Registry Cleaner - does one exists?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sage - John Leonard
  • Start date Start date
Just because it has one, why is it safe? BTW,
Windows
Live Onecare is being discontinued.

No: It WAS discontinued, and then came back
reincarnated. You're out of step.
 
Roy said:
Perhaps you should ask why Onecare steadfastly
refused to
include a registry cleaner in its "paid for"
version,
maybe Onecare and the support team didn't want
to deal
with problems caused by useless registry
cleaners. You
should ask why any application that deals with
user
security and malicious pests surreptitiously
enables
ActiveX without asking or even informing unwary
users
that it has done so. And finally, you should
ask
yourself why Onecare is being discontinued.
John

And why it reappeared again.
 
Even if YOU know exactly what you're doing, you
don't
know what the registry cleaner is doing.

Nor do you know what most any of the programs on a
machine are doing, starting from the point where
they are installed and the registry hooks
prepared. Which leads to: So?
 
lol, I KNEW the droids with the closed minds,
nothing to back up their claims and misinformation
would have to crawl out of the woodwork for this
one and there it is. This is the one that keeps
saying not to use a program written by someone who
knows the registry and how to program, and instead
use regedit, which you probably don't understand,
to fix a registry, which you also probably don't
understand.
He talks like a fix to the registry is a
one-location thing and it's done, when in fact
there are usually many locations related to a
possible program problem, each of which must be
considered. But mostly he's a closed minded
ignorant with a boilerplate he likes to use,
adding a mod here & there sometimes to further
differentiate it from where it was stolen from.
Then, to back himself up, he provides links to
discussions where he's used info very close to his
boilerplate, and submitted by him.

There is a small group of such ignorants here who
get really upset at being called on their
misinformation; they'll crawl into the pic soon
here, I'm sure, because every time someone calls
them they get more and more flustered and think
that by repeating the same misinformation over and
over someone might believe it.

This post in particular is interesting in the way
it conflicts with itself. But, it does make for a
comedic moment should one bother to read it, or at
least scan it quickly.

Thanks for this opportunity Bruce,

Twayne


Bruce C spewed:
There is no such thing as a "good" (meaning
useful or
beneficial) registry cleaner, free or otherwise.
Some
are less harmful than others, but because
they're all
nothing but snake oil, I won't recommend any.
Why do you even think you'd ever need to
clean your
registry? What specific *problems* are you
actually
experiencing (not some program's bogus listing
of
imaginary problems) that you think can be fixed
by using
a registry "cleaner?"
....
<drivel snipped>
 
bruce knows better and
enjoys the argument..: )

I wouldn't put to much
time in arguing with him,
especially since he has
already admitted to using
ccleaner regulary.

--

db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
- Systems Analyst
- Database Developer
- Accountancy
- Veteran of the Armed Forces

"nirvana is shared and not hoarded" - dbZen
 
I'm afraid I have to disagree on that one too.


You are certainly free to disagree with John
John's view
(which is the same as mine), but let me point
out a
couple of things.[/QUOTE]

lol, but not yours. Right?
That registry cleaner is safer than most (but
*not*
risk-free)

No, It's AS safe as many of them. NO PROGRAM is
"risk-free". How well a program functions depends
on the author of the program and his abilities to
understand the job at hand. And of course, like
any other utility, whether the intent is to push
malware or provide a good program. Like any
other, it's a buyer-beware, even for freeware, and
sticking to those with good track records usually
gets you a good product.
That's certainly good to do.




There are *many* people who have similar
experiences.
None of us has ever claimed that every time
someone uses
a registry cleaner, the result is a problem. If
that were
the case, everyone would know that they couldn't
be used,
and all registry cleaners would quickly
disappear.

Yup. Even if the eventuality you keep
pushing/harping on were true, people would catch
on and avoid them; not use them year after year as
I have, without a single problem, ever. The
biggest culprits I've seen for causing registry
problems has been poorly written code that craps
in the registry when it installs and when it runs.
But although no registry cleaner always causes a
problem,
....

But you said, and I quote:
"
There is no such thing as a "good" (meaning useful
or beneficial)
registry cleaner, free or otherwise. Some are
less harmful than others,
but because they're all nothing but snake oil,
...."
So you've been lucky to not have a problem, and
if you
continue to use it, I hope you continue to be
lucky. But
my advice is not to trust in luck, and stop
running the
risks you are running, which provide you with no
benefit.

That's baloney. Chances of running into a
ccleaner caused problem are no greater than any
other application and may in fact, due to some of
the safeties and health features of the registry,
probably a lot less so than other applications.
That's unquestionably true.




