Registry

[Peter]

On 07/10/2010 08:45 PM, Unknown wrote:
> PS What benefits have you gained by running a registry cleaner?

You only can really see a performance improvement when used on a pretty
messed up machine. In some cases, it fixed problems with a program that
wouldn't start but I used System Suite for that one, not Crap Cleaner. I
haven't used the thing on any of my computers for years. I just use them
on computers that take 35 passes to get into XP and five minutes before
the desktop loads properly type of messed up machine. In all cases, all
the data was backed up and the prospect of a reinstall of XP was plan B.

> "Peter"<nospam@nospam.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:i1addp$mq7$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>> On 07/10/2010 071 PM, Unknown wrote:
>>> But, there is absolutely no reason to nuke them so, it is far better NOT
>>> to
>>> use, as you call it, 'Crap Cleaner'
>>
>> That's the original name of the program and I still use the name.
>>
>>> and avoid possibly rendering you system useless..
>>
>> I haven't had that problem ever and I've been using the program on dozens
>> of machines and know of a friend who's used it on hundreds of machines for
>> years. Have you got any proof that Crap Cleaner will render a computer
>> useless? I didn't think so.
>>
>>> "Peter"<nospam@nospam.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:i1a6se$cfl$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>> On 07/08/2010 05:50 PM, Spamlet wrote:
>>>>> "Peter"<nospam@nospam.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>> news:i14qje$5f9$2@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>>>> On 07/08/2010 05:09 PM, Barbara wrote:
>>>>>>> Unable to find any specific category for a registry question so am
>>>>>>> posting
>>>>>>> the question here. The registry on the computer needs to be cleaned.
>>>>>>> Most
>>>>>>> of the errors I am getting are related to registry problems. I am
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> computer knowledgeable to clean the registry manually. I wonder if
>>>>>>> someone
>>>>>>> could suggest a good, reliable and trustworthy registry cleaner
>>>>>>> software
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> that would not be too expensive. Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can try CCleaner at http://www.ccleaner.com/ Be sure and make a
>>>>>> back
>>>>>> up before fixing anything and run it THREE times to catch everything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> Most of the 'errors' picked up in CCleaner's registry ap are just links
>>>>> to
>>>>> things like Google Earth, that only resolve when you are online at
>>>>> their
>>>>> site. You have to have a good knowledge of what is and has been on
>>>>> your
>>>>> computer, and how each prog works, before you can decide whether an
>>>>> 'error'
>>>>> is real. By and large it is better just to use this to help you find
>>>>> suspect entries than to try and 'clean' with it.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are oodles of warnings about registry cleaners in these columns.
>>>>>
>>>>> S
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can see you have never used the Registry feature of Crap Cleaner but
>>>> that doesn't stop you from posting about it as if you were an expert.
>>>> Why?
>>>> You can untick all or some of the entries found. For example, if you're
>>>> trying to uninstall *everything* McAfee or Norton that was preinstalled
>>>> on
>>>> a computer like Acer, HP or Dell, you can use the registry cleaner to
>>>> find
>>>> any entries missed and nuke them. I am not advocating nuking everything
>>>> Crap Cleaner finds but for things like the above, it's quite useful.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter
>
>


--
Peter

 

[Bill in Co]

Bruce Chambers wrote:
> Bill in Co wrote:
>> Granted, with one possible exception:
>> If someone is trying to clean reinstall an app, and the system reports
>> it's
>> already installed and balks at the attempt, it is possible that by
>> removing
>> some specific registry entries (left over from the previous uninstall),
>> it
>> may allow that to take place.
>>
>
>
> It's true that sometimes -- very rarely, in my experience -- an
> uninstalled application can leave behind registry entries that interfere
> with the re-installation of that application. However this is easily
> remedied in minutes by using Regedit's own "Find" capability and
> manually deleting those troublesome entries. Further doing it this way,
> besides being safer, is much faster than downloading and installing a
> registry cleaner, waiting for it to complete its scan, and then having
> to sort through potentially hundreds of bogus error reports to find the
> one or two (well, maybe several, in some cases) troublesome entries that
> actually need to go.

Good point. I agree with you on that one (it's generally a better and
safer way to go).

> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
>
> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
>
> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand
> Russell
>
> The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
> killed a great many philosophers.
> ~ Denis Diderot

 

[HeyBub]

Twayne wrote:
>
> Neat; a product provides you with information about the contents of
> your registry, so you call it worthless. Now there's a piece of real
> advice!! Yup, you sure proved it here, didn't you? lol, so pathetic!

No, the program provides DATA. Only when the data are meaningful do they
become "information."

But some people are terminally curious ("How many angels can dance on the
head of a pin") and devote untold resources to discover obscure - and
meaningless - data. I once heard that it took a team of people two years to
discover the exact middle word in the King James Bible (and it turned out
there was NOT a middle word - there were two!).

 

[Incognitus]

On 07/10/2010 10:03 AM, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>
> Eddie wrote:
>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired, boosted,
>>> tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't), read
>>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own conclusions.
>>
>>
>> Hi [PA],
>>
>> I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and also
>> your affiliation toward ms products.
>>
>> I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an excerpt
>> from the link you posted re: O/P.
>> ------\/
>>
>> "Microsoft has a freebie online program at
>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's
>> program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm.
>> I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare
>> registry cleaner
>>
>> Here's why:
>>
>> The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and
>> whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a key
>> or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone along
>> with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's registry
>> cleaner completely hose systems."
>> ------
>>
>> My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in
>> the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it is
>> written by M/S)
>> Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see
>> Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and especially
>> considering each persons computer is different due to d/loads and
>> software and blah blah.
> <snip>
>> What do you reckon?
>
> A very sore subject! I reckon that many longtime MVPs are Microsoft's
> most vocal critics (vs. newer MVPs who are basically "MS Enthusiasts;"
> e.g., the obnoxious Win7 Launch Parties).
>
> I can't think of one Windows MVP who didn't take MS to task for
> misguidedly including a "Registry cleaner" in OneCare when beta testing
> began in 2006. (Four years later and we're still griping about it so if
> you think MVPs have much "pull" these days, think again.)
>
> The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's
> (http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm) "Clean up" scan is MS's
> online "Registry cleaner," and it's included when you run the Full
> Service scan. Even while the applications were in beta, this started
> causing problems (i.e., stuff was "cleaned" that shouldn't have been),
> so much so that Support had to make this page available, primarily due
> to MVP pressure):
> http://boards.msn.com/safetyboards/thread.aspx?ThreadID=4868
>
> While OneCare itself has been discontinued (cf.
> http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/activation/oc_eol_guidance.htm),
> the online scans remain available and haven't been changed at all.
>
> The The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's online scan for Vista/Win7
> is the Full Service scan only (i.e., you can't just run the Protection
> scan) and continues to cause problems for users; cf.
> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/center/whatsnew.htm.
>
> Even Mark Russinovich (Technical Fellow in the MS Platform and Services
> Division) criticized the use of Registry cleaners back in 2005:
> http://blogs.technet.com/b/markruss.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>
>
> Again, a very sore subject!

Well, first off re: http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm

The statements " The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is
removed and whatever it removes is gone, forever."

and

"Should it mistakenly remove a key or value needed by your operating
system or software it's gone along with your program or operating system."

are not true.

CDocuments and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application
Data\Microsoft\Windows Live Onecare safety scanner\Backup

is the location in XP where WLSC_Backup Registration Entries along with
XML Documentation are stored.

Registry cleaners themselves do no harm, it's the clueless twit using
them that causes the harm, the proof is in the two false statements
quoted above.

I'm surprised you didn't tell Eddie of the Backup folder.

 

[a]

"Nil" <rednoise@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message news:Xns9DB1757987A3Enilch1@130.133.4.11...
> On 10 Jul 2010, "a" <b@invalid.com> wrote in
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> If CCleaner can find "suspicious" files on a clean Windows
>> install, then how is that not a placebo effect? And you know what
>> they say above having an open mind... it lets your brain fall out.
>
> First of all, where are you seeing Ccleaner report "suspicious" files?
> I've never seen it use that phrase, and the program isn't designed to
> look for them. Are you sure you saw what you think you saw?
>
> How about you tell us what those supposedly "suspicious" files are? If
> you can't do that, there's no way we can say whether Ccleaner has found
> anything legitimate or not. They could be cookies or temporary files,
> which are all good candidates for removal.

Don't ask me all this. Ask the poster who said he did it.

 

[Nil]

On 11 Jul 2010, "a" <b@invalid.com> wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> Don't ask me all this. Ask the poster who said he did it.

