Re: registry cleaner

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

Alias

You chose not to respond to the specific points I made earlier, electing
only to answer one of a number. Was that because it did not suit your
cause?


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Alias wrote:
Edward W. Thompson wrote:
"Alias" <iamalias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fe03fq$kog$1@xxxxxxxxxxx
Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
"Alias" <iamalias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:udaAJ2aBIHA.4712@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pegasus (MVP) wrote:
Unless you know exactly what you're doing, you should rely
on the add/remove tool when removing programs from your
PC. The amount of disk space used by left-over registry
entries is so small that it would require tens of thousands of
programs to make a noticeable difference on the amount of
free disk space.
True.

Registry cleaners often claim to speed up your machine by
removing such entries. The claim is false: There is no difference
in speed before and after.

False. I see a marked improvement in performance and boot up time,
especially when using CCleaner and SystemSuite5 after a clean
install of XP and Office.

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes
Let's have some details:
- What exactly did you measure, i.e. what was your benchmark test?
- How did you measure it? Did it "feel" faster? Did you use a
stopwatch? - What was the improvement?
- Was this a once of test or were you able to see a consistent
improvement
on many different machines?

Unless you supply full details it won't be possible for other
readers to duplicate your tests and confirm your results.

Stop watch. Dozens and dozens of machines. I just cleaned up a
computer that took TEN MINUTES to boot up. Now it boots up in 46
seconds. Enough of a benchmark for you? I removed almost a THOUSAND
errant registry entries. --
Alias
To email me, remove shoes

Your assertions are patently false (in crude terms 'lies') and
unfortunately I think you know it. This thread is nothing but SPAM.
I am suprised that anyone has given you any credence.



Care to give evidence to back up your sweeping insults? I have no
vested interest in any software program. Everything I have posted
here is true.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: With Tiger is OS 9 pointless?
    ... > partitions on machines which can't boot OS 9. ... Or perhaps the users have no apps which need Mac OS 9, ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: New XP box will only boot in safe mode?
    ... Also, this is happening on two identical, new machines with the ... combination does boot in normal mode. ... You can access Event Viewer by selecting Start, Administrative Tools, ... done I had to install a couple of applications that some of the ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: 2.6.22-rc1-mm1
    ... With these two patches in combination, previously failing machines ... patches but silently fail on boot with no output via earlyprintk. ... forward to v2.6.22-rc2-mm1 and that also fails. ... and decompressor into memory ok and execution passed to it normally. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • RE:: freebsd7 on older machines
    ... older machines To: freebsd-questions@xxxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: ... i read somewhere that the older drives aren't supported by the installation cdrom. ... or i can setup the hd on another machine that does support the install cdrom and then transfer to the older machine. ... if i dd a hd onto another hd will i have a problem with the mbr and be unable to boot? ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: pws600au vms startup console output
    ... > I use set host/dte to get to the consoles, and the SRM consoles are set ... > I am able to boot the machines, but for some reason I don't see the ... > boot messages from VMS. ... Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: ...
    (comp.os.vms)