I'm sure that most people don't have any idea as to what a computer
registry is unless you are a computer technician or expert. It is
basically a database which stores various different settings and
options utilised by your computer. The information consists of the
various software programs which are installed on your computer,
hardware, operating system information and various other user
preferences. So basically any time you add, remove or make changes to
your software you change or edit an entry in your registry.
Having said this you can understand why it is so easy to get registry
problems. The average pc user will continuously add and remove
software applications over a course of time. These constant additions
and removals of software will result in broken files and residuals
which will litter your hard drive, consequently making it perform
slower and less responsive. This is why it is so important to make
sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
cleaners which keep your system in good health.If this central system
component becomes too erroneous it can result in the destruction of
you entire operating system. This means that you will either have to
reformat you computer or pay a repair technician to fix it for you....

Registry Repair: http://groups.google.com/group/regrepairsbv

Spam & snake oil.

On Jul 25, 10:56*pm, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
> Spam & snake oil.

Despite the Spammer at the start of this -
what IS the purpose behind the Registry? I'm sure there's more to it
than meets the eye!
if it were just the operating system I could understand it -
but your own personal programs you install !?! why do these NEED to
insert Registry entries!?
they Don't actually need them to run !!! If it's a program that -
rare as they may be - that installs all files required into it's
install folder, you can restore registry back to before that app was
installed, having previously saved the install folder! go to that
folder and initiate the programs exe file - it will run ok! so long as
it does have it's required files - you could even restore "C" drive
from backup (ghost) if you had taken one - and if the installed
program was on another partition - it would still run ok, assuming of
course again - if it was one of the rare ones that does have all it's
required files within that folder.
and that being the case - having restored "C" - there would be no
record of this prog in the registry...
it still runs ok - so what purpose is there for having a program add
records to the registry
when it is not a requirement for those programs to actually run!?

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:07 -0700 (PDT), "voujnbwuotkd******.com"
<voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote:


> This is why it is so important to make
> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
> cleaners which keep your system in good health.


This is not only spam, it's terrible advice. For anybody reading the
above (snipped from a longer post) who might be tempted to believe it,
registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.

The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
it may have.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

See below.

"neutrino" <stuartr@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
news:1c2878eb-b2fd-4541-8a1f-d2ba277a746a@u36g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 25, 10:56 pm, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
> Spam & snake oil.

Despite the Spammer at the start of this -
what IS the purpose behind the Registry? I'm sure there's more to it
than meets the eye!
if it were just the operating system I could understand it -
but your own personal programs you install !?! why do these NEED to
insert Registry entries!?
*** It depends on the program. All but the simplest of programs rely on
*** a number of static or dynamic settings. They used to be stored in
*** various .ini files but these days the program designers put them into
*** the registry.

they Don't actually need them to run !!!
*** It depends on how the designer created the application.

If it's a program that -
rare as they may be - that installs all files required into it's
install folder, you can restore registry back to before that app was
installed, having previously saved the install folder! go to that
folder and initiate the programs exe file - it will run ok! so long as
it does have it's required files - you could even restore "C" drive
from backup (ghost) if you had taken one - and if the installed
program was on another partition - it would still run ok, assuming of
course again - if it was one of the rare ones that does have all it's
required files within that folder.
*** Try your approach with any component of the MS Office
*** Suite - it will fail spectacularly unless it has the correct
*** registry entries.

and that being the case - having restored "C" - there would be no
record of this prog in the registry...
it still runs ok - so what purpose is there for having a program add
records to the registry
when it is not a requirement for those programs to actually run!?
*** If your courageous then you can do this test:
*** -Create a Restore Point.
*** - Install Outlook (for example).
*** - Save all Outlook files on a flash disk.
*** - Restore your system to a point before the installation.
*** - Manually restore the Outlook files to drive C:.
*** - Launch Outlook.
*** It will fail. Why? Because numerous registry entries are missing.

