Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

First, you can still run SCANREG /OPT, which IIRC, removes empty space. I
believe you can also compact (in the sense of rearranging) the Registry
using the old Export/Import method, but when it's that big, it will take a
while. Personally, I think compacting the Registry is highly overrated.
Registries that big get that way due to massive apps suites like Office. If
you have a large Registry that you think should be significantly smaller,
then it would have to be due to doing something stupid like manual removal
of the Office programs folder without properly uninstalling. The solution
for that is to reinstall the Suite/Apps, then uninstall them properly. If
you want to go looking for remains afterwards, fine, but you won't find
much, miniscule crumbs compared to the size of the Registry in whole, and
Registry Cleaning tools are only going to find some of the garbage
(relatively small portion in most cases.)

In short, yes. If you've so royally messed up your Registry as to require
"cleaning", or even compacting, then wipe/reinstall of Windows IS the best
recourse.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MM" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 5 May 2008 16:45:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote:

Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any significant
failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to run on
a
large Registry. BFD.

This is the problem I have had. But IS there a way to compact the
registry after deinstalling unwanted programs? Or is the ONLY solution
to reinstall Windows and reinstall only the apps one needs? My
SYSTEM.DAT on one PC (98SE) is 10MB and SCANREG /FIX barfs at about
87% completed.

MM

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might have
| come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one for
| the momentary purpose, I was done.
|
| I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
| exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend a
| full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
suspect.
| Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
| removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
virus(es)
| they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even have
| REG files for the purpose.

In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these things
are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used to
locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant. Without
the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One could
even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class, yet
without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
cleanup as well.

| If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of crap,
then
| we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt about
it,
| but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot of
| "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
| instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your AT
| commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS to
| remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| reinstall themselves.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com

The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation disks
for their applications, or those applications may no longer be supported
[leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then you
run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted upon
the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one can
search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever is
found.
Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved these
during the course of their usage, sadly many don't.

I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we did
offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to work
through the potentials associated.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
| I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings for
| individual responses...
|
| Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
| programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
| caution
| not to use the auto cleanup.
|
| But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
group;
| remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare and
Virus
| removal forums and sites.
| These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly during
| the
| process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
the
| registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting manual
| editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
addin
| or
| replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
basic
| regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
|
| So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be of
| use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any significant
| | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to
run
| on
| a
| | large Registry. BFD.
| |
| | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
| disaster
| | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done, but
| only
| | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might* locate a
| few
| | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of any
| real
| | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL
| search
| | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| |
| | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete it,
| | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
| weren't
| a
| | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after many
| years
| | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've never
once
| had
| | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry tools,
| | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
their
| | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
| | "idiot-proof".
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| |
| | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
| which
| | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications which
fill
| the
| | registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
| supposedly
| | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless entries;
to
| any
| | number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
| changed
| | at sometime.
| | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be prone
to
| | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
then
| | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
crisis.
| |
| | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
| methods
| | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
otherwise
| work
| | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| confronted
| | with
| | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,, advised
HOW
| to
| | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| |
| | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
| | registry,
| | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean and
| | mean,,,
| | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be taken
| with
| | *a
| | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the user
is
| | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur. IF, on
| the
| | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the registry,
makes
| an
| | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by searching
| first
| | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
| results
| | can
| | be achieved.
| |
| | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and understanding is
| YOUR
| | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT cause
| more
| | harm than good.
| |
| | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during cleanup
| | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| |
| | "Bill in Co." wrote in message
| | ...
| | | wrote:
| | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none
wrote:
| | |
| | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
will
| | | actually
| | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
| | |
| | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never
| seen
| | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
| | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would
get
| so
| | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
| created
| a
| | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a
| bunch
| | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from
text,
| or
| | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
Then
| I
| | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
| | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
| Wordpad
| | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
documented
| in
| | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
"recently
| | | opened files".
| | |
| | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
| delete
| | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo downloads
I
| | tried.
| | |
| | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK folder,
| | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
things
| | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
removed
| | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course I
| | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
| it's
| | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | |
| | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and should
not
| be
| | | used.
| | |
| | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
about.
| | |
| | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
| | | them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| | |
| | | Nonsense.
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
have
| come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one
for
| the momentary purpose, I was done.
|
| I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
| exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend a
| full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
suspect.
| Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
| removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
virus(es)
| they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even
have
| REG files for the purpose.

In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these
things
are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used to
locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant. Without
the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One could
even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class, yet
without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a hard
time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised Registry
Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.

They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
cleanup as well.

I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back to
"cleaning" MRUs, etc.?

| If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of crap,
then
| we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt about
it,
| but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot
of
| "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
| instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your
AT
| commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS to
| remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| reinstall themselves.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com

The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation disks
for their applications, or those applications may no longer be supported
[leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
you
run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted upon
the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one can
search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever is
found.
Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
these
during the course of their usage, sadly many don't

You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?

OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but that
small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my blanket
condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the real
skinny.

I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we did
offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to work
through the potentials associated.

HUH!?!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
| I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
for
| individual responses...
|
| Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
| programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
| caution
| not to use the auto cleanup.
|
| But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
group;
| remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare and
Virus
| removal forums and sites.
| These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
during
| the
| process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
the
| registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting manual
| editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
addin
| or
| replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
basic
| regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
|
| So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
of
| use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
significant
| | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to
run
| on
| a
| | large Registry. BFD.
| |
| | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
| disaster
| | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done,
but
| only
| | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might* locate
a
| few
| | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of
any
| real
| | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL
| search
| | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| |
| | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
it,
| | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
| weren't
| a
| | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after many
| years
| | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've never
once
| had
| | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
tools,
| | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
their
| | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
| | "idiot-proof".
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| |
| | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
| which
| | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications which
fill
| the
| | registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
| supposedly
| | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless entries;
to
| any
| | number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
| changed
| | at sometime.
| | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
prone
to
| | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
then
| | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
crisis.
| |
| | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
| methods
| | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
otherwise
| work
| | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| confronted
| | with
| | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,, advised
HOW
| to
| | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| |
| | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
| | registry,
| | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
and
| | mean,,,
| | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
taken
| with
| | *a
| | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
user
is
| | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur. IF,
on
| the
| | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the registry,
makes
| an
| | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
searching
| first
| | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
| results
| | can
| | be achieved.
| |
| | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and understanding
is
| YOUR
| | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
cause
| more
| | harm than good.
| |
| | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
cleanup
| | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| |
| | "Bill in Co." wrote in message
| | ...
| | | wrote:
| | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none
wrote:
| | |
| | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
will
| | | actually
| | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
| | |
| | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
never
| seen
| | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
| | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would
get
| so
| | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
| created
| a
| | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place
a
| bunch
| | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from
text,
| or
| | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
Then
| I
| | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
| | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
| Wordpad
| | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
documented
| in
| | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
"recently
| | | opened files".
| | |
| | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
| delete
| | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
downloads
I
| | tried.
| | |
| | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
folder,
| | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
things
| | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
removed
| | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course
I
| | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the
time
| it's
| | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | |
| | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and should
not
| be
| | | used.
| | |
| | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
about.
| | |
| | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
| | | them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| | |
| | | Nonsense.
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|

