If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Do you really think so?
Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
It most certainly does NOT say 'do not use any kind of regclean utility'. It
says "RegClean" is no longer supported. "Raj" wrote in message ... Please read the following line: The RegClean utility is no longer supported and has been removed from all Microsoft download sites. It itself says do not use anykind of regclean utility. Raj "Prabhat" wrote: Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Not true! Many residual pieces of garbage are left.
" wrote in message ... This is also my past experience. I now use the programme "Total Install" to install and if necessary uninstall a programme. This appears to remove all programme entries in the register when a programme is uninstalled. Derek "R. McCarty" wrote in message .net... Most recent Applications will remove their Registry content when they are uninstalled. Usually, you can check in HKLM\Software and see if the uninstall left behind a Key Heading (Listed by Company name). It varies from vendor to vendor. Some Uninstallers do an excellent job of removal, and some leave pieces behind. Along with Registry keys some uninstalls will leave the Program Files folder with customization settings or values to retain if the program is re-installed at a later date. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... I don't know, But the people from Microsoft or MVPs should able to reply this. Thanks Prabhat " wrote in message ... Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Absolute hogwash. You will notice an improvement in performance if you run a
good registry cleaner. As a matter of fact, the first time a good cleaner is run it will find over 300 useless entries. "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Use NTREGOPT.
NTREGOPT NT Registry Optimizer ERUNT The Emergency Recovery Utility NT http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.hederer/erunt/ ERUNT [[Note: The "Export registry" function in Regedit is USELESS (!) to make a complete backup of the registry. Neither does it export the whole registry (for example, no information from the "SECURITY" hive is saved), nor can the exported file be used later to replace the current registry with the old one. Instead, if you re-import the file, it is merged with the current registry, leaving you with an absolute mess of old and new registry keys.]] http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.he...runt/erunt.txt NTREGOPT [[Similar to Windows 9x/Me, the registry files in an NT-based system can become fragmented over time, occupying more space on your hard disk than necessary and decreasing overall performance. You should use the NTREGOPT utility regularly, but especially after installing or uninstalling a program, to minimize the size of the registry files and optimize registry access. The program works by recreating each registry hive "from scratch", thus removing any slack space that may be left from previously modified or deleted keys. Note that the program does NOT change the contents of the registry in any way, nor does it physically defrag the registry files on the drive (as the PageDefrag program from SysInternals does). The optimization done by NTREGOPT is simply compacting the registry hives to the minimum size possible.]] http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.he...t/ntregopt.txt -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , Prabhat hunted and pecked: Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
[[Wesley is correct, of course.]] LOL I may have to print this out and
frame it. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , Ted Zieglar hunted and pecked: Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Any performance improvement from the elimination of "300 useless entries"
exists in your head. You've bought into the hype, my friend. Big time. -- Ted Zieglar "Unknown" wrote in message . com... Absolute hogwash. You will notice an improvement in performance if you run a good registry cleaner. As a matter of fact, the first time a good cleaner is run it will find over 300 useless entries. "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Hi Prabhat - In my experience all of these Reg cleaners, even the best, are
fraught with danger. I advise against using them except in one specific instance, that is when you have one that is capable of doing specific Reg searches, and you NEED (not just WANT) to remove the remaining traces of something that didn't get uninstalled correctly. (and you didn't have foresight enough to install it using Total Uninstall, http://www.geocities.com/ggmartau/tu.html or direct dwnld he http://files.webattack.com/localdl834/tun234.zip, in the first place.) Lastly, if you must screw around with your Registry, then at least get Erunt/Erdnt, and run it before you do the Reg clean. You'll then have a true restore available to you. Read below to see why you might not just using the Reg cleaner's resto Get Erunt here for all NT-based computers including XP: http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.he...runt/index.htm I've set it up to take a scheduled backup each night at 12:01AM on a weekly round-robin basis, and a Monthly on the 1st of each month. See here for how to set that up: http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.he...runt/erunt.txt, and for some useful information about this subject. This program is one of the best things around - saved my butt on many occasions, and will also run very nicely from a DOS prompt (in case you've done something that won't let you boot any more and need to revert to a previous Registry) IF you're FAT32 OR have a DOS startup disk with NTFS write drivers in an NTFS system. (There is also a way using the Recovery Console to get back to being "bootable" even without separate DOS write NTFS drivers, after which you can do a "normal" Erdnt restore.) (BTW, it also includes a Registry defragger program). Free, and very, very highly recommended. FYI, quoting from the above document: "Note: The "Export registry" function in Regedit is USELESS (!) to make a complete backup of the registry. Neither does it export the whole registry (for example, no information from the "SECURITY" hive is saved), nor can the exported file be used later to replace the current registry with the old one. Instead, if you re-import the file, it is merged with the current registry, leaving you with an absolute mess of old and new registry keys. -- Please respond in the same thread. Regards, Jim Byrd, MS-MVP In , Prabhat typed: I don't know, But the people from Microsoft or MVPs should able to reply this. Thanks Prabhat " wrote in message ... Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Consider this then!
