Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

On a scale, I'd say it's medium dangerous. That's why you can't find it on
Microsoft's site to download, and haven't been able to for ~ 10 years or
more.

From http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb727154.aspx, "Distributing
Registry Changes" dated 2001-- "However, Regclean works only with the
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT subtree, which is almost never the source of major
registry problems, and the program has been known to cause as many problems
as it fixes."

Unfortunately, that paragraph also says you can't delete anything from the
Registry using REG files, which is patently false. See
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/310516

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MM" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jpq0249ccv43mqvcpk8ejo7gn6pk0j8huc@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 5 May 2008 14:15:26 -0500, "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>
>><letterman@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>news:1uku145tld6kusvbhp5hj9r48d4o7tolej@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:
>>>
>>> >ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and will
>>actually
>>> >FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
>>>
>>> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never seen
>>> it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
>>> Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would get so
>>> huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I created a
>>> folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a bunch
>>> of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from text, or
>>> Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc. Then I
>>> begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
>>> downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and Wordpad
>>> to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are documented in
>>> the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store "recently
>>> opened files".
>>>
>>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>I agree with Gary Terhune 100% .
>
> What about Microsoft's own RegClean.exe? For Windows 98 SE? I use that
> occasionally.
>
> MM

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

First, you can still run SCANREG /OPT, which IIRC, removes empty space. I
believe you can also compact (in the sense of rearranging) the Registry
using the old Export/Import method, but when it's that big, it will take a
while. Personally, I think compacting the Registry is highly overrated.
Registries that big get that way due to massive apps suites like Office. If
you have a large Registry that you think should be significantly smaller,
then it would have to be due to doing something stupid like manual removal
of the Office programs folder without properly uninstalling. The solution
for that is to reinstall the Suite/Apps, then uninstall them properly. If
you want to go looking for remains afterwards, fine, but you won't find
much, miniscule crumbs compared to the size of the Registry in whole, and
Registry Cleaning tools are only going to find some of the garbage
(relatively small portion in most cases.)

In short, yes. If you've so royally messed up your Registry as to require
"cleaning", or even compacting, then wipe/reinstall of Windows IS the best
recourse.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MM" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9uq024522do4vrkjorsusns6prgi2848e2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 5 May 2008 16:45:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:
>
>>Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any significant
>>failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to run on
>>a
>>large Registry. BFD.
>
> This is the problem I have had. But IS there a way to compact the
> registry after deinstalling unwanted programs? Or is the ONLY solution
> to reinstall Windows and reinstall only the apps one needs? My
> SYSTEM.DAT on one PC (98SE) is 10MB and SCANREG /FIX barfs at about
> 87% completed.
>
> MM

 

[MEB]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might have
| come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one for
| the momentary purpose, I was done.
|
| I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
| exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend a
| full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
suspect.
| Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
| removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
virus(es)
| they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even have
| REG files for the purpose.

In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these things
are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used to
locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant. Without
the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One could
even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class, yet
without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
cleanup as well.

| If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of crap,
then
| we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt about
it,
| but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot of
| "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
| instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your AT
| commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS to
| remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| reinstall themselves.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com

The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation disks
for their applications, or those applications may no longer be supported
[leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then you
run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted upon
the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one can
search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever is
found.
Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved these
during the course of their usage, sadly many don't.

I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we did
offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to work
through the potentials associated.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings for
| > individual responses...
| >
| > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
| > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
| > caution
| > not to use the auto cleanup.
| >
| > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
group
| > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
Virus
| > removal forums and sites.
| > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly during
| > the
| > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
the
| > registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting manual
| > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
addin
| > or
| > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
basic
| > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| >
| > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be of
| > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
| >
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any significant
| > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to
run
| > on
| > a
| > | large Registry. BFD.
| > |
| > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
| > disaster
| > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done, but
| > only
| > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might* locate a
| > few
| > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of any
| > real
| > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL
| > search
| > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| > |
| > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete it,
| > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
| > weren't
| > a
| > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after many
| > years
| > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've never
once
| > had
| > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry tools,
| > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
their
| > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
| > | "idiot-proof".
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| > |
| > |
| > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| > | >
| > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
| > which
| > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications which
fill
| > the
| > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
| > supposedly
| > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless entries
to
| > any
| > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
| > changed
| > | > at sometime.
| > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be prone
to
| > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
then
| > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
crisis.
| > | >
| > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
| > methods
| > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
otherwise
| > work
| > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| > confronted
| > | > with
| > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,, advised
HOW
| > to
| > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| > | >
| > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
| > | > registry,
| > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean and
| > | > mean,,,
| > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be taken
| > with
| > | > *a
| > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the user
is
| > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur. IF, on
| > the
| > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the registry,
makes
| > an
| > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by searching
| > first
| > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
| > results
| > | > can
| > | > be achieved.
| > | >
| > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and understanding is
| > YOUR
| > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT cause
| > more
| > | > harm than good.
| > | >
| > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during cleanup
| > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > --
| > | > _________
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
| > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
wrote:
| > | > | >
| > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
will
| > | > | >> actually
| > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never
| > seen
| > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
| > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would
get
| > so
| > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
| > created
| > a
| > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a
| > bunch
| > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from
text,
| > or
| > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
Then
| > I
| > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
| > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
| > Wordpad
| > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
documented
| > in
| > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
"recently
| > | > | > opened files".
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
| > delete
| > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo downloads
I
| > | > tried.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK folder,
| > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
things
| > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
removed
| > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course I
| > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
| > it's
| > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and should
not
| > be
| > | > | > used.
| > | > |
| > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
about.
| > | > |
| > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
| > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| > | > |
| > | > | Nonsense.
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| >
| >
|

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
> have
> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one
> for
> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
> |
> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend a
> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
> suspect.
> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
> virus(es)
> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even
> have
> | REG files for the purpose.
>
> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
> things
> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used to
> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant. Without
> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One could
> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class, yet
> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a hard
time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised Registry
Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.

> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
> cleanup as well.

I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back to
"cleaning" MRUs, etc.?

> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of crap,
> then
> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt about
> it,
> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot
> of
> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your
> AT
> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS to
> | remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
> | reinstall themselves.
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
>
> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation disks
> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be supported
> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
> you
> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted upon
> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one can
> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever is
> found.
> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
> these
> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't

You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?

OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but that
small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my blanket
condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the real
skinny.

> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we did
> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to work
> through the potentials associated.

HUH!?!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
>
> |
> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
> for
> | > individual responses...
> | >
> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
> | > caution
> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
> | >
> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
> group
> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
> Virus
> | > removal forums and sites.
> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
> during
> | > the
> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
> the
> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting manual
> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
> addin
> | > or
> | > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
> basic
> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
> | >
> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
> of
> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
> | >
> | > --
> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > --
> | > _________
> | >
> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
> significant
> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to
> run
> | > on
> | > a
> | > | large Registry. BFD.
> | > |
> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
> | > disaster
> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done,
> but
> | > only
> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might* locate
> a
> | > few
> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of
> any
> | > real
> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL
> | > search
> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
> | > |
> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
> it,
> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
> | > weren't
> | > a
> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after many
> | > years
> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've never
> once
> | > had
> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
> tools,
> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
> their
> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
> | > | "idiot-proof".
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
> | > | >
> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
> | > which
> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications which
> fill
> | > the
> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
> | > supposedly
> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless entries
> to
> | > any
> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
> | > changed
> | > | > at sometime.
> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
> prone
> to
> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
> then
> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
> crisis.
> | > | >
> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
> | > methods
> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
> otherwise
> | > work
> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
> | > confronted
> | > | > with
> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,, advised
> HOW
> | > to
> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
> | > | >
> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
> | > | > registry,
> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
> and
> | > | > mean,,,
> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
> taken
> | > with
> | > | > *a
> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
> user
> is
> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur. IF,
> on
> | > the
> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the registry,
> makes
> | > an
> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
> searching
> | > first
> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
> | > results
> | > | > can
> | > | > be achieved.
> | > | >
> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and understanding
> is
> | > YOUR
> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
> cause
> | > more
> | > | > harm than good.
> | > | >
> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
> cleanup
> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
> | > | >
> | > | > --
> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | > --
> | > | > _________
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
> wrote:
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
> will
> | > | > | >> actually
> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
> never
> | > seen
> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would
> get
> | > so
> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
> | > created
> | > a
> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place
> a
> | > bunch
> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from
> text,
> | > or
> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
> Then
> | > I
> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
> | > Wordpad
> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
> documented
> | > in
> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
> "recently
> | > | > | > opened files".
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
> | > delete
> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
> downloads
> I
> | > | > tried.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
> folder,
> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
> things
> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
> removed
> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course
> I
> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the
> time
> | > it's
> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and should
> not
> | > be
> | > | > | > used.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
> about.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | Nonsense.
> | > | > |
> | > | > |
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that system
connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger to
others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs down.

And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those few
Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do you
recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if you
saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
>> have
>> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one
>> for
>> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
>> |
>> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
>> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend
>> a
>> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
>> suspect.
>> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
>> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
>> virus(es)
>> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even
>> have
>> | REG files for the purpose.
>>
>> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
>> things
>> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used to
>> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
>> Without
>> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One could
>> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class, yet
>> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
>> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
>
> Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
> hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised
> Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
>
>> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
>> cleanup as well.
>
> I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back to
> "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
>
>> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
>> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of crap,
>> then
>> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt
>> about
>> it,
>> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot
>> of
>> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
>> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your
>> AT
>> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
>> to
>> | remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
>> | reinstall themselves.
>> |
>> | --
>> | Gary S. Terhune
>> | MS-MVP Shell/User
>> | www.grystmill.com
>>
>> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
>> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
>> disks
>> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be supported
>> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
>> you
>> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
>> upon
>> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one can
>> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever is
>> found.
>> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
>> these
>> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
>
> You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
>
> OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
> experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
> that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my
> blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the
> real skinny.
>
>> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
>> did
>> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to work
>> through the potentials associated.
>
> HUH!?!
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
>>
>> --
>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>> --
>> _________
>>
>>
>> |
>> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
>> for
>> | > individual responses...
>> | >
>> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
>> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
>> | > caution
>> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
>> | >
>> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
>> group
>> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
>> Virus
>> | > removal forums and sites.
>> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
>> during
>> | > the
>> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
>> the
>> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
>> manual
>> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
>> addin
>> | > or
>> | > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
>> basic
>> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
>> | >
>> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
>> of
>> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
>> | >
>> | > --
>> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>> | > --
>> | > _________
>> | >
>> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
>> significant
>> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to
>> run
>> | > on
>> | > a
>> | > | large Registry. BFD.
>> | > |
>> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
>> | > disaster
>> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done,
>> but
>> | > only
>> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
>> locate a
>> | > few
>> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of
>> any
>> | > real
>> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
>> MANUAL
>> | > search
>> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
>> | > |
>> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
>> it,
>> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
>> | > weren't
>> | > a
>> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
>> many
>> | > years
>> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've never
>> once
>> | > had
>> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
>> tools,
>> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
>> their
>> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
>> | > | "idiot-proof".
>> | > |
>> | > | --
>> | > | Gary S. Terhune
>> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
>> | > | www.grystmill.com
>> | > |
>> | > |
>> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
>> | > | >
>> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
>> entries
>> | > which
>> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications which
>> fill
>> | > the
>> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
>> | > supposedly
>> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
>> entries
>> to
>> | > any
>> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
>> been
>> | > changed
>> | > | > at sometime.
>> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
>> prone
>> to
>> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
>> then
>> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
>> crisis.
>> | > | >
>> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
>> | > methods
>> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
>> otherwise
>> | > work
>> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
>> | > confronted
>> | > | > with
>> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,, advised
>> HOW
>> | > to
>> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
>> | > | >
>> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
>> | > | > registry,
>> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
>> and
>> | > | > mean,,,
>> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
>> taken
>> | > with
>> | > | > *a
>> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
>> user
>> is
>> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur. IF,
>> on
>> | > the
>> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the registry,
>> makes
>> | > an
>> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
>> searching
>> | > first
>> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
>> | > results
>> | > | > can
>> | > | > be achieved.
>> | > | >
>> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and understanding
>> is
>> | > YOUR
>> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
>> cause
>> | > more
>> | > | > harm than good.
>> | > | >
>> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
>> cleanup
>> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
>> | > | >
>> | > | > --
>> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>> | > | > --
>> | > | > _________
>> | > | >
>> | > | >
>> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
>> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
>> wrote:
>> | > | > | >
>> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
>> will
>> | > | > | >> actually
>> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
>> | > | > | >
>> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
>> never
>> | > seen
>> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless
>> junk.
>> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would
>> get
>> | > so
>> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
>> | > created
>> | > a
>> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily
>> place a
>> | > bunch
>> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from
>> text,
>> | > or
>> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
>> Then
>> | > I
>> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of
>> the
>> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
>> | > Wordpad
>> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
>> documented
>> | > in
>> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
>> "recently
>> | > | > | > opened files".
>> | > | > | >
>> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
>> | > delete
>> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
>> downloads
>> I
>> | > | > tried.
>> | > | > | >
>> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
>> folder,
>> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
>> things
>> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
>> removed
>> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
>> course I
>> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the
>> time
>> | > it's
>> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
>> | > | > | >
>> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and should
>> not
>> | > be
>> | > | > | > used.
>> | > | > |
>> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
>> about.
>> | > | > |
>> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
>> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
>> | > | > |
>> | > | > | Nonsense.
>> | > | > |
>> | > | > |
>> | > | >
>> | > | >
>> | > |
>> | >
>> | >
>> |
>>
>>
>