*** Registry corruption, e.g. by viruses/malware, is a common
*** cause for failing applications, proving that the registry is an
*** essential repository for lots of OS and application settings.

neutrino <stuartr@bluebottle.com> wrote:

>On Jul 25, 10:56*pm, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
>> Spam & snake oil.
>
>Despite the Spammer at the start of this -
>what IS the purpose behind the Registry? I'm sure there's more to it
>than meets the eye!
>if it were just the operating system I could understand it -
>but your own personal programs you install !?! why do these NEED to
>insert Registry entries!?

The biggest benefit to storing program preferences in the registry is
that each user on the computer can then maintain a separate set of
preferences.

Other than that, it's a data base of all kinds of information that
lots of different parts of the OS use. Everything from information on
your hardware, to filetype associations, to counts of programs that
use each DLL (which are supposed to be maintained by the install and
uninstall utilities for each program). My problems with it are
primarily two: it cannot be read except by using MS's proprietary
routines, making it difficult to impossible to repair damage that
prevents your system from booting; and it's a HUGE single point of
failure. Unix systems do the same thing with a plethora of text files.
If one gets screwed, it's not likely to be a total disaster, and it
can be fixed with a text editor. Not so with the registry.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
Slattery_T@bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

On Jul 26, 3:14*am, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
> See below.
>
> "neutrino" <stua...@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1c2878eb-b2fd-4541-8a1f-d2ba277a746a@u36g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 25, 10:56 pm, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
>
> > Spam & snake oil.
>
> Despite the Spammer at the start of this -
> what IS the purpose behind the Registry? I'm sure there's more to it
> than meets the eye!
> if it were just the operating system I could understand it -
> but your own personal programs you install !?! *why do these NEED to
> insert Registry entries!?
> *** It depends on the program. All but the simplest of programs rely on
> *** a number of static or dynamic settings. They used to be stored in
> *** various .ini files but these days the program designers put them into
> *** the registry.
>
> they Don't actually need them to run !!!
> *** It depends on how the designer created the application.
>
> If it's a program that -
> rare as they may be - that installs all files required into it's
> install folder, you can restore registry back to before that app was
> installed, having previously saved the install folder! *go to that
> folder and initiate the programs exe file - it will run ok! so long as
> it does have it's required files - you could even restore "C" drive
> from backup (ghost) if you had taken one - and if the installed
> program was on another partition - it would still run ok, assuming of
> course again - if it was one of the rare ones that does have all it's
> required files within that folder.
> *** Try your approach with any component of the MS Office
> *** Suite - it will fail spectacularly unless it has the correct
> *** registry entries.
>
> and that being the case - having restored "C" - there would be no
> record of this prog in the registry...
> it still runs ok - so what purpose is there for having a program add
> records to the registry
> when it is not a requirement for those programs to actually run!?
> *** If your courageous then you can do this test:
> *** -Create a Restore Point.
> *** - Install Outlook (for example).
> *** - Save all Outlook files on a flash disk.
> *** - Restore your system to a point before the installation.
> *** - Manually restore the Outlook files to drive C:.
> *** - Launch Outlook.
> *** It will fail. Why? Because numerous registry entries are missing.
>
> *** Registry corruption, e.g. by viruses/malware, is a common
> *** cause for failing applications, proving that the registry is an
> *** essential repository for lots of OS and application settings.

Agreed - there are going to be some software impossible to do this to
-
nothing more than speculation, and curiosity, that 'some apps' where
the files they require,
are installed into their install folder - discovered it by chance when
I reinstalled XP a while back,
I went to check what I needed to reinstal - and just for the heck of
It clicked an exe of one app previously installed in other partition,
(but not installed since reinstalling XP), and that program came up
fine!!
that proved that 'some' programs like this do not require or need any
mention in the registry.
just saying - it's not a requirement in some cases, and the fact that
the more you install, the more bloated
the registry gets.. and it seems - the system slows-down and you just
don't have that fresh speedy feel to it anymore - anything to avoid
that would be great - been reading about "Portable Apps" and from
what I can determine - this is what I'm getting at - programs that can
be run without being "installed" (in the normal manner), the fewer
extra records added to the registry - the better the system will be -
and remain so.

