CCleaner works with Vista. http://www.ccleaner.com.

 

Charlie42

 

"hahnkathio" <hahnkathio@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote

news:E71F459E-5756-4D59-A37B-EC32B18E51F2@microsoft.com...

>

>

> "Arun" wrote:

>

>> Can any One Suggest Best Registry Cleaner And residual file Cleaner for

>> vista

>> Ultimate.............

Charlie42 wrote:

> CCleaner works with Vista. http://www.ccleaner.com.

>

Ubuntu works even better. Just don't setup dual boot. Let Ubuntu have the

whole drive and you will never again need to worry about cleaning a

registry.

 

http://ubuntu.com

 

Cheers.

> Charlie42

>

> "hahnkathio" <hahnkathio@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote

> news:E71F459E-5756-4D59-A37B-EC32B18E51F2@microsoft.com...

>>

>>

>> "Arun" wrote:

>>

>>> Can any One Suggest Best Registry Cleaner And residual file Cleaner for

>>> vista

>>> Ultimate.............

 

--

 

The "Wow" starts now. http://tinyurl.com/269m7q

 

"Vista is finally secure from hacking. No one is going to 'hack' the product

activation and try and steal the o/s. Anyone smart enough to do so ... is

also smart enough not to want to bother." philo

NOPE, i'd say CCleaner.

They just rebuilt it from the ground up in C++

 

Really nice Beta Version

 

 

Have to wait for an update to the uninstaller though. . .

 

 

GREAT PROGRAM!!!!!!!

 

 

Ubuntu is a toy os

 

wouldn't recommend it

 

 

At all

 

 

Unless you like dwarves, gnomes, and wind up keys

 

 

It doesn't even have a battery like the rest of the big boys XD

 

 

 

suckme@don'tmail.com

 

 

 

"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:EaGyi.77791$rX4.68186@pd7urf2no...

> Charlie42 wrote:

>

>> CCleaner works with Vista. http://www.ccleaner.com.

>>

> Ubuntu works even better. Just don't setup dual boot. Let Ubuntu have the

> whole drive and you will never again need to worry about cleaning a

> registry.

>

> http://ubuntu.com

>

> Cheers.

>

>> Charlie42

>>

>> "hahnkathio" <hahnkathio@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote

>> news:E71F459E-5756-4D59-A37B-EC32B18E51F2@microsoft.com...

>>>

>>>

>>> "Arun" wrote:

>>>

>>>> Can any One Suggest Best Registry Cleaner And residual file Cleaner for

>>>> vista

>>>> Ultimate.............

>

> --

>

> The "Wow" starts now. http://tinyurl.com/269m7q

>

> "Vista is finally secure from hacking. No one is going to 'hack' the

> product

> activation and try and steal the o/s. Anyone smart enough to do so ... is

> also smart enough not to want to bother." philo

>

>

>

>

hahnkathio wrote:

>

>

> Continuing the car analogy, using a registry cleaner is like scheduling

> regular maintenance on your car. It has to be done to keep the car tuned.

>

 

Utter nonsense. Using a registry cleaner does nothing but risk

rendering the computer unusable. It does no good, whatsoever.

 

 

 

--

 

Bruce Chambers

 

Help us help you:

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

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

"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message

> Utter nonsense. Using a registry cleaner does nothing but risk rendering

> the computer unusable. It does no good, whatsoever.

 

And blanket statements are most always "utter nonsense" themselves.

 

Try removing a Roxio, McAfee, or any similar viral like application from a

box and you'll quickly change your tune as to the usefulness of a well

written "registry cleaner" as a _tool_ in knowledgeable hands.

 

--

http://www.e-woodshop.net

Last update: 8/08/07

KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:29:42 -0500, "Swingman" <kac@nospam.com> wrote:

>"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message

>

>> Utter nonsense. Using a registry cleaner does nothing but risk rendering

>> the computer unusable. It does no good, whatsoever.

>

>And blanket statements are most always "utter nonsense" themselves.

>

>Try removing a Roxio, McAfee, or any similar viral like application from a

>box and you'll quickly change your tune as to the usefulness of a well

>written "registry cleaner" as a _tool_ in knowledgeable hands.

