How to clean registry

[Twayne]

lol, well put! Never thought about it, but your last para is right on,
too. I have to wonder sometimes if some of these maroons actually know
what a database is and anything about the various structures they may
have. I think I'll go ACCESS my other DBASEs and see what's in the
REPORTS from another TABLE.

Have a great week!

Twayne

 

[db.·.. >]

the only two utilities
i formally analyzed was
microsoft's one care
safety scanner and
eusing.

each has their criterion
which does not overlap.
------------

@ me at
databaseben
hotmail
------------

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

 

[Unknown]

Perhaps there is a closed minded faction here. However, they are wise.
How do you explain your brainwashed faction??? I know, they're stupid.

 

[Unknown]

You use the term 'closed minds' but have you considered your mind as being
brainwashed?

 

[Bruce Chambers]

I have recently uninstalled various programs and would like to remove old
file remnants from the registry knowing what I am doing. Can someone tell me
the best way to do that or refer me to a website that guides one through it?
Also, is there any free software that is recommended? I Goggled this and
there were various that seemed good and free but were in reality for
purchase.

Thanks for any help you can offer.

Joanramu

Why do you even think you'd ever need to clean your registry? What
specific *problems* are you actually experiencing (not some program's
bogus listing of imaginary problems) that you think can be fixed by
using a registry "cleaner?"

If you do have a problem that is rooted in the registry, it would
be far better to simply edit (after backing up, of course) only the
specific key(s) and/or value(s) that are causing the problem. After
all, why use a chainsaw when a scalpel will do the job? Additionally,
the manually changing of one or two registry entries is far less likely
to have the dire consequences of allowing an automated product to make
multiple changes simultaneously. The only thing needed to safely clean
your registry is knowledge and Regedit.exe.

The registry contains all of the operating system's "knowledge" of
the computer's hardware devices, installed software, the location of the
device drivers, and the computer's configuration. A misstep in the
registry can have severe consequences. One should not even turning
loose a poorly understood automated "cleaner," unless he is fully
confident that he knows *exactly* what is going to happen as a result of
each and every change.

Having repeatedly seen the results of inexperienced people using
automated registry "cleaners," I can only advise all but the most
experienced computer technicians (and/or hobbyists) to avoid them all.
Experience has shown me that such tools simply are not safe in the hands
of the inexperienced user. If you lack the knowledge and experience to
maintain your registry by yourself, then you also lack the knowledge and
experience to safely configure and use any automated registry cleaner,
no matter how safe they claim to be.

More importantly, no one has ever demonstrated that the use of an
automated registry "cleaner," particularly by an untrained,
inexperienced computer user, does any real good, whatsoever. There's
certainly been no empirical evidence offered to demonstrate that the use
of such products to "clean" WinXP's registry improves a computer's
performance or stability. Given the potential for harm, it's just not
worth the risk.

Granted, most registry "cleaners" won't cause problems each and
every time they're used, but the potential for harm is always there.
And, since no registry "cleaner" has ever been demonstrated to do any
good (think of them like treating the flu with chicken soup - there's no
real medicinal value, but it sometimes provides a warming placebo
effect), I always tell people that the risks far out-weigh the
non-existent benefits.

I will concede that a good registry *scanning* tool, in the hands
of an experienced and knowledgeable technician or hobbyist can be a
useful time-saving diagnostic tool, as long as it's not allowed to make
any changes automatically. But I really don't think that there are any
registry "cleaners" that are truly safe for the general public to use.
Experience has proven just the opposite: such tools simply are not safe
in the hands of the inexperienced user.

A little further reading on the subject:

Why I don't use registry cleaners
http://www.edbott.com/weblog/?p=643

AumHa Forums • View topic - AUMHA Discussion: Should I Use a Registry
Cleaner?
http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099



--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:


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

 

[Bill in Co.]

LOL. Was that a rhetorical comment? Because we already know the answer.

 

[Bill in Co.]