 

[MEB]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
used without knowledge.

I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER misuse..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
| generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
system
| connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger to
| others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs down.
|
| And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
few
| Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
you
| recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if you
| saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| >
| > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| >>
| >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| >> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
| >> have
| >> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
one
| >> for
| >> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| >> |
| >> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
minor
| >> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
recommend
| >> a
| >> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
| >> suspect.
| >> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
| >> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
| >> virus(es)
| >> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even
| >> have
| >> | REG files for the purpose.
| >>
| >> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
| >> things
| >> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used
to
| >> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
| >> Without
| >> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
could
| >> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
yet
| >> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
| >> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
| >
| > Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
| > hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised
| > Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
| >
| >> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
| >> cleanup as well.
| >
| > I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
to
| > "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
| >
| >> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| >> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
crap,
| >> then
| >> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt
| >> about
| >> it,
| >> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
lot
| >> of
| >> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
| >> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
your
| >> AT
| >> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
| >> to
| >> | remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| >> | reinstall themselves.
| >> |
| >> | --
| >> | Gary S. Terhune
| >> | MS-MVP Shell/User
| >> | www.grystmill.com
| >>
| >> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
| >> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
| >> disks
| >> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
supported
| >> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
| >> you
| >> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
| >> upon
| >> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
can
| >> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
is
| >> found.
| >> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
| >> these
| >> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
| >
| > You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
| >
| > OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
| > experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
| > that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my
| > blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the
| > real skinny.
| >
| >> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
| >> did
| >> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
work
| >> through the potentials associated.
| >
| > HUH!?!
| >
| > --
| > Gary S. Terhune
| > MS-MVP Shell/User
| > www.grystmill.com
| >
| >>
| >> --
| >> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| >> --
| >> _________
| >>
| >>
| >> |
| >> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| >> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| >> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
| >> for
| >> | > individual responses...
| >> | >
| >> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
| >> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
| >> | > caution
| >> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
| >> | >
| >> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
| >> group
| >> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
| >> Virus
| >> | > removal forums and sites.
| >> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
| >> during
| >> | > the
| >> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
and
| >> the
| >> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
| >> manual
| >> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
| >> addin
| >> | > or
| >> | > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of
the
| >> basic
| >> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| >> | >
| >> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can
be
| >> of
| >> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
| >> | >
| >> | > --
| >> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| >> | > --
| >> | > _________
| >> | >
| >> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| >> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
| >> significant
| >> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
to
| >> run
| >> | > on
| >> | > a
| >> | > | large Registry. BFD.
| >> | > |
| >> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
wide-spread
| >> | > disaster
| >> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done,
| >> but
| >> | > only
| >> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
| >> locate a
| >> | > few
| >> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of
| >> any
| >> | > real
| >> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
| >> MANUAL
| >> | > search
| >> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| >> | > |
| >> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
delete
| >> it,
| >> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
| >> | > weren't
| >> | > a
| >> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
| >> many
| >> | > years
| >> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
never
| >> once
| >> | > had
| >> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
| >> tools,
| >> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed
by
| >> their
| >> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought
were
| >> | > | "idiot-proof".
| >> | > |
| >> | > | --
| >> | > | Gary S. Terhune
| >> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| >> | > | www.grystmill.com
| >> | > |
| >> | > |
| >> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| >> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| >> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
| >> entries
| >> | > which
| >> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
which
| >> fill
| >> | > the
| >> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
| >> | > supposedly
| >> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
| >> entries
| >> to
| >> | > any
| >> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
| >> been
| >> | > changed
| >> | > | > at sometime.
| >> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
| >> prone
| >> to
| >> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues]....
which
| >> then
| >> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
| >> crisis.
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time,
posted
| >> | > methods
| >> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
| >> otherwise
| >> | > work
| >> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| >> | > confronted
| >> | > | > with
| >> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
advised
| >> HOW
| >> | > to
| >> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean
the
| >> | > | > registry,
| >> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
| >> and
| >> | > | > mean,,,
| >> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
| >> taken
| >> | > with
| >> | > | > *a
| >> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
| >> user
| >> is
| >> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
IF,
| >> on
| >> | > the
| >> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
registry,
| >> makes
| >> | > an
| >> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
| >> searching
| >> | > first
| >> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
| >> | > results
| >> | > | > can
| >> | > | > be achieved.
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
understanding
| >> is
| >> | > YOUR
| >> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
| >> cause
| >> | > more
| >> | > | > harm than good.
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
| >> cleanup
| >> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > --
| >> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| >> | > | > --
| >> | > | > _________
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| >> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| >> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
| >> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
| >> wrote:
| >> | > | > | >
| >> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system,
and
| >> will
| >> | > | > | >> actually
| >> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
| >> | > | > | >
| >> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
| >> never
| >> | > seen
| >> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless
| >> junk.
| >> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
would
| >> get
| >> | > so
| >> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
| >> | > created
| >> | > a
| >> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily
| >> place a
| >> | > bunch
| >> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
from
| >> text,
| >> | > or
| >> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
| >> Then
| >> | > I
| >> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of
| >> the
| >> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures,
and
| >> | > Wordpad
| >> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
| >> documented
| >> | > in
| >> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
| >> "recently
| >> | > | > | > opened files".
| >> | > | > | >
| >> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and
I
| >> | > delete
| >> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
| >> downloads
| >> I
| >> | > | > tried.
| >> | > | > | >
| >> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
| >> folder,
| >> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
| >> things
| >> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
| >> removed
| >> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
| >> course I
| >> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the
| >> time
| >> | > it's
| >> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| >> | > | > | >
| >> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
should
| >> not
| >> | > be
| >> | > | > | > used.
| >> | > | > |
| >> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
| >> about.
| >> | > | > |
| >> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
| >> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| >> | > | > |
| >> | > | > | Nonsense.
| >> | > | > |
| >> | > | > |
| >> | > | >
| >> | > | >
| >> | > |
| >> | >
| >> | >
| >> |
| >>
| >>
| >
|

 

[Bill in Co.]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had some
problems - BTDT)

(That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).

And, like I said, if someone hasn't at least used regedit before, they
really are not in the league to be messing around with these programs,
because the consequences of running such "registry cleaning" programs can
be, and often are, *truly* dire (and in some cases, even necessating a
complete reinstall of Windows).

MEB wrote:
> Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
> statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
> worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
> used without knowledge.
>
> I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
> misuse..
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
>> generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
>> system
>> connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger to
>> others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
>> irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs down.
>>
>> And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
>> few
>> Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
>> you
>> recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
>> you
>> saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>> I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
>>>>> have
>>>>> come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one
>>>>> for
>>>>> the momentary purpose, I was done.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
>>>>> exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend
>>>>> a
>>>>> full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
>>>>> suspect. Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
>>>>> spyware removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
>>>>> and
>>>>> virus(es) they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove,
>>>>> and
>>>>> even have REG files for the purpose.
>>>>
>>>> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
>>>> things
>>>> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used
>>>> to
>>>> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
>>>> Without
>>>> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
>>>> could
>>>> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
>>>> yet
>>>> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
>>>> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
>>>
>>> Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
>>> hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised
>>> Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
>>>
>>>> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
>>>> cleanup as well.
>>>
>>> I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
>>> to
>>> "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
>>>
>>>>> If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
>>>>> tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
>>>>> crap,
>>>>> then we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
>>>>> blunt
>>>> about
>>>> it,
>>>>> but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot
>>>>> of
>>>>> "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
>>>>> instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your
>>>>> AT
>>>>> commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
>>>>> to
>>>>> remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
>>>>> reinstall themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
>>>> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
>>>> disks
>>>> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
>>>> supported
>>>> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
>>>> you
>>>> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
>>>> upon
>>>> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
>>>> can
>>>> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
>>>> is
>>>> found.
>>>> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
>>>> these
>>>> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
>>>
>>> You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
>>>
>>> OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
>>> experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
>>> that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my
>>> blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the
>>> real skinny.
>>>
>>>> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
>>>> did
>>>> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
>>>> work
>>>> through the potentials associated.
>>>
>>> HUH!?!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>> --
>>>> _________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> individual responses...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
>>>>>> programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
>>>>>> caution
>>>>>> not to use the auto cleanup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
>>>>>> group
>>>>>> remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
>>>>>> Virus
>>>>>> removal forums and sites.
>>>>>> These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
>>>>>> during
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
>>>>>> manual
>>>>>> editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
>>>>>> addin
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
>>>>>> basic regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
>>>>>>> significant
>>>>>>> failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
> to
>>>> run
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> large Registry. BFD.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
>>>>>>> disaster involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
>>>>>>> done, but only an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools
>>>>>>> *might* locate a few of those entries, you know better than most, I
>>>>>>> think, how much of any real Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to
>>>>>>> "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL search and research procedure
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> few if any tools do well at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
>>>>>>> it,
>>>>>>> ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
>>>>>> weren't
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after many
>>>>>>> years of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
> never
>>>> once
>>>>>> had
>>>>>>> any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
>>>>>>> tools,
>>>>>>> whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>> Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
>>>>>>> "idiot-proof".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
>>>>>>>> which relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
> which
>>>> fill
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
>>>>>>>> supposedly removed but actually leave, at times, countless
>>>>>>>> worthless
>>>> entries
>>>> to
>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>> number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
>>>>>>>> changed at sometime.
>>>>>>>> We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
>>>> prone
>>>> to
>>>>>>>> failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>> becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
>>>>>>>> crisis.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
>>>>>>>> methods to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
>>>>>>>> otherwise work upon the registry... They also have repeatedly
>>>>>>>> advised,
>>>>>>>> when confronted with
>>>>>>>> ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
> advised
>>>> HOW
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
>>>>>>>> registry,
>>>>>>>> which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean and
>>>>>>>> mean,,,
>>>>>>>> but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
>>>>>>>> taken
>>>>>>>> with *a
>>>>>>>> grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
>>>> user
>>>> is
>>>>>>>> unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
> IF,
>>>> on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
> registry,
>>>> makes
>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
>>>>>>>> searching
>>>>>>>> first to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
>>>>>>>> desired
>>>>>>>> results can
>>>>>>>> be achieved.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
> understanding
>>>> is
>>>>>> YOUR
>>>>>>>> responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
>>>>>>>> cause
>>>>>>>> more harm than good.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
>>>>>>>> cleanup
>>>>>>>> activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> letterman@invalid.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>>> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never
>>>>>>>>>> seen
>>>>>>>>>> it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
>>>>>>>>>> Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
> would
>>>> get
>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>> huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
>>>>>> created
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a
>>>>>>>>>> bunch of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
> from
>>>> text,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>> Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc. Then
>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>> begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
>>>>>>>>>> downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
>>>>>>>>>> Wordpad
>>>>>>>>>> to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are documented
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store "recently
>>>>>>>>>> opened files".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
>>>>>>>>>> delete
>>>>>>>>>> the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
>>>> downloads
>>>> I
>>>>>>>> tried.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK folder,
>>>>>>>>>> references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many things
>>>>>>>>>> relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
>>>>>>>>>> removed
>>>>>>>>>> from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course I
>>>>>>>>>> always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>> just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
> should
>>>> not
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
>>>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
>>>>>>>>>> them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nonsense.

