Ping: John John MVP re: Ccleaner

[Al Sparber]

The problem is such fine words rarely convince nutters like Ken Blake or
John John. Ken Blake hasn't formatted a HD in his life let alone to
have ever used CCleaner. As for John John, he is a convicted child
abuser who is required to report his whereabouts so that the authorities
can keep an eye on him. Our children are never safe with people like
John John around.

I use CCleaner once every month to clear all the clutter from my system
including odd orphaned registry entries. Never had any problems since
XP first came my way (in my case since Feb 2001).

 

[Ken Springer]

The amount of RAM consumed by the registry is minimal (we're talking a few
MB here, NOT GB or anything even close to that).

And the added processing time of handling any spurious leftover entries in
the registry would most likely be in the tens of microseconds range, so it's
of no consequence, either.

And AFAIK, the registry is always completely loaded into RAM memory, or
windows won't even run. (John or Ken else can correct me if I'm wrong)

But, isn't all of this processing, when it comes to speed, also
dependent on the speeds of the various parts of the computer, such as
CPU, bus, hard drive, etc.?

In my case, I very rarely work on computers that are less than 5 years
old. And in my earlier comment about noticeably faster boot up time,
that computer only had a 1.2GHz processor.

Why do I bother with the old computers? I eventually end up with, and
sometimes look for, older systems and peripherals that are destined for
recycling/trash. Then I assemble a working *legal* system (always have
a COA sticker for XP) with Open Source software. Once up and running, I
take the system to the Community Cupboard, a food bank plus, and they
give the system to someone that needs a computer, doesn't have one, and
can't afford one. Which means the modem also needs to work, and if
these folks can come up with the money for an ISP, it will likely be
dial-up, since in many areas where I live dial-up and satellite are your
only options. At least the kids can now do some of their homework at home.

The philosophy behind this is any working computer is better than no
computer.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[David H. Lipman]

The problem is such fine words rarely convince nutters like Ken Blake or
John John. Ken Blake hasn't formatted a HD in his life let alone to
have ever used CCleaner. As for John John, he is a convicted child
abuser who is required to report his whereabouts so that the authorities
can keep an eye on him. Our children are never safe with people like
John John around.

I use CCleaner once every month to clear all the clutter from my system
including odd orphaned registry entries. Never had any problems since
XP first came my way (in my case since Feb 2001).

Both those people you maligned with that acrid text is both false and tortious.

 

[James D Andrews]

Ken Springer snuck on to your hard drive to scribble:

But, isn't all of this processing, when it comes to speed, also dependent on
the speeds of the various parts of the computer, such as CPU, bus, hard
drive, etc.?

In my case, I very rarely work on computers that are less than 5 years old.
And in my earlier comment about noticeably faster boot up time, that computer
only had a 1.2GHz processor.

Why do I bother with the old computers? I eventually end up with, and
sometimes look for, older systems and peripherals that are destined for
recycling/trash. Then I assemble a working *legal* system (always have a COA
sticker for XP) with Open Source software. Once up and running, I take the
system to the Community Cupboard, a food bank plus, and they give the system
to someone that needs a computer, doesn't have one, and can't afford one.
Which means the modem also needs to work, and if these folks can come up with
the money for an ISP, it will likely be dial-up, since in many areas where I
live dial-up and satellite are your only options. At least the kids can now
do some of their homework at home.

The philosophy behind this is any working computer is better than no
computer.

BRAVO, Ken! I applaud both your efforts and your view, similar to
mine, that it doesn't have to be brand new to be any good. We've
become a disposable society and that has produced the mentality that if
it's not the latest product it's not worth having even if it still runs
fine.

I fix computers for locals who similarly cannot afford new ones and
can't afford the repairs on their computers when something goes wrong.
Leftover parts from old computers I collect replace or even upgrade
malfunctioning parts in theirs and they're happy to have their basic
computing services (and some games) back. Open Source software and
Freeware have been a great boon.

--
-There are some who call me...
Jim


"Facts are the enemy of truth."
- Don Quixote - "Man of La Mancha"

 

[James D Andrews]

Paul embroidered on the monitor :

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463468.aspx#ENC

"Kernel Enhancements for Windows XP

Registry Enhancements

The new registry implementation delivers two key benefits:

* Larger registries
* Faster queries

Larger Registries

Windows XP supports larger registries than previous versions of the
kernel,
which were effectively limited to about 80 percent of the total size of
paged pool.
The new implementation is limited only by available system disk space.

