WXP/SP3 + Registry Patrol

[choro]

I've read a lot of claims that all registry cleaners are nothing more than
"snake oil" and I nearly came to believe it.

Recently reinstalled WXP/SP3 with plenty and I mean plenty of software on
the HD gradually got slower and slower. Programs took ages to open or get
something done. It got nearly impossible to use my 10 year old favorite
desktop.

Finally in desperation I dug up Registry Patrol v3 (quite an old version)
and guess what? My old desktop starts a full 200 to 300 percent faster now
and when I click a program it opens up pronto and things get done pronto.

And to think that I had been nearly fooled into thinking that all registry
cleaners were "snake oil"!

To be honest I had used Registry Patrol before I reinstalled WXP/SP3 and
could see no drawbacks to it. So when my old faithful got impossibly slow
after the reinstall, I decided to look for my downloaded copy and there it
was on a CD with my notes containing the key. Installed it and pronto my
computer starts at least 2x to 3x faster now and all programs spring into
action pronto, real pronto.

Now who is that MVP who keeps saying all registry cleaners are "snake oil",
huh!?
--
choro
*****
PS. I can assure everybody that I am just an ordinary computer user and have
nothing to do with Registry Patrol people. And if this posting looks like a
plug for them, then so be it! A good program deserves acknowledgement.

 

[choro]

Oh sure. Are you sure it wasn't 500%? Or maybe 750%? How about 1000%?

200 % faster = 2x faster, you ninny! I timed it before making such claims.
But then if you are the one who claims all registry cleaners are snake oil,
then you would try to imply that I am not telling the truth.

You can give it a try if you don't believe me but don't expect such
improvement in every instance. I've been using Registry Patrol for years and
as I said before I can see no drawbacks to using it. But this time it really
and I mean really and seriously speeded up my very sluggish desktop.

It is up to you whether you believe me or not. But I can assure you I have
no reason to make fraudulent claims.

 

[Tim Meddick]

I can't understand anyone who says that registry cleaners do NO GOOD.

While it's true that the good they can do may be limited, it stands to
reason that a bloated registry is going to slow down your computer.

People are forever installing stuff they only use once, and they write a
good deal of data to the registry.

Now, when that data is under it's own SOFTWARE key, fine.

The problems come when it writes a whole bunch of entries under the
HKCR\CLSID key.

It's like the "gears" of the registry, and when you think there can be over
6000 separate sub-keys under the HKCR\CLSID key, when there are hardly 300
in a new system, it makes you wonder how long it takes to locate a single
entry.

If you want a practical example of how a bloated registry increases waiting
times for certain operations - open the "Folder Options" control panel,
then click on "File Types" (tab) - it can take quite a few minutes to load
all the separate registered file-type entries (many from that CLSID key ).

And the more of them there are the longer it takes !

Every time you install a program you never use again, it will often
register it's own set of file associations - and many do not delete them on
uninstalling!

One job reg-cleaners are supposed to be able to do is delete orphaned file
associations.

I don't see how anyone can think there's no difference in speed between a
brand-new OS install and one that's been around the block a few times!

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

 

[choro]

Maybe my system WAS really messed up or even ****ed up. I guess it must have
been because it was painfully slow.

But no longer. And that's the whole idea behind using a Registry Cleaner. I
realize there must be quite a few "snake oil" types among Registry Cleaners
but Registry Patrol certainly ain't one of them!

Look, mon ami, IF I scan my computer with Registry Patrol and let it sort
things out for me AND as a result my computer starts up 3x faster AND if
everything speeds up by a factor of 3 to 5x or even more in some cases, then
I am more than happy.

Get it?!
--
choro
*****

200 % faster = 2x faster, you ninny!

No kidding?

I timed it before making such claims.

That's what I was getting at. Maybe your "timings" were off, and it was
even 500%. Let' see, that would mean instead of taking 5 minutes to
boot up, it could now take only one minute, and this after running a
registry cleaner. Yeah, right.

But then if you are the one who claims all registry cleaners are snake
oil,
then you would try to imply that I am not telling the truth.

You can give it a try if you don't believe me but don't expect such
improvement in every instance. I've been using Registry Patrol for years
and
as I said before I can see no drawbacks to using it. But this time it
really
and I mean really and seriously speeded up my very sluggish desktop.

Then maybe, just maybe, your system was really messed up. And I'm sure
there are numerous articles on the Internet on how to help with that, but
none of the truly documented ones involve snake oil.

