4 Myths of Registry Cleaning

M

Mike Hall - MVP

Twayne said:
Ahh, the typical response of one who doesn't know what to say. Prove me
wrong and I won't be able to say those things. Go ahead, prove registry
cleaners can not do anything good and that they are all snake oil. If
you've kept track, that's the start of these threads.

If you call the expression of opinions and supporting evidence trolling,
then so be it. That's how closed minds operate. If I'm wrong, prove it.
Prove registry cleaners are no good and are snake oil.


As I said in another response, the burden of proof is on you. So far, you
have regurgitated a sales pitch by a Russian software company..


--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
P

pemo

i LOVE top posting...
Don Schmidt said:
Seems both my and Microsoft believe in top posting (when responding, the
cursor defaults to the top of the page) and alerting the message isn't a
problem.
 
T

Twayne

Twayne said:
You are a troll, you have never provided any supporting documents for
your claims and all you can do is provide SPAM in your feeble attempts
to support your opinions! Registry cleaners are nothing but snake oil
promoted by snakes in the grass!

Interesting attitude for a supposedly intelligent person. Your
abilities at reading comprehension are sorely lacking, I'm afraid.
 
T

Twayne

Twayne said:
As I said in another response, the burden of proof is on you. So far,
you have regurgitated a sales pitch by a Russian software company..

lol, and so far you have lied and provided misinformation with your
contradictory statement. I suspect you don't even had a good idea of
how a "cleaner" works or how it functions to decide whether and how to
present ojbects for possible repair. You have little to no background,
experience or knowledge of the subject at hand and show that ignorance
over and over in the last few posts. Mayhaps you should reread the
"pledge" you took otherwise known as the Code of Conduct amongst a few
other interesting connotations I've seen MVPs refer to. IF you're an
MVP you're not a good one and you don't follow the rules - or you would
go on subject with your posts.
Also I can only assume your comment about a "Russian..." is prejudice
clear and simple. As in, they are not capable of doing such a thing
because ... ? Is that what you meant? What other meaning can I apply
to the comment? Over my career I hired a total of 4 Russians, and they
all turned out to be excellent employees, not devoid of intelligence or
ethics in any way. One in fact was awarded many recognitions for his
out of box thinking, though it wasn't called that then.

Now, let's talk about what you've regurgitated: Nah, too easy. And
you're not showing anything to be worthy of the time.
 
T

Twayne

Twayne said:
I have already told you.

MS Regclean kept the size of the Win 9x registry to a size where it
would not cause the OS to crash.

Where did win98 come from? Redirection attempt maybe? OK, I accept it.
That's one. But at least it's an empirical fact mostly backed by valid
information. But you can't paint the whole world based on an average of
one any more than I can paint all MVPs as ignorant because one says
registry cleaners are all bad.
NT does not crash if the registry grows, and it ignores orphaned
entries..

And, that proves what? An improvement over 98? Duhh!
Registry cleaners which claim to fix registry problems more often
than not stop the OS working completely. One only has to look at
posts re registry cleaner use in these newsgroups.

I don't know of any registry cleaner that does NOT claim to fix registry
problems.
And of the ones I have used over the years, not a single one has ever
stopped the OS from working completely. Never. On several hundred
machines total. Often they didn't help anything; but they never did
harm either, especially to the point of rendering a system unusable of
unbootable.
So ... I've expressed experience but you only expressed opinion. Got
more? I'm serious, actually. I have not yet seen a registry cleaner
I've used trash a machine - where the heck do all the myths about "more
often than not" come from anyway? I cannot find it. I *could* find it,
if I used enough junky kiddie-designed and no-rep cleaners, but ...
that's a little silly and no way to prove that ALL do the same thing.
Your 'education' is a regurgitation of a sales pitch used by authors
of registry cleaners. It proves nothing.

It actually does, and if you like the word regurgitation, feel free.
You have seen some very good information and references to go along with
them. Because I'm not dishonest enough to remove links to things like a
list of the "ten best" or whatever, has little bearing on anything if
the information they present is accurate AND reflects the reaility of
the situations, which every one I have presented does do. I have had no
experiences contradictory to what those articles say. You are not
saying you have had the opposite experience either, I notice. Why is
that?
The burden of proof is on you. Find just one article where data shows
that a registry cleaner did anything more than remove stuff which
could have been left where it was, or completely stop an OS in its
tracks if all functions of the registry cleaner were brought into
play..