I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that system
connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger to
others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs down.

And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those few
Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do you
recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if you
saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
have
| come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one
for
| the momentary purpose, I was done.
|
| I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
| exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend
a
| full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
suspect.
| Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
| removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
virus(es)
| they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even
have
| REG files for the purpose.

In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these
things
are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used to
locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
Without
the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One could
even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class, yet
without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised
Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.

They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
cleanup as well.

I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back to
"cleaning" MRUs, etc.?

| If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of crap,
then
| we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt
about
it,
| but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot
of
| "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
| instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your
AT
| commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
to
| remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| reinstall themselves.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com

The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
disks
for their applications, or those applications may no longer be supported
[leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
you
run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
upon
the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one can
search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever is
found.
Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
these
during the course of their usage, sadly many don't

You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?

OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my
blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the
real skinny.

I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
did
offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to work
through the potentials associated.

HUH!?!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
| I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
for
| individual responses...
|
| Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
| programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
| caution
| not to use the auto cleanup.
|
| But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
group;
| remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare and
Virus
| removal forums and sites.
| These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
during
| the
| process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
the
| registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
manual
| editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
addin
| or
| replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
basic
| regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
|
| So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
of
| use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
significant
| | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing to
run
| on
| a
| | large Registry. BFD.
| |
| | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
| disaster
| | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done,
but
| only
| | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
locate a
| few
| | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of
any
| real
| | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
MANUAL
| search
| | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| |
| | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
it,
| | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
| weren't
| a
| | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
many
| years
| | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've never
once
| had
| | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
tools,
| | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
their
| | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
| | "idiot-proof".
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| |
| | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
entries
| which
| | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications which
fill
| the
| | registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
| supposedly
| | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
entries;
to
| any
| | number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
been
| changed
| | at sometime.
| | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
prone
to
| | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
then
| | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
crisis.
| |
| | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
| methods
| | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
otherwise
| work
| | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| confronted
| | with
| | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,, advised
HOW
| to
| | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| |
| | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
| | registry,
| | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
and
| | mean,,,
| | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
taken
| with
| | *a
| | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
user
is
| | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur. IF,
on
| the
| | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the registry,
makes
| an
| | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
searching
| first
| | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
| results
| | can
| | be achieved.
| |
| | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and understanding
is
| YOUR
| | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
cause
| more
| | harm than good.
| |
| | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
cleanup
| | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| |
| | "Bill in Co." wrote in message
| | ...
| | | wrote:
| | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none
wrote:
| | |
| | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
will
| | | actually
| | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
| | |
| | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
never
| seen
| | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless
junk.
| | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry would
get
| so
| | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
| created
| a
| | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily
place a
| bunch
| | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything from
text,
| or
| | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
Then
| I
| | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of
the
| | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
| Wordpad
| | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
documented
| in
| | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
"recently
| | | opened files".
| | |
| | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
| delete
| | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
downloads
I
| | tried.
| | |
| | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
folder,
| | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
things
| | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
removed
| | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
course I
| | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the
time
| it's
| | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | |
| | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and should
not
| be
| | | used.
| | |
| | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
about.
| | |
| | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
| | | them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| | |
| | | Nonsense.
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|

Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
used without knowledge.

