registry

  • Thread starter Thread starter Claire Brucker
  • Start date Start date
Twayne said:
The "crusade" is really about misinformation; in this case against
closed minded zealots who refuse to verify/clarify/validate their claims
in any way. His adamancy is bolstered by absolutely nothing based in
fact and reality around the issue. Otherwise he would either accept the
challenge or admit to the "evidence" and other things I've provided him
over the last couple of years and tried to convince me otherwise with
facts rather than blind proclamations. When one becomes that closed
minded they become dangerous to anyone who might listen to them because
they don't reason things out.
Click to expand...

If these cleaners are so darn good why are none of the MVPs or other
experts recommending them? It's quite a stretch for us to think that
you are right and that all the others who have a wealth of experience
and an immense collective amount of expertise are all wrong! The fact
is that there are only two or three persons here who think these
cleaners are worthwhile and all the others think that they provide
little to no benefits and that they do at times cause great damage. We
do see people posting reports of problems that they have had after using
these cleaners, these posters are not zealots with closed mind trying to
obfuscate the issues, they are real people with real problems caused by
those cleaners. I will take my advice from the pros and not use these
products, I have used them in the past but now my own experience tells
me that they do nothing at all to improve performance and reading posts
from those who have problems after using these programs is enough to
convince me that the pros are right and that you are wrong.

M
 
mark r. doesn't impress me.

he controdicts himself when
he says leave the registry alone,
but creates a freeware to
defrag it.

so he is a hypocrite and
manipulative or confused.

while he was still in diapers,
many of us were serving our
country in the military and have
already been using computers.
 
well, because safety
scanner is a web interface,
so its engineering is different
from that which is fully installed
and integrated with the o.s.
on the h.d.

plus if one is going to pay
for something, then paying
customers always get priority.

likewise, wealthy citizens always
get priority with government while
poor ones do not.
 
If paying customers always get priority then why aren't they getting a
built-in registry cleaner? If this is as important as you claim surely
one would thing that it would be part of the "paid for" package? It
looks like you are contradicting yourself...

John
 
Twayne said:
If these cleaners are so darn good why are none of the MVPs or other
experts recommending them? It's quite a stretch for us to think that
you are right and that all the others who have a wealth of experience
and an immense collective amount of expertise are all wrong! The fact
is that there are only two or three persons here who think these
cleaners are worthwhile and all the others think that they provide
little to no benefits and that they do at times cause great damage. We
do see people posting reports of problems that they have had after
using these cleaners, these posters are not zealots with closed mind
trying to obfuscate the issues, they are real people with real
problems caused by those cleaners. I will take my advice from the
pros and not use these products, I have used them in the past but now
my own experience tells me that they do nothing at all to improve
performance and reading posts from those who have problems after
using these programs is enough to convince me that the pros are right
and that you are wrong.
M
Click to expand...

Your ability to count is certainly lacking. Also "MVP" means nothing
other than the fact that they passed a test and got the title handed to
them. It's easy enough to read about it on their site if you're really
interested. MVPs are also people; they are good, bad and indifferent
just like everyone else and there have been the occasional bad apples
and posers along the lines, too. Being an MVP doesn't make one a "PRO",
it simply means they demonstrated some knownledge of whatever area of
the computer they chose to take the test in. Most anyone can become an
MVP. That includes closed minded people who have NO evidence for the
things they post, and who also never have shown any valid representation
of what they are claiming. Be cautious or you'll end up being a sock
puppet for the wrong person; it's easy to do if you're too gullible and
don't bother to verify the claims that anyone, not just MVPs, make on
groups and around the 'net.
Actually, there is only one MVP with the ignorance and ego to have to
post years-old boilerplate about registry software and says it's all
"snake oil". Most of the other MVPs are reasonable, thinking people who
are intelligent and seldom simply concentrate on only one application,
registry cleaners, and who will paint the entire world a single color.
I tend to appreciate MVPs when I know one has his certificate based on
the area I may be seeking assistance with. Some however, think that
because they are certified for networks say, also feel it enables them
to hand out misinformation in any area they wish to, whether it relates
to their area of expertise or not.