 

[Mint]

I can't understand anyone who says that registry cleaners do NO GOOD.

While it's true that the good they can do may be limited, it stands to
reason that a bloated registry is going to slow down your computer.

I don't see how anyone can think there's no difference in speed between a
brand-new OS install and one that's  been around the block a few times!

==

Tim,

I would not worry about what others think about registry cleaners.

The registry is a good system.

Most of it's bloat is due to poor programming practices that don't
properly clean up
after an un-installation.

Take care,
Andy

 

[Daave]

I've read a lot of claims that all registry cleaners are nothing more
than "snake oil" and I nearly came to believe it.

But this is usually the case, personal annecdotes notwithstanding.

There have been plenty of posts about hosed systems that were the result
of one too many registry "errors" being "corrected."

And even if there is no damage, there is no evidence of appreciable
performance improvement. There is no evidence a bloated registry slows
down a computer (except in starting up, perhaps). If there is a website
that demonstrates this, feel free to post it and I will read it. But to
date, I have seen NOTHING.

So if there is no damage, there might be a placebo effect, especially if
one has paid $29.99.

Recently reinstalled WXP/SP3 with plenty and I mean plenty of
software on the HD gradually got slower and slower. Programs took
ages to open or get something done. It got nearly impossible to use
my 10 year old favorite desktop.

This is very easy to explain. A number of programs that you rarely or
never use most likely were loading on startup. Also, there might have
been conflicts.

Finally in desperation I dug up Registry Patrol v3 (quite an old
version) and guess what? My old desktop starts a full 200 to 300
percent faster now and when I click a program it opens up pronto and
things get done pronto.

Your post is one anecdote and therefore statistically insignificant (no
offense). Also, Registry Patrol apparently has something called a
Startup Manager, so I'm not surprised your PC starts up faster. It was a
result of something you could have used msconfig for, not "correcting"
any "errors."

I am glad you are experiencing success. But I still wouldn't recommend
the cleaners, generally. There are better and safer ways to improve
performance.

 

[Paul]

I've read a lot of claims that all registry cleaners are nothing more than
"snake oil" and I nearly came to believe it.

Recently reinstalled WXP/SP3 with plenty and I mean plenty of software on
the HD gradually got slower and slower. Programs took ages to open or get
something done. It got nearly impossible to use my 10 year old favorite
desktop.

Finally in desperation I dug up Registry Patrol v3 (quite an old version)
and guess what? My old desktop starts a full 200 to 300 percent faster now
and when I click a program it opens up pronto and things get done pronto.

And to think that I had been nearly fooled into thinking that all registry
cleaners were "snake oil"!

To be honest I had used Registry Patrol before I reinstalled WXP/SP3 and
could see no drawbacks to it. So when my old faithful got impossibly slow
after the reinstall, I decided to look for my downloaded copy and there it
was on a CD with my notes containing the key. Installed it and pronto my
computer starts at least 2x to 3x faster now and all programs spring into
action pronto, real pronto.

Now who is that MVP who keeps saying all registry cleaners are "snake oil",
huh!?

I'd prefer to see a more controlled experiment.

1) Make a sector-by-sector backup of C:. That preserves the state of fragmentation
of the OS partition.

2) Run your registry experiment. Try to analyze what happened.
And precisely why it's faster. Compare registry size before
(using registry snapshot in a previous System Restore point)
with the new registry size.

3) If you missed something, had a new hypothesis or whatever,
restore the system using the sector-by-sector backup. Now you
can examine the system in it's pre-cleaner state again.

Using that approach, perhaps you can determine why it seems faster.
Or whether it was some other factor in the system, that was
responsible.

Paul

 

[choro]

AND also those who insist that vinyl records are
better than digital CDs, "because one is analog, and the other is
digitized". [hopefully you're not in that camp, and I don't think you are!]

Records *are* better than cds.Oh, yes, of course!

Far, far better at producing crackling sounds etc etc.

And all those strange sounds created by dust in the grooves. It is
absolutely impossible for the clean sparkling sound of a CD to match all
those extra sounds generated by LPs.

LPs and particularly old recordings on LPs remind me of fiddling with a
bow with no rosin! Better still rub the hair on the bow with some
vaseline to get somewhere near the sound of at least the not state of
the art LPs. You could also try rubbing the hair with some butter a la
Last Tango in Paris!

choro
*****

 

[Peter Foldes]

Bullcrap. I an yet to see proof if a Registry cleaner boosting the start up or
performance.