 

The point is few fanboys or MVPs are "knowledgeable" and that becomes

painfully obvious after reading the typical slop they write.

Swingman wrote:

> "Bruce Chambers" wrote in message

>

> And blanket statements are most always "utter nonsense" themselves.

>

 

 

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. This is a case of the latter.

 

> Try removing a Roxio, McAfee, or any similar viral like application from a

> box and you'll quickly change your tune as to the usefulness of a well

> written "registry cleaner" as a _tool_ in knowledgeable hands.

>

 

Not at all. One need only spend a few minutes with Regedit's built-in

"Find" capability, or use a simple registry *scanner*. A "cleaner" is

absolutely unnecessary. But why even bother? Orphaned registry entries

almost never cause problems, unless you're reinstalling the very

application you're so eager to be rid of, never cause any sort of

performance hit, and occupy a very miniscule amount of hard drive

storage space.

 

 

--

 

Bruce Chambers

 

Help us help you:

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

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

"Bruce Chambers"wrote in message

> A "cleaner" is absolutely unnecessary. But why even bother? Orphaned

> registry entries almost never cause problems, unless you're reinstalling

> the very application you're so eager to be rid of, never cause any sort of

> performance hit, and occupy a very miniscule amount of hard drive storage

> space.

 

Party line ... and plagiarized at that. You know better than that, or you

should.

 

--

http://www.e-woodshop.net

Last update: 8/08/07

KarlC@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:

> "Bruce Chambers"wrote in message

>

>> A "cleaner" is absolutely unnecessary. But why even bother? Orphaned

>> registry entries almost never cause problems, unless you're reinstalling

>> the very application you're so eager to be rid of, never cause any sort of

>> performance hit, and occupy a very miniscule amount of hard drive storage

>> space.

>

> Party line ...

 

 

No party line. Simply the results of years' worth of first-hand

observation while working as an IT professional. Please produce

verifiablee independent evidence to the contrary, if you can. Yo(u'd be

the first to ever do so.)

 

(Nor is restating od paraphrasing common knowledge "plagiarism.")

 

 

--

 

Bruce Chambers

 

Help us help you:

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

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

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message

news:%23ik9QMT5HHA.1992@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> No party line. Simply the results of years' worth of first-hand

> observation while working as an IT professional.

 

Well excuse me, exalted one. One certainly would not have guessed from such

a one-size-fits-all, most UNprofessional, blanket statment.

> Please produce verifiablee independent evidence to the contrary, if you

> can. Yo(u'd be the first to ever do so.)

 

"verfiablee"??

> (Nor is restating od paraphrasing common knowledge "plagiarism.")

 

Trouble with that keyboard, or too much sauce?

 

LOL ... How about actually reading my original post, then use your own

words, instead of google'd phrases, to bolster your weak argument .. but

wait till you sleep it off.

 

--

http://www.e-woodshop.net

Last update: 8/08/07

KarlC@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:

> "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message

> news:%23ik9QMT5HHA.1992@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>

>> No party line. Simply the results of years' worth of first-hand

>> observation while working as an IT professional.

>

> Well excuse me, exalted one. One certainly would not have guessed from such

> a one-size-fits-all, most UNprofessional, blanket statment.

>

>> Please produce verifiablee independent evidence to the contrary, if you

>> can. Yo(u'd be the first to ever do so.)

>

> "verfiablee"??

>

>> (Nor is restating od paraphrasing common knowledge "plagiarism.")

>

> Trouble with that keyboard, or too much sauce?

>

> LOL ... How about actually reading my original post, then use your own

> words, instead of google'd phrases, to bolster your weak argument .. but

> wait till you sleep it off.

>

 

 

Despite pointing out my typos (all the while hypocritically making some

of your own), I see that you still utterly failed to offer any sort of

evidence to bolster your claims. I wonder why that might be, hmmmmm?

 

 

--

 

Bruce Chambers

 

Help us help you:

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

 

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

"Steve Easton" wrote:

>

> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

> news:k5jv839smrup57gmhfho9ns657ie2jddr7@4ax.com...