I have no problem with you or your opinion of the MVP situation;
that's your perogative. I do urge you however to verify information and
not just take it on blind faith because they put a title after their
name. I have a few titles too, but I don't find the need to advertise
them or worse yet use them as some kind of tool to make people think I'm
greater than I am. There are a couple of MVPs that would do well to
remember that for themselves, and to re-read their "rules of the road"
for MVPs. I won't but some people would report them for almost any
infraction. But I'm not out to punish; in tihs case I'm only out to
stop misinformation, which the "all registry cleaners are bad" line is;
it's pure bunk and the one touting that line even knows it.

Regards,

Twayne
 
MVPs don't take *tests*

:> Twayne wrote:
: >>> Reply below.
: >>> ---
: >>> Leonard Grey
: >>> Errare humanum est
: >>>
: >>> "A Day in the Life of a Web 2.0 Hacker" - PC Magazine
: >>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2330952,00.asp
: >>>
: >>> John John (MVP) wrote:
: >>>> Twayne wrote:
: >>>>
: >>>>>> <answered inline>
: >>>>>>
: >>>>>> Claire Brucker wrote:
: >>>>>>
: >>>>>>> Just what is the registry?
: >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry
: >>>>>>
: >>>>>>
: >>>>>>> Does it need regular cleaning? If so,
: >>>>>>> how do you clean it?
: >>>>>> No. In fact - if you have to ask what tthe registry is (even
: >>>>>> after you learn it and can explain it to others) - the registry
: >>>>>> is better left alone except in particular cases where you are
: >>>>>> following specific instructions to add or remove specific things.
: >>>>>
: >>>>> That's a little condescending, don't you think? Especially
: >>>>> considering the stated purpose of the post was to find out WHAT
: >>>>> the registry is?
: >>>>>
: >>>>> You never answered either question, although you gave a long
: >>>>> boilerplate spew about the perceived dangers of registry cleaners.
: >>>>> Your only purpose in answering thus had to be self-serving, with
: >>>>> no consideration of helping the OP.
: >>>> The OP asked three questions:
: >>>>
: >>>> 1- Just what is the registry?
: >>>> 2- Does it need regular cleaning?
: >>>> 3- If so, how do you clean it?
: >>>>
: >>>> Shenan aswered questions 1 & 2, question 3 does not need an answer
: >>>> because the registry does not need cleaning.
: >>>>
: >>>> John
: >>> I would steer clear of Twayne. S/He's on this crusade over registry
: >>> cleaners and won't be denied.
: >>
: >> The "crusade" is really about misinformation; in this case against
: >> closed minded zealots who refuse to verify/clarify/validate their
: >> claims in any way. His adamancy is bolstered by absolutely nothing
: >> based in fact and reality around the issue. Otherwise he would
: >> either accept the challenge or admit to the "evidence" and other
: >> things I've provided him over the last couple of years and tried to
: >> convince me otherwise with facts rather than blind proclamations.
: >> When one becomes that closed minded they become dangerous to anyone
: >> who might listen to them because they don't reason things out.
: >
: > If these cleaners are so darn good why are none of the MVPs or other
: > experts recommending them? It's quite a stretch for us to think that
: > you are right and that all the others who have a wealth of experience
: > and an immense collective amount of expertise are all wrong! The fact
: > is that there are only two or three persons here who think these
: > cleaners are worthwhile and all the others think that they provide
: > little to no benefits and that they do at times cause great damage. We
: > do see people posting reports of problems that they have had after
: > using these cleaners, these posters are not zealots with closed mind
: > trying to obfuscate the issues, they are real people with real
: > problems caused by those cleaners. I will take my advice from the
: > pros and not use these products, I have used them in the past but now
: > my own experience tells me that they do nothing at all to improve
: > performance and reading posts from those who have problems after
: > using these programs is enough to convince me that the pros are right
: > and that you are wrong.
: > M
:
: Your ability to count is certainly lacking. Also "MVP" means nothing
: other than the fact that they passed a test and got the title handed to
: them. It's easy enough to read about it on their site if you're really
: interested. MVPs are also people; they are good, bad and indifferent
: just like everyone else and there have been the occasional bad apples
: and posers along the lines, too. Being an MVP doesn't make one a "PRO",
: it simply means they demonstrated some knownledge of whatever area of
: the computer they chose to take the test in. Most anyone can become an
: MVP. That includes closed minded people who have NO evidence for the
: things they post, and who also never have shown any valid representation
: of what they are claiming. Be cautious or you'll end up being a sock
: puppet for the wrong person; it's easy to do if you're too gullible and
: don't bother to verify the claims that anyone, not just MVPs, make on
: groups and around the 'net.
: Actually, there is only one MVP with the ignorance and ego to have to
: post years-old boilerplate about registry software and says it's all
: "snake oil". Most of the other MVPs are reasonable, thinking people who
: are intelligent and seldom simply concentrate on only one application,
: registry cleaners, and who will paint the entire world a single color.
: I tend to appreciate MVPs when I know one has his certificate based on
: the area I may be seeking assistance with. Some however, think that
: because they are certified for networks say, also feel it enables them
: to hand out misinformation in any area they wish to, whether it relates
: to their area of expertise or not.
:
: I have no problem with you or your opinion of the MVP situation;
: that's your perogative. I do urge you however to verify information and
: not just take it on blind faith because they put a title after their
: name. I have a few titles too, but I don't find the need to advertise
: them or worse yet use them as some kind of tool to make people think I'm
: greater than I am. There are a couple of MVPs that would do well to
: remember that for themselves, and to re-read their "rules of the road"
: for MVPs. I won't but some people would report them for almost any
: infraction. But I'm not out to punish; in tihs case I'm only out to
: stop misinformation, which the "all registry cleaners are bad" line is;
: it's pure bunk and the one touting that line even knows it.
:
: Regards,
:
: Twayne
:
:
 
