Rainy said:
Would you please be specific
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1dcd8/1dcd8f45ac1db0b678175455bb753df93538b6b5" alt="Smile :) :)"
you said that some of Norton's
utilities could be hazardous... which ones and in which way? thanks
Rainy
ps I don't use Norton's AV.. would never use it.. (My AV of choice is
AVG), but love Windoctor.. because after using it, my computer runs
better.. acts better than it did before I used it..
Well, I personally wouldn't use Windoctor or any of the so-called
registry cleaners. While I found Windoctor to be valuable in Win9x/ME,
my feeling about any sort of registry "fixers" in XP is that if you
don't know what you're doing, they can hose the registry and if you
*do* know what you're doing, you can do it by hand. You just don't get
the problems with the XP registry that you did in the older OS's. You
can do a Google Groups search of the windowsxp.general group if you
want to read lengthy discussions about registry cleaners; there have
been rather a lot of threads about that lately.
CleanSweep comes to mind because people get all bent out of shape about
"duplicate files" and what they really should do is just leave things
alone. And what was that really awful one again? Oh yeah, Crash Guard.
I don't know if Symantec even included Crash Guard in the 2002 program
- I know they removed it in later versions.
Basically, I don't think any utility-type programs are necessary with
XP. I know some people use Raxco's Perfect Disk to defrag, but I think
XP's own native tools are just fine. Maybe it is a case of "the
cobbler's children have no shoes", but all I ever do on my Windows
machines to keep them fit is run Spybot, Ad-aware, Disk Cleanup on some
sort of regular basis, and defrag whenever I think about it. My systems
run beautifully for years and years. Of course, I'm not loading them up
with all sorts of cr*p, either and they all are protected with av and
firewalls.
But that's just my opinion - if you are happy with what you are doing
and it works for you, that's great. But I do stand behind my answer to
the OP that System Works 2002 is not a good idea for WinXP.
Cheers,
Malke