A tendency to use the registry more like a database developed among
registry
consumers, which increased demands on registry size. The original design
of the
registry kept all of the registry files in the paged-pool, which, in the
32-bit
kernel, is effectively limited at approximately 160 MB because of the
layout of
the kernel virtual address space. A problem arose because, as larger
registry
consumers such as Terminal Services and COM appeared, a considerable
amount of
paged-pool was used for the registry alone, potentially leaving too
little memory
for other kernel-mode components.

Windows XP solves this problem by moving the registry out of paged pool
and using
the cache manager to do an in-house management of mapped views of the
registry files.
The mapped views are mapped in 256K chunks into system cache space
instead of paged pool.
"

So, yes, the registry is in RAM, but in a low memory situation, the Cache
Manager will
evict cached files. And in a low memory situation, your system slows down
anyway.
With portions of the registry evicted, a reference to the registry would
require
reading the disk again, to get it.

It's possible they have separate policies for handling the registry, but that
might
require an article that delves in more detail than that overview web page.

Paul

So with WinXP and later, this is no longer a problem. But for those of
us who still occasionally work on Win9x systems, the problem is still
there isn't it?

--
-There are some who call me...
Jim


"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

 

[jim]

The problem is such fine words rarely convince nutters like Ken Blake or
John John. Ken Blake hasn't formatted a HD in his life let alone to
have ever used CCleaner. As for John John, he is a convicted child
abuser who is required to report his whereabouts so that the authorities
can keep an eye on him. Our children are never safe with people like
John John around.

I use CCleaner once every month to clear all the clutter from my system
including odd orphaned registry entries. Never had any problems since
XP first came my way (in my case since Feb 2001).

You are publicly defaming both these people's characters .

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

But the "boot up speed" (and this is a different category!) does seem to
dependent on the number and type of applications installed, but that
difference is (AFAIK) primarily due to the extra time required to load the
extra drivers needed by those other applications (loading meaning reading
the driver files from the HD drive and reading them into memory).

Four points:

1. Drivers are *not* used by installed programs. Drivers are used by
hardware devices; they provide the interface between the language of
the device and the language of Windows.

2. It's not only drivers that aren't loaded for installed programs,
but for almost every program there is no software of any kind loaded
when you boot. Almost the only exception is for a program that starts
automatically when you boot.

3. So neither the number of programs you have installed nor what
programs they are affect your performance. What affects performance is
what programs you have running (*what* programs, not their number).

4. Even for programs that start automatically when you boot, their
number is irrelevant. Despite what many people tell you, you should be
concerned, not with how *many* of these programs you run, but *which*.
Some of them can hurt performance severely, but others have no effect
on performance.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Both those people you maligned with that acrid text is both false and tortious.

Thanks for the kind words. I didn't bother replying to him myself,
since he's obviously just trolling. If it continues, I'll soon
killfile him.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

OK. I was thinking of the boot-up time, which, I think, is to a large
extent influenced by the total number of applications you've installed.

No, not at all. It's influenced by the programs you have starting
automatically when you boot, and by *what* programs they are, not by
their number.

Having a program installed but not running has no effect at all,
except that it uses some disk space.

Which, in turn, I thought would have added more drivers of some sort to load
into memory as the system boots up (otherwise what's causing the extra delay
time in bootup?).

Once again, that's not correct. Programs don't uses drivers; hardware
devices use drivers.

Plus if you look in the running processes and drivers loaded list, even
before you open a program, I'm pretty sure there is a lot more there on a
system which has a lot of applications installed, than on a virgin system
(even with the program itself not running).

I mean, we all know a clean virgin windows system boots up almost instantly,
but over the years as we add more and more apps, the bootup time increases
significantly,

Not my experience at all.

and I attributed that extra time to the added drivers
installed by some of those applications. I'm not talking about the time to
actually run a program here.

But maybe I'm still missing of still confusing something here.

 

[Ken Springer]

Ken Springer snuck on to your hard drive to scribble:


BRAVO, Ken! I applaud both your efforts and your view, similar to
mine, that it doesn't have to be brand new to be any good. We've
become a disposable society and that has produced the mentality that if
it's not the latest product it's not worth having even if it still runs
fine.

