daave"
<dcwashNOSPAM[ at ]myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
All excellent points. Thanks for adding them (except for number 6,
about which I know nothing, so can't comment).
[Quoted Text] > Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:15:21 +0530, k17 <sam[ at ]sam.de> wrote:
> >
> >> I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
> >> encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure
> >> "luck", is it really that way?
> >
> >
> >
> > In the sense that sometimes using a registry cleaner results in a
> > problem, and sometimes it doesn't, yes, it's really that way. The risk
> > of its causing a problem is always there.
> >
> >
> >> Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
> >> manner without breaking something.
> >
> >
> > No. There is always a risk of breaking something. Moreover there is
> > *no* advantage to cleaning the registry. Leave it alone.
> >
> >
> >> Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
> >> cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
> >>
> >> I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more
> >> stable
> >
> >
> > Stable? There is no issue with registry stability.
>
> I'll bet all these folks asking about registry cleaners don't really
> understand what the registry is and how easy it is to screw it up.
> Furthermore, they are probably confusing a cluttered and fragmented hard
> drive (that is cluttered with temporary files) with a "cluttered"
> registry. Most of us know that a registry "cluttered" with leftover
> orphan entries has virtually no impact whatsoever on the performance of
> a PC, but a newbie doesn't realize the distinction.
>
> Further confusion no doubt comes from good (well, good in the event a
> newbie refrains from using the registry cleaning function!) programs
> like Ccleaner. Someone who uses Ccleaner (both the temp file cleaning
> *and* the registry cleaning) and then notices an improvement in
> performance can mistakenly conclude that is because they cleaned the
> registry. Of course, the improvement is from the cleaning of the temp
> files! Furthermore, the registry cleaning part of Ccleaner should be
> avoided by newbies because they don't necessarily know what they're
> doing!
>
> I wouldn't recommend a registry cleaner to anyone unless they show an
> active interest in understanding the nuts and bolts of the registry. And
> here are the prerequisites:
>
> 1. Don't mess with it at all until Step 6.
>
> 2. Study the registry. There are books and Web pages that have good
> information on it.
>
> 3. Learn to make backups of the registry JUST IN CASE.
>
> 4. Back up the registry!
>
> 5. Use regedit to the point of proficiency.
>
> 6. Don't use general all-purpose registry cleaners. Rather, use one like
> Jouni Vuorio's RegCleaner (and oldie, but goodie), which automatically
> backs up the entry changed for an easy undo.
>
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
|
|
I believe, RegCleaner used to be a part of his jvtools 1.6, before he made
it a stand alone utility. Its too powerful for most users. I have it in
backup, but I use CCleaner anymore these days; like RegCleaner - it allows
you to make a backup before you fix your issues.
Ken Blake, MVP <kblake[ at ]this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 19:07:26 -0400, "Daave"
> <dcwashNOSPAM[ at ]myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> All excellent points. Thanks for adding them (except for number 6,
> about which I know nothing, so can't comment).
>
>
>
>> Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
>>> On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:15:21 +0530, k17 <sam[ at ]sam.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have recently seen a thread where using registry cleaners was not
>>>> encouraged. On that thread Shenan Stanley, MVP said it is pure
>>>> "luck", is it really that way?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the sense that sometimes using a registry cleaner results in a
>>> problem, and sometimes it doesn't, yes, it's really that way. The risk
>>> of its causing a problem is always there.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is there any product out there that can do it in the most efficient
>>>> manner without breaking something.
>>>
>>>
>>> No. There is always a risk of breaking something. Moreover there is
>>> *no* advantage to cleaning the registry. Leave it alone.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Any reccomendations are welcome about your experince with registry
>>>> cleaners of anykind (freeware/shareware etc)
>>>>
>>>> I feel Microsoft should do something to make registry a bit more
>>>> stable
>>>
>>>
>>> Stable? There is no issue with registry stability.
>>
>> I'll bet all these folks asking about registry cleaners don't really
>> understand what the registry is and how easy it is to screw it up.