> > On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:02:38 -0700, notachance <nochance@all.to>

> > wrote:

> > I think part of the hostility towards Registry Cleaners is once upon a

> > time they were garbage. Times change, things improve. Windows was once

> > garbage too. It's the same knock Real Player gets. It use to include

> > spyware and it got black listed, It hasn't for years, is still one of

> > the best players offering some of the best compression verses quality

> > you can get. Yet people hold a grudge or just are dumb and because of

> > it, take your pick, won't use it. -)

>

>

> As someone who does a little programming on the side, and one who writes using windows

> APIs,

> let me make a comment on registry cleaners.

> Yes they will find "currently unused registry entries."

> Occasionally they will actually correct a registry related problem that will prevent

> installation of a program.

>

> However, keep in mind that there are lot of static registry entries that are in place to

> ensure

> backwards compatibility with older programs, especially when it comes to using API calls

> to ordinals ( routines in DLL files )

> Example, if I reference, in my application, a dll procedure from a dll that was included

> with Windows 98 and that

> dll has been upgraded / replaced by a newer dll in newer windows versions, the entries in

> the registry will automatically point my program to the newest version of the DLL on the

> machine in which the application is installed.

>

> So, if the "base" entry has been removed from the registry, guess what, my backwards

> compatible app fails to run.

>

> So as was stated earlier in the thread, use "ANY" registry cleaner at your own risk, and

> when the app you try to install

> That's "supposed" to be compatible with your new windows version fails to run, don't blame

> the author, restore your registry.

>

> And yep I'm an MVP for a different technology and YEP I will include it in my sig.

>

>

> --

>

> Steve Easton

> Microsoft MVP FrontPage

> FP Cleaner

> http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/fpclean.htm

> Hit Me FP

> http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/HitMeFP.htm

>

>

>

>

Sorry. I use ccleaner on all my computers. Free and works great.Try it. You

may like it.

"Steve Easton" wrote:

>

> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

> news:k5jv839smrup57gmhfho9ns657ie2jddr7@4ax.com...

> > On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:02:38 -0700, notachance <nochance@all.to>

> > wrote:

> > I think part of the hostility towards Registry Cleaners is once upon a

> > time they were garbage. Times change, things improve. Windows was once

> > garbage too. It's the same knock Real Player gets. It use to include

> > spyware and it got black listed, It hasn't for years, is still one of

> > the best players offering some of the best compression verses quality

> > you can get. Yet people hold a grudge or just are dumb and because of

> > it, take your pick, won't use it. -)

>

>

> As someone who does a little programming on the side, and one who writes using windows

> APIs,

> let me make a comment on registry cleaners.

> Yes they will find "currently unused registry entries."

> Occasionally they will actually correct a registry related problem that will prevent

> installation of a program.

>

> However, keep in mind that there are lot of static registry entries that are in place to

> ensure

> backwards compatibility with older programs, especially when it comes to using API calls

> to ordinals ( routines in DLL files )

> Example, if I reference, in my application, a dll procedure from a dll that was included

> with Windows 98 and that

> dll has been upgraded / replaced by a newer dll in newer windows versions, the entries in

> the registry will automatically point my program to the newest version of the DLL on the

> machine in which the application is installed.

>

> So, if the "base" entry has been removed from the registry, guess what, my backwards

> compatible app fails to run.

>

> So as was stated earlier in the thread, use "ANY" registry cleaner at your own risk, and

> when the app you try to install

> That's "supposed" to be compatible with your new windows version fails to run, don't blame

> the author, restore your registry.

>

> And yep I'm an MVP for a different technology and YEP I will include it in my sig.

>

>

> --

>

> Steve Easton

> Microsoft MVP FrontPage

> FP Cleaner

> http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/fpclean.htm

> Hit Me FP

> http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/HitMeFP.htm

>

>

>

>

CleanMyPC is the one I found to work on Vista64, but don't try and compact

registry--kills sidebar. Many others were real problems on Vista64.

 

"redvette" <redvette@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:EE3F7390-C567-42E2-BEF8-17918C03DD1E@microsoft.com...

