Free Registry Cleaner Download Review

**Bill in Co.** · May 7th 08, 09:34 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
"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! (BT,DT)

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.

Right.

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

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

Indeed. That is pretty much the case.

--
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.

**PCR** · May 8th 08, 01:23 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

"glee" wrote in message
...
| letterman wrote ...
|
| I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
| snip
|
| That's the same logic as saying:
| "I always smoke cigarettes while I pump gasoline, and I never caused
an explosion"

OTOH, you can put a cigarette out in #1 home heating oil. I saw my oil
man do it! Up until then, I was always standing 3 feet away!

| ;-)
| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
| http://dts-l.net/
| http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm
|

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR

**MEB[_2_]** · May 8th 08, 02:49 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

**glee** · May 8th 08, 04:36 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

"PCR" wrote in message
...
"glee" wrote in message
...
| letterman wrote ...
|
| I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
| snip
|
| That's the same logic as saying:
| "I always smoke cigarettes while I pump gasoline, and I never caused
an explosion"

OTOH, you can put a cigarette out in #1 home heating oil. I saw my oil
man do it! Up until then, I was always standing 3 feet away!

Now you know why it takes so much of the stuff to heat your home!
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
http://dts-l.net/

MM · May 8th 08, 02:32 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:11:49 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote:

"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.

This does, however, beg the question, why is the registry so obscure,
convoluted and arcane as to defeat all attempts to manipulate it,
except manually, gingerly, by folks in the know? It's only a couple of
very large files after all. Imagine there being such fuss made about
an mdb, for example. Or a .mid file. If one knows the structure, it
should not be rocket science to edit the data.

Also, given the absolute beating heart requirement for an intact
registry, isn't this fundamental construct of Microsoft Windows a very
bad design "feature"? Imagine a car that could never successfully be
repaired!

Personally, in my programming I avoid the registry like a hooker with
crabs. I use only .ini files.

MM

**Gary S. Terhune[_2_]** · May 8th 08, 04:10 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

You exaggerate. It's not the Registry that's delicate, it's the data
contained therein, and the primary danger to that data is people relying on
bad advice or bad so-called "utilities". If you make a mistake, you can
potentially, easily, stop Windows from opening at all. Or totally trash a
program, possibly in such a way that reinstalling it doesn't fix the
problem. Which is where you depend on a backup. And there's the rub: Is
there a backup? When using Registry tools or just manually tracking some
entries (there's a lot of internal self-referral), it's quite easy to get
lost and forget what all you've edited. Ideally, one makes a backup of EACH
entry before editing, but guess how much that's done, even by the experts.
These precautions I scream out are because no matter how much we insist,
people go into the Registry without proper backup. And then they end up
here. (Caveat 1: The Registry IS delicate in one major way: Because it's
always loaded, and quite regularly being edited by the system, a crash is
more likely to corrupt the Registry than it is likely to corrupt other
documents.)

Seems to me that INI files are probably slower, and imagine if you used
*only* INI files and other individualized settings files. There'd be
hundreds of thousands of them. There would be lots of redundancy, also, that
the Registry is meant to avoid.

I don't find the Registry to be obscure. Arcane, perhaps, convoluted, also,
but much of that is due to the way the programmers use it. And that will
always be so. You use programs that are written in convoluted and arcane
ways (it's practically inherent in programming work.) The only difference
between those and the Registry is that the Registry is a public database
that anyone can read and edit, and thus screw up, whereas most of the rest
of the programming is generally untouchable.

As for your car metaphor, that's why we insist so much on Registry backups,
but it's also not true that the Registry can't be repaired. It's done all
the time, one way or another, but successful repair is VERY unlikely to
include any of the widely advertised Registry Repair tools because they
DON'T truly repair anything, they just try to clean up useless entries,
based upon the "rules" of the Registry, whereas the truth is that unless you
have a perfect database of every application ever written and what the
programmers might have done in the Registry, the tool is BOUND to make
mistakes. That's because programmers are human and don't always follow the
rules. It's also because new ways are found to use the Registry, or because
some SMART programmers are thinking towards the future and stick in things
that aren't "valid" (don't need to be.) Of course, what happens even more
often is that an entry is programmed which is then forgotten and left
behind. That and crap left behind by uninstalls are two of the main things
Registry Cleaners claim to find and delete. Only I've yet to see one that
does that without also potentially removing entries that SHOULDN'T be
removed. And then the user ends up here, to learn about backups.

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

"MM" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:11:49 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote:

"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.

This does, however, beg the question, why is the registry so obscure,
convoluted and arcane as to defeat all attempts to manipulate it,
except manually, gingerly, by folks in the know? It's only a couple of
very large files after all. Imagine there being such fuss made about
an mdb, for example. Or a .mid file. If one knows the structure, it
should not be rocket science to edit the data.

Also, given the absolute beating heart requirement for an intact
registry, isn't this fundamental construct of Microsoft Windows a very
bad design "feature"? Imagine a car that could never successfully be
repaired!

