Ted Zieglar wrote:
Your response is based on a very common misunderstanding of how the registry
works and how software is uninstalled. The registry is not like my sock
drawer, where I can put 10 socks in and then take the very same 10 socks
out, leaving the drawer exactly as it was.

For all but the simplest of programs, a well written uninstaller often
leaves fragments of a program behind in the registry. Without going all
technical on you, this is for two reasons: One is for safety. A well written
uninstaller will not take the risk of editing registry keys if it might
adversely affect your computer's performance.

I would say that a reasonably written uninstaller should know which
items are expendible and which are not. Your statement implies that all
that is left behind is left behind for a good reason. I am willing to
bet you anything that such is not the case. If you're not aware of this
then you haven't looked hard enough. Run a cleaner in scan mode and see
if you have any references to non-existent files, where you know that
these references will never be called upon until the relevant product
is reinstalled. This is a simple, but realistic example.

The second is for business.
For example: Who would convert a time-limited free trial of a program to a
paid version if uninstalling the free version removed evidence that the
program was previously installed?

OK, I can accept this one. But, if I'm not mistaken, Registry entries
related to this type of stuff are generally well masked, their function
is not obvious, and they certainly are not the type that one would take
upon themselves to delete.

Going back to my sock drawer - because I'm too lazy to come up with a better
analogy - If my sock drawer was as big as Los Angeles, why would I care
whether it contained old pairs of torn socks stuck way in the back where
they aren't doing any harm to anybody, unless I was anal.

Socks in LA? What if it wasn't socks, but old rusting buses? What about
my "50 leftover files" example?


--
Ted Zieglar
"You can do it if you try."

"bxf" wrote in message
oups.com...

Ted Zieglar wrote:
"Same logic for getting rid of crap in the Registry."

Can you describe exactly how this "crap" adversely affects your
computer? Be
specific.

No, I specifically said "True, this usually does not create an actual
problem". My point is that it is garbage, and ought not to be there, by
definition (i.e. it is garbage). If the responsible product did its job
correctly, it would have deleted all the entries that it had created
for itself.

I could give you another example that may be easier to digest because
it is more conspicuous. If you installed and then uninstalled a product
that left 50 small files on your C: drive, wouldn't you want to
eliminate them, even though the space occupied is not significant?

I am not disputing the fact that deleting Registry entries
indiscriminately is dangerous. It's not as if letting cleaners run on
the loose MAY cause problems. It WILL cause problems, so you get no
argument from me in that regard. I just like to keep things clean.