"neutrino" <stuartr@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
news:0a109ad3-4d9b-4fed-9657-a63acfe24280@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 26, 3:14 am, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
> See below.
>
> "neutrino" <stua...@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1c2878eb-b2fd-4541-8a1f-d2ba277a746a@u36g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 25, 10:56 pm, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
>
> > Spam & snake oil.
>
> Despite the Spammer at the start of this -
> what IS the purpose behind the Registry? I'm sure there's more to it
> than meets the eye!
> if it were just the operating system I could understand it -
> but your own personal programs you install !?! why do these NEED to
> insert Registry entries!?
> *** It depends on the program. All but the simplest of programs rely on
> *** a number of static or dynamic settings. They used to be stored in
> *** various .ini files but these days the program designers put them into
> *** the registry.
>
> they Don't actually need them to run !!!
> *** It depends on how the designer created the application.
>
> If it's a program that -
> rare as they may be - that installs all files required into it's
> install folder, you can restore registry back to before that app was
> installed, having previously saved the install folder! go to that
> folder and initiate the programs exe file - it will run ok! so long as
> it does have it's required files - you could even restore "C" drive
> from backup (ghost) if you had taken one - and if the installed
> program was on another partition - it would still run ok, assuming of
> course again - if it was one of the rare ones that does have all it's
> required files within that folder.
> *** Try your approach with any component of the MS Office
> *** Suite - it will fail spectacularly unless it has the correct
> *** registry entries.
>
> and that being the case - having restored "C" - there would be no
> record of this prog in the registry...
> it still runs ok - so what purpose is there for having a program add
> records to the registry
> when it is not a requirement for those programs to actually run!?
> *** If your courageous then you can do this test:
> *** -Create a Restore Point.
> *** - Install Outlook (for example).
> *** - Save all Outlook files on a flash disk.
> *** - Restore your system to a point before the installation.
> *** - Manually restore the Outlook files to drive C:.
> *** - Launch Outlook.
> *** It will fail. Why? Because numerous registry entries are missing.
>
> *** Registry corruption, e.g. by viruses/malware, is a common
> *** cause for failing applications, proving that the registry is an
> *** essential repository for lots of OS and application settings.

Agreed - there are going to be some software impossible to do this to
-
nothing more than speculation, and curiosity, that 'some apps' where
the files they require,
are installed into their install folder - discovered it by chance when
I reinstalled XP a while back,
I went to check what I needed to reinstal - and just for the heck of
It clicked an exe of one app previously installed in other partition,
(but not installed since reinstalling XP), and that program came up
fine!!
that proved that 'some' programs like this do not require or need any
mention in the registry.
just saying - it's not a requirement in some cases, and the fact that
the more you install, the more bloated
the registry gets.. and it seems - the system slows-down and you just
don't have that fresh speedy feel to it anymore - anything to avoid
that would be great - been reading about "Portable Apps" and from
what I can determine - this is what I'm getting at - programs that can
be run without being "installed" (in the normal manner), the fewer
extra records added to the registry - the better the system will be -
and remain so.

=================

There are two persisten myths floating about:
a) A PC slows down as its disk fills up.
b) It slows down as the registry grows.

Claim a) is false unless the file system is heavily fragmented or
unless you're accessing folders with tens of thousands of files
inside.

Claim b) is false but is heavily promoted by companies selling
"registry cleaners". While registries often have hundreds of unused
entries, removing them makes no difference at all to a PC's speed.
If you think it does then you should perform some controlled tests
and measure the results with your stop watch.

I would guess that my computer should be slowed to a crawl with
"bloat" as I have around fifty or sixty programs installed.
But...it is NOT bloated and is as perky as when I got it new
three years ago. Routine maintenance is the key to good
performance. Most computers come with suggestions for
maintenance and most programs have help screens galore.

Microsoft forums and usergroup sites such as this one can
certainly assist if one has questions regarding tasks such as
defragmenting, disk clean-ups, etc.