No, the burden of "proof" is not upon me. You're irritated because I
have the audacity to actually say what I believe and have experienced,
while you just hide behind comments like your burden of proof. If it is
that important to you, then it is you who has the burden of proof. I
already know.
Besides making sure the lock on your mind is solidly connected, you
have done absoutely nothing to show yourself or anyone else that your
contentions are correct. It's interesting because it is so incredibly
simple to do and yet you fail to do so, along with your other cohorts
and fellow yearly "pledgers" to the ROC. With your background you
should know better IMO. I do assume that you at least are one who has a
current/valid MVP title. I have no idea whether you are or not and
dont' really care anyway. For the most part it would appear to me that
MVPs are freebie labor for Microsoft so they don't have to bother with
"peons". MS also claims they check into the groups now and then but in
the years I've been here, I've never seen one. If they do check in,
they are sure to hide. But I digress, which is something I don't
like.
My guess is that you have a vested interest in a registry cleaner..

lol, really? Well, in a way that's true: I DO have an INvestment in a
registry maintenance program, and the other fav one I use is a freebie
that costs nothing. Both are excellent applications and no matter what
windows machine I run them on, perform flawlessly. There are several
others I would have no problem seeing people use too, and a bunch I know
nothing about which I'd suggest not be used, but ... that's all true
with any application, not just registry maintenance.
 
T

Twayne

A good "fix" for the sig issues/cursor start positions etc., with OE is
"OE-quotefix". It fixes the top-positioning of the cursor problem
(actually it's programmable), color codes quotes and a few other handy
fixes that OE left out for use on newsgroups. Makes it a lot more
compatible including managing sigs, etc.. If you believe MS, OE was
never intended for public use; only internal. If you're interested
it's available here:
http://www.insideoe.com/resources/tools.htm

I'm not certain it's supported any longer but what is there works
reasonably well and doesn't break anything. I've had it for years and
like it.

Cheers,

Twayne
 
T

Twayne

Twayne said:
Yup; I'm aware of that one. You will notice that even MS's own SDK can
cause the same problem if you actually know anything about it.
Also: Not all registry maintenance programs caused the problem, MS
did something they shouldn't have, and it has little to do with whether
such programs are useful or not. They not only supplied a workaround
for the two situations where their own software created problems, but
even notified reg maint authors of the issues. That all came about back
in the day when MS still cared a little about their customers.
For some reason I have a feeling you just found that link and decided
it proved your case, but ... again, it has nothing to do with registry
maintenance all being snake oil.
That one's news to me, but:
did you read that one too? That's about their own buggy registry
cleaner; a failed event from the git-go in a lot more areas than just
that one.

I can show you a LOT more of such information but none of it does
anything to support the claims that all registry cleaners are snake oil,
should never be used, and never do anything useful. I know you'll
attack this one out of hand but I would never touch such a thing from
Microsoft without first finding considerable supporting evidence that it
worked. They have no idea what they're doing most of hte time and if
you kept up with that end of things, you also noticed that the "teams"
that worked with win reg cure were NOT comprised of anyone at MS who was
a guru or had written any even related code to the registry. Now that
latter part is hearsay from an MVPs blog, but I tend to believe it; he
seemed to have all the backup to support it.

But the main point is, it says nothing in support of the claims that
*all registry cleaners are snake oil, should never be used, and never do
anything useful.* As I keep saying over and over, THAT is the issue at
hand and has been since day one.
Of course in your usual dense blockhead manner you will brush those
proofs aside and still insist that everyone but you have closed minds
and that the ones who originally posted their problems are lying.
We've come to expect this from you. A short while ago I asked you to
post links and prove another one of your outlandish buffoonish claims
and as usual you couldn't provide anything. Now, as if you aren't
enough of a troll, you have sunk to new lows by resorting to spam to
spread your ignorant opinions.

John

lol, you're a really dim bulb, aren't you? First, I gave you the URLs
you asked for and said to come back if they weren't the ones you
expected, and you blackholed it. So much for your honesty and actual
interest in real fact.
I also don't follow short URLs from people I don't know, in
particular MVPs who can't adhere to their own Rules of Conduct. So you
wasted your time creating those. Put them in full URL format and I'll
look at them. Only bozos follow URLs they can't tell where they are
going. Nice try.