Of course it is. The thread evolved to the point where Alias was
conflating the notion of "an authoritative report that proves the
benefit of a registry cleaner" (something Pegasus pointed out he has
never seen) with the unobjective, unscientific marketing claims of
Microsoft. Although I agree that there are times when the registry needs
attention, the topic of discussion was whether or not there exists *any*
evidence to support the notion that "regularly deleting 'orphaned or
misplaced information' noticeably improves performance." Snipping the
rest of my post may have suited your hit-and-run one-liner, but your
failure to seriously address the issue is noted.

He (or db~) can't really address it, with any *real* documentation (except
in their own minds). So at least that much is evident.

 

[Bill in Co.]

Come on, Bear. THAT article is above their pay grade. Be nice.

 

[PA Bear [MS MVP]]

<shrug> Yeah, I suppose you'd have to be able to read to get it, eh?

 

[Kayman]

MS made XP. MS made OneCare. How much more "expert" on what works well
with XP can you get? Are you saying that MS is lying and ripping people
off with their registry cleaner program?

It is not unusual that in Multi National Organizations such as MSFT,the
Section Heads of the Commercial Department and the Program
Engineers (Operating Department), are having conflicting opinions as they
work for different goals.
The Program Engineers are the pragmatic type, they develop things, they
*know* the innards of an operating system. They have to demonstrate high
integrity in order to produce high quality software.
The Advertising People know how to sell and push things. They mostly walk
on a fine line but cross it frequently for the sake of the dollar almighty
and in the name of the share holders. The nature of their job prevents them
to be moral and ethical.
The goals of the Commercial Dept. are not necessarily in the best interest
for the end user.
Would MSFT recommend the use of registry cleaners if Dr. Mark Russinovich
and Ed Bott had a say? I don't think so!
Incidentally, would MSFT have included some the lame additions to their
Windows Live OneCare AV application if their program engineers had a say? I
don't think so either!
As usual, Marketing trumps common sense. Let's hope that users pay more
attention to the details instead to the sensational promotion.

 

[Alias]

It is not unusual that in Multi National Organizations such as MSFT,the
Section Heads of the Commercial Department and the Program
Engineers (Operating Department), are having conflicting opinions as they
work for different goals.
The Program Engineers are the pragmatic type, they develop things, they
*know* the innards of an operating system. They have to demonstrate high
integrity in order to produce high quality software.
The Advertising People know how to sell and push things. They mostly walk
on a fine line but cross it frequently for the sake of the dollar almighty
and in the name of the share holders. The nature of their job prevents them
to be moral and ethical.
The goals of the Commercial Dept. are not necessarily in the best interest
for the end user.
Would MSFT recommend the use of registry cleaners if Dr. Mark Russinovich
and Ed Bott had a say? I don't think so!
Incidentally, would MSFT have included some the lame additions to their
Windows Live OneCare AV application if their program engineers had a say? I
don't think so either!
As usual, Marketing trumps common sense. Let's hope that users pay more
attention to the details instead to the sensational promotion.

Um, engineers wrote the registry cleaning program, not the advertising
or marketing folks. *Someone* had to make the decision to let the
advertisers and marketing folks push it out the door to the unsuspecting
public using MS' "good name".

Alias

 

[Twayne]

Perhaps there is a closed minded faction here. However, they are wise.

That is your opinion and I do not refute that.

How do you explain your brainwashed faction??? I know, they're
stupid.

I feel it's pretty obvious I am not brainwashed and at least have the
benefit of experience and education to validate my claims. To date they
have nothing to validate theirs.

No, I don't think "they" are stupid at all, whoever "they" is. Well,
maybe you, but ... beside the point.

