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 | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
Hi
Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA -- remove fred before emailing |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
On 27/02/2018 20:22, scbs29 wrote:
Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA Pros only. Any malware you install is always a good thing. So go ahead and use it until you scream. -- With over 600 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
scbs29 wrote:
Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit? Any pros or cons? This, like many other suites that bundle in many utilities, provides less than stellar individual tools. You would be better off getting the tools you want and getting better quality ones. Glary doesn't even provide a list of the functions or tools they roll into their bundle. At the bottom of the page, they separately list their free tools which I'm guessing is what they roll into their bundled suite. Those a - Registry Repair Usually snake oil. Only rare will it help, like delete shell handlers that have been uninstalled but were dirty and left behind handlers defined in the registry. Alternative: Piriform CCleaner. It is a safe cleaner rather than more aggressive cleaners that can result in corrupting behavior of apps of the OS. - Tracks Eraser Alternative: Piriform CCleaner. - Duplicate Cleaner Alternative: Piriform CCleaner. Lots of these tool types. Ask in the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup for recommendations. - Disk Cleaner Alternative: Use the disk cleanup wizard that comes in Windows. Add CCleaner if a more thorough cleanup is wanted, especially if you want to include your own list of folders. - Disk Speedup Alternative: Use the disk defragmenter that comes in Windows, or use a 3rd party tool (e.g., Piriform Defraggler). DO NOT USE MORE THAN ONE DEFRAGMENTER! Each has their own scheme for how they think is the best layout on the drive and will undo the scheme done by the other. - Undelete Alternative: Piriform Recuva. - Absolute Uninstaller Alternative: Revo Uninstaller. The free version added 64-bit Windows support a while ago. - Quick Startup Alternative: Use msconfig.exe that comes in Windows. Add SysInternals AutoRuns to manage *all* startup locations, which also integrates with VirusTotal.com (50+ AV scan engines) to detect malicious startup programs. - Software Update Alternative: Secunia Software Inspector (SPI). Some anti-virus programs (e.g., Avast) include a software updater. Just because there is a new update does not mean you want it: new code = new bugs & new vulnerabilities. Plan when to perform updates on the OS and apps, do an image backup, then do the updates. If you plan for when to check for and install updates, these programs are nuisanceware. - Quick Search Alternative: Search Everything (by filename only), FileLocator Pro (if to search by filename and/or content). I use both. - Disk Explorer There are tons of file manager replacements. Ask in the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup on recommendations. - Security Process Explorer Alternative: SysInternals Process Explorer. Can even intregate with VirusTotal.com (uses 50+ AV scan engines) to detect malicious processes. Lots of info about a process. Handy tool to determine which process owns (has a handle to) a window. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:23:08 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
- Registry Repair Usually snake oil. Only rare will it help, like delete shell handlers that have been uninstalled but were dirty and left behind handlers defined in the registry. I agree with "usually snake oil". Something I've never tested is whether any of these cleaners will remove outdated entries in the COM Type Library for old versions of Microsoft Office. It's a known problem in 2013 and 2016, maybe 2010 too, but I can't remember, that when you uninstall the old version and install the new version, some registry entries can be left behind pointing to the no-longer-installed software. Then add-in software can crash because it uses those "road to nowhere" registry entries. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
scbs29 wrote:
Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA Registry Cleaner ? Did someone say Registry Cleaner ? ******* This review is written by a Registry Cleaner company. They make jv16 powertools. "In-Depth Review of 31 Most Popular Registry Cleaner Products These tests were performed in April 2009" https://www.macecraft.com/registry_cleaner_comparison2/ Glary Utilities Pro 2.10.0.622 4.8MB 14.7MB $39.95 System utility suite Glary Utilities Pro No No Yes Yes 30 day trial, nag screen when starting The test registry they used, had 1000 actual flaws as well as 1000 registry entries that should not be fixed because nothing is wrong with them. Glary found 1335 out of 1000. Glary Utilities Pro 1335 Many* Many* 22 Sec. Registry error fixing comparison - the registry settings that handle .bat launch were damaged on purpose. Could Glary fix it ? Glary Utilities Pro No No Removal later. Glary Utilities Pro Yes No Bad, leaves most (if not all) registry entries behind In addition to aggressive utilities, there are ones that just compact the registry. For some reason, their estimates of compaction vary widely. https://www.raymond.cc/blog/one-clic...try-optimizer/ Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
Paul wrote:
scbs29 wrote: Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA Registry Cleaner ? Did someone say Registry Cleaner ? ******* This review is written by a Registry Cleaner company. They make jv16 powertools. "In-Depth Review of 31 Most Popular Registry Cleaner Products These tests were performed in April 2009" https://www.macecraft.com/registry_cleaner_comparison2/ Glary Utilities Pro 2.10.0.622 4.8MB 14.7MB $39.95 System utility suite Glary Utilities Pro No No Yes Yes 30 day trial, nag screen when starting The test registry they used, had 1000 actual flaws as well as 1000 registry entries that should not be fixed because nothing is wrong with them. Glary found 1335 out of 1000. Glary Utilities Pro 1335 Many* Many* 22 Sec. Registry error fixing comparison - the registry settings that handle .bat launch were damaged on purpose. Could Glary fix it ? Glary Utilities Pro No No Removal later. Glary Utilities Pro Yes No Bad, leaves most (if not all) registry entries behind In addition to aggressive utilities, there are ones that just compact the registry. For some reason, their estimates of compaction vary widely. https://www.raymond.cc/blog/one-clic...try-optimizer/ Paul Registry compaction is worthless. That is no different than disk fragmenters (that will defrag the registry .dat files on the next boot of Windows). When Windows loads, the registry files are copied into system memory (RAM). All registry API calls are against the memory copy. RAM = Random Access Memory. Any part is just as fast to access as any other part, so it doesn't matter if the binary registry database is in contiguous memory blocks. All compaction (file defrag) will do is slightly shorten the Windows load time by about 17 ms to read contiguous clusters on the drive to copy the registry into the memory; however, since Windows startup does many things in parallel, there is no separately distinguishable speed gain from compacting the registry's files on the disk. Registry cleaners should only be used by those adept at manually editing the registry. After all, a registry cleaner is only used as a handy method to do what the user will do in the registry. Faster doesn't obviate the user's responsibility as the admin to make the decisions. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
Thanks for all of the replies.
I will not bother with it. I had a suspicion that the consensus would be similar to the replies, and my suspicions seem to have been confirmed. On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 20:22:22 +0000, scbs29 wrote: Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA -- remove fred before emailing |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
if its a bundle, it may be to hard for you to figure download and use.
We like simple stuff so that its quick to download, and does not eat your resources. And does the job. http://www.novirusthanks.org/ On 2/28/2018 2:33 AM, scbs29 scribbled: Thanks for all of the replies. I will not bother with it. I had a suspicion that the consensus would be similar to the replies, and my suspicions seem to have been confirmed. On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 20:22:22 +0000, wrote: Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
On 2/27/2018 2:22 PM, scbs29 wrote:
Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA EXCELLENT --especially it's ability to clean the computer of malware, junk etc (it does leave "cookies" alone however). It also cleans any junk from the registry |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 08:01:16 -0600, Mathedman
wrote: On 2/27/2018 2:22 PM, scbs29 wrote: Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA EXCELLENT --especially it's ability to clean the computer of malware, junk etc (it does leave "cookies" alone however). It also cleans any junk from the registry I agree with all of the *other* replies in this thread: it's garbage, avoid it. -- Char Jackson |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 20:08:27 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote: On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 08:01:16 -0600, Mathedman wrote: On 2/27/2018 2:22 PM, scbs29 wrote: Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA EXCELLENT --especially it's ability to clean the computer of malware, junk etc (it does leave "cookies" alone however). It also cleans any junk from the registry I agree with all of the *other* replies in this thread: it's garbage, avoid it. Another vote that it, and all similar utilities, is garbage. All such utilities are very dangerous. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
"scbs29" wrote in message
... Hi Has anyone any experience with using Glary Utiloities on Win 7 64-bit ? Any pros or cons ? TIA Looks like you have your answer but to open your mind a bit, Glary Utilities is more than a registry cleaner and I won't argue the merits of either it's other utilities usefulness or whether cleaning a registry actually helps. But consider that on system with limited storage - say 32GB of eMMC, saving a MB or two by cleaning the registry out can make a difference in performing an update or maybe adding some software you want. Note - I said nothing about registry cleaning increasing performance. Tools like this and most others are simply aggregators of useful tool-sets that are part of Windows. What a lot of these utilities do is offer an easy to use interface that then allows you to access some feature or modifier that you want to use but don't know the secret handshake to get there. Ever hear of God Mode...? Make a new folder and name it GodMode.{ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C} The GodeMode part can be named anything you want but it must be followed by the period and then the string {ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C} There are other special folders which can be accessed as explained he https://www.pcworld.com/article/2207...ks_tweaks.html Just do a search on GodMode and you will find plenty of other references. As for Glary Utilities, I have it and I find that it's an easy tool to grab when I want to do something quickly - but no, I would not recommend it to others. -- Bob S. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 21:45:04 -0500, Bob_S wrote:
But consider that on system with limited storage - say 32GB of eMMC, saving a MB or two by cleaning the registry out can make a difference in performing an update or maybe adding some software you want. I can't imagine how that can be true. For one thing, there's virtual memory. For another, a 1 MB increment in real memory of 32 GB is 0.003%. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
Stan Brown wrote:
Bob_S wrote: But consider that on system with limited storage - say 32GB of eMMC, saving a MB or two by cleaning the registry out can make a difference in performing an update or maybe adding some software you want. I can't imagine how that can be true. For one thing, there's virtual memory. For another, a 1 MB increment in real memory of 32 GB is 0.003%. Maybe he meant that there was a maximum aggregate file size for all the ..dat files that comprise the registry, like the total or maximum size of the registry had some upper bound. https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/.../cc963194.aspx In my Windows 7, RegistrySizeLimit = undefined and PagedPoolSize = 0. I have not changed these settings so they are the defaults. According to the above article: If the values of both RegistrySizeLimit and PagedPoolSize are 0x0, the system calculates an optimal value for both entries. Typically, the system sets the value of PagedPoolSize approximately equal to the amount of physical memory on the computer, and it sets the value of RegistrySizeLimit to approximately 33 percent of the value of PagedPoolSize. For Bob's 32GB setup, that means the maximum aggregate size for all files that comprise the registry is 11GB. WOW! That's huge. That does not include any slack space by the files within the file system, only the allocated space within each file to hold the data (what actually gets copied into memory). There are some horror stories about installers that stored huge-sized data blocks within the registry. One example was for a mouse "driver" that stored its 32MB .pdf help file as a data item's value in the registry. Some installers (and programmers) are very sloppy or don't care about how they consume registry space. A user noted how to use Nirsoft's RegScanner to find huge-size registry entries; see https://superuser.com/a/1268082. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...(v=vs.85).aspx Generally, data consisting of more than one or two kilobytes (K) should be stored as a file and referred to by using a key in the registry rather than being stored as a value. Instead of duplicating large pieces of data in the registry, an application should save the data as a file and refer to the file. Executable binary code should never be stored in the registry. That article states, "The maximum size of a registry hive is 2 GB, except for the system hive." There are only 2 real registry hives: HKEY_USERS and HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE. The others are pseudo-hives: they are composites of subsections of the 2 real hives and as such consume no more file space or memory (i.e., they are just different views into the real hives but they are addressable separately via registry API calls). There are some tools and Powershell scripts to get the current registry size, or you could export it to see the size of the export file (its size, not its size on disk which would include slack space in the file system). Alternatively, you could check the sizes of the registry's ..dat files: %userprofile%\ntuser.dat (user's registry hive) and the DEFAULT, SAM, SECURITY, SOFTWARE, and SYSTEM files for the system hive (under %windir%\system32\config). For me with a 4-year old Windows setup with 8GB system RAM, the user hive file is 7MB and the system hive files are 120MB, so 127MB total. That's 1.5% of of RAM for the registry for its memory copy when the files get loaded into memory. For Bob with his 32GB RAM setup, my registry size would be 0.38% of system RAM. I just did a check of exporting the entire registry (go into regedit.exe, select the root "Computer" node in the tree, and export all of it) and the .reg file size was 323MB. Why the discrepency between adding the file sizes for the user .dat and system .dat files? Because the exported .reg file is a text file, not a binay database file. That means a lot of wasted space to represent the keys and data items as text instead of binary data within records in a database. Exporting the registry to create a text file is not a good measure of the current registry's size. Add up the user (ntuser.dat) and system files noted above to get their aggregate file size. The registry's files are loaded into system RAM and the registry API calls access the memory copy. The registry is NEVER loaded into virtual memory (which is the pagefile.sys disk file) because of the paging that would restrict access to some parts of the registry and severely slow down its access coming off of slow disk media (even for an SSD). |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Glary Utilities ?
"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t... On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 21:45:04 -0500, Bob_S wrote: But consider that on system with limited storage - say 32GB of eMMC, saving a MB or two by cleaning the registry out can make a difference in performing an update or maybe adding some software you want. I can't imagine how that can be true. For one thing, there's virtual memory. For another, a 1 MB increment in real memory of 32 GB is 0.003%. Stan, Typo on the 32GB, should be 32MB. Didn't mean to cause a math wiz a bad hair day.... -- Bob S. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|