Personally, in my programming I avoid the registry like a hooker with
crabs. I use only .ini files.

MM

**PCR** · May 9th 08, 12:44 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

glee wrote:
| "PCR" wrote in message
| ...
| "glee" wrote in message
| ...
| | letterman wrote ...
| |
| | I run Regseeker regularly and never had a problem.
| | snip
| |
| | That's the same logic as saying:
| | "I always smoke cigarettes while I pump gasoline, and I never
| | caused an explosion"
|
| OTOH, you can put a cigarette out in #1 home heating oil. I saw my
| oil man do it! Up until then, I was always standing 3 feet away!
|
| Now you know why it takes so much of the stuff to heat your home!

It did, but I switched to ConED gas two/so years ago, when the cost of
oil was DOUBLING on me-- it hit a high of two bucks per gallon back
then! It seemed I immediately spent a 3rd as much using gas! Gas went up
since then, but I still spend half as much as the old oil price it
seems!

But my gas man refuses to try the same experiment!

| --
| Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
| http://dts-l.net/

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR

MM · May 9th 08, 03:41 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

..ini files display NO degradation in performance. Many erstwhile
performance problems have "fixed" themselves over the past few years
simply by dint of PC hardware becoming vastly more powerful. I can
remember working on 8088 PCs. Now that was slow. Recently I spent a
fair bit of time designing a database for 18,000 records. Then I
discovered that even on my relatively low-powered PC a straightforward
sequential search of a text file appears to be just as quick. Now, if
you measured access with a timer, the database version is likely to be
faster in milliseconds, but once it's fast enough, there's no point
making it any faster. If searching is so fast that the user
experiences absolutely no waiting at all on pressing Enter or clicking
a button, why go to the bother and potential risk of installing MDAC
etc?

Anyway, back to the darned registry and I have to say, it seems to me
that quite a few people tend to place the registry, or better, *** The
Registry *** in caps, with gold-plating and flashing lights, on a kind
of exalted pedestal. If it is such an important component (and it is),
then there should be tools galore to fix it when broken. Are you
saying that it is totally impossible to design such a tool? I will
also return to my own car analogy and say there is NOthing that could
not be repaired if it had to be. With modern cars, of course, it's not
a problem to exchange, say, the starter motor, whereas I can still
remember replacing brushes and undercutting commutators. This is why I
believe the registry is a flawed design if one only has to breathe on
it to create a fatal SNAFU.

It should be possible for any competent MSVP to construct a fully
functioning Windows installation on a newly formatted hard drive just
by extracting files from the CABs and building the registry by hand,
just as it is possible to build a Nasa space vehicle by hand.

MM

**Gary S. Terhune[_2_]** · May 9th 08, 04:24 PM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

"MM" wrote in message
...
.ini files display NO degradation in performance. Many erstwhile
performance problems have "fixed" themselves over the past few years
simply by dint of PC hardware becoming vastly more powerful. I can
remember working on 8088 PCs. Now that was slow. Recently I spent a
fair bit of time designing a database for 18,000 records. Then I
discovered that even on my relatively low-powered PC a straightforward
sequential search of a text file appears to be just as quick. Now, if
you measured access with a timer, the database version is likely to be
faster in milliseconds, but once it's fast enough, there's no point
making it any faster. If searching is so fast that the user
experiences absolutely no waiting at all on pressing Enter or clicking
a button, why go to the bother and potential risk of installing MDAC
etc?

The Registry is already open and functioning. INI files need to be opened
before they can be read. Takes longer.

Anyway, back to the darned registry and I have to say, it seems to me
that quite a few people tend to place the registry, or better, *** The
Registry *** in caps, with gold-plating and flashing lights, on a kind
of exalted pedestal.

It is thus called for the same reason it's Windows and not windows. A matter
of English. Proper noun and all.

If it is such an important component (and it is),
then there should be tools galore to fix it when broken. Are you
saying that it is totally impossible to design such a tool? I will
also return to my own car analogy and say there is NOthing that could
not be repaired if it had to be. With modern cars, of course, it's not
a problem to exchange, say, the starter motor, whereas I can still
remember replacing brushes and undercutting commutators. This is why I
believe the registry is a flawed design if one only has to breathe on
it to create a fatal SNAFU.

I never said it was impossible to fix the Registry. I just said that ALL of
the so called Registry Cleaning and Repair Tools out there are not capable
of doing so. Go ahead. Find a TOOL that will fix your car all by itself, no
human involvement. OK, maybe in today's day of standardization and
automation, a tool COULD fix a car by itself. But to make the comparison
valid, you have to imagine that even if we grant that they all leave the
factory more or less the same, the car is not yet complete -- it gets a ton
of customisations, none of which follow any "standards" provided by the car
maker very well. Now, go find a tool that can fix that.