Although I phrased it as a question, it was really in answer to your
question about why you might find easily-explained, supposedly
"suspicious" files on a new installation.

As for what CCleaner actually found, we'll have to wait to see if he
replies. I predict not.

 

[Unknown]

You're wasting your time if you think you can convince Twayne of ANYTHING.
"HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote in message
newsu4e38OILHA.5136@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Twayne wrote:
>>
>> Neat; a product provides you with information about the contents of
>> your registry, so you call it worthless. Now there's a piece of real
>> advice!! Yup, you sure proved it here, didn't you? lol, so pathetic!
>
> No, the program provides DATA. Only when the data are meaningful do they
> become "information."
>
> But some people are terminally curious ("How many angels can dance on the
> head of a pin") and devote untold resources to discover obscure - and
> meaningless - data. I once heard that it took a team of people two years
> to discover the exact middle word in the King James Bible (and it turned
> out there was NOT a middle word - there were two!).
>

 

[Unknown]

Absolute hogwash. There have been hundreds of posts on this newsgroup of
computers being rendered inoperative
by the user running a registry cleaner. Simply running a registry cleaner
has caused damage.
"Incognitus" <in@ccurate.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:i1chmc$875$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 07/10/2010 10:03 AM, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>
>> Eddie wrote:
>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired, boosted,
>>>> tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't), read
>>>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own conclusions.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi [PA],
>>>
>>> I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and also
>>> your affiliation toward ms products.
>>>
>>> I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an excerpt
>>> from the link you posted re: O/P.
>>> ------\/
>>>
>>> "Microsoft has a freebie online program at
>>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's
>>> program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm.
>>> I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare
>>> registry cleaner
>>>
>>> Here's why:
>>>
>>> The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and
>>> whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a key
>>> or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone along
>>> with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's registry
>>> cleaner completely hose systems."
>>> ------
>>>
>>> My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in
>>> the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it is
>>> written by M/S)
>>> Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see
>>> Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and especially
>>> considering each persons computer is different due to d/loads and
>>> software and blah blah.
>> <snip>
>>> What do you reckon?
>>
>> A very sore subject! I reckon that many longtime MVPs are Microsoft's
>> most vocal critics (vs. newer MVPs who are basically "MS Enthusiasts;"
>> e.g., the obnoxious Win7 Launch Parties).
>>
>> I can't think of one Windows MVP who didn't take MS to task for
>> misguidedly including a "Registry cleaner" in OneCare when beta testing
>> began in 2006. (Four years later and we're still griping about it so if
>> you think MVPs have much "pull" these days, think again.)
>>
>> The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's
>> (http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm) "Clean up" scan is MS's
>> online "Registry cleaner," and it's included when you run the Full
>> Service scan. Even while the applications were in beta, this started
>> causing problems (i.e., stuff was "cleaned" that shouldn't have been),
>> so much so that Support had to make this page available, primarily due
>> to MVP pressure):
>> http://boards.msn.com/safetyboards/thread.aspx?ThreadID=4868
>>
>> While OneCare itself has been discontinued (cf.
>> http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/activation/oc_eol_guidance.htm),
>> the online scans remain available and haven't been changed at all.
>>
>> The The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's online scan for Vista/Win7
>> is the Full Service scan only (i.e., you can't just run the Protection
>> scan) and continues to cause problems for users; cf.
>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/center/whatsnew.htm.
>>
>> Even Mark Russinovich (Technical Fellow in the MS Platform and Services
>> Division) criticized the use of Registry cleaners back in 2005:
>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/markruss.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>
>>
>> Again, a very sore subject!
>
> Well, first off re: http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm
>
> The statements " The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is
> removed and whatever it removes is gone, forever."
>
> and
>
> "Should it mistakenly remove a key or value needed by your operating
> system or software it's gone along with your program or operating system."
>
> are not true.
>
> CDocuments and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application
> Data\Microsoft\Windows Live Onecare safety scanner\Backup
>
> is the location in XP where WLSC_Backup Registration Entries along with
> XML Documentation are stored.
>
> Registry cleaners themselves do no harm, it's the clueless twit using them
> that causes the harm, the proof is in the two false statements quoted
> above.
>
> I'm surprised you didn't tell Eddie of the Backup folder.
>

 

[Bill in Co]

That's just because THEY didn't run it at the right time of the day.
What's the matter with you? It takes skill to know what time of the day is
best.