I'm tempted to compare this post from you to your rules of conduct, but
you've trashed them since long before you and I began to communicate.
Suffice it to say that I don't think you are an MVP, but that's
digressing, so I'll stop there.

Twayne
 
J

John John (MVP)

To be expected from you, you expect others to click on spam links and to
read advertisements but you find convenient excuses to ignore facts.
Why don't you click here then and see what kind of problems real people
experience with the trash that you peddle:

http://groups.google.com/group/micr...9/f9b2f696ca1b9462?lnk=st&q=#f9b2f696ca1b9462
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...8/b24120ba96fb6335?lnk=st&q=#b24120ba96fb6335
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...=audetweld+registry+cleaners#0ae3499993a4bb8b
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...4/f09899a007498781?lnk=st&q=#f09899a007498781
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...55eefb6026d/60852cd77c65fb8a#60852cd77c65fb8a
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...lnk=st&q=audetweld+text+size#7b440645e62a656f

It's exactly as I said earlier, when confronted with proof that these
cleaners cause real problems you choose to conveniently ignore the facts
and make up excuses to evade the real issues, something that we have
come to expect from you.

John
 
M

Mike Hall - MVP

Twayne said:
Where did win98 come from? Redirection attempt maybe? OK, I accept it.
That's one. But at least it's an empirical fact mostly backed by valid
information. But you can't paint the whole world based on an average of
one any more than I can paint all MVPs as ignorant because one says
registry cleaners are all bad.


And, that proves what? An improvement over 98? Duhh!

I don't know of any registry cleaner that does NOT claim to fix registry
problems.
And of the ones I have used over the years, not a single one has ever
stopped the OS from working completely. Never. On several hundred
machines total. Often they didn't help anything; but they never did harm
either, especially to the point of rendering a system unusable of
unbootable.
So ... I've expressed experience but you only expressed opinion. Got
more? I'm serious, actually. I have not yet seen a registry cleaner I've
used trash a machine - where the heck do all the myths about "more often
than not" come from anyway? I cannot find it. I *could* find it, if I
used enough junky kiddie-designed and no-rep cleaners, but ... that's a
little silly and no way to prove that ALL do the same thing.


It actually does, and if you like the word regurgitation, feel free. You
have seen some very good information and references to go along with them.
Because I'm not dishonest enough to remove links to things like a list of
the "ten best" or whatever, has little bearing on anything if the
information they present is accurate AND reflects the reaility of the
situations, which every one I have presented does do. I have had no
experiences contradictory to what those articles say. You are not saying
you have had the opposite experience either, I notice. Why is that?

No, the burden of "proof" is not upon me. You're irritated because I have
the audacity to actually say what I believe and have experienced, while
you just hide behind comments like your burden of proof. If it is that
important to you, then it is you who has the burden of proof. I already
know.
Besides making sure the lock on your mind is solidly connected, you
have done absoutely nothing to show yourself or anyone else that your
contentions are correct. It's interesting because it is so incredibly
simple to do and yet you fail to do so, along with your other cohorts and
fellow yearly "pledgers" to the ROC. With your background you should know
better IMO. I do assume that you at least are one who has a current/valid
MVP title. I have no idea whether you are or not and dont' really care
anyway. For the most part it would appear to me that MVPs are freebie
labor for Microsoft so they don't have to bother with "peons". MS also
claims they check into the groups now and then but in the years I've been
here, I've never seen one. If they do check in, they are sure to hide.
But I digress, which is something I don't like.


lol, really? Well, in a way that's true: I DO have an INvestment in a
registry maintenance program, and the other fav one I use is a freebie
that costs nothing. Both are excellent applications and no matter what
windows machine I run them on, perform flawlessly. There are several
others I would have no problem seeing people use too, and a bunch I know
nothing about which I'd suggest not be used, but ... that's all true with
any application, not just registry maintenance.


I am not irritated at all, but I will try to ensure that computer users
don't fall foul of registry cleaners.

As you have two of them, presumably you can produce data to show that they
do what they claim..

Re my contentions.. read the posts in newsgroups over the years and you come
across more than a few who have fallen foul.

All you state is a sales pitch which makes claims that can't be
substantiated at all. I believe that it is called FUD..