Doug W.
---

"neutrino" <stuartr@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
news:0a109ad3-4d9b-4fed-9657-a63acfe24280@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 26, 3:14 am, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz> wrote:
> See below.
>
> "neutrino" <stua...@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1c2878eb-b2fd-4541-8a1f-d2ba277a746a@u36g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 25, 10:56 pm, "Pegasus \(MVP\)" <I....@fly.com.oz>
> wrote:
>
> > Spam & snake oil.
>
> Despite the Spammer at the start of this -
> what IS the purpose behind the Registry? I'm sure there's more
> to it
> than meets the eye!
> if it were just the operating system I could understand it -
> but your own personal programs you install !?! why do these
> NEED to
> insert Registry entries!?
> *** It depends on the program. All but the simplest of
> programs rely on
> *** a number of static or dynamic settings. They used to be
> stored in
> *** various .ini files but these days the program designers
> put them into
> *** the registry.
>
> they Don't actually need them to run !!!
> *** It depends on how the designer created the application.
>
> If it's a program that -
> rare as they may be - that installs all files required into
> it's
> install folder, you can restore registry back to before that
> app was
> installed, having previously saved the install folder! go to
> that
> folder and initiate the programs exe file - it will run ok! so
> long as
> it does have it's required files - you could even restore "C"
> drive
> from backup (ghost) if you had taken one - and if the
> installed
> program was on another partition - it would still run ok,
> assuming of
> course again - if it was one of the rare ones that does have
> all it's
> required files within that folder.
> *** Try your approach with any component of the MS Office
> *** Suite - it will fail spectacularly unless it has the
> correct
> *** registry entries.
>
> and that being the case - having restored "C" - there would be
> no
> record of this prog in the registry...
> it still runs ok - so what purpose is there for having a
> program add
> records to the registry
> when it is not a requirement for those programs to actually
> run!?
> *** If your courageous then you can do this test:
> *** -Create a Restore Point.
> *** - Install Outlook (for example).
> *** - Save all Outlook files on a flash disk.
> *** - Restore your system to a point before the installation.
> *** - Manually restore the Outlook files to drive C:.
> *** - Launch Outlook.
> *** It will fail. Why? Because numerous registry entries are
> missing.
>
> *** Registry corruption, e.g. by viruses/malware, is a common
> *** cause for failing applications, proving that the registry
> is an
> *** essential repository for lots of OS and application
> settings.

Agreed - there are going to be some software impossible to do
this to
-
nothing more than speculation, and curiosity, that 'some apps'
where
the files they require,
are installed into their install folder - discovered it by
chance when
I reinstalled XP a while back,
I went to check what I needed to reinstal - and just for the
heck of
It clicked an exe of one app previously installed in other
partition,
(but not installed since reinstalling XP), and that program
came up
fine!!
that proved that 'some' programs like this do not require or
need any
mention in the registry.
just saying - it's not a requirement in some cases, and the fact
that
the more you install, the more bloated
the registry gets.. and it seems - the system slows-down and you
just
don't have that fresh speedy feel to it anymore - anything to
avoid
that would be great - been reading about "Portable Apps" and
from
what I can determine - this is what I'm getting at - programs
that can
be run without being "installed" (in the normal manner), the
fewer
extra records added to the registry - the better the system will
be -
and remain so.

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:07 -0700 (PDT), "voujnbwuotkd******.com"
> <voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote:
>
>
>> This is why it is so important to make
>> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
>> cleaners which keep your system in good health.
>
>
> This is not only spam, it's terrible advice.

It's "terrible advice" because it IS spam!. Never, ever trust spammed
information or sources for anything, no matter how tempting it is. The
#1 rule of spammers is, "Spammers lie".


> above (snipped from a longer post) who might be tempted to believe it,
> registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the

And that's about as big a piece of bull-chit as is spam. This closed
minded dummy, rather than being realistic and embracing reality has
simply closed his mind and wants the whole world to believe as he does
simply because he says so. He loves the phrase "snake oil" and uses it
ad infinitum and the majority of posts he makes are very nearly
identical in content to this one. Rather than post much useful advice
he seems to just lurk, waiting for someone to mention a registry cleaner
so he can climb out from the darkness and make his snake oil
proclamation.