I performed a clean install a month ago, just to test this theory. Clean install. Added SP1 and all available Window Updates. Installed all my programs (had a lot of time on my hands). Then I installed SP2. I ran WinDoctor and eliminated about 600 bad entries in the registry. I rebooted and emptied the recycle bin. I then ran NTREGopt.exe ( from ERUNT). This optimized (compacted) the registry. I obtained a 19% gain in the reduction of the registry size (about 8.5 meg smaller). When I rebooted I was able to "CLOCK" - via a stop watch, a 23 second reduction in bootup time to a usable desktop! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
The six hundred registry entries that you eliminated didn't make your bootup
any faster. It took your system a fraction of a second to load those registry entries into RAM; that's how much time you saved by eliminating them. Besides, how do you know that those 600 registry entries were "bad" -- because WinDoctor told you so? The great majority of 'errors' that WinDoctor finds (missing icons, broken shortcuts, etc.) are laughable. Does it seem a little suspicious to you that a clean install of Windows with nothing more than Windows updates added yielded 600 "bad" registry keys? Windows XP is continuously tuning itself in the background, establishing the pre-fetch, performing partial defrags, reordering the driver load (the 'secret' behind the bootvis routine), etc. Have you ever seen an article in a computer magazine that tested registry cleaners with 'before and after' benchmarks that measured boot times and overall system performance? -- Ted Zieglar "Richard Urban" wrote in message ... Consider this then! I performed a clean install a month ago, just to test this theory. Clean install. Added SP1 and all available Window Updates. Installed all my programs (had a lot of time on my hands). Then I installed SP2. I ran WinDoctor and eliminated about 600 bad entries in the registry. I rebooted and emptied the recycle bin. I then ran NTREGopt.exe ( from ERUNT). This optimized (compacted) the registry. I obtained a 19% gain in the reduction of the registry size (about 8.5 meg smaller). When I rebooted I was able to "CLOCK" - via a stop watch, a 23 second reduction in bootup time to a usable desktop! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Told you I loaded ALL of my software, about 100 major programs and smaller
applets! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... The six hundred registry entries that you eliminated didn't make your bootup any faster. It took your system a fraction of a second to load those registry entries into RAM; that's how much time you saved by eliminating them. Besides, how do you know that those 600 registry entries were "bad" -- because WinDoctor told you so? The great majority of 'errors' that WinDoctor finds (missing icons, broken shortcuts, etc.) are laughable. Does it seem a little suspicious to you that a clean install of Windows with nothing more than Windows updates added yielded 600 "bad" registry keys? Windows XP is continuously tuning itself in the background, establishing the pre-fetch, performing partial defrags, reordering the driver load (the 'secret' behind the bootvis routine), etc. Have you ever seen an article in a computer magazine that tested registry cleaners with 'before and after' benchmarks that measured boot times and overall system performance? -- Ted Zieglar "Richard Urban" wrote in message ... Consider this then! I performed a clean install a month ago, just to test this theory. Clean install. Added SP1 and all available Window Updates. Installed all my programs (had a lot of time on my hands). Then I installed SP2. I ran WinDoctor and eliminated about 600 bad entries in the registry. I rebooted and emptied the recycle bin. I then ran NTREGopt.exe ( from ERUNT). This optimized (compacted) the registry. I obtained a 19% gain in the reduction of the registry size (about 8.5 meg smaller). When I rebooted I was able to "CLOCK" - via a stop watch, a 23 second reduction in bootup time to a usable desktop! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
I just performed that benchmark, with a stop watch. I can't argue with the
results! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... The six hundred registry entries that you eliminated didn't make your bootup any faster. It took your system a fraction of a second to load those registry entries into RAM; that's how much time you saved by eliminating them. Besides, how do you know that those 600 registry entries were "bad" -- because WinDoctor told you so? The great majority of 'errors' that WinDoctor finds (missing icons, broken shortcuts, etc.) are laughable. Does it seem a little suspicious to you that a clean install of Windows with nothing more than Windows updates added yielded 600 "bad" registry keys? Windows XP is continuously tuning itself in the background, establishing the pre-fetch, performing partial defrags, reordering the driver load (the 'secret' behind the bootvis routine), etc. Have you ever seen an article in a computer magazine that tested registry cleaners with 'before and after' benchmarks that measured boot times and overall system performance? -- Ted Zieglar "Richard Urban" wrote in message ... Consider this then! I performed a clean install a month ago, just to test this theory. Clean install. Added SP1 and all available Window Updates. Installed all my programs (had a lot of time on my hands). Then I installed SP2. I ran WinDoctor and eliminated about 600 bad entries in the registry. I rebooted and emptied the recycle bin. I then ran NTREGopt.exe ( from ERUNT). This optimized (compacted) the registry. I obtained a 19% gain in the reduction of the registry size (about 8.5 meg smaller). When I rebooted I was able to "CLOCK" - via a stop watch, a 23 second reduction in bootup time to a usable desktop! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
Holly cow, Richard: What kind of software do you buy that causes 600
"errors" to appear in your registry? Maybe you ought to spend a little more and get the good stuff. {;- {;- Ted Zieglar "Richard Urban" wrote in message ... Told you I loaded ALL of my software, about 100 major programs and smaller applets! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... The six hundred registry entries that you eliminated didn't make your bootup any faster. It took your system a fraction of a second to load those registry entries into RAM; that's how much time you saved by eliminating them. Besides, how do you know that those 600 registry entries were "bad" -- because WinDoctor told you so? The great majority of 'errors' that WinDoctor finds (missing icons, broken shortcuts, etc.) are laughable. Does it seem a little suspicious to you that a clean install of Windows with nothing more than Windows updates added yielded 600 "bad" registry keys? Windows XP is continuously tuning itself in the background, establishing the pre-fetch, performing partial defrags, reordering the driver load (the 'secret' behind the bootvis routine), etc. Have you ever seen an article in a computer magazine that tested registry cleaners with 'before and after' benchmarks that measured boot times and overall system performance? -- Ted Zieglar "Richard Urban" wrote in message ... Consider this then! I performed a clean install a month ago, just to test this theory. Clean install. Added SP1 and all available Window Updates. Installed all my programs (had a lot of time on my hands). Then I installed SP2. I ran WinDoctor and eliminated about 600 bad entries in the registry. I rebooted and emptied the recycle bin. I then ran NTREGopt.exe ( from ERUNT). This optimized (compacted) the registry. I obtained a 19% gain in the reduction of the registry size (about 8.5 meg smaller). When I rebooted I was able to "CLOCK" - via a stop watch, a 23 second reduction in bootup time to a usable desktop! -- Regards: Richard Urban aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-) "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Do you really think so? Consider this: How many megabytes of memory does, say, one thousand redundant registry keys occupy? How much RAM do you have installed? How fast is your hardware? You accomplish nothing measurable (let alone perceptable) by eliminating those thousand registry keys, but you risk crippling your system with a so-called registry cleaner toy. If you're interested in speeding up your system in a way that you can actually notice, and you're already diligent about maintaining your computer, buy more RAM, a faster hard disk or a faster video card. -- Ted Zieglar "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi Ted, Doeas Registry Gets Load while the Windows Load? If yes Then that should affect the System Performance if the Size grows due to Unwanted Values in it. Thanks Prabhat "Ted Zieglar" wrote in message ... Wesley is correct, of course. The proper way to deal with the registry is to leave it alone, unless you need to fix a specific problem that can only be repaired by editing the registry. Redundant registry entries cause no harm to your computer and do not affect its performance. -- Ted Zieglar "Wesley Vogel" wrote in message ... No. XP does not do this. -- Hope this helps. Let us know. Wes In , hunted and pecked: Do I understand correctly, that XP removes redundant registry entries left behind when programmes are un-installed. "Prabhat" wrote in message ... Hi All, I have XP + SP1. I use Microsoft OLD RegClean. Is this the Best Registry Cleaner Available? Or If not which one I should Go For my XP System? Thanks Prabhat |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
A note with regards to restoring the registry with ERUNT when the partitions