Twayne said:
Your ability to count is certainly lacking. Also "MVP" means nothing
other than the fact that they passed a test and got the title handed to
them. It's easy enough to read about it on their site if you're really
interested. MVPs are also people; they are good, bad and indifferent just
like everyone else and there have been the occasional bad apples and
posers along the lines, too. Being an MVP doesn't make one a "PRO", it
simply means they demonstrated some knownledge of whatever area of the
computer they chose to take the test in. Most anyone can become an MVP.
That includes closed minded people who have NO evidence for the things
they post, and who also never have shown any valid representation of what
they are claiming. Be cautious or you'll end up being a sock puppet for
the wrong person; it's easy to do if you're too gullible and don't bother
to verify the claims that anyone, not just MVPs, make on groups and around
the 'net.
Actually, there is only one MVP with the ignorance and ego to have to
post years-old boilerplate about registry software and says it's all
"snake oil". Most of the other MVPs are reasonable, thinking people who
are intelligent and seldom simply concentrate on only one application,
registry cleaners, and who will paint the entire world a single color. I
tend to appreciate MVPs when I know one has his certificate based on the
area I may be seeking assistance with. Some however, think that because
they are certified for networks say, also feel it enables them to hand out
misinformation in any area they wish to, whether it relates to their area
of expertise or not.

I have no problem with you or your opinion of the MVP situation; that's
your perogative. I do urge you however to verify information and not just
take it on blind faith because they put a title after their name. I have
a few titles too, but I don't find the need to advertise them or worse yet
use them as some kind of tool to make people think I'm greater than I am.
There are a couple of MVPs that would do well to remember that for
themselves, and to re-read their "rules of the road" for MVPs. I won't
but some people would report them for almost any infraction. But I'm not
out to punish; in tihs case I'm only out to stop misinformation, which the
"all registry cleaners are bad" line is; it's pure bunk and the one
touting that line even knows it.

Regards,

Twayne
Click to expand...
Your BS is no more useful than the BS of others although you seem to think
it is. Your long and tiresome posts and tirades advocating the usefulness
of Registry Cleaners are to most nothing other then nonsense, surely even
you must have detected that from the responses you have received. If
Registry Cleaners are as useful as you seem to think it would be very
obvious to all and their usefulness would be simply verifiable and no debate
would be necessary, in fact that is not the case. Further, I would think
that those that market these programs would by now have devised a very
simple 'test' to show how useful their programs are, as far as I know no
such test or demonstration of their efficacy exists. I know you have made
such an offer but you have no credibility. From your responses to your
critics it appears you must believe there exists some sort of conspiracy to
discredit these programs. Why would that be the case?

