Registry Cleaners

[David Candy]

Over the years these types of programs cause problems. One example is Help in Win ME (http://www.google.com.au/groups?hl=...icrosoft.public.windowsme.*&lr=&num=100&hl=en)

These are fixes from one program that is as good a program as any. Each fix is for a different version. Registry cleaners are dangerous. Suppose you install Office, run it for a project for a while, finish your project. You run this program. Everything seems fine as you are not using office. In 6 months when you need Word again it errors. "Stupid Microsoft" you say. Note office has inbuilt protection against registry cleaners, most programs don't.



Fixes:

a.. Registry finder now skips "Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Setup\VarLDID", removal of these keys caused problems with Add/remove software Windows dialog (at least Windows ME)

Fixes:

a.. MS Money file "insider.bak" skipped, caused MS Money to ask for re-installation
b.. Registry finder now skips "Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\AutoplayHandlers", removal of these keys eliminated user selected autoplay options (Windows XP)


Fixes:

a.. Windows 2000 backup service files now skipped (.bks)


Fixes:

a.. LabView files skipped (.llb), caused the program not to start from a shortcut
b.. I found a Eudora file DoNotDelete.tmp, obviously it's now being skipped
c.. An Installshield file (_isuser.pch) is now skipped

Fixes:

a.. Microsoft Office 2003 broke when deleting unnecessary files

Fixes:

a.. The space usage is fixed, now shows correctly the free space available
b.. When saving undo information from startup inspector or add/remove software the entry name was used as the file name. Caused the undo file not to be saved when the entry name contained illegal characters (/, \, =, *, ?....). Fixed


Fixes:

a.. The infamous bug in Windows XP/ME that made help & support unusable after registry clean
b.. EasyCleaner broke Office XP after deleting unnecessary files

 

[Edward W. Thompson]

FWIW just in complete support of Bruce, one of the first questions I ask a
client is whether s/he's used a Reg cleaner recently and, if so, whether
s/he's done any software or hardware installtions since doing so. (Right
after whether they've got any non-commercial Norton/Symantec c**p installed.
)

I'm afraid that is not a very sensible approach, as I am sure you
know.

Certainly some software seems to cause problems in certain
circumstances, including MS software. When problems occur surely one
must establish the facts and not jump to conclusions that just because
certain software is installed it must be the cause of a problem. If
your approach is valid all problems must relate to the OS .

Having said that I came to the conclusion a long time ago that Norton
software (the Symantec variety) created more problems for me than it
solved but there is a sizeable customer base that beleives Norton
software works for them.

Who's right, you or the rest of the world? .

I can understand MVPs words of caution re registry cleaners and the
firm recommendation that whenever changes are made to the Registry a
retrievable backup of the Registry must be made. That applies both to
commercial 'cleaners' as well as to editing using Regedit that seems
to be the MVP recommendation.

It can be argued that commercial cleaners are safer than editing
using Regedit as most, if not all commercial registry cleaners
automatically make a backup of the changes made that can be restored
in the event of problems.

The recommendation, often made by MVPs, to use ERUNT to backup the
Registry is only valid if the OS partition is formatted FAT. However,
most machines using WINXP are formatted NTFS and if the Registry is
damaged to the extent the machine will not boot the backup from ERUNT
can't be loaded unless you have a DOS based NTFS 'writer'; most don't.

 

[Jim Byrd]

Hi Edward - I corrected this misstatement of yours once before, but
apparently you missed it, and since I don't want to leave this forum's
readers with incorrect information, I'll post the complete information
below, rather than just referencing it as I did before.

The following is from the Erdnt Readme, and describes how by making some
minor provision ahead of time about where you store the Erdnt backup files,
you can use the Erdnt created backup files to restore an unbootable
NTFS-based system to be bootable again to the point that you can then do a
complete restore using normal Erdnt procedures. Note that for this approach
DOS-based NTFS drivers are NOT required, and that the needed erdnt.con file
used by the Recovery Console procedure is provided in the Erdnt install:

"2. The Windows Recovery Console (Windows 2000 and higher)
Note that you can use this method only if you saved the registry
backup inside the Windows folder, and that using this procedure only
the system registry is restored. This should however get you back into
Windows, from where you can run the ERDNT program to restore user
registries, if necessary.
- Boot your system from the Windows 2000/2003/XP CD-ROM.
- At the welcome screen, press "R" (Windows 2000: "R" then "C").
- Type in the number of the Windows installation you want to repair
(usually 1), then press ENTER.
- Type in the Administrator password (leave blank if you are unsure
what it is) and press ENTER.
- At the command prompt type
cd erdnt
or whatever you named your restore folder, then press ENTER.
- If you created subfolders for different registry backups (for
example, with the different creation dates), type
dir <ENTER>
to see a list of available folders, then type
cd foldername <ENTER>
where foldername is the name of a folder listed by the dir command,
to open that folder.
- Now type
batch erdnt.con <ENTER>
to restore the system registry from that folder.
- Type
exit <ENTER>
and remove the CD from the CD-ROM drive. The system will now reboot
with the restored registry."


After which you can then do a "normal" full restore to include the User
hive, etc.


--
Please respond in the same thread.
Regards, Jim Byrd, MS-MVP



In

 

[Larry(LJL269)]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 00:55:30 -0800, "Jim Byrd"

|The following is from the Erdnt Readme, and describes how by making some
|minor provision ahead of time about where you store the Erdnt backup files,
|you can use the Erdnt created backup files to restore an unbootable
|NTFS-based system to be bootable again to the point that you can then do a
|complete restore using normal Erdnt procedures.

& people wonder why some of us decide to stay with
FAT32 & familiar DOS routines that have stood the test
of time Those 'archaic' routines.

I'm not poking fun at ur explanation Jim but rather
the 'people who wonder".

I dont have time or inclination to waddle thru such a
proceedure when I had no troubles with FAT32.

Off to tune my 1924 Model B Ford

Just my 2¢ worth-Larry
Any advise is my attempt to contribute more than I have received but I can only assure you that it works on my PC. GOOD LUCK.

 

[Rock]

Edward W. Thompson wrote:

The recommendation, often made by MVPs, to use ERUNT to backup the
Registry is only valid if the OS partition is formatted FAT. However,
most machines using WINXP are formatted NTFS and if the Registry is
damaged to the extent the machine will not boot the backup from ERUNT
can't be loaded unless you have a DOS based NTFS 'writer'; most don't.

Edward, that's not so. The ERUNT registry backup can be restored from
the recovery console on NTFS formatted drives if set up properly without
needing an DOS based NTFS file utility.

 

[Edward W. Thompson]

Yes, I agree, but how many have the recovery console set up and understand
its use. Not many I suspect?

The overall topic was, if I remember correctly, directed at these mythical
'inexperienced users' and it is unlikely that
this class of user, if they do exist, understands the potential of the
recovery console. On the other hand ERUNT is so user friendly
it is likely many believe it is providing security that they many find
illusive if they need it.

 

[Edward W. Thompson]

Over the years these types of programs cause problems. One example is Help in Win ME (http://www.google.com.au/groups?hl=...icrosoft.public.windowsme.*&lr=&num=100&hl=en)

These are fixes from one program that is as good a program as any. Each fix is for a different version. Registry cleaners are dangerous. Suppose you install Office, run it for a project for a while, finish your project. You run this program. Everything seems fine as you are not using office. In 6 months when you need Word again it errors. "Stupid Microsoft" you say. Note office has inbuilt protection against registry cleaners, most programs don't.



Fixes:

a.. Registry finder now skips "Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Setup\VarLDID", removal of these keys caused problems with Add/remove software Windows dialog (at least Windows ME)

Fixes:

a.. MS Money file "insider.bak" skipped, caused MS Money to ask for re-installation
b.. Registry finder now skips "Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\AutoplayHandlers", removal of these keys eliminated user selected autoplay options (Windows XP)


Fixes:

a.. Windows 2000 backup service files now skipped (.bks)


Fixes:

a.. LabView files skipped (.llb), caused the program not to start from a shortcut
b.. I found a Eudora file DoNotDelete.tmp, obviously it's now being skipped
c.. An Installshield file (_isuser.pch) is now skipped

Fixes:

a.. Microsoft Office 2003 broke when deleting unnecessary files

Fixes:

a.. The space usage is fixed, now shows correctly the free space available
b.. When saving undo information from startup inspector or add/remove software the entry name was used as the file name. Caused the undo file not to be saved when the entry name contained illegal characters (/, \, =, *, ?....). Fixed


Fixes:

a.. The infamous bug in Windows XP/ME that made help & support unusable after registry clean
b.. EasyCleaner broke Office XP after deleting unnecessary files

You have focused on problems with one particular registry cleaner,
Easy Cleaner, and possibly one particular rev of that software. I have
no quarrel with you concerning that particular software as I also had
problems with it, but that is not the essence of the thread. The
thread started on a question on Registry Mechanic and a particular MVP
then choose, without justification, to trash the whole class of
registry cleaner software.