Now we get to the insults.. way to go..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
M

Mike Hall - MVP

Twayne said:
lol, and so far you have lied and provided misinformation with your
contradictory statement. I suspect you don't even had a good idea of how
a "cleaner" works or how it functions to decide whether and how to present
ojbects for possible repair. You have little to no background, experience
or knowledge of the subject at hand and show that ignorance over and over
in the last few posts. Mayhaps you should reread the "pledge" you took
otherwise known as the Code of Conduct amongst a few other interesting
connotations I've seen MVPs refer to. IF you're an MVP you're not a good
one and you don't follow the rules - or you would go on subject with your
posts.
Also I can only assume your comment about a "Russian..." is prejudice
clear and simple. As in, they are not capable of doing such a thing
because ... ? Is that what you meant? What other meaning can I apply to
the comment? Over my career I hired a total of 4 Russians, and they all
turned out to be excellent employees, not devoid of intelligence or ethics
in any way. One in fact was awarded many recognitions for his out of box
thinking, though it wasn't called that then.

Now, let's talk about what you've regurgitated: Nah, too easy. And
you're not showing anything to be worthy of the time.


More insinuations and still not one piece from you where it clearly shows
that Registry cleaner has value..


--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
M

Marianne

Twayne said:
Yup; I'm aware of that one. You will notice that even MS's own SDK can
cause the same problem if you actually know anything about it.
Also: Not all registry maintenance programs caused the problem, MS
did something they shouldn't have, and it has little to do with whether
such programs are useful or not.

So now you blame it on Microsoft, Microsoft did something that they
shouldn't have done! Microsoft did nothing wrong with regards to the
registry cleaner removing needed entries from the registry, that is
solely the fault of the cleaner.

That one's news to me, but:
did you read that one too? That's about their own buggy registry
cleaner; a failed event from the git-go in a lot more areas than just
that one.

Can't you read, you numskull? The problem described in that article has
nothing to do with a Microsoft registry cleaner, in part the article states:

CAUSE
This issue may occur after you run the WinReg Cleaner feature in
WinCleaner by Business Logic Corporation. WinReg Cleaner scans the
registry to identify registry entries that are not valid and then
produces a report of the registry entries that it will remove. By
default, all the registry entries that WinReg Cleaner identifies are
selected, or checked, for removal. If you click Remove Checked, all the
selected registry entries are removed. If Office is installed on your
computer, WinReg Cleaner identifies most Office registry entries as not
valid and removes them from the registry.

and:

MORE INFORMATION
The third-party products that this article discusses are manufactured by
companies that are independent of Microsoft. Microsoft makes no
warranty, implied or otherwise, regarding the performance or reliability
of these products...

What is it that you can't understand in those two paragraphs? Are you
too stupid to read and understand the above paragraphs? You have been
provided with solid evidence of the kind of damages that registry
cleaners do yet you still insist that all others are wrong and that you
are right, a real testament to your lack of intelligence!

M
 
K

Ken Blake

A good "fix" for the sig issues/cursor start positions etc., with OE is
"OE-quotefix". It fixes the top-positioning of the cursor problem
(actually it's programmable), color codes quotes and a few other handy
fixes that OE left out for use on newsgroups. Makes it a lot more
compatible including managing sigs, etc.. If you believe MS, OE was never
intended for public use; only internal. If you're interested it's
available here:
http://www.insideoe.com/resources/tools.htm

I'm not certain it's supported any longer but what is there works
reasonably well and doesn't break anything. I've had it for years and
like it.


I like and recommend OE-QuoteFix too, but unfortunately it hasn't been
upgraded to work with the Vista equivalent of OE, Windows Mail. Although I'm
using OE on my laptop at the moment, normally I don't use it at all.
 
O

Olórin

No need!

You have already shown yourself to be a total fool.

Plonked him ages ago, meself... Mind you, that was down to his attitude and
language rather than anything technical.
 
T

Twayne

Twayne said:
I like and recommend OE-QuoteFix too, but unfortunately it hasn't been
upgraded to work with the Vista equivalent of OE, Windows Mail.
Although I'm using OE on my laptop at the moment, normally I don't
use it at all.

Yeah, last I knew it wasn't supported any longer and that was quite
awhile back. Haven't been to the site in a long time but that's the
last i knew anyway. I thought I'd heard Mail fixed some of those
issues; guess not. I'm still on XP for the foreseeable future.