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the advertised
intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too decrepit
to be worth the effort, AFAIC.

If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools will
do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true statement,
proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and worthless.
Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities are
revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?), which are
a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except the
most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly harmless.
Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably with
certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing that
would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you leave it
there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even if
that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O9RLrtAsIHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
> statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
> worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
> used without knowledge.
>
> I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
> misuse..
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
> | generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
> system
> | connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
> to
> | others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
> | irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
> down.
> |
> | And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
> few
> | Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
> you
> | recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
> you
> | saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> |
> | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | >
> | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | >>
> | >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | >> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
> might
> | >> have
> | >> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
> one
> | >> for
> | >> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
> | >> |
> | >> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
> minor
> | >> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
> recommend
> | >> a
> | >> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
> | >> suspect.
> | >> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
> spyware
> | >> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
> | >> virus(es)
> | >> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and
> even
> | >> have
> | >> | REG files for the purpose.
> | >>
> | >> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
> | >> things
> | >> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
> used
> to
> | >> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
> | >> Without
> | >> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
> could
> | >> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
> yet
> | >> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
> | >> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
> | >
> | > Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having
> a
> | > hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
> advertised
> | > Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
> | >
> | >> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles
> of
> | >> cleanup as well.
> | >
> | > I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
> to
> | > "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
> | >
> | >> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
> | >> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
> crap,
> | >> then
> | >> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt
> | >> about
> | >> it,
> | >> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
> lot
> | >> of
> | >> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere,
> for
> | >> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
> your
> | >> AT
> | >> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
> ALWAYS
> | >> to
> | >> | remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
> | >> | reinstall themselves.
> | >> |
> | >> | --
> | >> | Gary S. Terhune
> | >> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >> | www.grystmill.com
> | >>
> | >> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
> | >> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
> | >> disks
> | >> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
> supported
> | >> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
> Then
> | >> you
> | >> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
> | >> upon
> | >> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
> can
> | >> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
> is
> | >> found.
> | >> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
> | >> these
> | >> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
> | >
> | > You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
> | >
> | > OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
> | > experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
> | > that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in
> my
> | > blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
> the
> | > real skinny.
> | >
> | >> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and
> we
> | >> did
> | >> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
> work
> | >> through the potentials associated.
> | >
> | > HUH!?!
> | >
> | > --
> | > Gary S. Terhune
> | > MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > www.grystmill.com
> | >
> | >>
> | >> --
> | >> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | >> --
> | >> _________
> | >>
> | >>
> | >> |
> | >> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | >> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | >> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
> postings
> | >> for
> | >> | > individual responses...
> | >> | >
> | >> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use
> the
> | >> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why
> I
> | >> | > caution
> | >> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
> | >> | >
> | >> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of
> this
> | >> group
> | >> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare
> and
> | >> Virus
> | >> | > removal forums and sites.
> | >> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
> | >> during
> | >> | > the
> | >> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
> and
> | >> the
> | >> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
> | >> manual
> | >> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
> regedit
> | >> addin
> | >> | > or
> | >> | > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of
> the
> | >> basic
> | >> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
> | >> | >
> | >> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can
> be
> | >> of
> | >> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand
> them.
> | >> | >
> | >> | > --
> | >> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | >> | > --
> | >> | > _________
> | >> | >
> | >> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | >> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
> | >> significant
> | >> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
> failing
> to
> | >> run
> | >> | > on
> | >> | > a
> | >> | > | large Registry. BFD.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
> wide-spread
> | >> | > disaster
> | >> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
> done,
> | >> but
> | >> | > only
> | >> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
> | >> locate a
> | >> | > few
> | >> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much
> of
> | >> any
> | >> | > real
> | >> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
> | >> MANUAL
> | >> | > search
> | >> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
> delete
> | >> it,
> | >> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
> learned
> | >> | > weren't
> | >> | > a
> | >> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
> | >> many
> | >> | > years
> | >> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
> never
> | >> once
> | >> | > had
> | >> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
> | >> tools,
> | >> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed
> by
> | >> their
> | >> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought
> were
> | >> | > | "idiot-proof".
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | --
> | >> | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | >> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >> | > | www.grystmill.com
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | >> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | >> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
> | >> entries
> | >> | > which
> | >> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
> which
> | >> fill
> | >> | > the
> | >> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to
> applications
> | >> | > supposedly
> | >> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
> | >> entries
> | >> to
> | >> | > any
> | >> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
> | >> been
> | >> | > changed
> | >> | > | > at sometime.
> | >> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
> | >> prone
> | >> to
> | >> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues]....
> which
> | >> then
> | >> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
> | >> crisis.
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time,
> posted
> | >> | > methods
> | >> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
> | >> otherwise
> | >> | > work
> | >> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
> | >> | > confronted
> | >> | > | > with
> | >> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
> advised
> | >> HOW
> | >> | > to
> | >> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean
> the
> | >> | > | > registry,
> | >> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system
> lean
> | >> and
> | >> | > | > mean,,,
> | >> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should
> be
> | >> taken
> | >> | > with
> | >> | > | > *a
> | >> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF
> the
> | >> user
> | >> is
> | >> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
> IF,
> | >> on
> | >> | > the
> | >> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
> registry,
> | >> makes
> | >> | > an
> | >> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
> | >> searching
> | >> | > first
> | >> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
> desired
> | >> | > results
> | >> | > | > can
> | >> | > | > be achieved.
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
> understanding
> | >> is
> | >> | > YOUR
> | >> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they
> MIGHT
> | >> cause
> | >> | > more
> | >> | > | > harm than good.
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
> | >> cleanup
> | >> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > --
> | >> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | >> | > | > --
> | >> | > | > _________
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in
> message
> | >> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | >> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
> | >> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
> <none>
> | >> wrote:
> | >> | > | > | >
> | >> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system,
> and
> | >> will
> | >> | > | > | >> actually
> | >> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
> NEVER.
> | >> | > | > | >
> | >> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I
> have
> | >> never
> | >> | > seen
> | >> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless
> | >> junk.
> | >> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
> would
> | >> get
> | >> | > so
> | >> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say
> I
> | >> | > created
> | >> | > a
> | >> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily
> | >> place a
> | >> | > bunch
> | >> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
> from
> | >> text,
> | >> | > or
> | >> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads,
> etc.
> | >> Then
> | >> | > I
> | >> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many
> of
> | >> the
> | >> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures,
> and
> | >> | > Wordpad
> | >> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
> | >> documented
> | >> | > in
> | >> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
> | >> "recently
> | >> | > | > | > opened files".
> | >> | > | > | >
> | >> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media
> and
> I
> | >> | > delete
> | >> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
> | >> downloads
> | >> I
> | >> | > | > tried.
> | >> | > | > | >
> | >> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
> | >> folder,
> | >> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and
> many
> | >> things
> | >> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that
> is
> | >> removed
> | >> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
> | >> course I
> | >> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of
> the
> | >> time
> | >> | > it's
> | >> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
> | >> | > | > | >
> | >> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
> should
> | >> not
> | >> | > be
> | >> | > | > | > used.
> | >> | > | > |
> | >> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
> talking
> | >> about.
> | >> | > | > |
> | >> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
> without
> | >> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
> | >> | > | > |
> | >> | > | > | Nonsense.
> | >> | > | > |
> | >> | > | > |
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > |
> | >> | >
> | >> | >
> | >> |
> | >>
> | >>
> | >
> |
>
>

 

[MEB]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

Aw Gary, too decrepit??? That's like telling everyone to buy new
computers...

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:eLILfVGsIHA.5872@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the
advertised
| intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too
decrepit
| to be worth the effort, AFAIC.
|
| If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools
will
| do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true statement,
| proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and worthless.
| Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities are
| revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
| program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?), which
are
| a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except the
| most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly harmless.
| Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably with
| certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing that
| would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
| programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you leave
it
| there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even if
| that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com


Yes, in part. I have cautioned concerning removal pf ActiveX semmingly
blank entries. These ARE place holders,,, which should be left as they are
DISABLED...

As for "leave it there" that attempts to indicate all programmers know
what they are doing, and make proper installation files and uninstaller
routines... that's a dream world, it would ber nice, but its not a reality.