I think most software has had problems of some sort or the other in
its lifetime and it is most unfair to trash the whole class of
software due to the shortcomings of one program or one version of a
program. If that was the case we would not install anything on our
machines.

With respect to the examples of problems quoted by you that applied to
a particular version of Easy Cleaner only, none caused failure of the
OS to the extent that the machine was unuseable as has been proposed
by others. Granted the problems caused to some were at least annoying
but sufficient to say all such programs are 'dangerous'? I think not.

 

[XS11E]

Off to tune my 1924 Model B Ford

The Ford Model B was introduced in 1932, you'll need more than just
your basic wayback machine to tune a 1924 Model B. <G>

 

[Trent©]

On the contrary, I've never personally encountered an installation of
SP2 that caused any problems on a well-maintained and properly prepared
machine.





No, it's _not_ hearsay. Have you never heard of first-hand personal
observation and experience? I build, configure and repair computers for
a living. I've *seen* and had to repair the damage done by automated
registry cleaners.

That YOU'VE done with the programs? Probably not.

So...like most of the problems *I* repair on computers...perhaps the
problem lies with the customer who brought you the computer...and not
with the program itself.

I've been searching for a good reg cleaner for years...and I finally
found one.

REGISTRY CHECKER...

www.particleg.com


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Trent©]

FWIW just in complete support of Bruce, one of the first questions I ask a
client is whether s/he's used a Reg cleaner recently and, if so, whether
s/he's done any software or hardware installtions since doing so. (Right
after whether they've got any non-commercial Norton/Symantec c**p installed.
)

I fail to see what a customers's ability to screw up a machine has to
do with the program itself.

I've had MANY customers screw up just by usin' scandisk!! lol


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Bruce Chambers]

The Ford Model B was introduced in 1932, you'll need more than just
your basic wayback machine to tune a 1924 Model B. <G>

He must have the beta version.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[Trent©]

Well you have your experiences and I have mine, they seem not to agree.
You seem absolute sure this software gives rise to problems so I ask again
please give me a simple test to perform that demonstrates
how 'System Mechanic' (the software at the root of this exchange) will
damage my installation of WINXP Pro (SP2).
I know it removes redundant files but that does not class as damage. Surely
if 'System Mechanic is so potentially dangerous and your experience
seemingly is
so extensive, such a test should not be beyond you. Would you also explain
why Microsoft advertises/promotes System Mechanic or at least use to, which
seems
odd if the software poses so much of a risk to their software.

The complexity of the system makes a big difference on how such a
program works. Most folks simply use it on one drive...where the
links never travel beyond that drive.

I use Registry Checkup 2.2 across 3 partitions...and also across a
LAN. Some of the links point to the network. This kind of complexity
has confused any program I used before Registry Checkup.

In regard to Registry Mechanic, don't forget that many of the
'experts' here are prejudiced...as are most of us in life. Don't
expect unbiased opinions...from me or from anyone.


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Trent©]

Fixes:

a.. Microsoft Office 2003 broke when deleting unnecessary files

Are you talking about the same subject that we are? Registry cleaners
don't work with files.


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Trent©]

I'm coming to that conclusion.

Based upon what?

And when would you use regedt32?...instead of regedit?

And the most IMPORTANT thing...

How would you find registry errors that you don't even know EXIST?
That's one of the primary purposes of usin' a reg checker!

The last machine I used Registry Checkup on...it found over 800
errors...in less than 10 minutes. How long do you think it would take
someone to find those?

Registry checkers and optimizers are definitely worth the money. I
use each on every machine that I tweak.

I'll leave well enough alone.

Then don't install SP2. You'll be in for a rude awakening!! lol

Try Registry Checkup. I think you'll be pleased.


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Al Smith]

Off to tune my 1924 Model B Ford

The Ford Model B was introduced in 1932, you'll need more than just
your basic wayback machine to tune a 1924 Model B. <G>

I always wanted a Model A, myself. Slick looking car. I think they
even have a transmission.

 

[boss]

Regscrubxp works well for XP, search for the free program on www.google.com