registry cleaner

[Alias]

Likely running some anti spyware programs would have fixed it. I don't
like to see clutter in the registry either, but I've never noticed any
change in performance after cleaning my registry, and yes, I
periodically 'clean' my registry. It's sort of like cleaning the
backseat of my car. It doesn't make it run better, but it makes me
feel better. FYI, I'm using an older version of Registry First Aid
3.04 and I do backup registry with Erunt prior to using it.

The program I use, SystemSuite5 doesn't just "clean" the registry, it
will suggest pointing entries to where they belong as well instead of
deleting them. As an example, on one computer I couldn't complete defrag
so I ran SystemSuite's registry defrag and then the XP defrag could
complete its task.

There are registry tools and then there are registry tools.

 

[Alias]

Your assertions are patently false (in crude terms 'lies') and unfortunately
I think you know it. This thread is nothing but SPAM. I am suprised that
anyone has given you any credence.

Care to give evidence to back up your sweeping insults? I have no vested
interest in any software program. Everything I have posted here is true.

 

[Gerry]

Alias

You chose not to respond to the specific points I made earlier, electing
only to answer one of a number. Was that because it did not suit your
cause?


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Alias]

Alias

You chose not to respond to the specific points I made earlier, electing
only to answer one of a number. Was that because it did not suit your
cause?

That's because I already addressed them. You just don't accept what I
say. I can't prove it to you unless you come here and watch it in action
because anything I say that happened, you won't believe.

Unfortunately, you can't do it yourself because System Suite 5 is no
longer available and 8, the new version, isn't as good due to the fact
that someone bought out VCOM and changed the program considerably.

 

[Gerry]

Alias

I cannot see where you did? You might try a little harder instead of
being evasive.

The only way you can demonstrate your point is to test performance after
each stage of housekeeping. Unless a registry entry causes a timeout any
superfluous entry will have so little affect than you would not notice
any difference in performance. You mention removing 1,000 registry
entries but how many of those entries would have been accessed when you
restart the computer? Very few I suspect. If they are accessed to
provide a false start-up the best solution is to remove them manually
using Autoruns, having first confirmed what affect they have by
disabling rather than removing. The processor handles so many
transactions continuously that a few extra do not make a significant
difference. Event Viewer Reports generate errors / warnings if there is
a problem and it is logical to follow up from there.

Based on what you say you have been doing I do not see that you can
distinguish between the effect on performance of removing unnecessary
registry entries and defragmenting 4,000 files. Defragmenting in the
situation you describe will have a noticeable impact. Your approach may
not pose a significant risk in your hands but if the risk converts to
reality you can have a major problem which may be very difficult to
recover from.


--
Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[R. McCarty]

Most ( if any ) performance impact of a Registry Cleaning MIGHT BE
due to an orphaned Service that is no longer present on the machine. A
typical culprit is SymEvent, orphaned after a Norton Uninstall. However
this would only affect the computer's boot time as the service call will
no longer time out ( 30-Seconds ).

Most Registry Cleaners do little more than clean up MRU tables and a
few of the temporary/workspace files that exist on any PC. Things that
most users could accomplish manually with Regedit. The issue, if there
is any is the uninstall routines of many programs that leave remnants in
the Program Files and Common Files data trees. Program uninstalls will
leave Registry keys intact for the possibility of a reinstall so that any of
the customizations of the program stay in place.

From my own testing, I've never found two or more Registry Cleaners
that come even close to a matching determination of what is or is not
recommended to be "Registry Errors". It's this subjective determination
that is dangerous. No one who recommends a Registry Cleaning has a
clear idea of the interactions and associations between Keys and Values.
If a user cannot make that determination, how can an automated cleaner
scan thousands of keys and decide that a particular entry is "Bogus".

It's impossible to convince some Registry Cleaning proponents that there
is a risk that using a Registry Cleaner will break your machine. All I can
say is that over the years I've fixed a room full of computers that all had
the same "Self-Inflicted" malady - a Registry Cleaning.

If someone is tempted to use one, then make sure you have a "Image"
or backup of your system prior to using a Registry Cleaner - "Just in
Case.."

 

[Stephen]

Most ( if any ) performance impact of a Registry Cleaning MIGHT BE
due to an orphaned Service that is no longer present on the machine. A
typical culprit is SymEvent, orphaned after a Norton Uninstall. However
this would only affect the computer's boot time as the service call will
no longer time out ( 30-Seconds ).

Most Registry Cleaners do little more than clean up MRU tables and a
few of the temporary/workspace files that exist on any PC. Things that
most users could accomplish manually with Regedit. The issue, if there
is any is the uninstall routines of many programs that leave remnants in
the Program Files and Common Files data trees. Program uninstalls will
leave Registry keys intact for the possibility of a reinstall so that any
of
the customizations of the program stay in place.

From my own testing, I've never found two or more Registry Cleaners
that come even close to a matching determination of what is or is not
recommended to be "Registry Errors". It's this subjective determination
that is dangerous. No one who recommends a Registry Cleaning has a
clear idea of the interactions and associations between Keys and Values.
If a user cannot make that determination, how can an automated cleaner
scan thousands of keys and decide that a particular entry is "Bogus".

It's impossible to convince some Registry Cleaning proponents that there
is a risk that using a Registry Cleaner will break your machine. All I can
say is that over the years I've fixed a room full of computers that all
had
the same "Self-Inflicted" malady - a Registry Cleaning.

If someone is tempted to use one, then make sure you have a "Image"
or backup of your system prior to using a Registry Cleaner - "Just in
Case.."

