Now I Understand

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 08:50:20 -0500, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:

Bluuuue Rajah wrote:
"philo" wrote in
:

"Bluuuue Rajah" Bluuuuue@Rajah. wrote in message
...
Everybody rightly criticizes Micro$tiff for selling a crappy OS, and
Linux is obviuosly better, if you have the time and the expertise to
use in it, but until this week I didn't understand exaclty why
Windows is such a POS.

When I had to uninstall the Google toolbar because Google installed
an update tht I didn't ask for, which overrode IE5's ctrl-f command,
the reason beame clear. Windows' install/uninstall method causes
bugs to accumulate, if programs are not ununstalled in precise the
reverse order of which they were installed.

The problem is that terrible method of saving old copies of system
files, like .ini files, as backups, to be restored when software is
uninstalled. So the more apps you uninstall, out of order, the
buggier your system becomes, until you finally have to reinstall the
OS.

Linux apparently doesn't have anything resembling this problem, which
makes me wonder, how did the Linux designers (Torvald?) handle this
problem, and can we learn anything from their solution to help
minimize the problem with Windows?

Your thoughts?

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. Everybody knows that Windows slowly
accumulates bugs. They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.

On Dec 21, 6:29*pm, Lookout wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 08:50:20 -0500, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:
Bluuuue Rajah wrote:
"philo" wrote in
:

"Bluuuue Rajah" Bluuuuue@Rajah. wrote in message
...
Everybody rightly criticizes Micro$tiff for selling a crappy OS, and
Linux is obviuosly better, if you have the time and the expertise to
use in it, but until this week I didn't understand exaclty why
Windows is such a POS.

When I had to uninstall the Google toolbar because Google installed
an update tht I didn't ask for, which overrode IE5's ctrl-f command,
the reason beame clear. *Windows' install/uninstall method causes
bugs to accumulate, if programs are not ununstalled in precise the
reverse order of which they were installed.

The problem is that terrible method of saving old copies of system
files, like .ini files, as backups, to be restored when software is
uninstalled. *So the more apps you uninstall, out of order, the
buggier your system becomes, until you finally have to reinstall the
OS.

Linux apparently doesn't have anything resembling this problem, which
makes me wonder, how did the Linux designers (Torvald?) handle this
problem, and can we learn anything from their solution to help
minimize the problem with Windows?

Your thoughts?

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. *Everybody knows that Windows slowly
accumulates bugs. *They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. *That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.

Thats just great!

Does it also clean up unused desktop icons? /sarkasm

snip

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. Everybody knows that Windows slowly
accumulates bugs. They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


I don't advise that at all,
you can do more harm than good by using registry utilities.

The OP, if he's ruined his OS did so simply because he was clueless
and did not pay attention.

I know there are some apps that can put a Google search bar into your
browser (just as an example)
but if it's done, it's because the user was *not* paying attention.
I've never seen an application *not* give one a choice...
but most people just start clicking buttons without even watching
what the hell they are doing...
That is one way to destroy your system fast.

Apparently you DON"T understand a thing.
You state 'everybody RIGHTLY criticizes' Microsoft. What is right about it.
You state Linux is obviously better. How is it better?
You are posting nothing but emotional gibberish.
"Bluuuue Rajah" Bluuuuue@Rajah. wrote in message
...

Everybody rightly criticizes Micro$tiff for selling a crappy OS, and
Linux is obviuosly better, if you have the time and the expertise to use
in it, but until this week I didn't understand exaclty why Windows is
such a POS.

When I had to uninstall the Google toolbar because Google installed an
update tht I didn't ask for, which overrode IE5's ctrl-f command, the
reason beame clear. Windows' install/uninstall method causes bugs to
accumulate, if programs are not ununstalled in precise the reverse order
of which they were installed.

The problem is that terrible method of saving old copies of system
files, like .ini files, as backups, to be restored when software is
uninstalled. So the more apps you uninstall, out of order, the buggier
your system becomes, until you finally have to reinstall the OS.

Linux apparently doesn't have anything resembling this problem, which
makes me wonder, how did the Linux designers (Torvald?) handle this
problem, and can we learn anything from their solution to help minimize
the problem with Windows?

Your thoughts?

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 09:40:10 -0800 (PST), gabydewilde
wrote:

On Dec 21, 6:29*pm, Lookout wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 08:50:20 -0500, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:
Bluuuue Rajah wrote:
"philo" wrote in
:

"Bluuuue Rajah" Bluuuuue@Rajah. wrote in message
...
Everybody rightly criticizes Micro$tiff for selling a crappy OS, and
Linux is obviuosly better, if you have the time and the expertise to
use in it, but until this week I didn't understand exaclty why
Windows is such a POS.