What I have seen is an unbootable system from using a registry cleaner or a complete
hosing of the OS by using a Registry Tool.
What probably and most likely happened (most likely is that Registry Patrol
installed a Startup Manager which you could have done yourself)

Registry Tools are dangerous and they are all snake oil remedies. Playing with one
is like playing Russian Roulette

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[choro]

Gentlemen, I am pleased with the results I've got using Registry Patrol.
Not only does my computer start much and I mean much faster, when I
click a program it springs to life pronto and doesn't take ages to get
going as before.

That is good reason enough for me to use a good registry cleaner. Not
all of us are handy with Regedit, you know!

 

[Tester]

I use CCleaner once a week not because my system is slow but because I
am obsessive of keeping my machine neat and tidy of all clutter lying
about everywhere. Tmp files, browser cache, application log files etc
including, of course, systems registry where everything seems to be
registered.

hth

 

[choro]

On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:34:40 -0700, "Bill in Co"

AND also those who insist that vinyl records are
better than digital CDs, "because one is analog, and the other is
digitized". [hopefully you're not in that camp, and I don't think you
are!]

Records *are* better than cds.Oh, yes, of course!

Far, far better at producing crackling sounds etc etc.

And all those strange sounds created by dust in the grooves. It is
absolutely impossible for the clean sparkling sound of a CD to match all
those extra sounds generated by LPs.

LPs and particularly old recordings on LPs remind me of fiddling with a
bow with no rosin! Better still rub the hair on the bow with some
vaseline to get somewhere near the sound of at least the not state of
the art LPs. You could also try rubbing the hair with some butter a la
Last Tango in Paris!

choro
*****

LOL!
+1

Glad you liked my shot across the bows!

I bet you there must be people out there who hanker after wax cylinders!

You don't know what hi-fidelity, let alone audiophilie is, until you
have heard the crackling sounds emanating from the horn of a wax
cylinder phonograph fitted with a nice sharp needle. ;-)

 

[Tester]

Far, far better at producing crackling sounds etc etc.

And for the music publishers who can do good business to repeat
customers when one vinyl is damaged!

hth

 

[glee]

AND also those who insist that vinyl records are
better than digital CDs, "because one is analog, and the other is
digitized". [hopefully you're not in that camp, and I don't think
you are!]

Records *are* better than cds.Oh, yes, of course!

Far, far better at producing crackling sounds etc etc.

And all those strange sounds created by dust in the grooves. It is
absolutely impossible for the clean sparkling sound of a CD to match
all those extra sounds generated by LPs.

LPs and particularly old recordings on LPs remind me of fiddling with
a bow with no rosin! Better still rub the hair on the bow with some
vaseline to get somewhere near the sound of at least the not state of
the art LPs. You could also try rubbing the hair with some butter a la
Last Tango in Paris!

Humorous.... unfortunately, if you are serious, you are certainly no
audiophile. It's got nothing to do with the items about which you made
the funny comments...the musical quality on a vinyl LP is superior to CD
for reasons having nothing to do with the scratches and dust. A little
actual listening and research would educate you.

 

[glee]

Gentlemen, I am pleased with the results I've got using Registry
Patrol. Not only does my computer start much and I mean much faster,
when I click a program it springs to life pronto and doesn't take ages
to get going as before.

That is good reason enough for me to use a good registry cleaner. Not
all of us are handy with Regedit, you know!

But the speed improvement you think you see has nothing to do with any
"cleaning" of the registry. Registry Patrol has a number of other
"modules" that affect system startup and other aspects of the computer,
that are not registry-related. Any speed improvement you think you see
is due to those actions, not the supposed registry cleaning. Removing
entries from the registry does not increase the computer speed one iota.
This has been tested dozens of times.

We're thrilled your system runs faster....but it is not due to registry
cleaning, it's from the other portions of the program you used. BTW,
even among those who do use and like so-called registry cleaners,
Registry Patrol is considered one of the poorer utilities.

 

[glee]

On 11/12/2010 17:30, WaIIy wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:34:40 -0700, "Bill in Co"

AND also those who insist that vinyl records are
better than digital CDs, "because one is analog, and the other is
digitized". [hopefully you're not in that camp, and I don't think
you are!]

Records *are* better than cds.Oh, yes, of course!

Far, far better at producing crackling sounds etc etc.

And all those strange sounds created by dust in the grooves. It is
absolutely impossible for the clean sparkling sound of a CD to match
all those extra sounds generated by LPs.

