jv16 Power Tools 1.3 Expired

[REMbranded]

I just ran Regcleraner and it found 10 invalid entries, almost all of
them files I had deleted from my temp directory. IK then ran Regseeker
and it found 670 entries! That is quite a massive discrepancy. I am a
bit nervous about deleting 670 entries. Most of them are things such as
"path doesn't exist", and that kind of thing. Are they safe to delete?

Select the backup button just in case. I'd hate to give bum advise on
something like this and you can always reinstall the backup.

I had similar results the first time I ran RegSeeker. It found all
sorts of entries JV had not. I nervoulsy looked at a few and saw they
were stored paths that did not exist and selectec and deleted all. I
had no problem and a very tidy registry afterwards.

This is why I think it is superior to JV. It really does find all
sorts of stuff that is taking space in the registry and removes it.

You might have quite a few extensions that aren't used too. No problem
in deleting these either.

 

[Antoine]

I am running RegCleaner once or twice a week and I have never had
a problem either since I started using it about 9 months ago.

Sorry, I meant RegSeeker and not RegCleaner.

 

[REMbranded]

I am running RegCleaner once or twice a week and I have never had a problem either since I
started using it about 9 months ago.

Give RegSeeker a run after RegCleaner and see what else is discovered.

 

[John Corliss]

Thanks for getting back to me. I'll check it out!

It's a great program. Also, doesn't require install- simply copy the
files to a folder of your choice and create a shortcut to the executable.

There doesn't seem to be any problems with the Add/Remove Programs
module. This version included the FixAddRemove.reg fix anyway, I notice.

 

[John Corliss]

In <[email protected]>, on Fri, 02 Jan 2004 00:46:26 GMT,



I just ran Regcleraner and it found 10 invalid entries, almost all of
them files I had deleted from my temp directory. IK then ran Regseeker
and it found 670 entries! That is quite a massive discrepancy. I am a
bit nervous about deleting 670 entries. Most of them are things such as
"path doesn't exist", and that kind of thing. Are they safe to delete?

There were about the same number of entries on this system. I went
through the list (doesn't take as long as you would expect) and
deleted only those that I knew were worthless. No problems resulted.

 

[John Corliss]

I don't any have problems deleting "path doesn't exist" with Regcleaner.
But 670 entries would make me quite nervous. Scanreg > Yes

I ran Regseeker and noted the number of entries, then ran
"C:\WINDOWS\SCANREGW.EXE /opt", then openeed Regseeker again. There
were still about the same number of entries.

 

[John Corliss]

Yes, expired on both my machines. Funny part was, even on the 31st, it would
find a whole bunch of items but wouldn't delete them. It would just sit
there. Anyway, I had version 1.1.0.154 archived, installed it, and it runs
fine. I really can't see where the 1.3 version had any extra functionality.

It did: that expiration function. Hyuck.

 

[Gord McFee]

There were about the same number of entries on this system. I went
through the list (doesn't take as long as you would expect) and
deleted only those that I knew were worthless. No problems resulted.

Thanks to all who replied. I am doing it your way, John, I intend to
delete the stuff, but only things I know are safe.

 

[Gord McFee]

In <[email protected]>, on Fri, 02 Jan 2004 10:14:54 GMT,

Select the backup button just in case. I'd hate to give bum advise on
something like this and you can always reinstall the backup.

I had similar results the first time I ran RegSeeker. It found all
sorts of entries JV had not. I nervoulsy looked at a few and saw they
were stored paths that did not exist and selectec and deleted all. I
had no problem and a very tidy registry afterwards.

This is why I think it is superior to JV. It really does find all
sorts of stuff that is taking space in the registry and removes it.

You might have quite a few extensions that aren't used too. No problem
in deleting these either.

I seem to be finding these kinds of entries:

- HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
ActiveEx.ButtonProvider
Invalid ActiveX/COM entry (CLSID) (this line in red type)

- HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
..frg
Extension not used

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
Applications\fontview.exe
Unused "Open with" entry

I think it is safe to delete those.

I am now down to 129 entries (from 670). Most of them were remainders
of an Office installation that had changed directories.

 

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 02 Jan 2004, Gord McFee wrote

-snip-

I seem to be finding these kinds of entries:

- HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
ActiveEx.ButtonProvider
Invalid ActiveX/COM entry (CLSID) (this line in red type)

- HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
.frg
Extension not used

On my machine -- Win 98SE -- deleting these extensions appears to be
pointless: Windows re-creates them at the next boot-up. (I put them in
RegSeeker's "exclude" category instead.)

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
Applications\fontview.exe
Unused "Open with" entry

I think it is safe to delete those.

I am now down to 129 entries (from 670). Most of them were
remainders of an Office installation that had changed directories.

A lot of the "path does not exist" entries I found on mine seemed to be
the "last used" lists in various programs, so I junked them on my
machine -- I wound up getting rid of all 600+ things that RegSeeker
found, and so far haven't found noticed anything that doesn't work.