As well as a computer using society where the majority of "power users",
aka people who know how to actually configure and use the computer and
the software installed, are increasingly becoming snobs (IMO) who then
to belittle those who do not have the latest and greatest.

H***, if the computer does what you need, and is faster than you, what
more do you need?

I fix computers for locals who similarly cannot afford new ones and
can't afford the repairs on their computers when something goes wrong.
Leftover parts from old computers I collect replace or even upgrade
malfunctioning parts in theirs and they're happy to have their basic
computing services (and some games) back. Open Source software and
Freeware have been a great boon.

When I fix someone's computer, I ask them for absolutely everything that
goes with the system, the monitor, keyboard, mouse, printer, ET. all.,
and the software. Then I reinstall from the ground up, formatting the
HD at the very beginning. Update all firmware, except BIOS, software
updates, the whole kit and caboodle. Never had anyone complain about
the result, and only one system that had an issue *after* I gave it
back. That issue is somehow tied to Kodak software, it works from the
pair of USB ports I used to install the software. Plug the cameras into
any of the other ports, and the programs will not run. Kodak, of
course, said the ports were bad, but both printers will print from those
ports! LOL

And everyone feels like the computer runs faster than it did new. I
doubt that, but that tells me they are genuinely pleased with the outcome.

Most of these folks don't have a single piece of software to go with the
computer, it's all hacked, stolen, borrowed, something. Ergo, open
source. And for most people, you don't need all the pricey stuff in the
store. Open Source does have its drawbacks, unfortunately. :-( As you
can tell from my sig, even I use Open Source products.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[Ken Springer]

No, not at all. It's influenced by the programs you have starting
automatically when you boot, and by *what* programs they are, not by
their number.

The precise reason I tell everyone *never* install a toolbar! As
well as removing any Windows components I know the owner will never use,
like MSN. Most have no clue what it even is.

Durned TSR's! LOL I wonder how many people today even know what they are.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[Ken Springer]

Both those people you maligned with that acrid text is both false and tortious.

He's the kind of poster that will never get a response from me, nor any
assistance of any kind.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

And the extra time to load some program's resident DLLs into memory (shown
in System Information) to speed up the app loading time when it's invoked.
More on that below.

You're right, that sometimes happens. But it's on very few programs,
and the time it takes is very slight.

OK, thanks for the correction (sometimes it takes time to register over here
.

You're welcome. Glad to help.

And I gather those are only installed when windows was installed or updated,
or if a user clicks on update driver (and one is found),

Yes.


or, if when
installing some newer program, it itself notices a relevant driver is out of
date (like for some CD/DVD app needing to use the CD/DVD drive).

I suppose that's possible, but I've never seen it. Since an
application program needs to be able to work with many different
devices (for example, there are many brands and models of CD/DVD
Drives) and It's unlikely that any program would keep track of what
the latest version of all of them are.

Moreover, although you frequently see advice these days to get the
latest driver, for most devices it seldom matters. If an older driver
works for you, there is rarely an advantage to getting a newer one.

So then, perhaps it could be due to the extra "Loaded Modules" as shown in
the System Information utility. These are extra DLL files that were
installed by some programs and apparently are loaded at bootup even before
the program is even run (presumably to speed its launch time).

Yes, but as I say, on only a few programs and it typically doesn't
take very long.

Not at all? You mean you've haven't noticed any change in bootup time since
when you first had a virgin system (talking about the same computer here)?

No.


I used to watch the monitor as windows was booting up, and when it was new,
it would show perhaps seven or eight frames worth of moving dots across the
screen to boot up, versus double that now.

As I said, not my experience.

 

[James D Andrews]

Ken Springer embroidered on the monitor :

Most of these folks don't have a single piece of software to go with the
computer, it's all hacked, stolen, borrowed, something. Ergo, open source.
And for most people, you don't need all the pricey stuff in the store. Open
Source does have its drawbacks, unfortunately. :-( As you can tell from my
sig, even I use Open Source products.

I have been gradually moving away from MS products since they seem to
think everyone has the money to upgrade multiple software packages and
OS every 1-2 years. I've found more Open Source and Freeware can do
most anything that needs to be done and then some.