Personally I myself only have one closed minded area: That's the area
of giving misinformation either by making wrong statements of what can
be called lying by omission. I DO have a closed mind there: If one
cannot provide accurate and up to date information, then they should
shut up and keep quiet, and hopefully check to see if there might be
some flaw in what they said. But, like I said ... it's a closed mind
there about "registry cleaners".

> registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
> don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
> what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
> having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.

I suspect this person hasn't read anything legitimate or reality based
about the registry since the first year it showed up. I can agree that
a few leftover entries in the registry are no problem since it's just
text files that are read very, very quickly, but ... to say "never" as
implied above, is silly. In one short paragraph I could give you
instructions on how to work with your registry and end up with a
woefully slow machine, without putting a single useless entry into the
registry or mangling anything in the registry. With a little background
and experience, it's not all that illogical either. I'm NOT going to do
that here of course, since I consider it unethical. My point is, the
registry is not a big mystery if one digs into it a bit and you do NOT
have to be an expert on the registry to know how it works.
>
> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
> removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
> it may have.

And that is also false, since all decent registry "cleaners" backup any
changes they make AND include an Undo in case something does
accidentally get caught in the process. In fact, most of them even
advise the user that it could happen with certain programs and include
them in their readme files. At this point in time though, it almost
never happens. It's a thing of the past with XP in particular, so that
warning isn't all that relevant. They are just like any other program
in that you can undo things.
Additionally, this person likes to talk as though the only thing the
registry contains is instructions for the operating system. Far from
it. It also includes instructions for nearly every application
installed on the computer and even a bunch of internet links, shortcuts
and other incidentals.

So, can it dummy. Either open those few brain cells you have left that
aren't burned out, or get off the pot. Or better yet, move to Linux; if
you can figure out how to use it.

HTH, OP,

Twayne

Twayne wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:07 -0700 (PDT), "voujnbwuotkd******.com"
>> <voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This is why it is so important to make
>>> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
>>> cleaners which keep your system in good health.
>>
>>
>> This is not only spam, it's terrible advice.
>
> It's "terrible advice" because it IS spam!. Never, ever trust spammed
> information or sources for anything, no matter how tempting it is. The
> #1 rule of spammers is, "Spammers lie".
>
>> above (snipped from a longer post) who might be tempted to believe it,
>> registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
>
> And that's about as big a piece of bull-chit as is spam. This closed
> minded dummy, rather than being realistic and embracing reality has
> simply closed his mind and wants the whole world to believe as he does
> simply because he says so. He loves the phrase "snake oil" and uses it
> ad infinitum and the majority of posts he makes are very nearly
> identical in content to this one. Rather than post much useful advice
> he seems to just lurk, waiting for someone to mention a registry cleaner
> so he can climb out from the darkness and make his proclamations.

Pot, kettle?

> Personally I myself only have one closed minded area: That's the area
> of giving misinformation either by making wrong statements of what can
> be called lying by omission. I DO have a closed mind here

Yup, you sure do. Agreed.

> If one cannot provide accurate and up to date information, then they
> should shut up and keep quiet, and hopefully check to see if there might
> be
> some flaw in what they said.

Pot, kettle (since YOU NEVER have posted any accurate data, even when
asked).
This would almost be funny, if it weren't so pathetic. (Talking about
projection, this one really takes the cake).

> But, like I said ... it's a closed mind there about "registry cleaners".

Well, indeed you have. So at least we can agree on that.

>> registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
>> don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
>> what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
>> having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>
> I suspect this person hasn't read anything legitimate or reality based
> about the registry since the first year it showed up. I can agree that
> a few leftover entries in the registry are no problem since it's just
> text files that are read very, very quickly, but ... to say "never" as
> implied above, is silly. In one short paragraph I could give you
> instructions on how to work with your registry and end up with a
> woefully slow machine, without putting a single useless entry into the
> registry or mangling anything in the registry. With a little background
> and experience, it's not all that illogical either. I'm NOT going to do
> that here of course, since I consider it unethical.

ROFL!