I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER misuse..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
| generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
system
| connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger to
| others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs down.
|
| And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
few
| Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
you
| recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if you
| saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
| have
| | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
one
| for
| | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| |
| | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
minor
| | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
recommend
| a
| | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
| suspect.
| | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and spyware
| | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
| virus(es)
| | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and even
| have
| | REG files for the purpose.
|
| In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these
| things
| are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used
to
| locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
| Without
| the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
could
| even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
yet
| without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
| experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
|
| Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
| hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised
| Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
|
| They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
| cleanup as well.
|
| I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
to
| "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
|
| | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
crap,
| then
| | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt
| about
| it,
| | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
lot
| of
| | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
| | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
your
| AT
| | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
| to
| | remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| | reinstall themselves.
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
|
| The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
| possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
| disks
| for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
supported
| [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
| you
| run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
| upon
| the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
can
| search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
is
| found.
| Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
| these
| during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
|
| You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
|
| OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
| experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
| that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my
| blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the
| real skinny.
|
| I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
| did
| offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
work
| through the potentials associated.
|
| HUH!?!
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
|
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| | I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
| for
| | individual responses...
| |
| | Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
| | programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
| | caution
| | not to use the auto cleanup.
| |
| | But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
| group;
| | remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare and
| Virus
| | removal forums and sites.
| | These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
| during
| | the
| | process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
and
| the
| | registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
| manual
| | editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
| addin
| | or
| | replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of
the
| basic
| | regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| |
| | So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can
be
| of
| | use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| | | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
| significant
| | | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
to
| run
| | on
| | a
| | | large Registry. BFD.
| | |
| | | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
wide-spread
| | disaster
| | | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been done,
| but
| | only
| | | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
| locate a
| | few
| | | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much of
| any
| | real
| | | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
| MANUAL
| | search
| | | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| | |
| | | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
delete
| it,
| | | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
| | weren't
| | a
| | | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
| many
| | years
| | | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
never
| once
| | had
| | | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
| tools,
| | | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed
by
| their
| | | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought
were
| | | "idiot-proof".
| | |
| | | --
| | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | www.grystmill.com
| | |
| | |
| | | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| | |
| | | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
| entries
| | which
| | | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
which
| fill
| | the
| | | registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
| | supposedly
| | | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
| entries;
| to
| | any
| | | number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
| been
| | changed
| | | at sometime.
| | | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
| prone
| to
| | | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues]....
which
| then
| | | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
| crisis.
| | |
| | | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time,
posted
| | methods
| | | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
| otherwise
| | work
| | | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| | confronted
| | | with
| | | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
advised
| HOW
| | to
| | | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| | |
| | | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean
the
| | | registry,
| | | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
| and
| | | mean,,,
| | | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
| taken
| | with
| | | *a
| | | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
| user
| is
| | | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
IF,
| on
| | the
| | | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
registry,
| makes
| | an
| | | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
| searching
| | first
| | | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the desired
| | results
| | | can
| | | be achieved.
| | |
| | | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
understanding
| is
| | YOUR
| | | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
| cause
| | more
| | | harm than good.
| | |
| | | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
| cleanup
| | | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| | |
| | | --
| | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | --
| | | _________
| | |
| | |
| | | "Bill in Co." wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | | wrote:
| | | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none
| wrote:
| | | |
| | | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system,
and
| will
| | | | actually
| | | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.
| | | |
| | | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have
| never
| | seen
| | | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless
| junk.
| | | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
would
| get
| | so
| | | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
| | created
| | a
| | | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily
| place a
| | bunch
| | | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
from
| text,
| | or
| | | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc.
| Then
| | I
| | | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of
| the
| | | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures,
and
| | Wordpad
| | | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
| documented
| | in
| | | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
| "recently
| | | | opened files".
| | | |
| | | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and
I
| | delete
| | | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
| downloads
| I
| | | tried.
| | | |
| | | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
| folder,
| | | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
| things
| | | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
| removed
| | | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
| course I
| | | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the
| time
| | it's
| | | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | | |
| | | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
should
| not
| | be
| | | | used.
| | | |
| | | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
| about.
| | | |
| | | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
| | | | them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| | | |
| | | | Nonsense.
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|

Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had some
problems - BTDT)

(That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).

And, like I said, if someone hasn't at least used regedit before, they
really are not in the league to be messing around with these programs,
because the consequences of running such "registry cleaning" programs can
be, and often are, *truly* dire (and in some cases, even necessating a
complete reinstall of Windows).

MEB wrote:
Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
used without knowledge.

I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
misuse..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
system
connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger to
others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs down.

And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
few
Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
you
recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
you
saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
have
come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing one
for
the momentary purpose, I was done.

I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With minor
exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I recommend
a
full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
suspect. Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
spyware removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
and
virus(es) they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove,
and
even have REG files for the purpose.

In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these
things
are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used
to
locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
Without
the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
could
even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
yet
without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely advertised
Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.

They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles of
cleanup as well.

I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
to
"cleaning" MRUs, etc.?

If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
crap,
then we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
blunt
about
it,
but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a lot
of
"fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all your
AT
commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
to
remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
reinstall themselves.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
disks
for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
supported
[leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates]. Then
you
run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
upon
the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
can
search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
is
found.
Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
these
during the course of their usage, sadly many don't

You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?

OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in my
blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for the
real skinny.

I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
did
offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
work
through the potentials associated.

HUH!?!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________



"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...
I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
for
individual responses...

Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
caution
not to use the auto cleanup.

But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
group;
remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare and
Virus
removal forums and sites.
These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
during
the
process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them and
the
registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
manual
editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
addin
or
replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
basic regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?

So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
of
use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
significant
failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
to
run
on
a
large Registry. BFD.

Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
disaster involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
done, but only an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools
*might* locate a few of those entries, you know better than most, I
think, how much of any real Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to
"cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL search and research procedure
that
few if any tools do well at all.

I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
it,
ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
weren't
a
good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after many
years of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
never
once
had
any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
tools,
whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
their
Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
"idiot-proof".

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...
Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,

As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
which relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
which
fill
the
registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
supposedly removed but actually leave, at times, countless
worthless
entries;
to
any
number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
changed at sometime.
We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
prone
to
failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
then
becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
crisis.

All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
methods to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
otherwise work upon the registry... They also have repeatedly
advised,
when confronted with
ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
advised
HOW
to
*manually* search the registry to *clean it*.

I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
registry,
which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean and
mean,,,
but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
taken
with *a
grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
user
is
unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
IF,
on
the
other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
registry,
makes
an
effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
searching
first to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
desired
results can
be achieved.

Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
understanding
is
YOUR
responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
cause
more harm than good.

These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
cleanup
activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none
wrote:

ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
will
actually
FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.

I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never
seen
it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
would
get
so
huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
created
a
folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a
bunch of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
from
text,
or
Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc. Then
I
begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
Wordpad
to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are documented
in
the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store "recently
opened files".

Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
delete
the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
downloads
I
tried.

Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK folder,
references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many things
relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
removed
from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course I
always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
it's
just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.

So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
should
not
be
used.

Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
about.

I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.

Nonsense.

Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the advertised
intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too decrepit
to be worth the effort, AFAIC.

If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools will
do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true statement,
proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and worthless.
Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities are
revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?), which are
a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except the
most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly harmless.
Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably with
certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing that
would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you leave it
there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even if
that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...
Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
used without knowledge.