So again, these types of TOOLS can be of use, but must be used with
caution AND only after making an effort to understand what they might find.
IN FACT, several of these tools now include Search Tools built-in, and
suggest using them BEFORE removal of any items. Its just like any
application or program that a user might have, they MUST learn how to use
it.

|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:O9RLrtAsIHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
| > statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them
are
| > worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen
when
| > used without knowledge.
| >
| > I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
| > misuse..
| >
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should
be
| > | generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
| > system
| > | connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
| > to
| > | others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| > | irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
| > down.
| > |
| > | And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see,
those
| > few
| > | Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT.
Do
| > you
| > | recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
| > you
| > | saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| > |
| > |
| > | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | >
| > | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | >>
| > | >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | >> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
| > might
| > | >> have
| > | >> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of
grabbing
| > one
| > | >> for
| > | >> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| > | >> |
| > | >> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
| > minor
| > | >> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
| > recommend
| > | >> a
| > | >> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it
permanently
| > | >> suspect.
| > | >> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
| > spyware
| > | >> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
| > | >> virus(es)
| > | >> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and
| > even
| > | >> have
| > | >> | REG files for the purpose.
| > | >>
| > | >> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as
these
| > | >> things
| > | >> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
| > used
| > to
| > | >> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
| > | >> Without
| > | >> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
| > could
| > | >> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same
class,
| > yet
| > | >> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other,
and
| > | >> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
| > | >
| > | > Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm
having
| > a
| > | > hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
| > advertised
| > | > Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
| > | >
| > | >> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other
styles
| > of
| > | >> cleanup as well.
| > | >
| > | > I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we
back
| > to
| > | > "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
| > | >
| > | >> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| > | >> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
| > crap,
| > | >> then
| > | >> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
blunt
| > | >> about
| > | >> it,
| > | >> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like
a
| > lot
| > | >> of
| > | >> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere,
| > for
| > | >> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
| > your
| > | >> AT
| > | >> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
| > ALWAYS
| > | >> to
| > | >> | remove all networking and related devices and services and let
them
| > | >> | reinstall themselves.
| > | >> |
| > | >> | --
| > | >> | Gary S. Terhune
| > | >> | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >> | www.grystmill.com
| > | >>
| > | >> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just
not
| > | >> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the
installation
| > | >> disks
| > | >> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
| > supported
| > | >> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
| > Then
| > | >> you
| > | >> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates
posted
| > | >> upon
| > | >> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted,
one
| > can
| > | >> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of
whatever
| > is
| > | >> found.
| > | >> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and
saved
| > | >> these
| > | >> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
| > | >
| > | > You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
| > | >
| > | > OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of
truly
| > | > experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy,
but
| > | > that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist
in
| > my
| > | > blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
| > the
| > | > real skinny.
| > | >
| > | >> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and
| > we
| > | >> did
| > | >> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
| > work
| > | >> through the potentials associated.
| > | >
| > | > HUH!?!
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > Gary S. Terhune
| > | > MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > www.grystmill.com
| > | >
| > | >>
| > | >> --
| > | >> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | >> --
| > | >> _________
| > | >>
| > | >>
| > | >> |
| > | >> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | >> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | >> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
| > postings
| > | >> for
| > | >> | > individual responses...
| > | >> | >
| > | >> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use
| > the
| > | >> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is
why
| > I
| > | >> | > caution
| > | >> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
| > | >> | >
| > | >> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of
| > this
| > | >> group
| > | >> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare
| > and
| > | >> Virus
| > | >> | > removal forums and sites.
| > | >> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used
regularly
| > | >> during
| > | >> | > the
| > | >> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with
them
| > and
| > | >> the
| > | >> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
| > | >> manual
| > | >> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
| > regedit
| > | >> addin
| > | >> | > or
| > | >> | > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities
of
| > the
| > | >> basic
| > | >> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| > | >> | >
| > | >> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners
can
| > be
| > | >> of
| > | >> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand
| > them.
| > | >> | >
| > | >> | > --
| > | >> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | >> | > --
| > | >> | > _________
| > | >> | >
| > | >> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | >> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
| > | >> significant
| > | >> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
| > failing
| > to
| > | >> run
| > | >> | > on
| > | >> | > a
| > | >> | > | large Registry. BFD.
| > | >> | > |
| > | >> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
| > wide-spread
| > | >> | > disaster
| > | >> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
| > done,
| > | >> but
| > | >> | > only
| > | >> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
| > | >> locate a
| > | >> | > few
| > | >> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how
much
| > of
| > | >> any
| > | >> | > real
| > | >> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
| > | >> MANUAL
| > | >> | > search
| > | >> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| > | >> | > |
| > | >> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
| > delete
| > | >> it,
| > | >> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
| > learned
| > | >> | > weren't
| > | >> | > a
| > | >> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and
after
| > | >> many
| > | >> | > years
| > | >> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
| > never
| > | >> once
| > | >> | > had
| > | >> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any
Registry
| > | >> tools,
| > | >> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were
screwed
| > by
| > | >> their
| > | >> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought
| > were
| > | >> | > | "idiot-proof".
| > | >> | > |
| > | >> | > | --
| > | >> | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | >> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >> | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | >> | > |
| > | >> | > |
| > | >> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | >> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | >> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
| > | >> entries
| > | >> | > which
| > | >> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
| > which
| > | >> fill
| > | >> | > the
| > | >> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to
| > applications
| > | >> | > supposedly
| > | >> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
| > | >> entries
| > | >> to
| > | >> | > any
| > | >> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have
somehow
| > | >> been
| > | >> | > changed
| > | >> | > | > at sometime.
| > | >> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or
be
| > | >> prone
| > | >> to
| > | >> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues]....
| > which
| > | >> then
| > | >> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time
of
| > | >> crisis.
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time,
| > posted
| > | >> | > methods
| > | >> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
| > | >> otherwise
| > | >> | > work
| > | >> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised,
when
| > | >> | > confronted
| > | >> | > | > with
| > | >> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
| > advised
| > | >> HOW
| > | >> | > to
| > | >> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to
clean
| > the
| > | >> | > | > registry,
| > | >> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system
| > lean
| > | >> and
| > | >> | > | > mean,,,
| > | >> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should
| > be
| > | >> taken
| > | >> | > with
| > | >> | > | > *a
| > | >> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF
| > the
| > | >> user
| > | >> is
| > | >> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely
occur.
| > IF,
| > | >> on
| > | >> | > the
| > | >> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
| > registry,
| > | >> makes
| > | >> | > an
| > | >> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
| > | >> searching
| > | >> | > first
| > | >> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
| > desired
| > | >> | > results
| > | >> | > | > can
| > | >> | > | > be achieved.
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
| > understanding
| > | >> is
| > | >> | > YOUR
| > | >> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they
| > MIGHT
| > | >> cause
| > | >> | > more
| > | >> | > | > harm than good.
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily
during
| > | >> cleanup
| > | >> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such
activities...
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > --
| > | >> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | >> | > | > --
| > | >> | > | > _________
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | >
| > | >> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in
| > message
| > | >> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | >> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
| > | >> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
| > <none>
| > | >> wrote:
| > | >> | > | > | >
| > | >> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your
system,
| > and
| > | >> will
| > | >> | > | > | >> actually
| > | >> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
| > NEVER.
| > | >> | > | > | >
| > | >> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I
| > have
| > | >> never
| > | >> | > seen
| > | >> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of
useless
| > | >> junk.
| > | >> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
| > would
| > | >> get
| > | >> | > so
| > | >> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets
say
| > I
| > | >> | > created
| > | >> | > a
| > | >> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to
temporarily
| > | >> place a
| > | >> | > bunch
| > | >> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
| > from
| > | >> text,
| > | >> | > or
| > | >> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads,
| > etc.
| > | >> Then
| > | >> | > I
| > | >> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many
| > of
| > | >> the
| > | >> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the
pictures,
| > and
| > | >> | > Wordpad
| > | >> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
| > | >> documented
| > | >> | > in
| > | >> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
| > | >> "recently
| > | >> | > | > | > opened files".
| > | >> | > | > | >
| > | >> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media
| > and
| > I
| > | >> | > delete
| > | >> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
| > | >> downloads
| > | >> I
| > | >> | > | > tried.
| > | >> | > | > | >
| > | >> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that
JUNK
| > | >> folder,
| > | >> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and
| > many
| > | >> things
| > | >> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that
| > is
| > | >> removed
| > | >> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
| > | >> course I
| > | >> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of
| > the
| > | >> time
| > | >> | > it's
| > | >> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| > | >> | > | > | >
| > | >> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
| > should
| > | >> not
| > | >> | > be
| > | >> | > | > | > used.
| > | >> | > | > |
| > | >> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
| > talking
| > | >> about.
| > | >> | > | > |
| > | >> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
| > without
| > | >> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless
garbage.
| > | >> | > | > |
| > | >> | > | > | Nonsense.
--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

You exaggerate extremely. The numbers of machines I'm talking about amount
to maybe one millionth of one percent of machines out there, or more likely
a millionth of that number. Come on, really... How many drivers really CAN'T
be found, or are you really saying, "Can't be *easily* found?" I'll bet you
can find every driver set ever written out there, somewhere, even if it
requires shelling out some bucks to get them.

Anyway, you're the one who described the machine you chose as an exemplar of
a machine that MUST be repaired in place because there is no way to rebuild
it. The machine(s) you describe are "decrepit" by definition. And just like
decrepit automobiles, they are just as much a danger to society as they are
a nuisance to their owners.