It should be possible for any competent MSVP to construct a fully
functioning Windows installation on a newly formatted hard drive just
by extracting files from the CABs and building the registry by hand,
just as it is possible to build a Nasa space vehicle by hand.

If you mean MS-MVP, you mistake the meaning of the award. Suggest you look
it up. If you're trying to refer to someone who is a super-expert, what you
say isn't true, either. The documentation doesn't exist and that Registry
was built by a million hands. IF what you say were even true, it would take
a lifetime. Besides, all you'd end up with is a semi-worthless fresh
installation of Windows, lacking applications most consider indispensable.
What about those, eh?

Anyway, your vehicle analogies, and your comparison of mechanics are
worthless. Windows isn't a car. Nor is it a space vehicle. These things
exist in different dimensions.

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

MM · May 10th 08, 09:49 AM posted to microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion

On Fri, 9 May 2008 08:24:26 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" none wrote:

"MM" wrote in message
.. .
.ini files display NO degradation in performance. Many erstwhile
performance problems have "fixed" themselves over the past few years
simply by dint of PC hardware becoming vastly more powerful. I can
remember working on 8088 PCs. Now that was slow. Recently I spent a
fair bit of time designing a database for 18,000 records. Then I
discovered that even on my relatively low-powered PC a straightforward
sequential search of a text file appears to be just as quick. Now, if
you measured access with a timer, the database version is likely to be
faster in milliseconds, but once it's fast enough, there's no point
making it any faster. If searching is so fast that the user
experiences absolutely no waiting at all on pressing Enter or clicking
a button, why go to the bother and potential risk of installing MDAC
etc?

The Registry is already open and functioning. INI files need to be opened
before they can be read. Takes longer.

Measurable only with a Timer. In practice, instantaneous. After all,
Windows still uses .ini files, does it not? So not even Microsoft can
make its mind up (no change there, then...)

Anyway, back to the darned registry and I have to say, it seems to me
that quite a few people tend to place the registry, or better, *** The
Registry *** in caps, with gold-plating and flashing lights, on a kind
of exalted pedestal.

It is thus called for the same reason it's Windows and not windows. A matter
of English. Proper noun and all.

If it is such an important component (and it is),
then there should be tools galore to fix it when broken. Are you
saying that it is totally impossible to design such a tool? I will
also return to my own car analogy and say there is NOthing that could
not be repaired if it had to be. With modern cars, of course, it's not
a problem to exchange, say, the starter motor, whereas I can still
remember replacing brushes and undercutting commutators. This is why I
believe the registry is a flawed design if one only has to breathe on
it to create a fatal SNAFU.

I never said it was impossible to fix the Registry. I just said that ALL of
the so called Registry Cleaning and Repair Tools out there are not capable
of doing so. Go ahead. Find a TOOL that will fix your car all by itself, no
human involvement. OK, maybe in today's day of standardization and
automation, a tool COULD fix a car by itself. But to make the comparison
valid, you have to imagine that even if we grant that they all leave the
factory more or less the same, the car is not yet complete -- it gets a ton
of customisations, none of which follow any "standards" provided by the car
maker very well. Now, go find a tool that can fix that.

But the vast majority of cars don't get customised and neither does
the registry. Actually, an *alternative* to the registry, by a
third-party company, might not be such a bad idea. They could even do
a better job at it than Microsoft and provide tools from the get-go.

It should be possible for any competent MSVP to construct a fully
functioning Windows installation on a newly formatted hard drive just
by extracting files from the CABs and building the registry by hand,
just as it is possible to build a Nasa space vehicle by hand.

If you mean MS-MVP, you mistake the meaning of the award. Suggest you look
it up. If you're trying to refer to someone who is a super-expert, what you
say isn't true, either. The documentation doesn't exist

Well, whaddya know! You mean, Microsoft doesn't want to release a
workshop manual the way Ford or GM does?

and that Registry
was built by a million hands. IF what you say were even true, it would take
a lifetime. Besides, all you'd end up with is a semi-worthless fresh
installation of Windows, lacking applications most consider indispensable.
What about those, eh?

How so? If a basic Windows installation were constructed as if from
the Setup.exe, then you'd have a virgin Windows box anyway. You still
have to install apps.

Anyway, your vehicle analogies, and your comparison of mechanics are
worthless. Windows isn't a car. Nor is it a space vehicle. These things
exist in different dimensions.

But I expect, and hope, that someone will have read my words and will
take them as a challenge and is right now avidly working on a tool
that will confound even you!

MM

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Free Windows XP Registry Cleaner Download	[email protected]	General	1	February 29th 08 04:06 PM
MS Registry Cleaner	Delboy	General	10	February 14th 07 06:58 PM
Registry Cleaners - WINner Tweak Registry Cleaner XP	Dell	General	2	April 10th 05 12:31 PM
Registry Cleaners - WINner Tweak Registry Cleaner XP	Dell	Setup & Installation	2	April 10th 05 12:31 PM
Registry Cleaner	Smirnoff	General	1	January 11th 05 06:55 PM