I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
misuse..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
| generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
system
| connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
to
| others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
down.
|
| And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
few
| Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
you
| recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
you
| saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
might
| have
| | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
one
| for
| | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| |
| | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
minor
| | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
recommend
| a
| | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
| suspect.
| | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
spyware
| | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
| virus(es)
| | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and
even
| have
| | REG files for the purpose.
|
| In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these
| things
| are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
used
to
| locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
| Without
| the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
could
| even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
yet
| without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
| experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
|
| Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having
a
| hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
advertised
| Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
|
| They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles
of
| cleanup as well.
|
| I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
to
| "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
|
| | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
crap,
| then
| | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too blunt
| about
| it,
| | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
lot
| of
| | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere,
for
| | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
your
| AT
| | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
ALWAYS
| to
| | remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
| | reinstall themselves.
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
|
| The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
| possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
| disks
| for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
supported
| [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
Then
| you
| run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
| upon
| the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
can
| search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
is
| found.
| Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
| these
| during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
|
| You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
|
| OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
| experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
| that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in
my
| blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
the
| real skinny.
|
| I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and
we
| did
| offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
work
| through the potentials associated.
|
| HUH!?!
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
|
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| | I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
postings
| for
| | individual responses...
| |
| | Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use
the
| | programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why
I
| | caution
| | not to use the auto cleanup.
| |
| | But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of
this
| group;
| | remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare
and
| Virus
| | removal forums and sites.
| | These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
| during
| | the
| | process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
and
| the
| | registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
| manual
| | editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
regedit
| addin
| | or
| | replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of
the
| basic
| | regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| |
| | So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can
be
| of
| | use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand
them.
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| | | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
| significant
| | | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
failing
to
| run
| | on
| | a
| | | large Registry. BFD.
| | |
| | | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
wide-spread
| | disaster
| | | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
done,
| but
| | only
| | | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
| locate a
| | few
| | | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how much
of
| any
| | real
| | | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
| MANUAL
| | search
| | | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| | |
| | | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
delete
| it,
| | | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
learned
| | weren't
| | a
| | | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
| many
| | years
| | | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
never
| once
| | had
| | | any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
| tools,
| | | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed
by
| their
| | | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought
were
| | | "idiot-proof".
| | |
| | | --
| | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | www.grystmill.com
| | |
| | |
| | | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| | |
| | | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
| entries
| | which
| | | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
which
| fill
| | the
| | | registry with open files which no longer exist, to
applications
| | supposedly
| | | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
| entries;
| to
| | any
| | | number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow
| been
| | changed
| | | at sometime.
| | | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
| prone
| to
| | | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues]....
which
| then
| | | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
| crisis.
| | |
| | | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time,
posted
| | methods
| | | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
| otherwise
| | work
| | | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised, when
| | confronted
| | | with
| | | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
advised
| HOW
| | to
| | | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| | |
| | | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean
the
| | | registry,
| | | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system
lean
| and
| | | mean,,,
| | | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should
be
| taken
| | with
| | | *a
| | | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF
the
| user
| is
| | | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
IF,
| on
| | the
| | | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
registry,
| makes
| | an
| | | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
| searching
| | first
| | | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
desired
| | results
| | | can
| | | be achieved.
| | |
| | | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
understanding
| is
| | YOUR
| | | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they
MIGHT
| cause
| | more
| | | harm than good.
| | |
| | | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
| cleanup
| | | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...
| | |
| | | --
| | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | --
| | | _________
| | |
| | |
| | | "Bill in Co." wrote in
message
| | | ...
| | | | wrote:
| | | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
none
| wrote:
| | | |
| | | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system,
and
| will
| | | | actually
| | | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
NEVER.
| | | |
| | | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I
have
| never
| | seen
| | | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless
| junk.
| | | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
would
| get
| | so
| | | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say
I
| | created
| | a
| | | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily
| place a
| | bunch
| | | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
from
| text,
| | or
| | | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads,
etc.
| Then
| | I
| | | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many
of
| the
| | | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures,
and
| | Wordpad
| | | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
| documented
| | in
| | | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
| "recently
| | | | opened files".
| | | |
| | | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media
and
I
| | delete
| | | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
| downloads
| I
| | | tried.
| | | |
| | | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK
| folder,
| | | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and
many
| things
| | | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that
is
| removed
| | | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
| course I
| | | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of
the
| time
| | it's
| | | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | | |
| | | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
should
| not
| | be
| | | | used.
| | | |
| | | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
talking
| about.
| | | |
| | | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
without
| | | | them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.
| | | |
| | | | Nonsense.
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|

Aw Gary, too decrepit??? That's like telling everyone to buy new
computers...

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the
advertised
| intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too
decrepit
| to be worth the effort, AFAIC.
|
| If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools
will
| do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true statement,
| proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and worthless.
| Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities are
| revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
| program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?), which
are
| a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except the
| most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly harmless.
| Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably with
| certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing that
| would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
| programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you leave
it
| there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even if
| that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com


Yes, in part. I have cautioned concerning removal pf ActiveX semmingly
blank entries. These ARE place holders,,, which should be left as they are
DISABLED...

As for "leave it there"; that attempts to indicate all programmers know
what they are doing, and make proper installation files and uninstaller
routines... that's a dream world, it would ber nice, but its not a reality.

So again, these types of TOOLS can be of use, but must be used with
caution AND only after making an effort to understand what they might find.
IN FACT, several of these tools now include Search Tools built-in, and
suggest using them BEFORE removal of any items. Its just like any
application or program that a user might have, they MUST learn how to use
it.