In the case of idiots who didn't save the software that came with their
computer, they deserve to be forced to buy a new machine.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OycJifGsIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Aw Gary, too decrepit??? That's like telling everyone to buy new
> computers...
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:eLILfVGsIHA.5872@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the
> advertised
> | intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too
> decrepit
> | to be worth the effort, AFAIC.
> |
> | If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools
> will
> | do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true statement,
> | proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and
> worthless.
> | Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities are
> | revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
> | program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?), which
> are
> | a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except the
> | most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly harmless.
> | Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably
> with
> | certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing that
> | would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
> | programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you
> leave
> it
> | there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even if
> | that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
>
>
> Yes, in part. I have cautioned concerning removal pf ActiveX semmingly
> blank entries. These ARE place holders,,, which should be left as they are
> DISABLED...
>
> As for "leave it there" that attempts to indicate all programmers know
> what they are doing, and make proper installation files and uninstaller
> routines... that's a dream world, it would ber nice, but its not a
> reality.
>
> So again, these types of TOOLS can be of use, but must be used with
> caution AND only after making an effort to understand what they might
> find.
> IN FACT, several of these tools now include Search Tools built-in, and
> suggest using them BEFORE removal of any items. Its just like any
> application or program that a user might have, they MUST learn how to use
> it.
>
> |
> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:O9RLrtAsIHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
> | > statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them
> are
> | > worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen
> when
> | > used without knowledge.
> | >
> | > I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
> | > misuse..
> | >
> | > --
> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > --
> | > _________
> | >
> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > | I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should
> be
> | > | generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
> | > system
> | > | connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable*
> danger
> | > to
> | > | others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
> | > | irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
> | > down.
> | > |
> | > | And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see,
> those
> | > few
> | > | Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as
> HJT.
> Do
> | > you
> | > | recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!!
> if
> | > you
> | > | saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | > | >
> | > | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | > news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > | >>
> | > | >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | >> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | >> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
> | > might
> | > | >> have
> | > | >> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of
> grabbing
> | > one
> | > | >> for
> | > | >> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal.
> With
> | > minor
> | > | >> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
> | > recommend
> | > | >> a
> | > | >> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it
> permanently
> | > | >> suspect.
> | > | >> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
> | > spyware
> | > | >> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
> and
> | > | >> virus(es)
> | > | >> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and
> | > even
> | > | >> have
> | > | >> | REG files for the purpose.
> | > | >>
> | > | >> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as
> these
> | > | >> things
> | > | >> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
> | > used
> | > to
> | > | >> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that
> variant.
> | > | >> Without
> | > | >> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses.
> One
> | > could
> | > | >> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same
> class,
> | > yet
> | > | >> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other,
> and
> | > | >> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
> | > | >
> | > | > Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm
> having
> | > a
> | > | > hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
> | > advertised
> | > | > Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
> | > | >
> | > | >> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other
> styles
> | > of
> | > | >> cleanup as well.
> | > | >
> | > | > I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we
> back
> | > to
> | > | > "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
> | > | >
> | > | >> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
> | > | >> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs
> of
> | > crap,
> | > | >> then
> | > | >> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
> blunt
> | > | >> about
> | > | >> it,
> | > | >> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just
> like
> a
> | > lot
> | > | >> of
> | > | >> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN
> sphere,
> | > for
> | > | >> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads,
> all
> | > your
> | > | >> AT
> | > | >> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
> | > ALWAYS
> | > | >> to
> | > | >> | remove all networking and related devices and services and let
> them
> | > | >> | reinstall themselves.
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | --
> | > | >> | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | >> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | >> | www.grystmill.com
> | > | >>
> | > | >> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just
> not
> | > | >> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the
> installation
> | > | >> disks
> | > | >> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
> | > supported
> | > | >> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no
> updates].
> | > Then
> | > | >> you
> | > | >> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates
> posted
> | > | >> upon
> | > | >> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted,
> one
> | > can
> | > | >> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of
> whatever
> | > is
> | > | >> found.
> | > | >> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and
> saved
> | > | >> these
> | > | >> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
> | > | >
> | > | > You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
> | > | >
> | > | > OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of
> truly
> | > | > experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy,
> but
> | > | > that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist
> in
> | > my
> | > | > blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite
> for
> | > the
> | > | > real skinny.
> | > | >
> | > | >> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum,
> and
> | > we
> | > | >> did
> | > | >> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were
> to
> | > work
> | > | >> through the potentials associated.
> | > | >
> | > | > HUH!?!
> | > | >
> | > | > --
> | > | > Gary S. Terhune
> | > | > MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | > www.grystmill.com
> | > | >
> | > | >>
> | > | >> --
> | > | >> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | >> --
> | > | >> _________
> | > | >>
> | > | >>
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | >> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | >> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
> | > postings
> | > | >> for
> | > | >> | > individual responses...
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I
> use
> | > the
> | > | >> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is
> why
> | > I
> | > | >> | > caution
> | > | >> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of
> | > this
> | > | >> group
> | > | >> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the
> SpyWare
> | > and
> | > | >> Virus
> | > | >> | > removal forums and sites.
> | > | >> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used
> regularly
> | > | >> during
> | > | >> | > the
> | > | >> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with
> them
> | > and
> | > | >> the
> | > | >> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than
> suggesting
> | > | >> manual
> | > | >> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
> | > regedit
> | > | >> addin
> | > | >> | > or
> | > | >> | > replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities
> of
> | > the
> | > | >> basic
> | > | >> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners
> can
> | > be
> | > | >> of
> | > | >> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand
> | > them.
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > --
> | > | >> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | >> | > --
> | > | >> | > _________
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | >> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > | >> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
> | > | >> significant
> | > | >> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
> | > failing
> | > to
> | > | >> run
> | > | >> | > on
> | > | >> | > a
> | > | >> | > | large Registry. BFD.
> | > | >> | > |
> | > | >> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
> | > wide-spread
> | > | >> | > disaster
> | > | >> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
> | > done,
> | > | >> but
> | > | >> | > only
> | > | >> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools
> *might*
> | > | >> locate a
> | > | >> | > few
> | > | >> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how
> much
> | > of
> | > | >> any
> | > | >> | > real
> | > | >> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a
> painstaking
> | > | >> MANUAL
> | > | >> | > search
> | > | >> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at
> all.
> | > | >> | > |
> | > | >> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
> | > delete
> | > | >> it,
> | > | >> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
> | > learned
> | > | >> | > weren't
> | > | >> | > a
> | > | >> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and
> after
> | > | >> many
> | > | >> | > years
> | > | >> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now.
> I've
> | > never
> | > | >> once
> | > | >> | > had
> | > | >> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any
> Registry
> | > | >> tools,
> | > | >> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were
> screwed
> | > by
> | > | >> their
> | > | >> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and
> thought
> | > were
> | > | >> | > | "idiot-proof".
> | > | >> | > |
> | > | >> | > | --
> | > | >> | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | >> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | >> | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > | >> | > |
> | > | >> | > |
> | > | >> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | >> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | > | >> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated
> with
> | > | >> entries
> | > | >> | > which
> | > | >> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to
> applications
> | > which
> | > | >> fill
> | > | >> | > the
> | > | >> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to
> | > applications
> | > | >> | > supposedly
> | > | >> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
> | > | >> entries
> | > | >> to
> | > | >> | > any
> | > | >> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have
> somehow
> | > | >> been
> | > | >> | > changed
> | > | >> | > | > at sometime.
> | > | >> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL
> or
> be
> | > | >> prone
> | > | >> to
> | > | >> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing
> issues]....
> | > which
> | > | >> then
> | > | >> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a
> time
> of
> | > | >> crisis.
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some
> time,
> | > posted
> | > | >> | > methods
> | > | >> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry,
> and
> | > | >> otherwise
> | > | >> | > work
> | > | >> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised,
> when
> | > | >> | > confronted
> | > | >> | > | > with
> | > | >> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
> | > advised
> | > | >> HOW
> | > | >> | > to
> | > | >> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to
> clean
> | > the
> | > | >> | > | > registry,
> | > | >> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a
> system
> | > lean
> | > | >> and
> | > | >> | > | > mean,,,
> | > | >> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner
> should
> | > be
> | > | >> taken
> | > | >> | > with
> | > | >> | > | > *a
> | > | >> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea.
> IF
> | > the
> | > | >> user
> | > | >> is
> | > | >> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely
> occur.
> | > IF,
> | > | >> on
> | > | >> | > the
> | > | >> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
> | > registry,
> | > | >> makes
> | > | >> | > an
> | > | >> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries
> by
> | > | >> searching
> | > | >> | > first
> | > | >> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
> | > desired
> | > | >> | > results
> | > | >> | > | > can
> | > | >> | > | > be achieved.
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
> | > understanding
> | > | >> is
> | > | >> | > YOUR
> | > | >> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they
> | > MIGHT
> | > | >> cause
> | > | >> | > more
> | > | >> | > | > harm than good.
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily
> during
> | > | >> cleanup
> | > | >> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such
> activities...
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > --
> | > | >> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | >> | > | > --
> | > | >> | > | > _________
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in
> | > message
> | > | >> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > | >> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
> | > | >> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
> | > <none>
> | > | >> wrote:
> | > | >> | > | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your
> system,
> | > and
> | > | >> will
> | > | >> | > | > | >> actually
> | > | >> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
> | > NEVER.
> | > | >> | > | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I
> | > have
> | > | >> never
> | > | >> | > seen
> | > | >> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of
> useless
> | > | >> junk.
> | > | >> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the
> registry
> | > would
> | > | >> get
> | > | >> | > so
> | > | >> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets
> say
> | > I
> | > | >> | > created
> | > | >> | > a
> | > | >> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to
> temporarily
> | > | >> place a
> | > | >> | > bunch
> | > | >> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are
> everything
> | > from
> | > | >> text,
> | > | >> | > or
> | > | >> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file
> downloads,
> | > etc.
> | > | >> Then
> | > | >> | > I
> | > | >> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open
> many
> | > of
> | > | >> the
> | > | >> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the
> pictures,
> | > and
> | > | >> | > Wordpad
> | > | >> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things
> are
> | > | >> documented
> | > | >> | > in
> | > | >> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all
> store
> | > | >> "recently
> | > | >> | > | > | > opened files".
> | > | >> | > | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other
> media
> | > and
> | > I
> | > | >> | > delete
> | > | >> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
> | > | >> downloads
> | > | >> I
> | > | >> | > | > tried.
> | > | >> | > | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that
> JUNK
> | > | >> folder,
> | > | >> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and
> | > many
> | > | >> things
> | > | >> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of
> that
> | > is
> | > | >> removed
> | > | >> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean.
> Of
> | > | >> course I
> | > | >> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9%
> of
> | > the
> | > | >> time
> | > | >> | > it's
> | > | >> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
> | > | >> | > | > | >
> | > | >> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous
> and
> | > should
> | > | >> not
> | > | >> | > be
> | > | >> | > | > | > used.
> | > | >> | > | > |
> | > | >> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
> | > talking
> | > | >> about.
> | > | >> | > | > |
> | > | >> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
> | > without
> | > | >> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless
> garbage.
> | > | >> | > | > |
> | > | >> | > | > | Nonsense.
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
>
>

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%232UrnNBsIHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
> capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had some
> problems - BTDT)

For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say NONE of them come
any where near close to living up to the hype.

> (That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).

For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say they're useless.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

> And, like I said, if someone hasn't at least used regedit before, they
> really are not in the league to be messing around with these programs,
> because the consequences of running such "registry cleaning" programs can
> be, and often are, *truly* dire (and in some cases, even necessating a
> complete reinstall of Windows).
>
> MEB wrote:
>> Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
>> statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
>> worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
>> used without knowledge.
>>
>> I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
>> misuse..
>>
>> --
>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>> --
>> _________
>>
>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>> news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
>>> generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
>>> system
>>> connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
>>> to
>>> others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
>>> irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
>>> down.
>>>
>>> And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
>>> few
>>> Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
>>> you
>>> recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
>>> you
>>> saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>>
>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>> news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
>>>>>> one for
>>>>>> the momentary purpose, I was done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
>>>>>> minor
>>>>>> exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
>>>>>> recommend a
>>>>>> full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
>>>>>> suspect. Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
>>>>>> spyware removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> virus(es) they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> even have REG files for the purpose.
>>>>>
>>>>> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
>>>>> things
>>>>> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used
>>>>> to
>>>>> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
>>>>> Without
>>>>> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
>>>>> could
>>>>> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
>>>>> yet
>>>>> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
>>>>> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
>>>>
>>>> Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
>>>> hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
>>>> advertised
>>>> Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
>>>>
>>>>> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles
>>>>> of
>>>>> cleanup as well.
>>>>
>>>> I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
>>>> to
>>>> "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
>>>>
>>>>>> If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
>>>>>> tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
>>>>>> crap,
>>>>>> then we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
>>>>>> blunt
>>>>> about
>>>>> it,
>>>>>> but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
>>>>>> lot of
>>>>>> "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
>>>>>> instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
>>>>>> your AT
>>>>>> commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
>>>>>> reinstall themselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>
>>>>> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
>>>>> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
>>>>> disks
>>>>> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
>>>>> supported
>>>>> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
>>>>> Then
>>>>> you
>>>>> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
>>>>> upon
>>>>> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
>>>>> can
>>>>> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
>>>>> is
>>>>> found.
>>>>> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
>>>>> these
>>>>> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
>>>>
>>>> You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
>>>>
>>>> OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
>>>> experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
>>>> that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in
>>>> my
>>>> blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
>>>> the
>>>> real skinny.
>>>>
>>>>> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
>>>>> did
>>>>> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
>>>>> work
>>>>> through the potentials associated.
>>>>
>>>> HUH!?!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>> --
>>>>> _________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> individual responses...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
>>>>>>> programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
>>>>>>> caution
>>>>>>> not to use the auto cleanup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
>>>>>>> group
>>>>>>> remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
>>>>>>> Virus
>>>>>>> removal forums and sites.
>>>>>>> These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
>>>>>>> during
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
>>>>>>> and the
>>>>>>> registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
>>>>>>> manual
>>>>>>> editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
>>>>>>> addin
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
>>>>>>> basic regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
>>>>>>>> significant
>>>>>>>> failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
>> to
>>>>> run
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> large Registry. BFD.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
>>>>>>>> disaster involving the user doing something that shouldn't have
>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>> done, but only an expert is likely to know for sure, and while
>>>>>>>> tools
>>>>>>>> *might* locate a few of those entries, you know better than most, I
>>>>>>>> think, how much of any real Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to
>>>>>>>> "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL search and research procedure
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> few if any tools do well at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
>>>>>>>> it,
>>>>>>>> ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
>>>>>>> weren't
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>> years of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
>> never
>>>>> once
>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>> any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
>>>>>>>> tools,
>>>>>>>> whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>> Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
>>>>>>>> "idiot-proof".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
>>>>>>>>> which relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
>> which
>>>>> fill
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
>>>>>>>>> supposedly removed but actually leave, at times, countless
>>>>>>>>> worthless
>>>>> entries
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>> number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
>>>>>>>>> changed at sometime.
>>>>>>>>> We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
>>>>> prone
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>> becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
>>>>>>>>> crisis.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
>>>>>>>>> methods to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry,
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> otherwise work upon the registry... They also have repeatedly
>>>>>>>>> advised,
>>>>>>>>> when confronted with
>>>>>>>>> ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
>> advised
>>>>> HOW
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
>>>>>>>>> registry,
>>>>>>>>> which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> mean,,,
>>>>>>>>> but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
>>>>>>>>> taken
>>>>>>>>> with *a
>>>>>>>>> grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
>>>>> user
>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
>> IF,
>>>>> on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
>> registry,
>>>>> makes
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>> effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
>>>>>>>>> searching
>>>>>>>>> first to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
>>>>>>>>> desired
>>>>>>>>> results can
>>>>>>>>> be achieved.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
>> understanding
>>>>> is
>>>>>>> YOUR
>>>>>>>>> responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
>>>>>>>>> cause
>>>>>>>>> more harm than good.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
>>>>>>>>> cleanup
>>>>>>>>> activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> letterman@invalid.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>>>> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never
>>>>>>>>>>> seen
>>>>>>>>>>> it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
>>>>>>>>>>> Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
>> would
>>>>> get
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>>> huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
>>>>>>> created
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a
>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
>> from
>>>>> text,
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>> Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc. Then
>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>> begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
>>>>>>>>>>> downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
>>>>>>>>>>> Wordpad
>>>>>>>>>>> to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
>>>>>>>>>>> documented in
>>>>>>>>>>> the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
>>>>>>>>>>> "recently
>>>>>>>>>>> opened files".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
>>>>>>>>>>> delete
>>>>>>>>>>> the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
>>>>> downloads
>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> tried.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK folder,
>>>>>>>>>>> references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>> relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
>>>>>>>>>>> removed
>>>>>>>>>>> from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course I
>>>>>>>>>>> always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>> just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
>> should
>>>>> not
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
>>>>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
>>>>>>>>>>> them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nonsense.
>
>

