Re: registry cleaner

It has nothing to do with MVP. I have held the same views for many years. Perhaps you would take it better from me if I used my old IBM status?


"Alias" <iamalias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fe3t13$b5k$2@xxxxxxxxxxx
Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
Now you are making it up as you go along..

I haven't changed anything I've said and stand by all statements. I have done it. Many times. You have never done it so all you have are insults and a sneering techier than thou attitude, typical of those who feel they need to post under the MVP badge.


"Alias" <iamalias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fe34qf$tvp$2@xxxxxxxxxxx
Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
The defrag would have impacted performance more than orphaned registry entries.

It booted up quicker and had better performance BEFORE the defrag, right after cleaning up the registry. After the defrag, it got even better.



"Alias" <iamalias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fe2ucg$9pj$1@xxxxxxxxxxx
Gerry wrote:
Alias

I cannot see where you did? You might try a little harder instead of being evasive.

The only way you can demonstrate your point is to test performance after
each stage of housekeeping. Unless a registry entry causes a timeout any
superfluous entry will have so little affect than you would not notice
any difference in performance. You mention removing 1,000 registry
entries but how many of those entries would have been accessed when you
restart the computer? Very few I suspect. If they are accessed to
provide a false start-up the best solution is to remove them manually
using Autoruns, having first confirmed what affect they have by
disabling rather than removing. The processor handles so many
transactions continuously that a few extra do not make a significant
difference. Event Viewer Reports generate errors / warnings if there is
a problem and it is logical to follow up from there.

Based on what you say you have been doing I do not see that you can
distinguish between the effect on performance of removing unnecessary
registry entries and defragmenting 4,000 files. Defragmenting in the
situation you describe will have a noticeable impact. Your approach may
not pose a significant risk in your hands but if the risk converts to
reality you can have a major problem which may be very difficult to
recover from.


--
Regards.

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




Alias wrote:
Gerry wrote:
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?


That's because I already addressed them. You just don't accept what I
say. I can't prove it to you unless you come here and watch it in
action because anything I say that happened, you won't believe.

Unfortunately, you can't do it yourself because System Suite 5 is no
longer available and 8, the new version, isn't as good due to the fact
that someone bought out VCOM and changed the program considerably.



Is there an echo in here? I removed a slew of errant registry entries and the performance was increased and the boot time decreased. Chances are you don't install and uninstall as many programs as the user of the computer I worked on did. I doubt you let your hard drive accumulate over 4000 fragmented files either.

I am also 100% positive that you've never used System Suite 5 and I seriously doubt any of the others who sneer at registry fixers have either. If what you and the others say is true, I would have fuçked up 100s of computers and none, I repeat none, had anything but positive results from using System Suite 5. I have a friend who turned me on to SS5 and he's a repair tech and has used it on thousands of computers with no ill effects, only positive results. So if thousands of instances with 100% success rates isn't good enough for you, find someone with SS5 and install and uninstall a couple of hundred programs, run it and do the tests the way you think they should be done. Either that or STFU.

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes



--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes



--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: registry cleaner
    ... It booted up quicker and had better performance BEFORE the defrag, right after cleaning up the registry. ... entries but how many of those entries would have been accessed when you ... I am also 100% positive that you've never used System Suite 5 and I seriously doubt any of the others who sneer at registry fixers have either. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: registry cleaner
    ... It booted up quicker and had better performance BEFORE the defrag, right after cleaning up the registry. ... entries but how many of those entries would have been accessed when you ... I am also 100% positive that you've never used System Suite 5 and I seriously doubt any of the others who sneer at registry fixers have either. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: registry cleaner
    ... You have never done it so all you have are insults and a sneering techier than thou attitude, typical of those who feel they need to post under the MVP badge. ... It booted up quicker and had better performance BEFORE the defrag, right after cleaning up the registry. ... registry entries and defragmenting 4,000 files. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: registry cleaner
    ... I know both registry fixers work so I use them on every machine I encounter and have been doing this for years with no problems. ... will suggest pointing entries to where they belong as well instead of deleting them. ... on one computer I couldn't complete defrag so I ran SystemSuite's registry defrag and then the XP defrag could complete its task. ... There are registry tools and then there are registry tools. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Meaning of "application configuration is incorrect"?
    ... I've seen several others caused by missing Registry ... entries. ... MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)