LPs and particularly old recordings on LPs remind me of fiddling
with
a bow with no rosin! Better still rub the hair on the bow with some
vaseline to get somewhere near the sound of at least the not state
of
the art LPs. You could also try rubbing the hair with some butter a
la
Last Tango in Paris!

Humorous.... unfortunately, if you are serious, you are certainly no
audiophile. It's got nothing to do with the items about which you
made
the funny comments...the musical quality on a vinyl LP is superior to
CD
for reasons having nothing to do with the scratches and dust. A
little
actual listening and research would educate you.

Have to disagree with you, Glen, on this one. And yes, I am an
audiophile, but I'm also an EE, so I know where the hype leaves off
(and ditto on "monster cables" supposedly providing better sound - no
doubt due to the gold connectors .

If you've got any scientific evidence to support that assertion,
provide it. (and hint: just saying it has been digitized has to have
ruined it - is not evidence

You need scientific evidence after listening to the same recording on
vinyl and then on CD??

 

[Mint]

+1 on this one
-1 on the other one.  

I think the "angry posters" need a good old fashioned pillow
fight.

Andy

 

[MyNews]

glee
Maybe they need to go to
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
And make their on quality on a vinyl LP on CD or DVD!

Audacity Effect
VyNil (Vinyl Effect)
it work it's a scientific evidence after listening to the same recording CD
you hear vinyl

 

[glee]

glee wrote:


On 11/12/2010 17:30, WaIIy wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:34:40 -0700, "Bill in Co"

AND also those who insist that vinyl records are
better than digital CDs, "because one is analog, and the other
is
digitized". [hopefully you're not in that camp, and I don't
think
you are!]

Records *are* better than cds.Oh, yes, of course!

Far, far better at producing crackling sounds etc etc.

And all those strange sounds created by dust in the grooves. It is
absolutely impossible for the clean sparkling sound of a CD to
match
all those extra sounds generated by LPs.

LPs and particularly old recordings on LPs remind me of fiddling
with
a bow with no rosin! Better still rub the hair on the bow with
some
vaseline to get somewhere near the sound of at least the not state
of
the art LPs. You could also try rubbing the hair with some butter
a
la
Last Tango in Paris!

Humorous.... unfortunately, if you are serious, you are certainly
no
audiophile. It's got nothing to do with the items about which you
made
the funny comments...the musical quality on a vinyl LP is superior
to
CD
for reasons having nothing to do with the scratches and dust. A
little
actual listening and research would educate you.

Have to disagree with you, Glen, on this one. And yes, I am an
audiophile, but I'm also an EE, so I know where the hype leaves off
(and ditto on "monster cables" supposedly providing better sound -
no
doubt due to the gold connectors .

If you've got any scientific evidence to support that assertion,
provide it. (and hint: just saying it has been digitized has to
have
ruined it - is not evidence

You need scientific evidence after listening to the same recording on
vinyl and then on CD??

Just to be clear, I don't dispute that some may like the sound of
records (including even 78's) with all their particular nuances. But
if we're talking about actual accuracy and fidelity, per se, however,
that's a whole 'nother story.

Just as there are those who prefer the sound of one codec/version used
in encoding vs another (e.g:, for the different variations of many mp3
or wma codecs, each having its own somewhat distinguising sound
characteristics on certain passages, iff heavily compressed)

But - their own preferences are not based on the accuracy or fidelity
of the reproduction, just on the nuances of the particular encoder
being used.
One might be able to say the same thing about fine wines.

But I digress - the medium of vinyl is inherently limited by its
intrinsic nature (and the cartridge being used), not to mention the
fact of its wholefully low, maximum dynamic range of around 60-65 db.
But yes, I still have a nice LP collection.
And I grew up with records, just like you did. Even going back to the
78s, in some instances. But not the Edison cylinders.

There is greater accuracy of musical sound reproduction with analog
(vinyl) than with digital (CD).

You can argue the electronics details till the cows come home, the sound
difference is obvious if you just listen.

"Is the sound on vinyl records better than on CDs or DVDs?"
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm

 

[glee]

glee
Maybe they need to go to
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
And make their on quality on a vinyl LP on CD or DVD!

Audacity Effect
VyNil (Vinyl Effect)
it work it's a scientific evidence after listening to the same
recording CD you hear vinyl

Not relevant as far as I can see. It's an "effect"....it isn't vinyl
quality.