 

[Bill in Co.]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%232UrnNBsIHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
>> capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had
>> some
>> problems! (BT,DT)
>
> For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say NONE of them come
> any where near close to living up to the hype.

Right.

>> (That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).
>
> For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say they're useless.

Indeed. That is pretty much the case.

> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
>> And, like I said, if someone hasn't at least used regedit before, they
>> really are not in the league to be messing around with these programs,
>> because the consequences of running such "registry cleaning" programs can
>> be, and often are, *truly* dire (and in some cases, even necessating a
>> complete reinstall of Windows).
>>
>> MEB wrote:
>>> Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
>>> statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them
>>> are
>>> worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen
>>> when
>>> used without knowledge.
>>>
>>> I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
>>> misuse..
>>>
>>> --
>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>> --
>>> _________
>>>
>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>> news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
>>>> generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
>>>> system
>>>> connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
>>>> to
>>>> others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
>>>> irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
>>>> down.
>>>>
>>>> And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see,
>>>> those
>>>> few
>>>> Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT.
>>>> Do
>>>> you
>>>> recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
>>>> you
>>>> saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>> news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>
>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
>>>>>>> one for
>>>>>>> the momentary purpose, I was done.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
>>>>>>> minor
>>>>>>> exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
>>>>>>> recommend a
>>>>>>> full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
>>>>>>> suspect. Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> spyware removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what
>>>>>>> spyware
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> virus(es) they are dealing with and which Registry entries to
>>>>>>> remove,
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> even have REG files for the purpose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as these
>>>>>> things
>>>>>> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
>>>>>> used
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
>>>>>> Without
>>>>>> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
>>>>>> could
>>>>>> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
>>>>>> yet
>>>>>> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
>>>>>> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having
>>>>> a
>>>>> hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
>>>>> advertised
>>>>> Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
>>>>>
>>>>>> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> cleanup as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
>>>>> to
>>>>> "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
>>>>>>> tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
>>>>>>> crap,
>>>>>>> then we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
>>>>>>> blunt
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> it,
>>>>>>> but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
>>>>>>> lot of
>>>>>>> "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere,
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
>>>>>>> your AT
>>>>>>> commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
>>>>>>> ALWAYS
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
>>>>>>> reinstall themselves.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's just not
>>>>>> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
>>>>>> disks
>>>>>> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
>>>>>> supported
>>>>>> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
>>>>>> Then
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
>>>>>> upon
>>>>>> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> found.
>>>>>> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
>>>>>> these
>>>>>> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
>>>>>
>>>>> You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
>>>>> experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
>>>>> that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in
>>>>> my
>>>>> blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
>>>>> the
>>>>> real skinny.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> did
>>>>>> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> through the potentials associated.
>>>>>
>>>>> HUH!?!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> individual responses...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
>>>>>>>> programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
>>>>>>>> caution
>>>>>>>> not to use the auto cleanup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
>>>>>>>> group
>>>>>>>> remind the parties of their postings and direct to the SpyWare and
>>>>>>>> Virus
>>>>>>>> removal forums and sites.
>>>>>>>> These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
>>>>>>>> during
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
>>>>>>>> and the
>>>>>>>> registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
>>>>>>>> manual
>>>>>>>> editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
>>>>>>>> addin
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> basic regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
>>>>>>>>> significant
>>>>>>>>> failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
>>> to
>>>>>> run
>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> large Registry. BFD.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
>>>>>>>>> wide-spread
>>>>>>>>> disaster involving the user doing something that shouldn't have
>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>> done, but only an expert is likely to know for sure, and while
>>>>>>>>> tools
>>>>>>>>> *might* locate a few of those entries, you know better than most,
>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> think, how much of any real Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to
>>>>>>>>> "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL search and research procedure
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> few if any tools do well at all.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
>>>>>>>>> it,
>>>>>>>>> ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
>>>>>>>> weren't
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
>>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>> years of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
>>> never
>>>>>> once
>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>> any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
>>>>>>>>> tools,
>>>>>>>>> whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
>>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>>> Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
>>>>>>>>> "idiot-proof".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
>>>>>>>>>> entries
>>>>>>>>>> which relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
>>> which
>>>>>> fill
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
>>>>>>>>>> supposedly removed but actually leave, at times, countless
>>>>>>>>>> worthless
>>>>>> entries
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>> changed at sometime.
>>>>>>>>>> We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
>>>>>> prone
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
>>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>>> becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
>>>>>>>>>> crisis.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
>>>>>>>>>> methods to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry,
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> otherwise work upon the registry... They also have repeatedly
>>>>>>>>>> advised,
>>>>>>>>>> when confronted with
>>>>>>>>>> ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
>>> advised
>>>>>> HOW
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
>>>>>>>>>> registry,
>>>>>>>>>> which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> mean,,,
>>>>>>>>>> but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
>>>>>>>>>> taken
>>>>>>>>>> with *a
>>>>>>>>>> grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
>>>>>> user
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
>>> IF,
>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
>>> registry,
>>>>>> makes
>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>> effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
>>>>>>>>>> searching
>>>>>>>>>> first to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
>>>>>>>>>> desired
>>>>>>>>>> results can
>>>>>>>>>> be achieved.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
>>> understanding
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> YOUR
>>>>>>>>>> responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
>>>>>>>>>> cause
>>>>>>>>>> more harm than good.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
>>>>>>>>>> cleanup
>>>>>>>>>> activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>> letterman@invalid.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
>>>>>>>>>>>> never
>>>>>>>>>>>> seen
>>>>>>>>>>>> it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
>>> would
>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>>>> huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
>>>>>>>> created
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place
>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
>>> from
>>>>>> text,
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then
>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wordpad
>>>>>>>>>>>> to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
>>>>>>>>>>>> documented in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
>>>>>>>>>>>> "recently
>>>>>>>>>>>> opened files".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> delete
>>>>>>>>>>>> the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
>>>>>> downloads
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>> tried.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
>>>>>>>>>>>> folder,
>>>>>>>>>>>> references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
>>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>>> relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
>>>>>>>>>>>> removed
>>>>>>>>>>>> from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course
>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
>>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>>>> just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
>>> should
>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
>>>>>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
>>>>>>>>>>>> them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nonsense.

 

[PCR]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:%23b$mU$xrIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > letterman wrote ...
| >>
| >> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
| >> snip
|
| That's the same logic as saying:
| "I always smoke cigarettes while I pump gasoline, and I never caused
an explosion"

OTOH, you can put a cigarette out in #1 home heating oil. I saw my oil
man do it! Up until then, I was always standing 3 feet away!

| -)
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
| http://dts-l.net/
| http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm
|

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

 

[MEB]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

Well not really. Just as HP has removed many of their files, so have dozens
of other manufacturers.
when find a supposed file on the NET elsewhere, one is likely to get an
"update driver" which does not contain the full set of files need for proper
installation OR has been placed by someone who put the wrong designation on
the file, e.g., this driver works with the 7452b, when in actuality it was
for the 5452a.
Then you run across the inevitable *software that came installed* that the
user has used for years BUT did not come on any disk or CDROM to replace it
with.