|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
| Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
| statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them
are
| worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen
when
| used without knowledge.
|
| I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
| misuse..
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should
be
| | generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
| system
| | connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
| to
| | others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| | irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
| down.
| |
| | And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see,
those
| few
| | Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT.
Do
| you
| | recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
| you
| | saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| | | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
| might
| | have
| | | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of
grabbing
| one
| | for
| | | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| | |
| | | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
| minor
| | | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
| recommend
| | a
| | | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it
permanently
| | suspect.
| | | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
| spyware
| | | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware and
| | virus(es)
| | | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and
| even
| | have
| | | REG files for the purpose.
| |
| | In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as
these
| | things
| | are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
| used
| to
| | locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
| | Without
| | the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
| could
| | even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same
class,
| yet
| | without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other,
and
| | experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
| |
| | Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm
having
| a
| | hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
| advertised
| | Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
| |
| | They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other
styles
| of
| | cleanup as well.
| |
| | I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we
back
| to
| | "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
| |
| | | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| | | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
| crap,
| | then
| | | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
blunt
| | about
| | it,
| | | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like
a
| lot
| | of
| | | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere,
| for
| | | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
| your
| | AT
| | | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
| ALWAYS
| | to
| | | remove all networking and related devices and services and let
them
| | | reinstall themselves.
| | |
| | | --
| | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | www.grystmill.com
| |
| | The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just
not
| | possible for many users. Either they no longer have the
installation
| | disks
| | for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
| supported
| | [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
| Then
| | you
| | run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates
posted
| | upon
| | the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted,
one
| can
| | search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of
whatever
| is
| | found.
| | Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and
saved
| | these
| | during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
| |
| | You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
| |
| | OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of
truly
| | experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy,
but
| | that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist
in
| my
| | blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
| the
| | real skinny.
| |
| | I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and
| we
| | did
| | offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
| work
| | through the potentials associated.
| |
| | HUH!?!
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| |
| | |
| | | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
| postings
| | for
| | | individual responses...
| | |
| | | Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use
| the
| | | programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is
why
| I
| | | caution
| | | not to use the auto cleanup.
| | |
| | | But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of
| this
| | group;
| | | remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare
| and
| | Virus
| | | removal forums and sites.
| | | These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used
regularly
| | during
| | | the
| | | process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with
them
| and
| | the
| | | registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
| | manual
| | | editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
| regedit
| | addin
| | | or
| | | replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities
of
| the
| | basic
| | | regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| | |
| | | So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners
can
| be
| | of
| | | use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand
| them.
| | |
| | | --
| | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | --
| | | _________
| | |
| | | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
| | significant
| | | | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
| failing
| to
| | run
| | | on
| | | a
| | | | large Registry. BFD.
| | | |
| | | | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
| wide-spread
| | | disaster
| | | | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
| done,
| | but
| | | only
| | | | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools *might*
| | locate a
| | | few
| | | | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how
much
| of
| | any
| | | real
| | | | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a painstaking
| | MANUAL
| | | search
| | | | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at all.
| | | |
| | | | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
| delete
| | it,
| | | | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
| learned
| | | weren't
| | | a
| | | | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and
after
| | many
| | | years
| | | | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
| never
| | once
| | | had
| | | | any success helping anyone else by having them run any
Registry
| | tools,
| | | | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were
screwed
| by
| | their
| | | | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought
| were
| | | | "idiot-proof".
| | | |
| | | | --
| | | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | | www.grystmill.com
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | | | ...
| | | | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| | | |
| | | | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with
| | entries
| | | which
| | | | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
| which
| | fill
| | | the
| | | | registry with open files which no longer exist, to
| applications
| | | supposedly
| | | | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
| | entries;
| | to
| | | any
| | | | number of other things which aren't need, or may have
somehow
| | been
| | | changed
| | | | at sometime.
| | | | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or
be
| | prone
| | to
| | | | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues]....
| which
| | then
| | | | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time
of
| | crisis.
| | | |
| | | | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time,
| posted
| | | methods
| | | | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry, and
| | otherwise
| | | work
| | | | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised,
when
| | | confronted
| | | | with
| | | | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
| advised
| | HOW
| | | to
| | | | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| | | |
| | | | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to
clean
| the
| | | | registry,
| | | | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system
| lean
| | and
| | | | mean,,,
| | | | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should
| be
| | taken
| | | with
| | | | *a
| | | | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF
| the
| | user
| | is
| | | | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely
occur.
| IF,
| | on
| | | the
| | | | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
| registry,
| | makes
| | | an
| | | | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
| | searching
| | | first
| | | | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
| desired
| | | results
| | | | can
| | | | be achieved.
| | | |
| | | | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
| understanding
| | is
| | | YOUR
| | | | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they
| MIGHT
| | cause
| | | more
| | | | harm than good.
| | | |
| | | | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily
during
| | cleanup
| | | | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such
activities...
| | | |
| | | | --
| | | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | | --
| | | | _________
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | "Bill in Co." wrote in
| message
| | | | ...
| | | | | wrote:
| | | | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
| none
| | wrote:
| | | | |
| | | | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your
system,
| and
| | will
| | | | | actually
| | | | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
| NEVER.
| | | | |
| | | | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I
| have
| | never
| | | seen
| | | | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of
useless
| | junk.
| | | | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
| would
| | get
| | | so
| | | | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets
say
| I
| | | created
| | | a
| | | | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to
temporarily
| | place a
| | | bunch
| | | | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
| from
| | text,
| | | or
| | | | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads,
| etc.
| | Then
| | | I
| | | | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many
| of
| | the
| | | | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the
pictures,
| and
| | | Wordpad
| | | | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
| | documented
| | | in
| | | | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
| | "recently
| | | | | opened files".
| | | | |
| | | | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media
| and
| I
| | | delete
| | | | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
| | downloads
| | I
| | | | tried.
| | | | |
| | | | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that
JUNK
| | folder,
| | | | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and
| many
| | things
| | | | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that
| is
| | removed
| | | | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of
| | course I
| | | | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of
| the
| | time
| | | it's
| | | | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | | | |
| | | | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
| should
| | not
| | | be
| | | | | used.
| | | | |
| | | | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
| talking
| | about.
| | | | |
| | | | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
| without
| | | | | them the registry will become a pile of useless
garbage.
| | | | |
| | | | | Nonsense.
--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

You exaggerate extremely. The numbers of machines I'm talking about amount
to maybe one millionth of one percent of machines out there, or more likely
a millionth of that number. Come on, really... How many drivers really CAN'T
be found, or are you really saying, "Can't be *easily* found?" I'll bet you
can find every driver set ever written out there, somewhere, even if it
requires shelling out some bucks to get them.

Anyway, you're the one who described the machine you chose as an exemplar of
a machine that MUST be repaired in place because there is no way to rebuild
it. The machine(s) you describe are "decrepit" by definition. And just like
decrepit automobiles, they are just as much a danger to society as they are
a nuisance to their owners.

In the case of idiots who didn't save the software that came with their
computer, they deserve to be forced to buy a new machine.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...
Aw Gary, too decrepit??? That's like telling everyone to buy new
computers...