What "they" do however, is provide misinformation.
"They" say all registry cleaners are snake oil. Wrong.
"They" say all registry cleaners are useless. Wrong.
"They" say no registry cleaner has ever done any good. Wrong.
"They" say there can never be a benefit to using a registry cleaner.
Wrong.
"They" say, often without qualification, that it is always better to
manually edit the registry than to use a program to repair problems and
remove chaff. Wrong.
"They" once told me that, because they "said so", should be enough for
me to believe the lines they were trying to feed me. Wrong.
"They" have closed minds. I do not.
"They" have never provided an iota of anything to support/verify their
claims. Because They" do not have it.
"They" think obscure web sites that "They" wrote a few articles for
makes them right. It does not.
"They" continue to spew misinformation over and over and ...
"They" are just plain wrong.
"They" identifies whoever one wants it to define. Just like "we"
defines nothing and only makes the one who used the words look all that
much sillier for speaking for the entire "group", which is not possible
for them to do.
"They" apparently have very little knowledge of ANY such applications
any newer than say the 80's but yet profess to be experts on the
subject.
"They" get pretty upset when one doesn't think exactly as "They" do.
That's OK because most everyone now understands "They" are wrong and
their words are recorded for posterity in many repositories.

And you, well, in your trollish fashion, profess that because I have
experience and knowledge that I am brainwashed. If validating
experience over many years with many products, research on the subject
and conversations with many others who share similar backgrounds and
experience, plus knowing how to research a subject make me brainwashed,
then yeah, I'm brainwashed by all of that.
What kind of inhuman washing has your brain had? Alcohol and drugs
maybe. But I don't care; that's your business and irrelevant to me.
Your misinformation however is not irrelevant; it's wrong.

It's been fun but trolls eventually bore me and I'm now bored by you.

See ya next time I cross that bridge,

Twayne

 

[Daave]

That is your opinion and I do not refute that.


I feel it's pretty obvious I am not brainwashed and at least have the
benefit of experience and education to validate my claims. To date
they have nothing to validate theirs.

The only claims I have seen are that there are no objective,
third-party, verifiable reports demonstrating that cleaning a registry
significantly speeds up a PC's performance. Since no one has posted any,
the claim still stands. Marketing hype from companies like Microsoft or
Amust don't meet the above-mentioned criteria.

"Brainwashed" is not a relevant adjective for you, Twayne. However, you
don't seem to seriously exhibit level-headed critical thinking skills in
this *one isolated matter*. The interesting thing is that you usually
do! However, it seems that you enjoy having carved out this little niche
to challenge the consensus and that you are far more interested in
continuing the challenge rather than backing up your claims with
objective, third-party verifiable reports.

FWIW, I'm willing to meet you halfway and even concede that there may be
times when a good registry utility might make the job of locating a
problematic registry key quicker than regedit. (Jouni Vuorio's registry
program, for example, is top-notch.) If the incomplete uninstallation of
a particular program prevents one from installing another similar
program, then deleting one or more associated keys is sometimes
necessary. But as far as routine maintenance is concerned, I'm just not
sold. However, I remain open to evidence to the contrary. But it needs
to be in the form of an objective, third-party, verifiable report. I'm
very picky like that!

 

[Bill in Co.]

The only claims I have seen are that there are no objective,
third-party, verifiable reports demonstrating that cleaning a registry
significantly speeds up a PC's performance. Since no one has posted any,
the claim still stands. Marketing hype from companies like Microsoft or
Amust don't meet the above-mentioned criteria.

"Brainwashed" is not a relevant adjective for you, Twayne. However, you
don't seem to seriously exhibit level-headed critical thinking skills in
this *one isolated matter*. The interesting thing is that you usually
do! However, it seems that you enjoy having carved out this little niche
to challenge the consensus and that you are far more interested in
continuing the challenge rather than backing up your claims with
objective, third-party verifiable reports.

FWIW, I'm willing to meet you halfway and even concede that there may be
times when a good registry utility might make the job of locating a
problematic registry key quicker than regedit. (Jouni Vuorio's registry
program, for example, is top-notch.) If the incomplete uninstallation of
a particular program prevents one from installing another similar
program, then deleting one or more associated keys is sometimes
necessary. But as far as routine maintenance is concerned, I'm just not
sold. However, I remain open to evidence to the contrary. But it needs
to be in the form of an objective, third-party, verifiable report. I'm
very picky like that!

Exactly. And well said. Presumably he can understand your explanation.

 

[Bill in Co.]

That is your opinion and I do not refute that.


I feel it's pretty obvious I am not brainwashed and at least have the
benefit of experience and education to validate my claims. To date they
have nothing to validate theirs.