But we can banter back and forth about the variables and never come to
agreement. You think as you do, and I believe in what I have stated. As the
saying goes: we agree to disagree.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:u6zJ3sGsIHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| You exaggerate extremely. The numbers of machines I'm talking about amount
| to maybe one millionth of one percent of machines out there, or more
likely
| a millionth of that number. Come on, really... How many drivers really
CAN'T
| be found, or are you really saying, "Can't be *easily* found?" I'll bet
you
| can find every driver set ever written out there, somewhere, even if it
| requires shelling out some bucks to get them.
|
| Anyway, you're the one who described the machine you chose as an exemplar
of
| a machine that MUST be repaired in place because there is no way to
rebuild
| it. The machine(s) you describe are "decrepit" by definition. And just
like
| decrepit automobiles, they are just as much a danger to society as they
are
| a nuisance to their owners.
|
| In the case of idiots who didn't save the software that came with their
| computer, they deserve to be forced to buy a new machine.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:OycJifGsIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > Aw Gary, too decrepit??? That's like telling everyone to buy new
| > computers...
| >
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:eLILfVGsIHA.5872@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the
| > advertised
| > | intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too
| > decrepit
| > | to be worth the effort, AFAIC.
| > |
| > | If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools
| > will
| > | do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true
statement,
| > | proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and
| > worthless.
| > | Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities
are
| > | revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
| > | program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?),
which
| > are
| > | a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except
the
| > | most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly
harmless.
| > | Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably
| > with
| > | certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing
that
| > | would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
| > | programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you
| > leave
| > it
| > | there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even
if
| > | that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| >
| >
| > Yes, in part. I have cautioned concerning removal pf ActiveX semmingly
| > blank entries. These ARE place holders,,, which should be left as they
are
| > DISABLED...
| >
| > As for "leave it there" that attempts to indicate all programmers know
| > what they are doing, and make proper installation files and uninstaller
| > routines... that's a dream world, it would ber nice, but its not a
| > reality.
| >
| > So again, these types of TOOLS can be of use, but must be used with
| > caution AND only after making an effort to understand what they might
| > find.
| > IN FACT, several of these tools now include Search Tools built-in, and
| > suggest using them BEFORE removal of any items. Its just like any
| > application or program that a user might have, they MUST learn how to
use
| > it.
| >
| > |
| > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | news:O9RLrtAsIHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | > Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
| > | > statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of
them
| > are
| > | > worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen
| > when
| > | > used without knowledge.
| > | >
| > | > I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
| > | > misuse..
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > --
| > | > _________
| > | >
| > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > news:eduY226rIHA.3900@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | > | I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite
should
| > be
| > | > | generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as
that
| > | > system
| > | > | connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable*
| > danger
| > | > to
| > | > | others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| > | > | irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say
thumbs
| > | > down.
| > | > |
| > | > | And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see,
| > those
| > | > few
| > | > | Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as
| > HJT.
| > Do
| > | > you
| > | > | recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream
DANGER!!!
| > if
| > | > you
| > | > | saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | news:OfeA8t6rIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:%23thP3H6rIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | >> news:OIlgiP4rIHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >> | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose
they
| > | > might
| > | > | >> have
| > | > | >> | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of
| > grabbing
| > | > one
| > | > | >> for
| > | > | >> | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| > | > | >> |
| > | > | >> | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal.
| > With
| > | > minor
| > | > | >> | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
| > | > recommend
| > | > | >> a
| > | > | >> | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it
| > permanently
| > | > | >> suspect.
| > | > | >> | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
| > | > spyware
| > | > | >> | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
| > and
| > | > | >> virus(es)
| > | > | >> | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove,
and
| > | > even
| > | > | >> have
| > | > | >> | REG files for the purpose.
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >> In part you're right, many do have these reg files however, as
| > these
| > | > | >> things
| > | > | >> are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools*
are
| > | > used
| > | > to
| > | > | >> locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that
| > variant.
| > | > | >> Without
| > | > | >> the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses.
| > One
| > | > could
| > | > | >> even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same
| > class,
| > | > yet
| > | > | >> without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or
other,
| > and
| > | > | >> experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm
| > having
| > | > a
| > | > | > hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
| > | > advertised
| > | > | > Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >> They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other
| > styles
| > | > of
| > | > | >> cleanup as well.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are
we
| > back
| > | > to
| > | > | > "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
| > | > | >
| > | > | >> | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| > | > | >> | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the
signs
| > of
| > | > crap,
| > | > | >> then
| > | > | >> | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
| > blunt
| > | > | >> about
| > | > | >> it,
| > | > | >> | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just
| > like
| > a
| > | > lot
| > | > | >> of
| > | > | >> | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN
| > sphere,
| > | > for
| > | > | >> | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads,
| > all
| > | > your
| > | > | >> AT
| > | > | >> | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is
almost
| > | > ALWAYS
| > | > | >> to
| > | > | >> | remove all networking and related devices and services and
let
| > them
| > | > | >> | reinstall themselves.
| > | > | >> |
| > | > | >> | --
| > | > | >> | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | >> | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | >> | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >> The full wipe would be the safest, I agree however, that's
just
| > not
| > | > | >> possible for many users. Either they no longer have the
| > installation
| > | > | >> disks
| > | > | >> for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
| > | > supported
| > | > | >> [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no
| > updates].
| > | > Then
| > | > | >> you
| > | > | >> run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates
| > posted
| > | > | >> upon
| > | > | >> the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered.
Granted,
| > one
| > | > can
| > | > | >> search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of
| > whatever
| > | > is
| > | > | >> found.
| > | > | >> Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and
| > saved
| > | > | >> these
| > | > | >> during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
| > | > | >
| > | > | > You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten
million?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of
| > truly
| > | > | > experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in
handy,
| > but
| > | > | > that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to
desist
| > in
| > | > my
| > | > | > blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite
| > for
| > | > the
| > | > | > real skinny.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >> I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum,
| > and
| > | > we
| > | > | >> did
| > | > | >> offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors
were
| > to
| > | > work
| > | > | >> through the potentials associated.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > HUH!?!
| > | > | >
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | > MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | > www.grystmill.com
| > | > | >
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >> --
| > | > | >> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | >> --
| > | > | >> _________
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >>
| > | > | >> |
| > | > | >> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | >> | news:eQZZwCzrIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >> | > I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
| > | > postings
| > | > | >> for
| > | > | >> | > individual responses...
| > | > | >> | >
| > | > | >> | > Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I
| > use
| > | > the
| > | > | >> | > programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which
is
| > why
| > | > I
| > | > | >> | > caution
| > | > | >> | > not to use the auto cleanup.
| > | > | >> | >
| > | > | >> | > But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives
of
| > | > this
| > | > | >> group
| > | > | >> | > remind the parties of their postings and direct to the
| > SpyWare
| > | > and
| > | > | >> Virus
| > | > | >> | > removal forums and sites.
| > | > | >> | > These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used
| > regularly
| > | > | >> during
| > | > | >> | > the
| > | > | >> | > process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar
with
| > them
| > | > and
| > | > | >> the
| > | > | >> | > registry, but certainly are used far more often than
| > suggesting
| > | > | >> manual
| > | > | >> | > editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
| > | > regedit
| > | > | >> addin
| > | > | >> | > or
| > | > | >> | > replacement that they use because of the limited
capabilities
| > of
| > | > the
| > | > | >> basic
| > | > | >> | > regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| > | > | >> | >
| > | > | >> | > So my statement stands, careful application of these
cleaners
| > can
| > | > be
| > | > | >> of
| > | > | >> | > use, but not to those who fail to take the time to
understand
| > | > them.
| > | > | >> | >
| > | > | >> | > --
| > | > | >> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | >> | > --
| > | > | >> | > _________
| > | > | >> | >
| > | > | >> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | >> | > news:uJJ8wpwrIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >> | > | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing
any
| > | > | >> significant
| > | > | >> | > | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
| > | > failing
| > | > to
| > | > | >> run
| > | > | >> | > on
| > | > | >> | > a
| > | > | >> | > | large Registry. BFD.
| > | > | >> | > |
| > | > | >> | > | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
| > | > wide-spread
| > | > | >> | > disaster
| > | > | >> | > | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have
been
| > | > done,
| > | > | >> but
| > | > | >> | > only
| > | > | >> | > | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools
| > *might*
| > | > | >> locate a
| > | > | >> | > few
| > | > | >> | > | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how
| > much
| > | > of
| > | > | >> any
| > | > | >> | > real
| > | > | >> | > | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a
| > painstaking
| > | > | >> MANUAL
| > | > | >> | > search
| > | > | >> | > | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at
| > all.
| > | > | >> | > |
| > | > | >> | > | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap"
and
| > | > delete
| > | > | >> it,
| > | > | >> | > | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
| > | > learned
| > | > | >> | > weren't
| > | > | >> | > a
| > | > | >> | > | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and
| > after
| > | > | >> many
| > | > | >> | > years
| > | > | >> | > | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now.
| > I've
| > | > never
| > | > | >> once
| > | > | >> | > had
| > | > | >> | > | any success helping anyone else by having them run any
| > Registry
| > | > | >> tools,
| > | > | >> | > | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were
| > screwed
| > | > by
| > | > | >> their
| > | > | >> | > | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and
| > thought
| > | > were
| > | > | >> | > | "idiot-proof".
| > | > | >> | > |
| > | > | >> | > | --
| > | > | >> | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | >> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | >> | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | >> | > |
| > | > | >> | > |
| > | > | >> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | >> | > | news:OnaPSovrIHA.3616@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >> | > | > Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated
| > with
| > | > | >> entries
| > | > | >> | > which
| > | > | >> | > | > relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to
| > applications
| > | > which
| > | > | >> fill
| > | > | >> | > the
| > | > | >> | > | > registry with open files which no longer exist, to
| > | > applications
| > | > | >> | > supposedly
| > | > | >> | > | > removed but actually leave, at times, countless
worthless
| > | > | >> entries
| > | > | >> to
| > | > | >> | > any
| > | > | >> | > | > number of other things which aren't need, or may have
| > somehow
| > | > | >> been
| > | > | >> | > changed
| > | > | >> | > | > at sometime.
| > | > | >> | > | > We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL
| > or
| > be
| > | > | >> prone
| > | > | >> to
| > | > | >> | > | > failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing
| > issues]....
| > | > which
| > | > | >> then
| > | > | >> | > | > becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a
| > time
| > of
| > | > | >> crisis.
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some
| > time,
| > | > posted
| > | > | >> | > methods
| > | > | >> | > | > to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry,
| > and
| > | > | >> otherwise
| > | > | >> | > work
| > | > | >> | > | > upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised,
| > when
| > | > | >> | > confronted
| > | > | >> | > | > with
| > | > | >> | > | > ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or
otherwise,,
| > | > advised
| > | > | >> HOW
| > | > | >> | > to
| > | > | >> | > | > *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > I personally have used [and still use] several tools to
| > clean
| > | > the
| > | > | >> | > | > registry,
| > | > | >> | > | > which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a
| > system
| > | > lean
| > | > | >> and
| > | > | >> | > | > mean,,,
| > | > | >> | > | > but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner
| > should
| > | > be
| > | > | >> taken
| > | > | >> | > with
| > | > | >> | > | > *a
| > | > | >> | > | > grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea.
| > IF
| > | > the
| > | > | >> user
| > | > | >> is
| > | > | >> | > | > unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely
| > occur.
| > | > IF,
| > | > | >> on
| > | > | >> | > the
| > | > | >> | > | > other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
| > | > registry,
| > | > | >> makes
| > | > | >> | > an
| > | > | >> | > | > effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries
| > by
| > | > | >> searching
| > | > | >> | > first
| > | > | >> | > | > to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
| > | > desired
| > | > | >> | > results
| > | > | >> | > | > can
| > | > | >> | > | > be achieved.
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
| > | > understanding
| > | > | >> is
| > | > | >> | > YOUR
| > | > | >> | > | > responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as
they
| > | > MIGHT
| > | > | >> cause
| > | > | >> | > more
| > | > | >> | > | > harm than good.
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily
| > during
| > | > | >> cleanup
| > | > | >> | > | > activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such
| > activities...
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > --
| > | > | >> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | >> | > | > --
| > | > | >> | > | > _________
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in
| > | > message
| > | > | >> | > | > news:O18TzSurIHA.5060@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >> | > | > | letterman@invalid.com wrote:
| > | > | >> | > | > | > On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S.
Terhune"
| > | > <none>
| > | > | >> wrote:
| > | > | >> | > | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > | >> ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your
| > system,
| > | > and
| > | > | >> will
| > | > | >> | > | > | >> actually
| > | > | >> | > | > | >> FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
| > | > NEVER.
| > | > | >> | > | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > | > I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
I
| > | > have
| > | > | >> never
| > | > | >> | > seen
| > | > | >> | > | > | > it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of
| > useless
| > | > | >> junk.
| > | > | >> | > | > | > Without such programs, it seems to me that the
| > registry
| > | > would
| > | > | >> get
| > | > | >> | > so
| > | > | >> | > | > | > huge that it would be crash prone. For example,
lets
| > say
| > | > I
| > | > | >> | > created
| > | > | >> | > a
| > | > | >> | > | > | > folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to
| > temporarily
| > | > | >> place a
| > | > | >> | > bunch
| > | > | >> | > | > | > of things I find on my hard drive, which are
| > everything
| > | > from
| > | > | >> text,
| > | > | >> | > or
| > | > | >> | > | > | > Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file
| > downloads,
| > | > etc.
| > | > | >> Then
| > | > | >> | > I
| > | > | >> | > | > | > begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open
| > many
| > | > of
| > | > | >> the
| > | > | >> | > | > | > downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the
| > pictures,
| > | > and
| > | > | >> | > Wordpad
| > | > | >> | > | > | > to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things
| > are
| > | > | >> documented
| > | > | >> | > in
| > | > | >> | > | > | > the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all
| > store
| > | > | >> "recently
| > | > | >> | > | > | > opened files".
| > | > | >> | > | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > | > Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other
| > media
| > | > and
| > | > I
| > | > | >> | > delete
| > | > | >> | > | > | > the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the
demo
| > | > | >> downloads
| > | > | >> I
| > | > | >> | > | > tried.
| > | > | >> | > | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > | > Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that
| > JUNK
| > | > | >> folder,
| > | > | >> | > | > | > references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files,
and
| > | > many
| > | > | >> things
| > | > | >> | > | > | > relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of
| > that
| > | > is
| > | > | >> removed
| > | > | >> | > | > | > from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean.
| > Of
| > | > | >> course I
| > | > | >> | > | > | > always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9%
| > of
| > | > the
| > | > | >> time
| > | > | >> | > it's
| > | > | >> | > | > | > just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| > | > | >> | > | > | >
| > | > | >> | > | > | > So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous
| > and
| > | > should
| > | > | >> not
| > | > | >> | > be
| > | > | >> | > | > | > used.
| > | > | >> | > | > |
| > | > | >> | > | > | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
| > | > talking
| > | > | >> about.
| > | > | >> | > | > |
| > | > | >> | > | > | > I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
| > | > without
| > | > | >> | > | > | > them the registry will become a pile of useless
| > garbage.
| > | > | >> | > | > |
| > | > | >> | > | > | Nonsense.
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| >
| >
|