You may prefer not to have them, but except for
the tiny
amount of disk space they take, there is *no*
disadvantage to their being there. Running any
risk at
all (even if small) to get rid of them is a bad
bargain.

Single-tracked: That is not a major reason to use
a cleaner. It is one of a whole host of features
they can perform for the user. You always want to
single out one thing, which is also always
nonsense, and intimate that's what they're used
for.
If I remove a program and don't care to take
advantage of the settings I made and other files
created by the program, there is nothing wrong
with removing those entries. How many entries do
you suppose a program may create in the registry?
Ten, a hundred, a thousand? It's not one unless
it's maybe a VB6 application and the Add/Remove
entry, it's more than ten, and often more than a
hundred and closer to a thousand? In the counts I
have made one sample went well over 600, but
you're going to claim ignorance to having read the
past things I've posted about that. Those can,
over time, indeed slow things down. You're fond
of saying entries are directly addressed, and
yeah, they more or less are, for EVERY entry they
need in the registry. They aren't as "direct" as
you like to so vaguely point out, either.
That's a decent attitude and one that works.
If your knowledge of the registry is above that
of most
people, and you are very careful in what you let
the
registry cleaner do, yes, your risk is lower
than that of
most people. Nevertheless, it is not zero,

It is NEVER zero for ANY application! It's
windows' nature. Amongst the many things I've seen
happen to computers, I have NEVER had a problem
result from ANY registry cleaner that I chose and
used. Cleaners are closer to zero than most other
programs, though. Actually XP seems to be pretty
reliable these days; I haven't had a corruption
problem in a very long time.

so I repeat my
comment above: "except for the tiny amount of
disk space
they take, there is *no* disadvantage to their
being
there. Running any risk at all (even if small)
to get rid
of them is a bad bargain."

And that paragraph is just plain silly, even
comedic in nature. I liken them to a benign tumor
on the back of one's hand; it doesn't belong there
and eventually should be removed just to get it
out of the way of a future mishap. I suspect you
have never seen a 3 or more year old machine's
registry that has never been maintained. Or even
just a year, for that matter.

Thanks again for the opportunity,

Twayne
 
Twayne said:
And why it reappeared again.

One has to wonder why it is that with the internet at your fingertips
that you don't bother to research anything before you post your
erroneous information.

John
 
John said:
One has to wonder why it is that with the internet at your fingertips
that you don't bother to research anything before you post your
erroneous information.

John

Laziness?
 
Twayne said:
out of the way of a future mishap. I suspect you
have never seen a 3 or more year old machine's
registry that has never been maintained. Or even
just a year, for that matter.

You mean, it's missing it's oil change?
ROFL.
 
: >
: > One has to wonder why it is that with the internet at your fingertips
: > that you don't bother to research anything before you post your
: > erroneous information.
: >
: > John
:
: Laziness?
:
Trolls don't research.
 
So don't use a program such as a registry cleaner that is totally unneeded
and potentially damaging.
What is so hard to understand about that?
 
The best registry cleaner is your perseverance to reformat the HD and
reinstall the operating system. All other methods are completely futile and
there is no evidence your system will improve at all.

It is all in the the mind of nutters out there who claim that they work;
take it from me - THEY DON'T!!!
 
Twayne said:
One has to wonder why it is that with the
internet at
your fingertips that you don't bother to
research
anything before you post your erroneous
information.

John

lol, you're pathetic; ever hear of Morro? No?
It's the 1 care replacement. Works with Vista
too. But I wouldn't expect you to know anything
that wasn't hand fed to you.
 
So don't use a program such as a registry
cleaner that is
totally unneeded and potentially damaging.
What is so hard to understand about that?

Nothing hard to understand at all: Your info is
erroneous, not true and otherwise wrong. I use
one of two different registry cleaners routinely.
Have for years. NEVER a single problem. Unlike
you intentional ignorants and sock puppets I
actually take the time to know what I'm talking
about.

Thanks for the opportunity again,

Twayne
 
bruce knows better and
enjoys the argument..: )

No problem; I enjoy pointing out his ignorance
anyway and he makes it so easy. He's pretty much
known to all who visit here now as pretty
pathetic, along with some of his socks who love
the smell in there.

If he bothered me I'd just ignore him. He only
has the one song anymore online and doesn't seem
to post on anything else so he's apparently become
pretty obsessed with his misinformation crusade.

I probably should pity him, but I don't and won't
as long as he spews misinformation. He used to
post on other subjects and usually was pretty
accurate but lately ... .
I wouldn't put to much
time in arguing with him,
especially since he has
already admitted to using
ccleaner regulary.