Unknown wrote:
> Absolute hogwash. There have been hundreds of posts on this newsgroup of
> computers being rendered inoperative
> by the user running a registry cleaner. Simply running a registry cleaner
> has caused damage.
>
> "Incognitus" <in@ccurate.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:i1chmc$875$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>> On 07/10/2010 10:03 AM, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>
>>> Eddie wrote:
>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired,
>>>>> boosted,
>>>>> tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't), read
>>>>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own conclusions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi [PA],
>>>>
>>>> I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and also
>>>> your affiliation toward ms products.
>>>>
>>>> I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an
>>>> excerpt
>>>> from the link you posted re: O/P.
>>>> ------\/
>>>>
>>>> "Microsoft has a freebie online program at
>>>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's
>>>> program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm.
>>>> I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare
>>>> registry cleaner
>>>>
>>>> Here's why:
>>>>
>>>> The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and
>>>> whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a key
>>>> or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone along
>>>> with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's registry
>>>> cleaner completely hose systems."
>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>> My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in
>>>> the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it
>>>> is
>>>> written by M/S)
>>>> Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see
>>>> Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and
>>>> especially
>>>> considering each persons computer is different due to d/loads and
>>>> software and blah blah.
>>> <snip>
>>>> What do you reckon?
>>>
>>> A very sore subject! I reckon that many longtime MVPs are Microsoft's
>>> most vocal critics (vs. newer MVPs who are basically "MS Enthusiasts;"
>>> e.g., the obnoxious Win7 Launch Parties).
>>>
>>> I can't think of one Windows MVP who didn't take MS to task for
>>> misguidedly including a "Registry cleaner" in OneCare when beta testing
>>> began in 2006. (Four years later and we're still griping about it so if
>>> you think MVPs have much "pull" these days, think again.)
>>>
>>> The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's
>>> (http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm) "Clean up" scan is MS's
>>> online "Registry cleaner," and it's included when you run the Full
>>> Service scan. Even while the applications were in beta, this started
>>> causing problems (i.e., stuff was "cleaned" that shouldn't have been),
>>> so much so that Support had to make this page available, primarily due
>>> to MVP pressure):
>>> http://boards.msn.com/safetyboards/thread.aspx?ThreadID=4868
>>>
>>> While OneCare itself has been discontinued (cf.
>>> http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/activation/oc_eol_guidance.htm),
>>> the online scans remain available and haven't been changed at all.
>>>
>>> The The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's online scan for Vista/Win7
>>> is the Full Service scan only (i.e., you can't just run the Protection
>>> scan) and continues to cause problems for users; cf.
>>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/center/whatsnew.htm.
>>>
>>> Even Mark Russinovich (Technical Fellow in the MS Platform and Services
>>> Division) criticized the use of Registry cleaners back in 2005:
>>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/markruss.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>
>>>
>>> Again, a very sore subject!
>>
>> Well, first off re: http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm
>>
>> The statements " The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is
>> removed and whatever it removes is gone, forever."
>>
>> and
>>
>> "Should it mistakenly remove a key or value needed by your operating
>> system or software it's gone along with your program or operating
>> system."
>>
>> are not true.
>>
>> CDocuments and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application
>> Data\Microsoft\Windows Live Onecare safety scanner\Backup
>>
>> is the location in XP where WLSC_Backup Registration Entries along with
>> XML Documentation are stored.
>>
>> Registry cleaners themselves do no harm, it's the clueless twit using
>> them
>> that causes the harm, the proof is in the two false statements quoted
>> above.
>>
>> I'm surprised you didn't tell Eddie of the Backup folder.

 

[Unknown]