When I had to uninstall the Google toolbar because Google installed
an update tht I didn't ask for, which overrode IE5's ctrl-f command,
the reason beame clear. *Windows' install/uninstall method causes
bugs to accumulate, if programs are not ununstalled in precise the
reverse order of which they were installed.

The problem is that terrible method of saving old copies of system
files, like .ini files, as backups, to be restored when software is
uninstalled. *So the more apps you uninstall, out of order, the
buggier your system becomes, until you finally have to reinstall the
OS.

Linux apparently doesn't have anything resembling this problem, which
makes me wonder, how did the Linux designers (Torvald?) handle this
problem, and can we learn anything from their solution to help
minimize the problem with Windows?

Your thoughts?

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. *Everybody knows that Windows slowly
accumulates bugs. *They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. *That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.

Thats just great!

Does it also clean up unused desktop icons? /sarkasm

It looks for registry entries that lead to dead ends and deletes them.
Then you use the hard drive cleaner to look for files that don't have
registry entries that apply to them. That eliminates most invalid
entries and files. No program is perfect but those I do help swear by
it after having problems for years now they don't have the same
problems.

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:50:35 -0600, "philo" wrote:


snip

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. Everybody knows that Windows slowly
accumulates bugs. They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


I don't advise that at all,
you can do more harm than good by using registry utilities.

Of course that's true. You don't let it do all the work..you have to
watch what it points out as a problem and work from there.


The OP, if he's ruined his OS did so simply because he was clueless
and did not pay attention.

I know there are some apps that can put a Google search bar into your
browser (just as an example)
but if it's done, it's because the user was *not* paying attention.
I've never seen an application *not* give one a choice...
but most people just start clicking buttons without even watching
what the hell they are doing...
That is one way to destroy your system fast.

Rev Turd Fredericks wrote:
Shenan Stanley wrote:
Bluuuue Rajah wrote:
Everybody rightly criticizes Micro$tiff for selling a crappy OS, and
Linux is obviuosly better, if you have the time and the expertise
to use in it, but until this week I didn't understand exaclty why
Windows is such a POS.

When I had to uninstall the Google toolbar because Google installed
an update tht I didn't ask for, which overrode IE5's ctrl-f
command, the reason beame clear. Windows' install/uninstall method
causes bugs to accumulate, if programs are not ununstalled in
precise the reverse order of which they were installed.

The problem is that terrible method of saving old copies of system
files, like .ini files, as backups, to be restored when software is
uninstalled. So the more apps you uninstall, out of order, the
buggier your system becomes, until you finally have to reinstall
the OS.

Linux apparently doesn't have anything resembling this problem,
which makes me wonder, how did the Linux designers (Torvald?)
handle this problem, and can we learn anything from their solution
to help minimize the problem with Windows?

Your thoughts?

I think you have made gross generalizations based off personal
experience - which are usually proven inaccurate (at best.)

I utilize many different operating systems (and flavors/versions of
said operating systems) and if there is a single OS that is not
lacking in one or more (mostly more after years of use on any given
OS) ways, I have yet to come across it. Many times - some of the
'problems' found could have been avoided with experience and know-how
on the part of the user - which is acceptable in most cases because I
don't believe someone whould 'hold my hand' in everything I do. Also
- many times - it is a 'personal' issue with the OS - meaning it won't
do something the end-user believes it *should* do.

As far as your gross generalizations - I have a system I have been
running since Windows XP was released. It has been through two
different sets of hardware, several hardware failures, many *MANY*
installations and software removals and is now finally running as a
VirtualBox machine on top of my Windows Vista and Windows Vista x64
Ultimate machines. I have *not* had to 'reinstall my OS' (assuming
you mean a clean installation) nor did it ever slow down in any way I
did not expect (when you upgrade applications, seldom do they actually
utilize less resources than their prior versions...)

In my specific experience - Windows (XP, Vista and some prior versions
to a certain extent) are fairly stable operating systems that have
given me personally little trouble. I've thrown a lot at them - and
my experience is not limited to just the applications I utilize on a
daily basis nor is my experience limited to just one or two hardware
configurations (I would put myself in the thousands (possibly tens of
thousands), easily, as far as how many different hardware
configurations I have had to deal with in the years since Windows XP
was first released alone.) I also pull from the experience of those
whose systems I have cleaned up from a mess or setup initially - in
that they seldom have the same trouble after a little configuration
and a little tutoring on how to properly utilize their system.