>

>

> "Steve Easton" wrote:

>

>>

>> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

>> news:k5jv839smrup57gmhfho9ns657ie2jddr7@4ax.com...

>> > On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:02:38 -0700, notachance <nochance@all.to>

>> > wrote:

>> > I think part of the hostility towards Registry Cleaners is once upon a

>> > time they were garbage. Times change, things improve. Windows was once

>> > garbage too. It's the same knock Real Player gets. It use to include

>> > spyware and it got black listed, It hasn't for years, is still one of

>> > the best players offering some of the best compression verses quality

>> > you can get. Yet people hold a grudge or just are dumb and because of

>> > it, take your pick, won't use it. -)

>>

>>

>> As someone who does a little programming on the side, and one who writes

>> using windows

>> APIs,

>> let me make a comment on registry cleaners.

>> Yes they will find "currently unused registry entries."

>> Occasionally they will actually correct a registry related problem that

>> will prevent

>> installation of a program.

>>

>> However, keep in mind that there are lot of static registry entries that

>> are in place to

>> ensure

>> backwards compatibility with older programs, especially when it comes to

>> using API calls

>> to ordinals ( routines in DLL files )

>> Example, if I reference, in my application, a dll procedure from a dll

>> that was included

>> with Windows 98 and that

>> dll has been upgraded / replaced by a newer dll in newer windows

>> versions, the entries in

>> the registry will automatically point my program to the newest version of

>> the DLL on the

>> machine in which the application is installed.

>>

>> So, if the "base" entry has been removed from the registry, guess what,

>> my backwards

>> compatible app fails to run.

>>

>> So as was stated earlier in the thread, use "ANY" registry cleaner at

>> your own risk, and

>> when the app you try to install

>> That's "supposed" to be compatible with your new windows version fails to

>> run, don't blame

>> the author, restore your registry.

>>

>> And yep I'm an MVP for a different technology and YEP I will include it

>> in my sig.

>>

>>

>> --

>>

>> Steve Easton

>> Microsoft MVP FrontPage

>> FP Cleaner

>> http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/fpclean.htm

>> Hit Me FP

>> http://www.95isalive.com/fixes/HitMeFP.htm

>>

>>

>>

>>

Try Registry Mechanic or RegSupreme Pro buy remember the cautions. I've used

both over the years and they work very well. RegSupreme Pro has an Aggressive

mode but avoid that unless you want to spend a lot of time reading every

entry.

Sandy

 

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

> To put it another way...

> A registry cleaner should not be used by anyone unfamiliar with the

> registry they are unable to see something wrong.

> Only use a registry cleaner if you are familiar enough to do the job

> manually but desire a too to speed the job.

>

> Since there is little or nothing to be gained anyway, leave the

> registry alone unless you know exactly what you are doing.

>

> --

> Jupiter Jones [MVP]

> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

> http://www.dts-l.org

>

>

> "Alun Harford" <devnull@alunharford.co.uk> wrote in message

> news:OtpkQ$KwHHA.4800@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> > The tool is even more dangerous than doing it manually.

> > Most users decide against the idea when confronted with the registry

> > editor, because they realise that they don't know what they're

> > doing.

> > With a tool, most users go "Nice pretty wizard. Next, next, next,

> > next, finish. Oh dear, my system doesn't boot any more." Only then

> > do they realise that they didn't know what they were doing.

> >

> > Alun Harford

>

>

I have Registry Mechanic, however it does not work at all for cleaning

in the SYSWOW64 folder and just gets stuck, so I have to do a Custom

Scan and untick the Deep Scan Mode.

Deffo not 64bit compatible.

 

 

--

coolchris

 

*:cool:Dual Core E6550*

*Asus P5K Motherboard*

*2GB DDR2 800 SDRAM*

*GForce 8600GTS 512mb*

*Auzentech XMeridian 7.1 on Onkyo605 Rxer*

If I can add my word of caution

I ran http://www.ccleaner.com. in Vista Home Premium. It did so much damage that I

had to reinstall everything.

I have an additional language,Russian, installed and use mtreg.reg to

automatically look up translations at multitran. Well after running ccleaner,

garbled Russian words were sent to multitran.