>> Furthermore, they are probably confusing a cluttered and fragmented hard
>> drive (that is cluttered with temporary files) with a "cluttered"
>> registry. Most of us know that a registry "cluttered" with leftover
>> orphan entries has virtually no impact whatsoever on the performance of
>> a PC, but a newbie doesn't realize the distinction.
>>
>> Further confusion no doubt comes from good (well, good in the event a
>> newbie refrains from using the registry cleaning function!) programs
>> like Ccleaner. Someone who uses Ccleaner (both the temp file cleaning
>> *and* the registry cleaning) and then notices an improvement in
>> performance can mistakenly conclude that is because they cleaned the
>> registry. Of course, the improvement is from the cleaning of the temp
>> files! Furthermore, the registry cleaning part of Ccleaner should be
>> avoided by newbies because they don't necessarily know what they're
>> doing!
>>
>> I wouldn't recommend a registry cleaner to anyone unless they show an
>> active interest in understanding the nuts and bolts of the registry. And
>> here are the prerequisites:
>>
>> 1. Don't mess with it at all until Step 6.
>>
>> 2. Study the registry. There are books and Web pages that have good
>> information on it.
>>
>> 3. Learn to make backups of the registry JUST IN CASE.
>>
>> 4. Back up the registry!
>>
>> 5. Use regedit to the point of proficiency.
>>
>> 6. Don't use general all-purpose registry cleaners. Rather, use one like
>> Jouni Vuorio's RegCleaner (and oldie, but goodie), which automatically
>> backs up the entry changed for an easy undo.
|
|
"C J." <no.reply[ at ]example.invalid> wrote in message
news:e5MVidrwHHA.4132[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] >I believe, RegCleaner used to be a part of his jvtools 1.6, before he
>made it a stand alone utility. Its too powerful for most users. I
>have it in backup, but I use CCleaner anymore these days; like
>RegCleaner - it allows you to make a backup before you fix your issues.
Actually, I find RegCleaner easier to use because of the Author and
Software columns (as well as "Advanced Info"). One time I wanted to
uninstall Firefox (I forget the version, but on my 98SE box, a fresh
install even in Safe Mode kept on hanging) and nothing worked (not even
the reinstall/uninstall trick). So I deleted the program files using
Windows Explorer and took care of the rest using RegCleaner.
And yes, that's the same utility which was part of JVTools.
|
|
I've used RegCleaner hundreds of times without a problem.
KG
"Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM[ at ]myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message
news:%23LEffgxwHHA.4588[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] > "C J." <no.reply[ at ]example.invalid> wrote in message
> news:e5MVidrwHHA.4132[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I believe, RegCleaner used to be a part of his jvtools 1.6, before he made
>>it a stand alone utility. Its too powerful for most users. I have it in
>>backup, but I use CCleaner anymore these days; like RegCleaner - it allows
>>you to make a backup before you fix your issues.
>
> Actually, I find RegCleaner easier to use because of the Author and
> Software columns (as well as "Advanced Info"). One time I wanted to
> uninstall Firefox (I forget the version, but on my 98SE box, a fresh
> install even in Safe Mode kept on hanging) and nothing worked (not even
> the reinstall/uninstall trick). So I deleted the program files using
> Windows Explorer and took care of the rest using RegCleaner.
>
> And yes, that's the same utility which was part of JVTools.
|
|
I've used Vuorio's Reg Cleaner for years -- with care. Just never
guess. I've also used Norton Utilities 2002; it works well for
reassociating keys if you've moved stuff around. Again, never guess.
Never use the default options. Always read the options Norton finds
and if there's anything a bit off, leave it alone.
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:38:32 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake[ at ]this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote:
|On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 19:07:26 -0400, "Daave"
|<dcwashNOSPAM[ at ]myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
|
|
|All excellent points. Thanks for adding them (except for number 6,
|about which I know nothing, so can't comment).
||
|> Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
|> > On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:15:21 +0530, k17 <sam[ at ]sam.de> wrote:
|> >chomp chomp chomp
|>
|> 6. Don't use general all-purpose registry cleaners. Rather, use one like
|> Jouni Vuorio's RegCleaner (and oldie, but goodie), which automatically
|> backs up the entry changed for an easy undo.
|>
`
Lady Dungeness
Crabby, but Delicious!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|