> My point is, the
> registry is not a big mystery if one digs into it a bit and you do NOT
> have to be an expert on the registry to know how it works.

Whatever you say, Rush. :-)

Oh, and be sure to come back with "your accurate data" substantiating your
claims, sometime. I'll even leave the light on for ya. :-)

Or better yet, move over to talk radio with the dittoheads.

>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
>> removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
>> it may have.
>
> And that is also false, since all decent registry "cleaners" backup any
> changes they make AND include an Undo in case something does
> accidentally get caught in the process. In fact, most of them even
> advise the user that it could happen with certain programs and include
> them in their readme files. At this point in time though, it almost
> never happens. It's a thing of the past with XP in particular, so that
> warning isn't all that relevant. They are just like any other program
> in that you can undo things.
> Additionally, this person likes to talk as though the only thing the
> registry contains is instructions for the operating system. Far from
> it. It also includes instructions for nearly every application
> installed on the computer and even a bunch of internet links, shortcuts
> and other incidentals.
>
> So, can it dummy. Either open those few brain cells you have left that
> aren't burned out, or get off the pot. Or better yet, move to Linux; if
> you can figure out how to use it.
>
> HTH, OP,
>
> Twayne

This is absolute BS
<voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote in message
news:0e0bea25-5d8c-47c9-846d-72f47d9d76c0@y22g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> I'm sure that most people don't have any idea as to what a computer
> registry is unless you are a computer technician or expert. It is
> basically a database which stores various different settings and
> options utilised by your computer. The information consists of the
> various software programs which are installed on your computer,
> hardware, operating system information and various other user
> preferences. So basically any time you add, remove or make changes to
> your software you change or edit an entry in your registry.
> Having said this you can understand why it is so easy to get registry
> problems. The average pc user will continuously add and remove
> software applications over a course of time. These constant additions
> and removals of software will result in broken files and residuals
> which will litter your hard drive, consequently making it perform
> slower and less responsive. This is why it is so important to make
> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
> cleaners which keep your system in good health.If this central system
> component becomes too erroneous it can result in the destruction of
> you entire operating system. This means that you will either have to
> reformat you computer or pay a repair technician to fix it for you....
>
> Registry Repair: http://groups.google.com/group/regrepairsbv

Regardless of your tirade a registry cleaner IS NOT necessary and COULD
cause irreparable damage.
"Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:uCDZelq7IHA.4864@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:07 -0700 (PDT), "voujnbwuotkd******.com"
>> <voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This is why it is so important to make
>>> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
>>> cleaners which keep your system in good health.
>>
>>
>> This is not only spam, it's terrible advice.
>
> It's "terrible advice" because it IS spam!. Never, ever trust spammed
> information or sources for anything, no matter how tempting it is. The #1
> rule of spammers is, "Spammers lie".
>
>
>> above (snipped from a longer post) who might be tempted to believe it,
>> registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
>
> And that's about as big a piece of bull-chit as is spam. This closed
> minded dummy, rather than being realistic and embracing reality has simply
> closed his mind and wants the whole world to believe as he does simply
> because he says so. He loves the phrase "snake oil" and uses it ad
> infinitum and the majority of posts he makes are very nearly identical in
> content to this one. Rather than post much useful advice he seems to just
> lurk, waiting for someone to mention a registry cleaner so he can climb
> out from the darkness and make his snake oil proclamation.
>
> Personally I myself only have one closed minded area: That's the area of
> giving misinformation either by making wrong statements of what can be
> called lying by omission. I DO have a closed mind there: If one cannot
> provide accurate and up to date information, then they should shut up and
> keep quiet, and hopefully check to see if there might be some flaw in what
> they said. But, like I said ... it's a closed mind there about "registry
> cleaners".
>
>> registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
>> don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
>> what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
>> having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>
> I suspect this person hasn't read anything legitimate or reality based
> about the registry since the first year it showed up. I can agree that a
> few leftover entries in the registry are no problem since it's just text
> files that are read very, very quickly, but ... to say "never" as implied
> above, is silly. In one short paragraph I could give you instructions on
> how to work with your registry and end up with a woefully slow machine,
> without putting a single useless entry into the registry or mangling
> anything in the registry. With a little background and experience, it's
> not all that illogical either. I'm NOT going to do that here of course,
> since I consider it unethical. My point is, the registry is not a big
> mystery if one digs into it a bit and you do NOT have to be an expert on
> the registry to know how it works.
>>
>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
>> removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
>> it may have.
>
> And that is also false, since all decent registry "cleaners" backup any
> changes they make AND include an Undo in case something does accidentally
> get caught in the process. In fact, most of them even advise the user
> that it could happen with certain programs and include them in their
> readme files. At this point in time though, it almost never happens.
> It's a thing of the past with XP in particular, so that warning isn't all
> that relevant. They are just like any other program in that you can undo
> things.
> Additionally, this person likes to talk as though the only thing the
> registry contains is instructions for the operating system. Far from it.
> It also includes instructions for nearly every application installed on
> the computer and even a bunch of internet links, shortcuts and other
> incidentals.
>
> So, can it dummy. Either open those few brain cells you have left that
> aren't burned out, or get off the pot. Or better yet, move to Linux; if
> you can figure out how to use it.
>
> HTH, OP,
>
> Twayne
>
>
>