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
| Yes, but the "good" uses you propose have nothing to do with the
advertised
| intended use of the tools, and your examples depend on machines too
decrepit
| to be worth the effort, AFAIC.
|
| If the Registry is in such a state that it needs "cleaning", the tools
will
| do little if anything to help. In short, as a generally true statement,
| proven over and over again, Registry Cleaners are dangerous and
worthless.
| Please read PA's reference to the Aumha.net thread wherein realities are
| revealed after much testing. Hell, the most I've seen tagged by such a
| program were several hundred entries (so called "empty" CLSIDs?), which
are
| a drop in the bucket compared to the entire Registry. In all, except the
| most decrepit Windows 98 machine, those entries are perfectly harmless.
| Note, too, that "empty" CLSIDs were put there by someone, presumably
with
| certain future situations in mind. IOW, the context may be missing that
| would explain why the CLSID is there in the first place. IOW, if a
| programmer put something in the Registry, my suggestion is that you
leave
it
| there, since you have no ide3a what purpose it might be serving, even if
| that purpose "breaks the rules" on proper Registry use.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com


Yes, in part. I have cautioned concerning removal pf ActiveX semmingly
blank entries. These ARE place holders,,, which should be left as they are
DISABLED...

As for "leave it there"; that attempts to indicate all programmers know
what they are doing, and make proper installation files and uninstaller
routines... that's a dream world, it would ber nice, but its not a
reality.

So again, these types of TOOLS can be of use, but must be used with
caution AND only after making an effort to understand what they might
find.
IN FACT, several of these tools now include Search Tools built-in, and
suggest using them BEFORE removal of any items. Its just like any
application or program that a user might have, they MUST learn how to use
it.

|
| "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| ...
| Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
| statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them
are
| worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen
when
| used without knowledge.
|
| I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
| misuse..
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| ...
| | I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should
be
| | generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
| system
| | connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable*
danger
| to
| | others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
| | irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
| down.
| |
| | And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see,
those
| few
| | Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as
HJT.
Do
| you
| | recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!!
if
| you
| | saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| |
| | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | ...
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | ...
| | | I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they
| might
| | have
| | | come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of
grabbing
| one
| | for
| | | the momentary purpose, I was done.
| | |
| | | I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal.
With
| minor
| | | exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
| recommend
| | a
| | | full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it
permanently
| | suspect.
| | | Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
| spyware
| | | removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
and
| | virus(es)
| | | they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove, and
| even
| | have
| | | REG files for the purpose.
| |
| | In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as
these
| | things
| | are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are
| used
| to
| | locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that
variant.
| | Without
| | the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses.
One
| could
| | even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same
class,
| yet
| | without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other,
and
| | experts would be without the tools necessary to help.
| |
| | Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm
having
| a
| | hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
| advertised
| | Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.
| |
| | They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other
styles
| of
| | cleanup as well.
| |
| | I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we
back
| to
| | "cleaning" MRUs, etc.?
| |
| | | If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
| | | tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs
of
| crap,
| | then
| | | we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
blunt
| | about
| | it,
| | | but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just
like
a
| lot
| | of
| | | "fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN
sphere,
| for
| | | instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads,
all
| your
| | AT
| | | commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost
| ALWAYS
| | to
| | | remove all networking and related devices and services and let
them
| | | reinstall themselves.
| | |
| | | --
| | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | www.grystmill.com
| |
| | The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just
not
| | possible for many users. Either they no longer have the
installation
| | disks
| | for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
| supported
| | [leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no
updates].
| Then
| | you
| | run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates
posted
| | upon
| | the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted,
one
| can
| | search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of
whatever
| is
| | found.
| | Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and
saved
| | these
| | during the course of their usage, sadly many don't
| |
| | You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?
| |
| | OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of
truly
| | experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy,
but
| | that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist
in
| my
| | blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite
for
| the
| | real skinny.
| |
| | I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum,
and
| we
| | did
| | offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were
to
| work
| | through the potentials associated.
| |
| | HUH!?!
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| |
| | |
| | | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the
| postings
| | for
| | | individual responses...
| | |
| | | Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I
use
| the
| | | programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is
why
| I
| | | caution
| | | not to use the auto cleanup.
| | |
| | | But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of
| this
| | group;
| | | remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the
SpyWare
| and
| | Virus
| | | removal forums and sites.
| | | These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used
regularly
| | during
| | | the
| | | process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with
them
| and
| | the
| | | registry, but certainly are used far more often than
suggesting
| | manual
| | | editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite
| regedit
| | addin
| | | or
| | | replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities
of
| the
| | basic
| | | regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?
| | |
| | | So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners
can
| be
| | of
| | | use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand
| them.
| | |
| | | --
| | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | --
| | | _________
| | |
| | | "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
| | | ...
| | | | Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
| | significant
| | | | failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX
| failing
| to
| | run
| | | on
| | | a
| | | | large Registry. BFD.
| | | |
| | | | Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a
| wide-spread
| | | disaster
| | | | involving the user doing something that shouldn't have been
| done,
| | but
| | | only
| | | | an expert is likely to know for sure, and while tools
*might*
| | locate a
| | | few
| | | | of those entries, you know better than most, I think, how
much
| of
| | any
| | | real
| | | | Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to "cleaning", is a
painstaking
| | MANUAL
| | | search
| | | | and research procedure that few if any tools do well at
all.
| | | |
| | | | I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and
| delete
| | it,
| | | | ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had
| learned
| | | weren't
| | | a
| | | | good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and
after
| | many
| | | years
| | | | of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now.
I've
| never
| | once
| | | had
| | | | any success helping anyone else by having them run any
Registry
| | tools,
| | | | whereas I have several times dealt with people who were
screwed
| by
| | their
| | | | Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and
thought
| were
| | | | "idiot-proof".
| | | |
| | | | --
| | | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | | www.grystmill.com
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | "MEB" meb@not wrote in message
| | | | ...
| | | | Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,
| | | |
| | | | As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated
with
| | entries
| | | which
| | | | relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to
applications
| which
| | fill
| | | the
| | | | registry with open files which no longer exist, to
| applications
| | | supposedly
| | | | removed but actually leave, at times, countless worthless
| | entries;
| | to
| | | any
| | | | number of other things which aren't need, or may have
somehow
| | been
| | | changed
| | | | at sometime.
| | | | We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL
or
be
| | prone
| | to
| | | | failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing
issues]....
| which
| | then
| | | | becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a
time
of
| | crisis.
| | | |
| | | | All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some
time,
| posted
| | | methods
| | | | to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry,
and
| | otherwise
| | | work
| | | | upon the registry... They also have repeatedly advised,
when
| | | confronted
| | | | with
| | | | ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
| advised
| | HOW
| | | to
| | | | *manually* search the registry to *clean it*.
| | | |
| | | | I personally have used [and still use] several tools to
clean
| the
| | | | registry,
| | | | which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a
system
| lean
| | and
| | | | mean,,,
| | | | but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner
should
| be
| | taken
| | | with
| | | | *a
| | | | grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea.
IF
| the
| | user
| | is
| | | | unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely
occur.
| IF,
| | on
| | | the
| | | | other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
| registry,
| | makes
| | | an
| | | | effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries
by
| | searching
| | | first
| | | | to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
| desired
| | | results
| | | | can
| | | | be achieved.
| | | |
| | | | Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
| understanding
| | is
| | | YOUR
| | | | responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they
| MIGHT
| | cause
| | | more
| | | | harm than good.
| | | |
| | | | These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily
during
| | cleanup
| | | | activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such
activities...
| | | |
| | | | --
| | | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | | --
| | | | _________
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | "Bill in Co." wrote in
| message
| | | | ...
| | | | | wrote:
| | | | | On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune"
| none
| | wrote:
| | | | |
| | | | | ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your
system,
| and
| | will
| | | | | actually
| | | | | FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately
| NEVER.
| | | | |
| | | | | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I
| have
| | never
| | | seen
| | | | | it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of
useless
| | junk.
| | | | | Without such programs, it seems to me that the
registry
| would
| | get
| | | so
| | | | | huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets
say
| I
| | | created
| | | a
| | | | | folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to
temporarily
| | place a
| | | bunch
| | | | | of things I find on my hard drive, which are
everything
| from
| | text,
| | | or
| | | | | Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file
downloads,
| etc.
| | Then
| | | I
| | | | | begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open
many
| of
| | the
| | | | | downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the
pictures,
| and
| | | Wordpad
| | | | | to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things
are
| | documented
| | | in
| | | | | the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all
store
| | "recently
| | | | | opened files".
| | | | |
| | | | | Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other
media
| and
| I
| | | delete
| | | | | the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
| | downloads
| | I
| | | | tried.
| | | | |
| | | | | Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that
JUNK
| | folder,
| | | | | references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and
| many
| | things
| | | | | relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of
that
| is
| | removed
| | | | | from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean.
Of
| | course I
| | | | | always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9%
of
| the
| | time
| | | it's
| | | | | just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.
| | | | |
| | | | | So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous
and
| should
| | not
| | | be
| | | | | used.
| | | | |
| | | | | Because he (and a few others here) know what they're
| talking
| | about.
| | | | |
| | | | | I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but
| without
| | | | | them the registry will become a pile of useless
garbage.
| | | | |
| | | | | Nonsense.
--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
Bottom line: these "registry cleaning" programs are of limited use in
capable hands, and that's it. (even the old MS regclean program had some
problems - BTDT)