I agree with you, there is a potential problem with remnants left behind by
uninstall programs. I've often thought it would be really good to know
exactly what registry entries are made (or changed) when a program is
installed, but I've not found a convenient way of doing this. It almost
feels as though this kind of information is deliberately kept shrouded in
mystery by program suppliers. Uninstall ought to remove ALL keys that are
specific to the particular program, but doesn't seem to. Neither (as far as
I have been able to discover) is there a reliable way of searching for such
keys. If you uninstall Norton, you might have thought that a search for
"Norton" would discover any remnants, but it's by no means that simple! Or
do I just not know enought about how to do it?

Stephen

 

[Gerry]

Stephen

Looking in Autoruns after removal can be worthwhile.


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Alias]

Alias

I cannot see where you did? You might try a little harder instead of
being evasive.

The only way you can demonstrate your point is to test performance after
each stage of housekeeping. Unless a registry entry causes a timeout any
superfluous entry will have so little affect than you would not notice
any difference in performance. You mention removing 1,000 registry
entries but how many of those entries would have been accessed when you
restart the computer? Very few I suspect. If they are accessed to
provide a false start-up the best solution is to remove them manually
using Autoruns, having first confirmed what affect they have by
disabling rather than removing. The processor handles so many
transactions continuously that a few extra do not make a significant
difference. Event Viewer Reports generate errors / warnings if there is
a problem and it is logical to follow up from there.

Based on what you say you have been doing I do not see that you can
distinguish between the effect on performance of removing unnecessary
registry entries and defragmenting 4,000 files. Defragmenting in the
situation you describe will have a noticeable impact. Your approach may
not pose a significant risk in your hands but if the risk converts to
reality you can have a major problem which may be very difficult to
recover from.


--
Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is there an echo in here? I removed a slew of errant registry entries
and the performance was increased and the boot time decreased. Chances
are you don't install and uninstall as many programs as the user of the
computer I worked on did. I doubt you let your hard drive accumulate
over 4000 fragmented files either.

I am also 100% positive that you've never used System Suite 5 and I
seriously doubt any of the others who sneer at registry fixers have
either. If what you and the others say is true, I would have fuçked up
100s of computers and none, I repeat none, had anything but positive
results from using System Suite 5. I have a friend who turned me on to
SS5 and he's a repair tech and has used it on thousands of computers
with no ill effects, only positive results. So if thousands of instances
with 100% success rates isn't good enough for you, find someone with SS5
and install and uninstall a couple of hundred programs, run it and do
the tests the way you think they should be done. Either that or STFU.

 

[Gerry]

Alias

You're still not answering the points I asked about! Why go on and rant
about something I was not challenging?

--
Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Alias]

Alias

You're still not answering the points I asked about! Why go on and rant
about something I was not challenging?

I answered them as best as I could. If my answers aren't good enough for
you, conduct the tests yourself or STFU. I am not your employee and have
no need or inclination to conduct tests the way you think they should be
conducted.

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

The defrag would have impacted performance more than orphaned registry
entries.

 

[Gerry]

Alias

Your attitude is an admission of the weakness of your assertions
regarding the use of registry cleaners. It clearly obvious to all who
read your evasive replies.


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Gerry]

Quite Mike, coupled with removing temporary files, emptying recycle bins
etc.

--
Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Alias]

Alias

Your attitude is an admission of the weakness of your assertions
regarding the use of registry cleaners. It clearly obvious to all who
read your evasive replies.

Ah, the trusty ad hominem attack when you run out of arguments. You
should put MVP next to your name.

 

[Alias]

The defrag would have impacted performance more than orphaned registry
entries.

It booted up quicker and had better performance BEFORE the defrag, right
after cleaning up the registry. After the defrag, it got even better.

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

Fine. My point is that your "belief" in how bad registry cleaners are is
no better founded than Alias's "belief" in their efficacy. There's nothing
wrong with "belief". Much of what we do in life isn't backed up by firm,
scientifically-repeatable proof, but is based on "belief", often founded
on some kind of evidence that falls short of proof.

As a matter of interest, I don't use registry cleaners either. I have done
so in the past and never experienced any problems. However, neither did I
see any improvement. I just think it would be better if BOTH sides of this
debate would put forward sensible evidence (not necessarily proof) for
their beliefs, rather than wild (and probably unsupportable) claims.

Stephen

You are entirely correct. However, you probabably think the
same way. If you're offered some miracle medicine that has not
been proven in a solid scientific way then you will only take it if
you ***believe*** in snake oils. If you don't then you go for
the medicine that has some solid proof behind it.

To me registry cleaners are snake oil until proven otherwise.
I'm still waiting for Alias' documented test procedure so that
I can test it for myself.

 

[Alias]

You are entirely correct. However, you probabably think the
same way. If you're offered some miracle medicine that has not
been proven in a solid scientific way then you will only take it if
you ***believe*** in snake oils. If you don't then you go for
the medicine that has some solid proof behind it.

To me registry cleaners are snake oil until proven otherwise.
I'm still waiting for Alias' documented test procedure so that
I can test it for myself.

Get SS5 and test it for yourself or would that be too much work, work
you want me to do?

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

Get SS5 and test it for yourself or would that be too much work, work you
want me to do?

When someone promotes a new medicine, the burden of proof
that it works is on him, not on the patient. ***You*** keep
claiming that registry cleaners do miracles for your PC's performance -
please supply the evidence so that we can repeat your tests.

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

Now you are making it up as you go along..

The defrag would have impacted performance more than orphaned registry
entries.

It booted up quicker and had better performance BEFORE the defrag, right
after cleaning up the registry. After the defrag, it got even better.