Indeed. And well said.

Unknown wrote:
> Regardless of your tirade a registry cleaner IS NOT necessary and COULD
> cause irreparable damage.
>
> "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:uCDZelq7IHA.4864@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:07 -0700 (PDT), "voujnbwuotkd******.com"
>>> <voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is why it is so important to make
>>>> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
>>>> cleaners which keep your system in good health.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is not only spam, it's terrible advice.
>>
>> It's "terrible advice" because it IS spam!. Never, ever trust spammed
>> information or sources for anything, no matter how tempting it is. The
>> #1
>> rule of spammers is, "Spammers lie".
>>
>>
>>> above (snipped from a longer post) who might be tempted to believe it,
>>> registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
>>
>> And that's about as big a piece of bull-chit as is spam. This closed
>> minded dummy, rather than being realistic and embracing reality has
>> simply
>> closed his mind and wants the whole world to believe as he does simply
>> because he says so. He loves the phrase "snake oil" and uses it ad
>> infinitum and the majority of posts he makes are very nearly identical in
>> content to this one. Rather than post much useful advice he seems to
>> just
>> lurk, waiting for someone to mention a registry cleaner so he can climb
>> out from the darkness and make his snake oil proclamation.
>>
>> Personally I myself only have one closed minded area: That's the area of
>> giving misinformation either by making wrong statements of what can be
>> called lying by omission. I DO have a closed mind there: If one cannot
>> provide accurate and up to date information, then they should shut up and
>> keep quiet, and hopefully check to see if there might be some flaw in
>> what
>> they said. But, like I said ... it's a closed mind there about
>> "registry
>> cleaners".
>>
>>> registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
>>> don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
>>> what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
>>> having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>
>> I suspect this person hasn't read anything legitimate or reality based
>> about the registry since the first year it showed up. I can agree that a
>> few leftover entries in the registry are no problem since it's just text
>> files that are read very, very quickly, but ... to say "never" as implied
>> above, is silly. In one short paragraph I could give you instructions on
>> how to work with your registry and end up with a woefully slow machine,
>> without putting a single useless entry into the registry or mangling
>> anything in the registry. With a little background and experience, it's
>> not all that illogical either. I'm NOT going to do that here of course,
>> since I consider it unethical. My point is, the registry is not a big
>> mystery if one digs into it a bit and you do NOT have to be an expert on
>> the registry to know how it works.
>>>
>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
>>> removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
>>> it may have.
>>
>> And that is also false, since all decent registry "cleaners" backup any
>> changes they make AND include an Undo in case something does accidentally
>> get caught in the process. In fact, most of them even advise the user
>> that it could happen with certain programs and include them in their
>> readme files. At this point in time though, it almost never happens.
>> It's a thing of the past with XP in particular, so that warning isn't all
>> that relevant. They are just like any other program in that you can undo
>> things.
>> Additionally, this person likes to talk as though the only thing the
>> registry contains is instructions for the operating system. Far from it.
>> It also includes instructions for nearly every application installed on
>> the computer and even a bunch of internet links, shortcuts and other
>> incidentals.
>>
>> So, can it dummy. Either open those few brain cells you have left that
>> aren't burned out, or get off the pot. Or better yet, move to Linux; if
>> you can figure out how to use it.
>>
>> HTH, OP,
>>
>> Twayne