For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say NONE of them come
any where near close to living up to the hype.

(That doesn't mean they are of NO use, however).

For the purposes for which they are advertised, I'd say they're useless.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

And, like I said, if someone hasn't at least used regedit before, they
really are not in the league to be messing around with these programs,
because the consequences of running such "registry cleaning" programs can
be, and often are, *truly* dire (and in some cases, even necessating a
complete reinstall of Windows).

MEB wrote:
Of course, but they are tools none the less. So naturally I like my
statement better. At least it doesn't make me sound like NONE of them are
worthy of use, just that the user should be aware of what can happen when
used without knowledge.

I have placed several "oh no" posts here when help is needed AFTER
misuse..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
I'm going to modify my answer below... Such cases as you cite should be
generally be scrapped and replaced. If nothing else, as soon as that
system
connects to any other system, in any manner, it is a *probable* danger
to
others. If it is so obsolete and unsupported and the user was so
irresponsible that it is really impossible to rebuild, I say thumbs
down.

And I've decided that I like your mention of HJT. From what I see, those
few
Registry Cleaners that aren't pure scam are JUST as dangerous as HJT. Do
you
recommend the unassisted use of HJT? Would you not scream DANGER!!! if
you
saw it advertised as a user-friendly, idiot-proof tool?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...

"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
I don't use any such add-on and never have. Yes, I suppose they might
have
come in handy once or twice, but by the time I thought of grabbing
one for
the momentary purpose, I was done.

I don't get involved in detailed spyware and virus removal. With
minor
exceptions, when I encounter a seriously infested machine, I
recommend a
full rebuild. Once a machine is infested, I consider it permanently
suspect. Besides, it would seem to me that in the case of viruses and
spyware removal, the experts should already know EXACTLY what spyware
and
virus(es) they are dealing with and which Registry entries to remove,
and
even have REG files for the purpose.

In part you're right, many do have these reg files; however, as these
things
are constantly being modified [variants] the "cleaning tools* are used
to
locate potential entries and or files which *may be* that variant.
Without
the output of these programs, diagnostics becomes just guesses. One
could
even, under the cleaner aspect, rate hijackthis as in the same class,
yet
without this tool many would be at the mercy of any BHO or other, and
experts would be without the tools necessary to help.

Can you provide a list of the most popular of these tools? I'm having a
hard time associating any of the usually suggested and widely
advertised
Registry Cleaners with discovery of virus variants.

They can be far more effective than running tweakUI for other styles
of
cleanup as well.

I never use TUI, either. What kind of cleanup does TUI do? Are we back
to
"cleaning" MRUs, etc.?