Good grief! Do you know what the correct time of day is? I ran one (about
five years ago) at about 2:00 PM.
Thank goodness for system restore.
"Bill in Co" <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:doydnWEPYOLrv6fRnZ2dnUVZ_qadnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> That's just because THEY didn't run it at the right time of the day.
> What's the matter with you? It takes skill to know what time of the day
> is best.
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> Absolute hogwash. There have been hundreds of posts on this newsgroup of
>> computers being rendered inoperative
>> by the user running a registry cleaner. Simply running a registry cleaner
>> has caused damage.
>>
>> "Incognitus" <in@ccurate.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:i1chmc$875$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>> On 07/10/2010 10:03 AM, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Eddie wrote:
>>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>>> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired,
>>>>>> boosted,
>>>>>> tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't), read
>>>>>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own conclusions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi [PA],
>>>>>
>>>>> I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and
>>>>> also
>>>>> your affiliation toward ms products.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an
>>>>> excerpt
>>>>> from the link you posted re: O/P.
>>>>> ------\/
>>>>>
>>>>> "Microsoft has a freebie online program at
>>>>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's
>>>>> program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm.
>>>>> I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare
>>>>> registry cleaner
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's why:
>>>>>
>>>>> The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and
>>>>> whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a
>>>>> key
>>>>> or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone along
>>>>> with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's registry
>>>>> cleaner completely hose systems."
>>>>> ------
>>>>>
>>>>> My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in
>>>>> the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it
>>>>> is
>>>>> written by M/S)
>>>>> Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see
>>>>> Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and
>>>>> especially
>>>>> considering each persons computer is different due to d/loads and
>>>>> software and blah blah.
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> What do you reckon?
>>>>
>>>> A very sore subject! I reckon that many longtime MVPs are Microsoft's
>>>> most vocal critics (vs. newer MVPs who are basically "MS Enthusiasts;"
>>>> e.g., the obnoxious Win7 Launch Parties).
>>>>
>>>> I can't think of one Windows MVP who didn't take MS to task for
>>>> misguidedly including a "Registry cleaner" in OneCare when beta testing
>>>> began in 2006. (Four years later and we're still griping about it so if
>>>> you think MVPs have much "pull" these days, think again.)
>>>>
>>>> The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's
>>>> (http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm) "Clean up" scan is
>>>> MS's
>>>> online "Registry cleaner," and it's included when you run the Full
>>>> Service scan. Even while the applications were in beta, this started
>>>> causing problems (i.e., stuff was "cleaned" that shouldn't have been),
>>>> so much so that Support had to make this page available, primarily due
>>>> to MVP pressure):
>>>> http://boards.msn.com/safetyboards/thread.aspx?ThreadID=4868
>>>>
>>>> While OneCare itself has been discontinued (cf.
>>>> http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/activation/oc_eol_guidance.htm),
>>>> the online scans remain available and haven't been changed at all.
>>>>
>>>> The The Windows Live OneCare Safety Center's online scan for Vista/Win7
>>>> is the Full Service scan only (i.e., you can't just run the Protection
>>>> scan) and continues to cause problems for users; cf.
>>>> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/center/whatsnew.htm.
>>>>
>>>> Even Mark Russinovich (Technical Fellow in the MS Platform and Services
>>>> Division) criticized the use of Registry cleaners back in 2005:
>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/markruss.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Again, a very sore subject!
>>>
>>> Well, first off re: http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm
>>>
>>> The statements " The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is
>>> removed and whatever it removes is gone, forever."
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> "Should it mistakenly remove a key or value needed by your operating
>>> system or software it's gone along with your program or operating
>>> system."
>>>
>>> are not true.
>>>
>>> CDocuments and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application
>>> Data\Microsoft\Windows Live Onecare safety scanner\Backup
>>>
>>> is the location in XP where WLSC_Backup Registration Entries along with
>>> XML Documentation are stored.
>>>
>>> Registry cleaners themselves do no harm, it's the clueless twit using
>>> them
>>> that causes the harm, the proof is in the two false statements quoted
>>> above.
>>>
>>> I'm surprised you didn't tell Eddie of the Backup folder.
>
>

 

[Nil]

On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> Absolute hogwash. There have been hundreds of posts on this
> newsgroup of computers being rendered inoperative
> by the user running a registry cleaner.

Fact or opinion? I'd like to see you to find "hundreds" of such posts.

 

[Unknown]

Absolute fact. If you have been monitoring this news group for the last six
years you would
know that. Registry cleaners have been labeled 'snake oil'.
I personally had a problem with a registry cleaner and will not use one ever
again.
"Nil" <rednoise@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9DB2AC9B1CC04nilch1@130.133.4.11...
> On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> Absolute hogwash. There have been hundreds of posts on this
>> newsgroup of computers being rendered inoperative
>> by the user running a registry cleaner.
>
> Fact or opinion? I'd like to see you to find "hundreds" of such posts.