Yup, and so could ANY other program/application/code.
I didn't say it was "necessary".
I didn't say it would never cause damage. ANY software can cause
damage. Even Microsoft's own code, in fact.
I did put things in a logical, normal and truthful, perspective.


> Regardless of your tirade a registry cleaner IS NOT necessary and
> COULD cause irreparable damage.
> "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:uCDZelq7IHA.4864@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 02:42:07 -0700 (PDT), "voujnbwuotkd******.com"
>>> <voujnbwuotkd******.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> This is why it is so important to make
>>>> sure that you maintain a healthy system by making use of registry
>>>> cleaners which keep your system in good health.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is not only spam, it's terrible advice.
>>
>> It's "terrible advice" because it IS spam!. Never, ever trust
>> spammed information or sources for anything, no matter how tempting
>> it is. The #1 rule of spammers is, "Spammers lie".
>>
>>
>>> above (snipped from a longer post) who might be tempted to believe
>>> it, registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
>>
>> And that's about as big a piece of bull-chit as is spam. This closed
>> minded dummy, rather than being realistic and embracing reality has
>> simply closed his mind and wants the whole world to believe as he
>> does simply because he says so. He loves the phrase "snake oil" and
>> uses it ad infinitum and the majority of posts he makes are very
>> nearly identical in content to this one. Rather than post much
>> useful advice he seems to just lurk, waiting for someone to mention
>> a registry cleaner so he can climb out from the darkness and make
>> his snake oil proclamation. Personally I myself only have one closed
>> minded area: That's the
>> area of giving misinformation either by making wrong statements of
>> what can be called lying by omission. I DO have a closed mind
>> there: If one cannot provide accurate and up to date information,
>> then they should shut up and keep quiet, and hopefully check to see
>> if there might be some flaw in what they said. But, like I said ...
>> it's a closed mind there about "registry cleaners".
>>
>>> registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
>>> don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
>>> what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
>>> having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>
>> I suspect this person hasn't read anything legitimate or reality
>> based about the registry since the first year it showed up. I can
>> agree that a few leftover entries in the registry are no problem
>> since it's just text files that are read very, very quickly, but ...
>> to say "never" as implied above, is silly. In one short paragraph I
>> could give you instructions on how to work with your registry and
>> end up with a woefully slow machine, without putting a single
>> useless entry into the registry or mangling anything in the
>> registry. With a little background and experience, it's not all
>> that illogical either. I'm NOT going to do that here of course,
>> since I consider it unethical. My point is, the registry is not a
>> big mystery if one digs into it a bit and you do NOT have to be an
>> expert on the registry to know how it works.
>>>
>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than any
>>> potential benefit it may have.
>>
>> And that is also false, since all decent registry "cleaners" backup
>> any changes they make AND include an Undo in case something does
>> accidentally get caught in the process. In fact, most of them even
>> advise the user that it could happen with certain programs and
>> include them in their readme files. At this point in time though,
>> it almost never happens. It's a thing of the past with XP in
>> particular, so that warning isn't all that relevant. They are just
>> like any other program in that you can undo things.
>> Additionally, this person likes to talk as though the only thing
>> the registry contains is instructions for the operating system. Far
>> from it. It also includes instructions for nearly every application
>> installed on the computer and even a bunch of internet links,
>> shortcuts and other incidentals.
>>
>> So, can it dummy. Either open those few brain cells you have left
>> that aren't burned out, or get off the pot. Or better yet, move to
>> Linux; if you can figure out how to use it.
>>
>> HTH, OP,
>>
>> Twayne