Regards,

Twayne
 
T

Twayne

More insinuations and still not one piece from you where it clearly
shows that Registry cleaner has value..

You'll get the best data when your supreme closed mind answers my
initial questions. Until then all you get is little things I come cross
here & there. I have provided information even if you are incapable of
understanding any of it. But there has never been a single viable
response from the other camp. But you continue to impart your spew
about the uselessness of any registry cleaner completely without
justification or backing of any kind. I can not help with reading
comprehension problems.
 
T

Twayne

....
I am not irritated at all, but I will try to ensure that computer
users don't fall foul of registry cleaners.

As you have two of them, presumably you can produce data to show that
they do what they claim..

Obviously I can, yes. And have in the past. I've even made an offer to
run side by side tests of cleaners along with Bruce (or anyone else who
wishes to participate) and post the results after we set up the rules to
work to and type of damage to create. I openly challenged Bruce
Chambers to same; and guess what his response was? Nada, nothing. I
have a sandbox PC that would be perfect for such testing and could be
relegated to the task for several consecutive days if need be. I even
alluded to that particular post 3 times more IIRC, all without a
response to it.
What got me onto that was his incessantly posted boilerplate posts on
registry cleaners. At first, likely almost 2 years ago now, I asked
him clarification questions. He didn't answer, but did once say, just
his saying so should have been enough for me. I let him know I
disagreed with him, and I guess having the sheer audacity to do that set
him off. Then when that was all he posted about, I decided to work from
the other side of the equation and make my opinions clear too, but never
with boilerplate; I'm more original and open minded than that.
Apparently by the look of his recent posts he's let it get him pretty
mad and rather than do anything that would settle the question, he got
upset and felt attacked. So I attacked him as he attacked me, and
finally issued that challenge a couple months ago now.
Re my contentions.. read the posts in newsgroups over the years and
you come across more than a few who have fallen foul.

I don't need to know your history anymore than I do anyne else's. My
"agenda" is simply to correct misinformation and the registry cleaner
stuff is a big one, coming from one who should know better.
All you state is a sales pitch which makes claims that can't be
substantiated at all. I believe that it is called FUD..

Call it what you want, but IMO it calls your reading comprehension into
question too, or the state of your mind being open or not to information
and the imparting of same.
Now we get to the insults.. way to go..

Too bad you think they're insults. Apparently anyone who disagrees with
you is insulting you. I can't help with that. Up until very recently I
considered you to have an open mind, in fact.
 
M

Mike Hall - MVP

Twayne said:
You'll get the best data when your supreme closed mind answers my initial
questions. Until then all you get is little things I come cross here &
there. I have provided information even if you are incapable of
understanding any of it. But there has never been a single viable
response from the other camp. But you continue to impart your spew about
the uselessness of any registry cleaner completely without justification
or backing of any kind. I can not help with reading comprehension
problems.


So you can't produce data which shows that registry cleaners do what they
claim?


--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
M

Mike Hall - MVP

Not my posting history.. the posting history of users who have fallen foul
of registry cleaner claims..

You insinuated stuff. In my books, that is resorting to insults..

I have used registry cleaners in the past, but I still maintain that they
are dangerous and, in the case of the Windows NT family, unnecessary.

We are still waiting for definitive proof that a registry cleaner is any
good with respect to the Windows NT family. Please post some actual results.


--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
T

Twayne

Not my posting history.. the posting history of users who have fallen
foul of registry cleaner claims..

You insinuated stuff. In my books, that is resorting to insults..

I have used registry cleaners in the past, but I still maintain that
they are dangerous and, in the case of the Windows NT family,
unnecessary.
We are still waiting for definitive proof that a registry cleaner is
any good with respect to the Windows NT family. Please post some
actual results.

Already done, as now explained about 4 times. I can't help that you
cannot comprehend what you read. If you want to know what it was, you go
look it up. Otherwise you've not a leg to stand on.
When I get answers to my original questions, then maybe, but like I
said, it's already there. Bruce didn't/couldn't even refute it; he just
black holed instead, so I'd consider that pretty good evidence in and of
itself, actually. I actually have the supporting information for my
claims, unlike those of the opposite camp who have nada, zip, nothing,
zero, useful information.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top