 

Gerhard

 

 

 

 

"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 00:47:51 -0500, "Hugh Jass" <imnot@home.com> wrote:

>

> > But if I had a car, and took out the V6 engine, and put in a V8 engine, I

> > would want the V6 distributor out, because it isn't doing anything.

>

>

> My view is that if the old distributor wasn't hurting you in any way,

> and unless you *knew* for sure that you could take it out without any

> risk of breaking something, you should leave it in.

>

>

>

> > "Myweb" <meiweb@gmx.de> wrote in message

> > news:ff16fb663e4008c98ed164ba10d0@msnews.microsoft.com...

> > > Hello Arun,

> > >

> > > For what did you have the need for cleaning your registry? If you delete

> > > something without knowledge and about the need for the entry you can break

> > > your system. Then maybe you have to reinstall. So why not using it like it

> > > is? If you buy a car you also will not take out some electronic or some

> > > devices from the engine.

> > >

> > > Best regards

> > >

> > > Myweb

> > > Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and

> > > confers no rights.

> > >

> > >> Can any One Suggest Best Registry Cleaner And residual file Cleaner

> > >> for vista Ultimate.............

> > >>

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> > --

> > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

>

> --

> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User

> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

>

dunno what went wrong with you but i run ccleaner at least once a day

and it never i mean never! did any thing bad for me. it does what its

made to do... delete unneeded files =) works great for me.

 

 

--

nitrofreak06

Hello

Have only just read this as I was hunting for info on Registry Cleaners and

Drive cleaners. Most seem to advise caution when using registry cleaners,

and now I can see why. Thanks. I am now wondering about Windows Live One Care

Safety Scanner (free) - which I use from time to time. This uses a registry

scanner doesn't it, so is it safe to use???? Also do you think drive cleaners

are necessary to remove junk?

 

--

Martin

 

 

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

> To put it another way...

> A registry cleaner should not be used by anyone unfamiliar with the

> registry they are unable to see something wrong.

> Only use a registry cleaner if you are familiar enough to do the job

> manually but desire a too to speed the job.

>

> Since there is little or nothing to be gained anyway, leave the

> registry alone unless you know exactly what you are doing.

>

> --

> Jupiter Jones [MVP]

> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

> http://www.dts-l.org

>

>

> "Alun Harford" <devnull@alunharford.co.uk> wrote in message

> news:OtpkQ$KwHHA.4800@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> > The tool is even more dangerous than doing it manually.

> > Most users decide against the idea when confronted with the registry

> > editor, because they realise that they don't know what they're

> > doing.

> > With a tool, most users go "Nice pretty wizard. Next, next, next,

> > next, finish. Oh dear, my system doesn't boot any more." Only then

> > do they realise that they didn't know what they were doing.

> >

> > Alun Harford

>

>

Martin wrote:

> Hello

> Have only just read this as I was hunting for info on Registry Cleaners

> and

> Drive cleaners. Most seem to advise caution when using registry cleaners,

> and now I can see why. Thanks. I am now wondering about Windows Live One

> Care

> Safety Scanner (free) - which I use from time to time. This uses a

> registry scanner doesn't it, so is it safe to use???? Also do you think

> drive cleaners are necessary to remove junk?

>

 

Hi, Martin - No, I don't think you should use the Windows Live One Care

registry scanner. Even though it comes from MS, I think registry cleaners

are a big mistake. And no, I don't think drive cleaners are absolutely

necessary to remove junk. I do use CCleaner on clients' machines when I'm

cleaning them up but I do all registry work by hand. If you decide to use

CCleaner, I'd give the registry tool portion a miss.

 

Malke

--

MS-MVP

Elephant Boy Computers

http://www.elephantboycomputers.com

Don't Panic!

In article <E19A7D1E-76DD-4632-9F9C-D82996894FCE@microsoft.com>,

Martin <Martin@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>

>Most seem to advise caution when using registry cleaners,

 

Fer shure. For one thing, never breathe the fumes. And always

use rubber gloves when you're cleaning your registry. Also keep away

from children. (Keep the cleaner away. You're probably safe enough.)

 

FWIW, I have XP boxes that have run for many years with no

attention to the registry, and they've had much installation and de-

installation. I think this used to be more of a problem with 9x.