 

[Bill in Co]

Nil wrote:
> On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> Absolute hogwash. There have been hundreds of posts on this
>> newsgroup of computers being rendered inoperative
>> by the user running a registry cleaner.
>
> Fact or opinion? I'd like to see you to find "hundreds" of such posts.

If you have been monitoring these newsgroups (including Win9 over several
years, you will recall that there indeed have been MANY such posts (although
not all "rendered inoperative", but indeed having resulting isssue and
problems as a consquence of running them, with some being quite serious).

 

[Nil]

On 11 Jul 2010, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote
in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> If you have been monitoring these newsgroups (including Win9
> over several years, you will recall that there indeed have been
> MANY such posts (although not all "rendered inoperative", but
> indeed having resulting isssue and problems as a consquence of
> running them, with some being quite serious).

I have, and there are some such posts. But not even close to
"hundreds".

 

[Nil]

On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> Absolute fact. If you have been monitoring this news group for the
> last six years you would know that. Registry cleaners have been
> labeled 'snake oil'. I personally had a problem with a registry
> cleaner and will not use one ever again.

Absolute horseshit. If you weren't just spouting your hyperbolic
opinion, you wouldn't say "hundreds". I challenge you to produce any
number even close to 100 such reports from this group.

 

[HeyBub]

Eddie wrote:
> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired,
>> boosted, tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't),
>> read http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own
>> conclusions.
>
>
> Hi Pa,
>
> I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and
> also your affiliation toward ms products.
>
> I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an
> excerpt from the link you posted re: O/P.
> ------\/
>
> "Microsoft has a freebie online program at
> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's
> program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm.
> I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare
> registry cleaner
>
> Here's why:
>
> The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and
> whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a
> key or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone
> along with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's
> registry cleaner completely hose systems."
> ------
>
> My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in
> the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it
> is written by M/S)
> Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see
> Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and
> especially considering each persons computer is different due to
> d/loads and software and blah blah.
>

I personally think the OneCare Registry Cleaner does nothing. It's a
placebo. It whirs and clanks. The lights flash. Things happen on the screen.
It has everything except flames.

Like a medical placebo, it makes people "feel" better that they've actually
done something to cure an imaginary pain.

It was developed, in my opinion, to satisfy a clamor for a MS "approved"
registry cleaner. "Find a need and fill it" is Microsoft's motto!

 

[Unknown]

Don't be so stupid. You know very well I cannot do that simply because they
were deleted.
You poll all other posters for their positions.
"Nil" <rednoise@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9DB2C316628E1nilch1@130.133.4.11...
> On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> Absolute fact. If you have been monitoring this news group for the
>> last six years you would know that. Registry cleaners have been
>> labeled 'snake oil'. I personally had a problem with a registry
>> cleaner and will not use one ever again.
>
> Absolute horseshit. If you weren't just spouting your hyperbolic
> opinion, you wouldn't say "hundreds". I challenge you to produce any
> number even close to 100 such reports from this group.

 

[Unknown]

Then you haven't been on this newsgroup very long.
"Nil" <rednoise@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9DB2C24E381F0nilch1@130.133.4.11...
> On 11 Jul 2010, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote
> in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> If you have been monitoring these newsgroups (including Win9
>> over several years, you will recall that there indeed have been
>> MANY such posts (although not all "rendered inoperative", but
>> indeed having resulting isssue and problems as a consquence of
>> running them, with some being quite serious).
>
> I have, and there are some such posts. But not even close to
> "hundreds".

 

[Bill in Co]

I can't say if it was hundreds, but it was definitely in the several dozen
range, and not just a handful or two (I'm talking about over ALL the years
I've been monitoring them).

Nil wrote:
> On 11 Jul 2010, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudgeon@earthlink.net> wrote
> in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:
>
>> If you have been monitoring these newsgroups (including Win9
>> over several years, you will recall that there indeed have been
>> MANY such posts (although not all "rendered inoperative", but
>> indeed having resulting isssue and problems as a consquence of
>> running them, with some being quite serious).
>
> I have, and there are some such posts. But not even close to
> "hundreds".

 

[Nil]

On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> Don't be so stupid. You know very well I cannot do that simply
> because they were deleted.

Really!?! By whom? Google has been archiving
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general for a decade or more. If they exist,
you should find your hundreds right there among the 442,902 messages
they have archived. Check it out if you are so sure.

> You poll all other posters for their positions.

I thought you insisted on facts, not "positions".

Be informed not opinionated.