Bruce said:
Of course there is.
Why would you even think you'd ever need to clean your registry?
That's condescending and not worthy of an MVP title claimant. Why do
you find there is never a reason to use a registry cleaner? Explain it
clearly, and with valid, verifiable references and someone might be able
to start taking you seriously at least about why you parrot such things
as you do.
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?"
See, that's not an actual question: It's rhetorical and a way for you to
be condescending again. You never "educate" but you love to put people
down with your closed minded, ignorant misinformation.
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.
And in another breath you'll warn them never to touch the registry
without first becoming experienced with it. Brilliant.
After
all, why use a chainsaw when a scalpel will do the job?
Why use snide remarks when a practical, well thought out response 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.
No, the least likely way to avoid problems is to use a tool that is
designed for the job, has a specific purpose, and is available to the
masses. If even a tiny part of your allegations and misinformation were
true, there would be a LOT more than a few supposed "experts" here
making these claims. If there was the tiniest bit of truth to anything
you say, the 'net would be full of information about it. One would
practically have to use NOT-terms to not see it pop up on search term
results. It'd be all over the e-mags and blogs where finding
verification of your allegations would be a very easy task.
So, why is it then that the ONLY place one sees this kind of
misinformation is here? Because it's misinformation - the questions
provides its own answer.
The only thing needed to
safely clean your registry is knowledge and Regedit.exe.
Sooo, why aren't you teaching how to use regedit and making references
to learn about the registry? Afraid someone will compare that knowledge
to how registry tools work? If you're not, you should be.
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.
Gee, I guess you'd better have an undo feature and not change areas that
aren't to be changed! Oh wait! They have been doing that for a long
time!
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.
Wow. You must have one hell of a time whenever you get an update to
anything because they usually make registry changes in the process. How
do you ever stand to install any programs that write to the registry?
It's the same analytic process, after all.
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.
You've said that a lot of times. How about some proof/evidence of it?
Some specifics of some sort. What damage happened that was so
catastrophic? I submit that the whole paragraph above is a lie and that
you have no proof in any of those cases that it had anything to do with
the registry cleaner but rather was the result of something else in the
systems.
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.
There has been. I've presented it and watched you weasel around it and
use irrelevant data to prove silly stuff that had nothing to do with the
case. If YOU consider it not worth the risk, fine - but take your
ignorance elsewhere if y ou believe the world at large has to agree with
you.
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.
Now that little bit of weaseling is in direct opposition to several of
your "all" and "never" allegations preceding this bit. What you spout
is true of ANY piece of code, period. In reality, registry cleaners
have a better record that way than most of Microsoft's software. In
many years I have never h ad a registry cleaner cause a serious problem,
actually never a problem, but I HAVE had Microsoft's own software pretty
well screw things up to the point of non-bootability. But you'd
probably pin that one on a fictional registry cleaner, I'll bet. You
logic just never holds up and turns into nothing but rationalizing.
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.
Earlier you said there we NO usefulness. You need to redo your
boilerplate for crap like this. Actually what you need is a brain
transplant or a fix for whatever has you so brainwhashed that you
believe your own tripe.
..
A little further reading on the subject: [extremely little, in
fact]
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
How many links with similar content/context would you like to see for
why someone DOES use a registry cleaner? There are a LOT more of them
than you can link with your few obscure, biased and self serving links.
It's a little suspect when you discover the same authors there as here;
not exactly a different set of data, you know? And weblogs, well, ...
anyone can do that and I'm sure you'll soon get a couple more blogs
together amongst your ignorant circle to up the URL count, but ... it'll
still be junk. Junk is junk, no matter what you try to make it look
and smell like.
Twayne`