YMMV.

After your assertion that personal experience is "inaccurate (at best)",
your whole post has become a meaningless diatribe.

actually he has eloquently described why every major o/s has the same
fundamental flaw: feature creep and bug-fix/ patches.....in other words,
bloatware.
I can only hope that his follow- up post will be an announcement of a
new o/s he and/or some friends built from the ground up.

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:29:48 -0600, Lookout
wrote:

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


That's a very dangerous and poor thing to do, in my view.

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.

Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html


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

"Lookout" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:50:35 -0600, "philo" wrote:


snip

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. Everybody knows that Windows
slowly
accumulates bugs. They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


I don't advise that at all,
you can do more harm than good by using registry utilities.

Of course that's true. You don't let it do all the work..you have to
watch what it points out as a problem and work from there.


If you know exactly what you are doing...
which I am sure is the case with you...that's fine.

The only time I've used them is to cleanup the mess left behind
by a poorly written application that would not uninstall...

In that respect I found such a utility useful...
but for someone who does not know what they are doing
and just blindly lets one work...
it could create a big problem.

"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote in
:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:29:48 -0600, Lookout
wrote:

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


That's a very dangerous and poor thing to do, in my view.

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.

Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html

This was my whole point from the start.

Having unused reigstry entries lying around does not cause the bugs that
slowly accumulate under Windows. It is caused by uninstalling codes in
some order other than the reverse of how they were installed.

When you do that, the system reverts to previous version of the saved
files that were in place when you did the install, and those files don't
account for any new installs that you did, along the way. There's no
way out of this headache other than to redesign the uninstall procedure
so that it doesn't revert to those saved files.

Although it may have some small faults, Linux is a *lot* more
bulletproof than Windows, which means that it doesn't use that uninstall
method. I'd like to know what it does use, so I can better understand
the OS design issues associated with this problem.

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 13:41:45 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:29:48 -0600, Lookout
wrote:

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


That's a very dangerous and poor thing to do, in my view.

I'm sure it's something you're not capable of working with. In my view
it's a great way to keep your system humming.

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 15:11:03 -0600, "philo" wrote:


"Lookout" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:50:35 -0600, "philo" wrote:


snip

I've been using Linux almost as long as I've been using Windows.

Linux is not immune from it's own problems...
and unless one is very familiar with Linux...the problems can
sometimes be harder to sort out.

That said, with a little bit of common sense, Windows should not
require a re-install.
I run mainly Win2k and XP and they have both been running 99% +
trouble free for *many* years.

You're living in a fantasy world. Everybody knows that Windows
slowly
accumulates bugs. They've known almost from day one, when people
started griping about what a POS it was.

Every OS accumulates bugs. That's reality, son.

/BHA

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


I don't advise that at all,
you can do more harm than good by using registry utilities.

Of course that's true. You don't let it do all the work..you have to
watch what it points out as a problem and work from there.


If you know exactly what you are doing...
which I am sure is the case with you...that's fine.

The only time I've used them is to cleanup the mess left behind
by a poorly written application that would not uninstall...

In that respect I found such a utility useful...
but for someone who does not know what they are doing
and just blindly lets one work...
it could create a big problem.

I work with them before they use it. But if they want to learn it's a
useful tool.

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 17:20:11 -0600, Lookout
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 13:41:45 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:29:48 -0600, Lookout
wrote:

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner. I use FixIt Utilities
and to delete invalid or no longer need registry entries and files.


That's a very dangerous and poor thing to do, in my view.

I'm sure it's something you're not capable of working with. In my view
it's a great way to keep your system humming.


You are certainly entitled to that view, if that's what you believe.
But as far as I'm concerned, you're dead wrong.

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

Dear Ken Blake, MVP:

"Ken Blake, MVP" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 17:20:11 -0600, Lookout

wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 13:41:45 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:29:48 -0600, Lookout

wrote:

Not if your regularly use a registry cleaner.
I use FixIt Utilities and to delete invalid or no
longer need registry entries and files.


That's a very dangerous and poor thing to do,
in my view.

I'm sure it's something you're not capable of
working with. In my view it's a great way to keep
your system humming.

You are certainly entitled to that view, if that's
what you believe. But as far as I'm concerned,
you're dead wrong.

So how do *you* get rid of Norton Anti-virus? RegClean.exe didn'
touch it...

David A. Smith

N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:


So how do *you* get rid of Norton Anti-virus? RegClean.exe didn'
touch it...

David A. Smith




http://service1.symantec.com/Support...05033108162039