We all know by now how much you faith you have in these programs, please
give the 'unconverted' the courtesy to know you are totally wrong in
everything you have said on the subject.
 
Twayne said:
Your ability to count is certainly lacking.
Click to expand...

Maybe you are right, I said that only two or three persons in these
groups recommend these utilities, in reality there are only two persons
who recommend them, you and that horrible person who goes by the
initials "db". db is suffering from disillusions, he now thinks that he
knows more about these things than Dr. Russinovich!

As for your comments about MVPs all I can say is that they certainly
know more about Windows than you or I do so I'll take their word before
yours. I said that "none of the MVPs or other experts" are recommending
these cleaners, the "other experts" includes all the other very
knowledgeable persons here who aren't MVPs, I don't see any of them
supporting your position so please excuse me but I think that you are
wrong about these cleaners.

M
 
db.·.. > said:
mark r. doesn't impress me.

he controdicts himself when
he says leave the registry alone,
but creates a freeware to
defrag it.

so he is a hypocrite and
manipulative or confused.

while he was still in diapers,
many of us were serving our
country in the military and have
already been using computers.
Click to expand...

Oh the irony of it all. Now you are the one in diapers and you still
don't know anything about computers!
 
....and, what does having been in the military have to do with anything?

: What specifically is your background with computers?
: " db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com>
wrote
: in message : > mark r. doesn't impress me.
: >
: > he controdicts himself when
: > he says leave the registry alone,
: > but creates a freeware to
: > defrag it.
: >
: > so he is a hypocrite and
: > manipulative or confused.
: >
: > while he was still in diapers,
: > many of us were serving our
: > country in the military and have
: > already been using computers.
: >
: >
: > --
: >
: > db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
: >
: >
: > : >> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 19:30:40 -0600, Bill in Co. wrote:
: >>
: >>> Oh, come on now. Don't you know by now that Twayne knows much more
: >>> about
: >>> this than Dr. Mark Russinovich? For shame, boy!
: >>>
: >>> ROFL.
: >>
: >> :-)
: >
:
:
 
In 1966 (when Mark was born) as a military guinea pig databaseben had
sessions with Eliza. The sessions didn't help any...
 
oh, just shut up.

MVP's are nothing
more than people
with ego's and unpaid
help for the microsoft
corporation.

where do you get you
information that mvp's
are experts?

is there a college degree
or certification for being
an mvp?

perhaps, you should further
review what qualifies anyone
to become an mvp.
 
unfortunately for you
and the other morons
and trolls, i have analyzed
the registry files utilizing
database methodologies.

and it is a gaurantee that
for anyone who does not
maintain the registry either
manually or with a an auto-
mated software, "will" eventually
surcome to system failure.

advocating the advice of others
because one lacks skills for
validating the crap being fed
to morons is simply moronic,
 
I was in the U.S. Army for 3 years, and served a year in Vietnam. I earned a
purple heart, and the Army Commendation Medal.

I also know enough about computers to know that you are not very credible.


" db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote
in message : perhaps you should
: enlist and figure it out
: for yourself.
:
: --
:
: db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
:
: > ...and, what does having been in the military have to do with anything?
: >
: > : > : What specifically is your background with computers?
: > : " db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com>
: > wrote
: > : in message : > : > mark r. doesn't impress me.
: > : >
: > : > he controdicts himself when
: > : > he says leave the registry alone,
: > : > but creates a freeware to
: > : > defrag it.
: > : >
: > : > so he is a hypocrite and
: > : > manipulative or confused.
: > : >
: > : > while he was still in diapers,
: > : > many of us were serving our
: > : > country in the military and have
: > : > already been using computers.
: > : >
: > : >
: > : > --
: > : >
: > : > db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
: > : >
: > : >
: > : > : > : >> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 19:30:40 -0600, Bill in Co. wrote:
: > : >>
: > : >>> Oh, come on now. Don't you know by now that Twayne knows much
more
: > : >>> about
: > : >>> this than Dr. Mark Russinovich? For shame, boy!
: > : >>>
: > : >>> ROFL.
: > : >>
: > : >> :-)
: > : >
: > :
: > :
: >
: >
:
 
What crock of malarchy! You don't know anything at all about the
registry, the BS is coming out of your ears sideways!
 
Back
Top