 

[glee]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:%23lmWYNKsIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:%23b$mU$xrIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > letterman wrote ...
> | >>
> | >> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
> | >> snip
> |
> | That's the same logic as saying:
> | "I always smoke cigarettes while I pump gasoline, and I never caused
> an explosion"
>
> OTOH, you can put a cigarette out in #1 home heating oil. I saw my oil
> man do it! Up until then, I was always standing 3 feet away!

Now you know why it takes so much of the stuff to heat your home!
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
http://dts-l.net/

 

[MM]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:11:49 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:%232UrnNBsIHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
>> capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had some
>> problems - BTDT)
>
>For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say NONE of them come
>any where near close to living up to the hype.
>
>> (That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).
>
>For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say they're useless.

This does, however, beg the question, why is the registry so obscure,
convoluted and arcane as to defeat all attempts to manipulate it,
except manually, gingerly, by folks in the know? It's only a couple of
very large files after all. Imagine there being such fuss made about
an mdb, for example. Or a .mid file. If one knows the structure, it
should not be rocket science to edit the data.

Also, given the absolute beating heart requirement for an intact
registry, isn't this fundamental construct of Microsoft Windows a very
bad design "feature"? Imagine a car that could never successfully be
repaired!

Personally, in my programming I avoid the registry like a hooker with
crabs. I use only .ini files.

MM

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

You exaggerate. It's not the Registry that's delicate, it's the data
contained therein, and the primary danger to that data is people relying on
bad advice or bad so-called "utilities". If you make a mistake, you can
potentially, easily, stop Windows from opening at all. Or totally trash a
program, possibly in such a way that reinstalling it doesn't fix the
problem. Which is where you depend on a backup. And there's the rub: Is
there a backup? When using Registry tools or just manually tracking some
entries (there's a lot of internal self-referral), it's quite easy to get
lost and forget what all you've edited. Ideally, one makes a backup of EACH
entry before editing, but guess how much that's done, even by the experts.
These precautions I scream out are because no matter how much we insist,
people go into the Registry without proper backup. And then they end up
here. (Caveat 1: The Registry IS delicate in one major way: Because it's
always loaded, and quite regularly being edited by the system, a crash is
more likely to corrupt the Registry than it is likely to corrupt other
documents.)

Seems to me that INI files are probably slower, and imagine if you used
*only* INI files and other individualized settings files. There'd be
hundreds of thousands of them. There would be lots of redundancy, also, that
the Registry is meant to avoid.

I don't find the Registry to be obscure. Arcane, perhaps, convoluted, also,
but much of that is due to the way the programmers use it. And that will
always be so. You use programs that are written in convoluted and arcane
ways (it's practically inherent in programming work.) The only difference
between those and the Registry is that the Registry is a public database
that anyone can read and edit, and thus screw up, whereas most of the rest
of the programming is generally untouchable.

As for your car metaphor, that's why we insist so much on Registry backups,
but it's also not true that the Registry can't be repaired. It's done all
the time, one way or another, but successful repair is VERY unlikely to
include any of the widely advertised Registry Repair tools because they
DON'T truly repair anything, they just try to clean up useless entries,
based upon the "rules" of the Registry, whereas the truth is that unless you
have a perfect database of every application ever written and what the
programmers might have done in the Registry, the tool is BOUND to make
mistakes. That's because programmers are human and don't always follow the
rules. It's also because new ways are found to use the Registry, or because
some SMART programmers are thinking towards the future and stick in things
that aren't "valid" (don't need to be.) Of course, what happens even more
often is that an entry is programmed which is then forgotten and left
behind. That and crap left behind by uninstalls are two of the main things
Registry Cleaners claim to find and delete. Only I've yet to see one that
does that without also potentially removing entries that SHOULDN'T be
removed. And then the user ends up here, to learn about backups.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MM" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ctv5245667tukrtca2hfoq0ffcc6vfcc3e@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:11:49 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:
>
>>"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:%232UrnNBsIHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
>>> capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had
>>> some
>>> problems - BTDT)
>>
>>For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say NONE of them come
>>any where near close to living up to the hype.
>>
>>> (That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).
>>
>>For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say they're useless.
>
> This does, however, beg the question, why is the registry so obscure,
> convoluted and arcane as to defeat all attempts to manipulate it,
> except manually, gingerly, by folks in the know? It's only a couple of
> very large files after all. Imagine there being such fuss made about
> an mdb, for example. Or a .mid file. If one knows the structure, it
> should not be rocket science to edit the data.
>
> Also, given the absolute beating heart requirement for an intact
> registry, isn't this fundamental construct of Microsoft Windows a very
> bad design "feature"? Imagine a car that could never successfully be
> repaired!
>
> Personally, in my programming I avoid the registry like a hooker with
> crabs. I use only .ini files.
>
> MM

 

[PCR]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

glee wrote:
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
| news:%23lmWYNKsIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
|> "glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
|> news:%23b$mU$xrIHA.4228@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
|> | > letterman wrote ...
|> | >>
|> | >> I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
|> | >> snip
|> |
|> | That's the same logic as saying:
|> | "I always smoke cigarettes while I pump gasoline, and I never
|> | caused an explosion"
|>
|> OTOH, you can put a cigarette out in #1 home heating oil. I saw my
|> oil man do it! Up until then, I was always standing 3 feet away!
|
| Now you know why it takes so much of the stuff to heat your home!

It did, but I switched to ConED gas two/so years ago, when the cost of
oil was DOUBLING on me-- it hit a high of two bucks per gallon back
then! It seemed I immediately spent a 3rd as much using gas! Gas went up
since then, but I still spend half as much as the old oil price it
seems!

But my gas man refuses to try the same experiment!

| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
| http://dts-l.net/

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

 

[MM]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

..ini files display NO degradation in performance. Many erstwhile
performance problems have "fixed" themselves over the past few years
simply by dint of PC hardware becoming vastly more powerful. I can
remember working on 8088 PCs. Now that was slow. Recently I spent a
fair bit of time designing a database for 18,000 records. Then I
discovered that even on my relatively low-powered PC a straightforward
sequential search of a text file appears to be just as quick. Now, if
you measured access with a timer, the database version is likely to be
faster in milliseconds, but once it's fast enough, there's no point
making it any faster. If searching is so fast that the user
experiences absolutely no waiting at all on pressing Enter or clicking
a button, why go to the bother and potential risk of installing MDAC
etc?

Anyway, back to the darned registry and I have to say, it seems to me
that quite a few people tend to place the registry, or better, *** The
Registry *** in caps, with gold-plating and flashing lights, on a kind
of exalted pedestal. If it is such an important component (and it is),
then there should be tools galore to fix it when broken. Are you
saying that it is totally impossible to design such a tool? I will
also return to my own car analogy and say there is NOthing that could
not be repaired if it had to be. With modern cars, of course, it's not
a problem to exchange, say, the starter motor, whereas I can still
remember replacing brushes and undercutting commutators. This is why I
believe the registry is a flawed design if one only has to breathe on
it to create a fatal SNAFU.

It should be possible for any competent MSVP to construct a fully
functioning Windows installation on a newly formatted hard drive just
by extracting files from the CABs and building the registry by hand,
just as it is possible to build a Nasa space vehicle by hand.

MM

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Re: DANGER! D ANGER!Re: Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

"MM" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:isn824tldrn7uko4kvd7i7otdd4ovrm98j@4ax.com...
> .ini files display NO degradation in performance. Many erstwhile
> performance problems have "fixed" themselves over the past few years
> simply by dint of PC hardware becoming vastly more powerful. I can
> remember working on 8088 PCs. Now that was slow. Recently I spent a
> fair bit of time designing a database for 18,000 records. Then I
> discovered that even on my relatively low-powered PC a straightforward
> sequential search of a text file appears to be just as quick. Now, if
> you measured access with a timer, the database version is likely to be
> faster in milliseconds, but once it's fast enough, there's no point
> making it any faster. If searching is so fast that the user
> experiences absolutely no waiting at all on pressing Enter or clicking
> a button, why go to the bother and potential risk of installing MDAC
> etc?

The Registry is already open and functioning. INI files need to be opened
before they can be read. Takes longer.

> Anyway, back to the darned registry and I have to say, it seems to me
> that quite a few people tend to place the registry, or better, *** The
> Registry *** in caps, with gold-plating and flashing lights, on a kind
> of exalted pedestal.

It is thus called for the same reason it's Windows and not windows. A matter
of English. Proper noun and all.

>If it is such an important component (and it is),
> then there should be tools galore to fix it when broken. Are you
> saying that it is totally impossible to design such a tool? I will
> also return to my own car analogy and say there is NOthing that could
> not be repaired if it had to be. With modern cars, of course, it's not
> a problem to exchange, say, the starter motor, whereas I can still
> remember replacing brushes and undercutting commutators. This is why I
> believe the registry is a flawed design if one only has to breathe on
> it to create a fatal SNAFU.

I never said it was impossible to fix the Registry. I just said that ALL of
the so called Registry Cleaning and Repair Tools out there are not capable
of doing so. Go ahead. Find a TOOL that will fix your car all by itself, no
human involvement. OK, maybe in today's day of standardization and
automation, a tool COULD fix a car by itself. But to make the comparison
valid, you have to imagine that even if we grant that they all leave the
factory more or less the same, the car is not yet complete -- it gets a ton
of customisations, none of which follow any "standards" provided by the car
maker very well. Now, go find a tool that can fix that.

> It should be possible for any competent MSVP to construct a fully
> functioning Windows installation on a newly formatted hard drive just
> by extracting files from the CABs and building the registry by hand,
> just as it is possible to build a Nasa space vehicle by hand.

If you mean MS-MVP, you mistake the meaning of the award. Suggest you look
it up. If you're trying to refer to someone who is a super-expert, what you
say isn't true, either. The documentation doesn't exist and that Registry
was built by a million hands. IF what you say were even true, it would take
a lifetime. Besides, all you'd end up with is a semi-worthless fresh
installation of Windows, lacking applications most consider indispensable.
What about those, eh?

Anyway, your vehicle analogies, and your comparison of mechanics are
worthless. Windows isn't a car. Nor is it a space vehicle. These things
exist in different dimensions.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com