Registry
in [Windows XP]
|
From: Bruce Chambers on 10 Jul 2010 14:20 Bill in Co wrote: > Granted, with one possible exception: > If someone is trying to clean reinstall an app, and the system reports it's > already installed and balks at the attempt, it is possible that by removing > some specific registry entries (left over from the previous uninstall), it > may allow that to take place. > It's true that sometimes -- very rarely, in my experience -- an uninstalled application can leave behind registry entries that interfere with the re-installation of that application. However this is easily remedied in minutes by using Regedit's own "Find" capability and manually deleting those troublesome entries. Further doing it this way, besides being safer, is much faster than downloading and installing a registry cleaner, waiting for it to complete its scan, and then having to sort through potentially hundreds of bogus error reports to find the one or two (well, maybe several, in some cases) troublesome entries that actually need to go. -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot
From: Bruce Chambers on 10 Jul 2010 14:22 Peter wrote: > On 07/09/2010 03:35 AM, Bruce Chambers wrote: >> Peter wrote: >>> >>> You can try CCleaner at http://www.ccleaner.com/ Be sure and make a >>> back up before fixing anything and run it THREE times to catch >>> everything. >>> >> >> >> CCleaner's only strength, and the only reason anyone should use it, lies >> in its usefulness for cleaning up unused temporary files from the hard >> drive. It differs from the native Windows tool in that it allows more >> granular control and you can specify which folders you want scanned. For >> instance, WinXP's disk cleaner will examine only the profile folders of >> the user who is running the utility. On a single-user machine, this is >> fine, but on a family or other mult-use machine, the ability to clean >> temorary files from all of the user profiles at once is a great time >> saver. >> >> It's registry cleaner, however, is worthless. I've tested the most >> recent recent version (with all updates) version on a brand-new OS >> installation with no additional applications installed, and certainly >> none installed and then uninstalled, and CCleaner still managed to >> "find" over a hundred allegedly orphaned registry entries and dozens of >> purportedly "suspicious" files, making it clearly a *worthless* product, >> in this regard. (Not that any registry cleaner can ever be anything but >> worthless, as they don't serve any *useful* purpose, to start with.) >> >> >> > > See my reply to Spamlet. > Yes, I already saw it. Regedit's own "Find" feature is much faster and safer. And yes, I've tested CCleaner. Had you actually read my post, you'd have known that. -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot
From: Bill in Co on 10 Jul 2010 17:39 Bruce Chambers wrote: > Bill in Co wrote: >> Granted, with one possible exception: >> If someone is trying to clean reinstall an app, and the system reports >> it's >> already installed and balks at the attempt, it is possible that by >> removing >> some specific registry entries (left over from the previous uninstall), >> it >> may allow that to take place. >> > > > It's true that sometimes -- very rarely, in my experience -- an > uninstalled application can leave behind registry entries that interfere > with the re-installation of that application. However this is easily > remedied in minutes by using Regedit's own "Find" capability and > manually deleting those troublesome entries. Further doing it this way, > besides being safer, is much faster than downloading and installing a > registry cleaner, waiting for it to complete its scan, and then having > to sort through potentially hundreds of bogus error reports to find the > one or two (well, maybe several, in some cases) troublesome entries that > actually need to go. Good point. I agree with you on that one (it's generally a better and safer way to go). > -- > > Bruce Chambers > > Help us help you: > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 > > They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary > safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin > > Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand > Russell > > The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has > killed a great many philosophers. > ~ Denis Diderot
From: HeyBub on 11 Jul 2010 07:50 Twayne wrote: > > Neat; a product provides you with information about the contents of > your registry, so you call it worthless. Now there's a piece of real > advice!! Yup, you sure proved it here, didn't you? lol, so pathetic! No, the program provides DATA. Only when the data are meaningful do they become "information." But some people are terminally curious ("How many angels can dance on the head of a pin") and devote untold resources to discover obscure - and meaningless - data. I once heard that it took a team of people two years to discover the exact middle word in the King James Bible (and it turned out there was NOT a middle word - there were two!).
From: Incognitus on 11 Jul 2010 09:40
On 07/10/2010 10:03 AM, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote: > > Eddie wrote: >> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote: >>> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired, boosted, >>> tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't), read >>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own conclusions. >> >> >> Hi [PA], >> >> I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and also >> your affiliation toward ms products. >> >> I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an excerpt >> from the link you posted re: O/P. >> ------\/ >> >> "Microsoft has a freebie online program at >> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's >> program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm. >> I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare >> registry cleaner >> >> Here's why: >> >> The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and >> whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a key >> or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone along >> with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's registry >> cleaner completely hose systems." >> ------ >> >> My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in >> the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it is >> written by M/S) >> Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see >> Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and especially >> considering each persons computer is different due to d/loads and >> software and blah blah. > <snip> >> What do you reckon? > > A very sore subject! I reckon that many longtime MVPs are Microsoft's > most vocal critics (vs. newer MVPs who are basically "MS Enthusiasts;" > e.g., the obnoxious Win7 Launch Parties). > > I can't think of one Windows MVP who didn't take MS to task for > misguidedly including a "Registry cleaner" in OneCare when beta testing > began in 2006. (Four years later and we're still griping about it so if > you think MVPs have much "pull" these days, think again.) > > The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's > (http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm) "Clean up" scan is MS's > online "Registry cleaner," and it's included when you run the Full > Service scan. Even while the applications were in beta, this started > causing problems (i.e., stuff was "cleaned" that shouldn't have been), > so much so that Support had to make this page available, primarily due > to MVP pressure): > http://boards.msn.com/safetyboards/thread.aspx?ThreadID=4868 > > While OneCare itself has been discontinued (cf. > http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/activation/oc_eol_guidance.htm), > the online scans remain available and haven't been changed at all. > > The The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's online scan for Vista/Win7 > is the Full Service scan only (i.e., you can't just run the Protection > scan) and continues to cause problems for users; cf. > http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/center/whatsnew.htm. > > Even Mark Russinovich (Technical Fellow in the MS Platform and Services > Division) criticized the use of Registry cleaners back in 2005: > http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2005/10/02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx > > > Again, a very sore subject! Well, first off re: http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm The statements " The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and whatever it removes is gone, forever." and "Should it mistakenly remove a key or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone along with your program or operating system." are not true. C:\Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Windows Live Onecare safety scanner\Backup is the location in XP where WLSC_Backup Registration Entries along with XML Documentation are stored. Registry cleaners themselves do no harm, it's the clueless twit using them that causes the harm, the proof is in the two false statements quoted above. I'm surprised you didn't tell Eddie of the Backup folder. |