Yeah, I've noticed he's been trying to mediate his
boilerplate lately over time with a little change
here and another there. He's made such a mess of
his boilerplate he's even contradicting himself in
it lately. Apparently I hit a nerve when I came
across his plagairism awhile back. His
boilerplate at that time was word for word from
another person's writings.
I don't put much time into arguing with him,
believe me. It doesn't take long to jot off a few
words about his erroneous statements. Just
enough to feel satisfied that he's been exposed
again and to keep him from misinforming too many
more newbies. He's a strange duck, that's for
certain.


Cheers,

Twayne
 
Speaking of a closed mind. You have been given
data from
a computer repair shop owner indicating the
hundreds of
computers he has repaired that was caused by a
'registry
cleaner'. Yet you refuse to accept that.

No, as a matter of fact, I have never seen any
such information here. Since you're obviously
talking about your friend Bruce: As for "a"
registry cleaner causing problems, sure, that's
entirely possible, but he's never said so and
never given anything at all to support his views.
Nada, zip, nothing.
I could probably download a few registry
cleaners right now that would cause problems, but
.... I could also download a LOT of other programs
too, that caused problems. As with anything else,
you have to consider the reputation and history of
the sites you download from. He has absolutely
no basis to state that no reg clnr ever does any
good and "all" will cause problems and "all" are
"snakeoil", which by the way is one of his
plagairisms. And so on.
Are you in the business of computer repair? Is
that why
you keep pushing registry cleaners?

Show me anywhere where I've "pushed" registry
cleaners: You cannot. I simply reply to his
misinformational statements. He tells a lie, I
correct it. It's that simple.
Perhaps YOU personally haven't been harmed by a
registry
cleaner but what about the hundreds that have?

And how about the millions who have been "harmed"
by XP, or win98, or Linux, or whatever? My long
experience and related research has NEVER shown
any support for his claims and he has never backed
them up in any way.
Since I haven't had any cleaner problems on the
many machines I've owned and still own and
operate, plus the many I've serviced and worked
on, without ever a single problem, I'd say that's
a pretty good record, especially when you consider
the millions of people with the same experience
and who have read the same articles and white
papers on the subject.

You might do well to do the same thing yourself;
gather information on your own and learn about
what the situation really is. Stop allowing other
people to do your thinking for you. Even if you
believe what a person tells you, if you feel it's
important, you still should go out and
verify/clarify it for yourself. I imagine you're
too lazy to do that and need everything handed to
you, but you would come away from the experience
with a new appreciation for software authors and
what they can accomplish when they create well
written, well planned and executed code, of which
several registry cleaners and other programs show.
A few years back when I first came across
Brucie I thought he might be on to something. But
his refusal to support any of his claims even that
far back, and his increasing vehemence on the
subject opened the doors for me to recheck a lot
of my prior information and, when compared to my
own and several other's experiences, he came off
as a simple, purposely ignorant closed mind who
probably had ONE problem with ONE registry cleaner
and decided that they all were bad. His only
purpose is vengence, not to expose any relevant,
true information. So as long as he keeps posting
his erroneous crap and if I come across it, I will
expose it for the junk information it is and the
ignorant that he is.

So, I'm happy to say that now, since people are
almost afraid to mention a registry cleaner here,
they then will not be subjected to his trash, and
if they are, and he does it here or wherever I
might come across him, I'll continue to expose
him.

You probably think this is a lot of text for such
a minor subject, but it's not. I'm a touch typist
and spit these things out quickly, nearly as fast
as I think the words. It's to the point now where
I actually enjoy exposing his misinformation so
it's not a job at all, but rather a labor of love
to see that accurate informaiton is protrayed
here.

Cheers sock,

Twayne
 
Twayne said:
lol, you're pathetic; ever hear of Morro? No?
It's the 1 care replacement. Works with Vista
too. But I wouldn't expect you to know anything
that wasn't hand fed to you.

One care has not yet "disappeared", Microsoft has announced that it will
be discontinued sometimes in the second half of 2009 and that in its
place they will offer a very different, free AV product called Morro.
If Onecare has not yet "disappeared" how could it have reappeared? When
and where did you see this "reappearance"?

And have you actually downloaded and used Morro? What do you know about
Morro? What does it look like? Does it have the same "features" as
Onecare? Does it include a registry cleaner? Where did you say you
downloaded it from? How did you get your hands on this Morro so that
you could take it for a test drive on your Vista machine?

Once again, as usual, you don't have a clue about anything so you invent
things and make up stories to fit your opinions and then you blow
bubbles through your hat. And once again instead of going on the
internet and doing your research you have instead decided to post more
fud and you have yet made an even bigger dunce of yourself than anyone
here thought possible.

John
 
Back
Top