Actually, we do. And probably even moreso than you, based on all the
collective years of experience.

No, I don't think "they" are stupid at all, whoever "they" is. Well,
maybe you, but ... beside the point.

What "they" do however, is provide misinformation.
"They" say all registry cleaners are snake oil. Wrong.
"They" say all registry cleaners are useless. Wrong.

Well, I for one didn't use the term useless.

"They" say no registry cleaner has ever done any good. Wrong.

I never said that, either. Nice try.

"They" say there can never be a benefit to using a registry cleaner.

Or that. (nice hyperbole, though - please DO keep it up)

Wrong.
"They" say, often without qualification, that it is always better to
manually edit the registry than to use a program to repair problems and
remove chaff. Wrong.
"They" once told me that, because they "said so", should be enough for
me to believe the lines they were trying to feed me. Wrong.
"They" have closed minds. I do not.

Actually, you do, based on at least some of your posts.
(Projection noted).

"They" have never provided an iota of anything to support/verify their
claims. Because They" do not have it.
"They" think obscure web sites that "They" wrote a few articles for
makes them right. It does not.
"They" continue to spew misinformation over and over and ...
"They" are just plain wrong.
"They" identifies whoever one wants it to define. Just like "we"
defines nothing and only makes the one who used the words look all that
much sillier for speaking for the entire "group", which is not possible
for them to do.
"They" apparently have very little knowledge of ANY such applications
any newer than say the 80's but yet profess to be experts on the
subject.
"They" get pretty upset when one doesn't think exactly as "They" do.
That's OK because most everyone now understands "They" are wrong and
their words are recorded for posterity in many repositories.

And you, well, in your trollish fashion, profess that because I have
experience and knowledge that I am brainwashed.

I got news for you: so do some of us, too. And probably more than you, too.

If validating
experience over many years with many products, research on the subject
and conversations with many others who share similar backgrounds and
experience, plus knowing how to research a subject make me brainwashed,
then yeah, I'm brainwashed by all of that.

But you don't have that. Everytime when asked for such *real*
verification, you run and hide.

What kind of inhuman washing has your brain had? Alcohol and drugs
maybe. But I don't care; that's your business and irrelevant to me.
Your misinformation however is not irrelevant; it's wrong.

It's been fun but trolls eventually bore me and I'm now bored by you.

See ya next time I cross that bridge,

I think you've already gone over.

 

[Unknown]

Anyone who preaches that registry cleaners are 'good' or should be run gotta
be brainwashed. No other explanation.
No-one benefits from a registry cleaner but many clobber (screw up) their
computers with them.
I cannot understand how he can say he has 'the experience and education' and
still preach registry cleaners are good.
Only possible explanation is 'BRAINWASHED'.

 

[Bill in Co.]

They *can* have their limited and selective uses, in the hands of someone
who knows what they are doing, but NOT as he freely advocates using them
(like to "speed up the system", and other such hogwash)

 

[Unknown]

Someone who knows what they are doing doesn't NEED a registry cleaner.

 

[Tom [Pepper] Willett]

: Someone who knows what they are doing doesn't NEED a registry cleaner.
:
Someone who *doesn't* know what they are doing doesn't need one, either.

 

[Bill in Co.]

Well, for example, I use it occasionally just to check out things after a
program install or uninstall, and then run "regedit" later to check it out
further, and make any appropriate changes as I want them to be Some things
I've wanted to be customized or fixed can ONLY be accomplished by *manually*
editing the registry (using *regedit*). Even simple things, like removing
extraneous references to files opened that no longer exist in the
application's history list. Or more often than not, customizing something
(say like disabling autoupdates in some program that isn't offered as an
option within the program itself)

I never run a registry cleaner and let it automatically "fix" all the things
it flags. That's just asking for trouble: "crusin for a bruisin". (I've
been around that block long enough to know that from experience, from many
moons ago. And I've seen firsthand when it can go wrong. Heck, even the
old Regclean from MS (long since discontinued) created some issues for me
with Netscape).