It needs translation. What he is saying in his rodent way is that registry

cleaning is a bourgeois excess, should not be done since it is a waste of

time. Overall it is a big nuisance, may be dangerous, unless of course the

registry is infected by malware.

 

This is all very true.

 

"the wharf rat" <wrat@panix.com> wrote in message

news:fot7tc$6gk$1@reader2.panix.com...

> In article <E19A7D1E-76DD-4632-9F9C-D82996894FCE@microsoft.com>,

> Martin <Martin@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>>

>>Most seem to advise caution when using registry cleaners,

>

> Fer shure. For one thing, never breathe the fumes. And always

> use rubber gloves when you're cleaning your registry. Also keep away

> from children. (Keep the cleaner away. You're probably safe enough.)

>

> FWIW, I have XP boxes that have run for many years with no

> attention to the registry, and they've had much installation and de-

> installation. I think this used to be more of a problem with 9x.

>

My rule is simple, and written policy.

Install a registry cleaner (or other unauthorized software) and face

disciplinary action.

 

Unless you're a super geek, using a registry cleaner is like trying to

disarm a nuke with fingernail clippers.

To be honest, if you actually need to clean the registry, you probably

aren't qualified to do so.

 

"the wharf rat" <wrat@panix.com> wrote in message

news:fot7tc$6gk$1@reader2.panix.com...

> In article <E19A7D1E-76DD-4632-9F9C-D82996894FCE@microsoft.com>,

> Martin <Martin@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>>

>>Most seem to advise caution when using registry cleaners,

>

> Fer shure. For one thing, never breathe the fumes. And always

> use rubber gloves when you're cleaning your registry. Also keep away

> from children. (Keep the cleaner away. You're probably safe enough.)

>

> FWIW, I have XP boxes that have run for many years with no

> attention to the registry, and they've had much installation and de-

> installation. I think this used to be more of a problem with 9x.

>

Agreed. This was discussed at great length and with some fervour about six

months back, and from what I remember the consensus that eventually emerged

was NEVER to use registry cleaners with Vista.

 

I had been addicted to them, and used three in rotation each day along with

a compacting routine in one of them. The more little annoyances that crept

in to my system the more avidly I decontaminated my system with the registry

cleaners until it all crashed catastrophically. After that I reinstalled

Windows Vista and I have never used a registry cleaner since. My system has

remained stable for months.

 

Perhaps any build-up in the registry is a bit like all those redundant bits

of our DNA - they are there but don't do any harm or slow us down

appreciably. I suppose you could say I was a control freak, but that now

I've gone rather more organic :)

 

"Not Me" <cargod01@bresnan.net> wrote in message

news:umkUduhbIHA.5348@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> My rule is simple, and written policy. Install a registry cleaner (or

> other unauthorised software) and face disciplinary action.

I've never used a Reg Cleaner, but I've always made it standard practice to

just reformat and reinstall with the latest drivers and software once a

year. Seems to work well for me. I do not recommend everyone to do that.

 

Dave

 

 

 

"Doug" <doug@FAKEpleasereplytogroup.com> wrote in message

news:etGQotjbIHA.5892@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Agreed. This was discussed at great length and with some fervour about six

> months back, and from what I remember the consensus that eventually

> emerged was NEVER to use registry cleaners with Vista.

>

> I had been addicted to them, and used three in rotation each day along

> with a compacting routine in one of them. The more little annoyances that

> crept in to my system the more avidly I decontaminated my system with the

> registry cleaners until it all crashed catastrophically. After that I

> reinstalled Windows Vista and I have never used a registry cleaner since.

> My system has remained stable for months.

>

> Perhaps any build-up in the registry is a bit like all those redundant

> bits of our DNA - they are there but don't do any harm or slow us down

> appreciably. I suppose you could say I was a control freak, but that now

> I've gone rather more organic :)

>

> "Not Me" <cargod01@bresnan.net> wrote in message

> news:umkUduhbIHA.5348@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>> My rule is simple, and written policy. Install a registry cleaner (or

>> other unauthorised software) and face disciplinary action.

>