What miniscule viewing I've done on Linux has told me I'm not ready to
go that far yet, especially since most software is Windows-based. Of
course, there's WINE, but I'm not there yet.

On fixing up old comps, I don't always go all the way back to reformat
since the "clients" sometimes don't even know what I mean when I ask
for the Windows disk or System disk, I have to assume the copy of
Windows on it is valid, but I'll wipe it as clean as I can down to
basics and then add the basics of software to cover most areas.

--
-There are some who call me...
Jim


"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

 

[James D Andrews]

Ken Springer embroidered on the monitor :

The precise reason I tell everyone *never* install a toolbar! As well
as removing any Windows components I know the owner will never use, like MSN.
Most have no clue what it even is.

Durned TSR's! LOL I wonder how many people today even know what they are.

The original company that created Dungeons & Dragons?

--
-There are some who call me...
Jim


"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

 

[David H. Lipman]

The precise reason I tell everyone *never* install a toolbar! As well as removing
any Windows components I know the owner will never use, like MSN. Most have no
clue what it even is.

Durned TSR's! LOL I wonder how many people today even know what they are.

What Terminate and Stay Residents, a throwback from DOS ?

 

[Ken Springer]

I have been gradually moving away from MS products since they seem to
think everyone has the money to upgrade multiple software packages and
OS every 1-2 years. I've found more Open Source and Freeware can do
most anything that needs to be done and then some.

I was having a similar conversation with my brother-in-law over the
weekend. I've had this Mac going on 2.5 years, and I don't think I've
spent $500 on software. Half of that cost has been virtual machine
software with 2 major upgrades, an accounting package, and upgrading the OS.

What miniscule viewing I've done on Linux has told me I'm not ready to
go that far yet, especially since most software is Windows-based. Of
course, there's WINE, but I'm not there yet.

I want to try Linux, either with the VM software I mentioned, or
multibooting this Mac.

On fixing up old comps, I don't always go all the way back to reformat
since the "clients" sometimes don't even know what I mean when I ask
for the Windows disk or System disk, I have to assume the copy of
Windows on it is valid, but I'll wipe it as clean as I can down to
basics and then add the basics of software to cover most areas.

I *always* reformat if I have that opening. Why? Basically because I
never know where, what, when, etc. the computer's been through. I think
I mentioned a Tech-net article about compromised computers earlier,
something I'd always believed even before reading that article.

I never assume the Windows installed is valid (legal) if there is no
product ID sticker provided. No sticker, no repair. Same goes for
installed software.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[Ken Springer]

And probably didn't have all that many programs installed on it. (By many,
I mean like a hundred, or more And especially the heavier duty
programs, like Microsoft Office or Adobe stuff.

In this case, there had been a lot of stuff installed, removed,
installed, removed, and on and on. I know this to be a fact for this
computer, as it was mine. LOL

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[Ken Springer]

Well, unlike the other Ken (Ken Blake), I noticed a difference in my bootup
time between a virgin system, and this now (pretty well loaded) system.

One hardware item I didn't think of when I mentioned the speed of this
and that, was the speed data is accessed from the hard drive. Even
though the data that gets loaded isn't actually used by anything at any
time later, it's logical the simple loading of that data has to slow
things down somewhere.

As Ken Blake said, those one or two lines in a registry file won't make
any noticeable difference. But what if it's one or two *thousand*
lines?

I'd think the loading of unneeded .dll's would also slow things down.

I just picked the "one or two thousand" line to illustrate the point.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.6.8
Firefox 7.0.1
Thunderbird 7.0.1
LibreOffice 3.3.4

 

[David H. Lipman]

One hardware item I didn't think of when I mentioned the speed of this and that, was the
speed data is accessed from the hard drive. Even though the data that gets loaded isn't
actually used by anything at any time later, it's logical the simple loading of that
data has to slow things down somewhere.

As Ken Blake said, those one or two lines in a registry file won't make any noticeable
difference. But what if it's one or two *thousand* lines?

I'd think the loading of unneeded .dll's would also slow things down.

I just picked the "one or two thousand" line to illustrate the point.

Its obvious you don't understand how accessing the Registry works.

Think of it as going straight into a store, to the shelf and product and leaving
immediately.

It is not a case where you have to walk up and down every aisle looking for the shelf that
holds the product of desire and as the store increases shelf space you have to walk up and
down more aisles.