If they are GUESSING to the point that they need
tools to seek out (intelligently, one presumes) just the signs of
crap,
then we're back to a full wipe and reinstall AFAIC. Not to be too
blunt
about
it,
but I consider such pastimes precisely that. Pastimes. Just like a
lot of
"fixing" that goes on here, say in the networking and DUN sphere, for
instance, with the interminable and often unresolved threads, all
your AT
commands, blah, blah... The way to FIX a DUN problem is almost ALWAYS
to
remove all networking and related devices and services and let them
reinstall themselves.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

The full wipe would be the safest, I agree; however, that's just not
possible for many users. Either they no longer have the installation
disks
for their applications, or those applications may no longer be
supported
[leaving them with only the installation disk{s}, but no updates].
Then
you
run against many devices which once had drivers and/or updates posted
upon
the manufacturer's site, which may no longer be offered. Granted, one
can
search the NET for them, but that places one in the hands of whatever
is
found.
Yes, users should understand that they should have obtained and saved
these
during the course of their usage, sadly many don't

You're starting to get pretty rarified, there. One in ten million?

OK, I'll allow that for particular purposes and in the hands of truly
experienced techs, one or more of these tools might come in handy, but
that small exception doesn't come close to convincing me to desist in
my
blanket condemnation of such tools in this forum. Read PA's cite for
the
real skinny.

I think we agreed on the Network issue in the networking forum, and we
did
offer that as the best test solution, and the other factors were to
work
through the potentials associated.

HUH!?!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________



"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...
I'll put the response here, rather than go through all the postings
for
individual responses...

Locating the issue areas is the primary purpose for which I use the
programs for, though I have tested them extensively, which is why I
caution
not to use the auto cleanup.

But for the rest, I suggest a perusal through the archives of this
group;
remind the parties of their postings; and direct to the SpyWare and
Virus
removal forums and sites.
These tools [ccleaner, regseeker, and others] are used regularly
during
the
process. Granted, under the guidance of people familiar with them
and the
registry, but certainly are used far more often than suggesting
manual
editing. Moreover, who in here, doesn't have their favorite regedit
addin
or
replacement that they use because of the limited capabilities of the
basic regedit. Is there anyone still that far in the mud?

So my statement stands, careful application of these cleaners can be
of
use, but not to those who fail to take the time to understand them.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" none wrote in message
...
Please provide documentation of Registry bloat causing any
significant
failures". Only such thing I've heard of is SCANREG /FIX failing
to
run
on
a
large Registry. BFD.

Yes, sometimes the Registry needs work, usually after a wide-spread
disaster involving the user doing something that shouldn't have
been
done, but only an expert is likely to know for sure, and while
tools
*might* locate a few of those entries, you know better than most, I
think, how much of any real Registry *REPAIR*, as opposed to
"cleaning", is a painstaking MANUAL search and research procedure
that
few if any tools do well at all.

I used them regularly for several years, to find "crap" and delete
it,
ALWAYS having to refuse the deletion of some things I had learned
weren't
a
good idea to remove (or were unimportant MRUs, etc.), and after
many
years of such experience, I arrived at the stance I take now. I've
never
once
had
any success helping anyone else by having them run any Registry
tools,
whereas I have several times dealt with people who were screwed by
their
Registry tools, even the same ones I'd been using and thought were
"idiot-proof".

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"MEB" meb@not wrote in message
...
Ah gosh I hate to do this, BUT,,,,

As we all know, the registry can become quite bloated with entries
which relate to nothing of value, from MRU lists to applications
which
fill
the
registry with open files which no longer exist, to applications
supposedly removed but actually leave, at times, countless
worthless
entries;
to
any
number of other things which aren't need, or may have somehow been
changed at sometime.
We also know or should know that the registry will FAIL or be
prone
to
failure after exceeding a certain size [parsing issues].... which
then
becomes an issue which may affect recoverability in a time of
crisis.

All the MVP that I have observed here, have, at some time, posted
methods to clean errant registry entries, compact the registry,
and
otherwise work upon the registry... They also have repeatedly
advised,
when confronted with
ghost entries, bad drivers or applications or otherwise,,
advised
HOW
to
*manually* search the registry to *clean it*.

I personally have used [and still use] several tools to clean the
registry,
which IF PROPERLY USED can be relied upon to make a system lean
and
mean,,,
but the key is PROPERLY USED... ANY use of a cleaner should be
taken
with *a
grain of salt*. AUTOMATIC cleaning is not a good idea. IF the
user
is
unfamiliar with the registry, then damage will likely occur.
IF,
on
the
other hand, the user familiarizes theirselves with the
registry,
makes
an
effort to first increase their knowledge of the entries by
searching
first to see if they ARE un-needed PRIOR to removal, then the
desired
results can
be achieved.

Never overlook the KEY, that personal knowledge and
understanding
is
YOUR
responsibility. OR stay away from these cleaners as they MIGHT
cause
more harm than good.

These things ARE after all, relied upon quite heavily during
cleanup
activities from SpyWare, Virus, and other such activities...

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________


"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2008 08:54:57 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none
wrote:

ALL registry cleaners are VERY dangerous to your system, and
will
actually
FIX a problem, even just "slowness", approximately NEVER.

I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem. I have never
seen
it fix any problems, but it does remove a lot of useless junk.
Without such programs, it seems to me that the registry
would
get
so
huge that it would be crash prone. For example, lets say I
created
a
folder called "JUNK". I used that folder to temporarily place a
bunch of things I find on my hard drive, which are everything
from
text,
or
Wordpad notes, to downloaded pictures, file downloads, etc. Then
I
begin sorting out the junk, and use winzip to open many of the
downloads, and some photo viewer to look at the pictures, and
Wordpad
to look at many of the notes. ALL of these things are
documented in
the registry. Wordpad, Winzip, Photo Viewers all store
"recently
opened files".

Eventually I get everything put on a CD or other media and I
delete
the "Junk" folder. Then I remove several of the demo
downloads
I
tried.

Running Regseeker finds multiple references to that JUNK folder,
references to Winzip, Wordpad, etc opening files, and many
things
relating to the demos I tried and removed. All of that is
removed
from the registry, thus keeping it small and clean. Of course I
always read what is being cleaned (removed). 99.9% of the time
it's
just this old stuff that is not needed or wanted.

So how can you say that Reg cleaners are dangerous and
should
not
be
used.

Because he (and a few others here) know what they're talking
about.

I do agree to be careful what is being removed, but without
them the registry will become a pile of useless garbage.

Nonsense.