 

[REMbranded]

Gord McFee <[email protected]> wrote:

I seem to be finding these kinds of entries:

- HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
ActiveEx.ButtonProvider
Invalid ActiveX/COM entry (CLSID) (this line in red type)

- HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
.frg
Extension not used

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
Applications\fontview.exe
Unused "Open with" entry

I think it is safe to delete those.

I am now down to 129 entries (from 670). Most of them were remainders
of an Office installation that had changed directories.

I'm not sure what version of windows you are using, but if it's not ME
you can boot to dos, copy your system.dat and user.dat files to
system.bak and user.bak. Then delete everything Regseeker recommends.

I think you'll find that it does not delete anything but useless
fluff. This is why I think it's best. It gets far more fluff to delete
safely than any others I have tried.

If it does go bad, reboot in dos and copy system.bak -> system.dat
and user.bak -> user.dat and you'll be back where you started.

My experience is in 98SE, and again I surely don't want to give bad
advise on registry cleaning. I think the program is pretty darned
solid, enough that I trust it without question anyway.

If the Office installation changed directories you don't need the old
entries.

 

[dszady]

I ran Regseeker and noted the number of entries, then ran
"C:\WINDOWS\SCANREGW.EXE /opt", then openeed Regseeker again. There
were still about the same number of entries.

Thanks for the info. I was teetering on switching to Regseeker, but
Regcleaner seems to be safe and I use it about once a week. (Win98)
Albeit not aggressively

 

[John]

Select the backup button just in case. I'd hate to give bum advise on
something like this and you can always reinstall the backup.

I had similar results the first time I ran RegSeeker. It found all
sorts of entries JV had not. I nervoulsy looked at a few and saw they
were stored paths that did not exist and selectec and deleted all. I
had no problem and a very tidy registry afterwards.

This is why I think it is superior to JV. It really does find all
sorts of stuff that is taking space in the registry and removes it.

You might have quite a few extensions that aren't used too. No problem
in deleting these either.

Decided to try out Regseeker after reading your post. Found 700 odd
entries, selected all and deleted. Rebooted and started to try out a
few programmes to see if everything worked okay. The third programme I
tried was 'Norton SystemWorks Pro" and instead of starting, it
attempted to reinstall "Ghost". When I say attempted to reinstall, it
just continued to restart the installation without actually doing
anything.
Got back into Regseeker and restored the backup that the programme
made, rebooted the computer, tried starting Systemworks but the same
problem existed.
Thankfully, before using Regseeker I had backed up the registry using
"Erunt" (I'm using Windows XP) and everything was restored back to the
way it was

I would suggest that before anyone uses Regseeker, they back up the
registry using another programme, don't rely on the backup Regseeker
makes.

Regards,
John

 

[Bob Adkins]

I just ran Regcleraner and it found 10 invalid entries, almost all of
them files I had deleted from my temp directory. IK then ran Regseeker
and it found 670 entries! That is quite a massive discrepancy. I am a
bit nervous about deleting 670 entries. Most of them are things such as
"path doesn't exist", and that kind of thing. Are they safe to delete?

Make sure Regcleaner is configured to back up the registry entries you
remove, then go ahead.

Bob

 

[Fred]

I'm not sure what version of windows you are using, but if it's not ME
you can boot to dos, copy your system.dat and user.dat files to
system.bak and user.bak. Then delete everything Regseeker recommends.

I think you'll find that it does not delete anything but useless
fluff. This is why I think it's best. It gets far more fluff to delete
safely than any others I have tried.

If it does go bad, reboot in dos and copy system.bak -> system.dat
and user.bak -> user.dat and you'll be back where you started.

My experience is in 98SE, and again I surely don't want to give bad
advise on registry cleaning. I think the program is pretty darned
solid, enough that I trust it without question anyway.

If the Office installation changed directories you don't need the old
entries.

Hi all
Am running W98 and have been using JV and whilst I could have continued
using it by back dating, I decided to download regseeker and have just
bitten the bullet and deleted all ! 683 entries it found. (regardless!)
Easycleaner found 2 temp files only. Just tried to run a few programs
and everything seems to be shipshape. I did think it wise nevertheless
to keep a regedit backup and a regseeker .bak.
Fred

 

[Gord McFee]

Hi all
Am running W98 and have been using JV and whilst I could have continued
using it by back dating, I decided to download regseeker and have just
bitten the bullet and deleted all ! 683 entries it found. (regardless!)
Easycleaner found 2 temp files only. Just tried to run a few programs
and everything seems to be shipshape. I did think it wise nevertheless
to keep a regedit backup and a regseeker .bak.

I got it down to 100, and then said, "what the hell" and deleted the
rest. Rebooted and no problems.

 

[J.D.]