are formatted and you are unable to start WINXP. You can restore the Registry to NTFS drives from DOS using ERUNT if you load NTFSDOSPro. THe program NTFSDOSPRO will allow you to read and write to NTFS volumes from DOS. However NTFSDOSPro remaps the partitions and the partition where the Registry hives resides (normally C:/windows) is likely to be remapped to another letter. In my case NTFSDOSPRO remaps C: to F:. To overcome this and restore the Registry using ERUNT you need to open ERDNT.ini in the file set to be restored and change all references to C: to the drive letter assigned by NTFSDOSPro before running ERDNT.exe. "Jim Byrd" wrote in message ... snip Lastly, if you must screw around with your Registry, then at least get Erunt/Erdnt, and run it before you do the Reg clean. You'll then have a true restore available to you. Read below to see why you might not just using the Reg cleaner's resto Get Erunt here for all NT-based computers including XP: http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.he...runt/index.htm I've set it up to take a scheduled backup each night at 12:01AM on a weekly round-robin basis, and a Monthly on the 1st of each month. See here for how to set that up: http://home.t-online.de/home/lars.he...runt/erunt.txt, and for some useful information about this subject. This program is one of the best things around - saved my butt on many occasions, and will also run very nicely from a DOS prompt (in case you've done something that won't let you boot any more and need to revert to a previous Registry) IF you're FAT32 OR have a DOS startup disk with NTFS write drivers in an NTFS system. (There is also a way using the Recovery Console to get back to being "bootable" even without separate DOS write NTFS drivers, after which you can do a "normal" Erdnt restore.) (BTW, it also includes a Registry defragger program). Free, and very, very highly recommended. FYI, quoting from the above document: "Note: The "Export registry" function in Regedit is USELESS (!) to make a complete backup of the registry. Neither does it export the whole registry (for example, no information from the "SECURITY" hive is saved), nor can the exported file be used later to replace the current registry with the old one. Instead, if you re-import the file, it is merged with the current registry, leaving you with an absolute mess of old and new registry keys. -- Please respond in the same thread. Regards, Jim Byrd, MS-MVP snip |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Which Registry Cleaner?
You are correct insofar as the registry can be thought of as a database, but
you can't compare it with a third party database program (like Microsoft Access, for example). Compaction of the registry is performed in the background by Windows. However, there are always those who think they can do measurably better with a registry cleaner/optimizer. And why not - that's what the advertising says. As an aside (and this is not directed at you): I am always amused at people's attempts to add insignificant performance improvements through the use of exotic tools when there is so much more performance to be gained by learning how to use their computer's to best advantage. -- Ted Zieglar "Bill Cotter" wrote in message g.com... On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 13:40:05 GMT, in article , "R. McCarty" wrote: Most recent Applications will remove their Registry content when they are uninstalled. Usually, you can check in HKLM\Software and see if the uninstall left behind a Key Heading (Listed by Company name). It varies from vendor to vendor. Some Uninstallers do an excellent job of removal, and some leave pieces behind. Along with Registry keys some uninstalls will leave the Program Files folder with customization settings or values to retain if the program is re-installed at a later date. The registry is a database however, and my understanding of databases is that, without compaction from time to time, they never become smaller, only larger. So, even if program vendors do an *excellent* job of removing useless keys (a huge 'if' IMHO), over time combined with many program installs and uninstalls, the registry is going to end up with a lot of "air pockets" in it. Can anyone address the implications of this on system performance and/or reliability? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Registry cleaner | TheBFG | New Users to Windows XP | 10 | November 26th 12 11:02 AM |
Registry cleaner | Just Me | General XP issues or comments | 21 | December 14th 04 01:31 AM |
Registry Cleaner for XP? | Dick M. | The Basics | 8 | October 8th 04 04:10 AM |
What are the reasons to use a registry cleaner? | Mike | General XP issues or comments | 5 | August 26th 04 04:02 AM |
Any Value in a 'Registry Cleaner' in Windows XP? | Lillly | General XP issues or comments | 11 | August 2nd 04 01:01 PM |