Decided to try out Regseeker after reading your post. Found 700 odd
entries, selected all and deleted. Rebooted and started to try out a
few programmes to see if everything worked okay. The third programme I
tried was 'Norton SystemWorks Pro" and instead of starting, it
attempted to reinstall "Ghost". When I say attempted to reinstall, it
just continued to restart the installation without actually doing
anything.
Got back into Regseeker and restored the backup that the programme
made, rebooted the computer, tried starting Systemworks but the same
problem existed.
Thankfully, before using Regseeker I had backed up the registry using
"Erunt" (I'm using Windows XP) and everything was restored back to the
way it was

I would suggest that before anyone uses Regseeker, they back up the
registry using another programme, don't rely on the backup Regseeker
makes.

Regards,
John

I had a similar experience last night. After sifting through 700+ entries and
adding exclusions for a couple I knew to be needed, I deleted the rest.
Afterwards a few icons I clicked on tried to re-install another program (PC
Forest StartMan) that was already installed, and it itself would not run. I got
rid of StartMan and the other programs worked as normal except for Geomatica
FreeView. I need to now re-load those from scratch.

I think the lesson is that Regseeker is much more agressive (or comprehensive
depending on your point of view) and care should be taken to make a good
registry backup before first use. jv16 if I remember right had a LOT of items
built into the stock exclusion list that either avoided the problems, or limited
the cleaning, again depending on your point of view.

I think some programs put paths/names of files or directores "they might need in
the future" in the registry, and Regseeker not finding the referenced
file/directory suggests deletion. Then the programs croak on running. 5D-PDF was
always like that. Other programs just put the entries back upon running.

Regseeker also called out a directory missing that was indeed there. (No, didn't
document the details, sorry).

I still have a dozen or so programs to check, but I think Regseeker is a keeper
for me, but I will exercise a little more caution about looking at what is
deleted before blind select all->delete.

The registry is a house of cards anyway that eventually turns into a roach motel
of unused entries - BACKUP-BACKUP-BACKUP!

-jd

 

[John]

[53 quoted lines suppressed]

I had a similar experience last night. After sifting through 700+ entries and
adding exclusions for a couple I knew to be needed, I deleted the rest.
Afterwards a few icons I clicked on tried to re-install another program (PC
Forest StartMan) that was already installed, and it itself would not run. I got
rid of StartMan and the other programs worked as normal except for Geomatica
FreeView. I need to now re-load those from scratch.

I think the lesson is that Regseeker is much more agressive (or comprehensive
depending on your point of view) and care should be taken to make a good
registry backup before first use. jv16 if I remember right had a LOT of items
built into the stock exclusion list that either avoided the problems, or limited
the cleaning, again depending on your point of view.

I think some programs put paths/names of files or directores "they might need in
the future" in the registry, and Regseeker not finding the referenced
file/directory suggests deletion. Then the programs croak on running. 5D-PDF was
always like that. Other programs just put the entries back upon running.

Regseeker also called out a directory missing that was indeed there. (No, didn't
document the details, sorry).

I still have a dozen or so programs to check, but I think Regseeker is a keeper
for me, but I will exercise a little more caution about looking at what is
deleted before blind select all->delete.

The registry is a house of cards anyway that eventually turns into a roach motel
of unused entries - BACKUP-BACKUP-BACKUP!

It wasn't the programme itself that caused me problems...what I was
concerned with was the inability of Regseeker to restore the backup it
made.
Anyone that uses this type of programme should be aware of the
potential problems. However, the danger with this programme isn't just
the problems it might cause (all registry programmes are potential
disasters waiting to happen), its problem is making a backup that
doesn't restore, or restore incorrectly.

Regards,
John.

 

[REMbranded]

Decided to try out Regseeker after reading your post. Found 700 odd
entries, selected all and deleted. Rebooted and started to try out a
few programmes to see if everything worked okay. The third programme I
tried was 'Norton SystemWorks Pro" and instead of starting, it
attempted to reinstall "Ghost". When I say attempted to reinstall, it
just continued to restart the installation without actually doing
anything.

Got back into Regseeker and restored the backup that the programme
made, rebooted the computer, tried starting Systemworks but the same
problem existed.

Thankfully, before using Regseeker I had backed up the registry using
"Erunt" (I'm using Windows XP) and everything was restored back to the
way it was

I would suggest that before anyone uses Regseeker, they back up the
registry using another programme, don't rely on the backup Regseeker
makes.

Eek! I'm glad that you did backup. XP and Norton must be far different
than what I have, 98SE, MS Word Suite and freewares. I hope the zeal
I've expressed doesn't cause anyone any grief. It works perfectly here
on my machine. I hoped and assumed it would work equally well on other
machines.

In seeing this result most definitely backup the registry files as
John did before attempting the full cleanup!

Has anyone else experienced any problems with RegSeeker? If so, what
OS are you using?

 

[Bob Adkins]

few programmes to see if everything worked okay. The third programme I
tried was 'Norton SystemWorks Pro" and instead of starting, it
attempted to reinstall "Ghost". When I say attempted to reinstall, it
just continued to restart the installation without actually doing
anything.

Why not EXCLUDE Ghost, and re-run RegSeeker and purge all the registry
fragments again?

Bob