Utilities question

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:52:40 +0100, FredW wrote:

If you want to download CCleaner please use the original site
and NOT some obscure download site,
that only has an obsolete version to download.
https://www.piriform.com/ccleaner/build

If you are going to continue to post unfounded slurs on CCleaner at
least get the download site right:
https://www.piriform.com/ccleaner/download/standard
From the system requirements page on the piriform.com site:

"CCleaner will run on any PC running Microsoft Windows XP, Mac 10.6
or later. If you're running one of the following operating systems,
you're fine to run CCleaner:

Windows 8 (all editions, including 64-bit)
Windows 7 (all editions, including 64-bit)
Windows Vista (all editions, including 64-bit)
Windows XP (Home, Professional, Media Center, Tablet Edition,
64-bit)
Windows 2003 and 2008 Server (all editions)
Mac 10.6 to 10.9 64-bit editions"

Note '64bit' in the above.

On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:31:39 +0100, FredW wrote:

I explained previously that *Revo Uninstaller Free* has no 64-bit
compatibility (your question), but you answer that CCleaner has.
I did not know RevoUninstalller Free and CCleaner are the same
program.

I think they are not. Maybe you should reread what is really
written?

Ooops - yes I see that I confused the two earlier on! Nevertheless
I'm pretty sure I used the free version to delete e.g. Kaspersky
ant-virus 64bit a while ago with no ill effects.

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:20:09 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

I think, depending on what you have on your computer and what you use a
computer for, indexing could be a good thing. Like my brother-in-law
who probably has 5,000+ music files (literally) and searches for all
versions of the same tune, indexing may find those files for him much
faster.

If index based searches seem fast, he obviously hasn't tried Everything,
from www.voidtools.com. With Everything, searching isn't fast, it's
immediate.

On your recommendation, I've just installed Everything (here on XP, but
I've got the 64 version for my 7 machine too), and I would agree, it is
excellent - mainly because, AFAICT, it works on filenames only.

However, it might not help Ken's brother - _if_ his searches for
"versions of the same tune" rely on looking at the tags inside MP3
files. (Which I'd have said any such search should do, in case the
filename has been corrupted or is just something like "track 10".)

Everything does look good, though.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Religion is a name for opinion that cannot be argued about. [Heard on Radio 4,
2010-10-18, 9:xx.]

On 3/28/15 5:47 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:20:09 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

I think, depending on what you have on your computer and what you use a
computer for, indexing could be a good thing. Like my brother-in-law
who probably has 5,000+ music files (literally) and searches for all
versions of the same tune, indexing may find those files for him much
faster.

If index based searches seem fast, he obviously hasn't tried Everything,
from www.voidtools.com. With Everything, searching isn't fast, it's
immediate.

On your recommendation, I've just installed Everything (here on XP, but
I've got the 64 version for my 7 machine too), and I would agree, it is
excellent - mainly because, AFAICT, it works on filenames only.

However, it might not help Ken's brother - _if_ his searches for
"versions of the same tune" rely on looking at the tags inside MP3
files. (Which I'd have said any such search should do, in case the
filename has been corrupted or is just something like "track 10".)

Everything does look good, though.

I don't know if my brother-in-law even uses tags, but I have a project
in mind where tags would be used, especially on photos. I've not looked
at the Windows searching and indexing abilities deep enough to know if
it will even search on tags. I do know I'm not, at this point,
impressed with the ease of use to enter tags.



--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 36.0.4
Thunderbird 31.5
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

In message , FredW
writes:
[]
If you want to download CCleaner please use the original site
and NOT some obscure download site,
that only has an obsolete version to download.
https://www.piriform.com/ccleaner/build

(Actually, I don't think you _did_ write that bit, but your Agent
doesn't seem to have added an extra "".)

Thanks, but no thanks, CCleaner is not a dedicated uninstaller.
As I said before, I prefer GeekUninstaller:
http://www.geekuninstaller.com/

Can you tell me how you think that compares with (the free version of)
Revo? [In particular, how good is it on things that have already been
uninstalled?]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Religion is a name for opinion that cannot be argued about. [Heard on Radio 4,
2010-10-18, 9:xx.]

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
On 3/28/15 5:47 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:20:09 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

I think, depending on what you have on your computer and what you use a
computer for, indexing could be a good thing. Like my brother-in-law
who probably has 5,000+ music files (literally) and searches for all
versions of the same tune, indexing may find those files for him much
faster.

If index based searches seem fast, he obviously hasn't tried Everything,
from www.voidtools.com. With Everything, searching isn't fast, it's
immediate.

On your recommendation, I've just installed Everything (here on XP, but
I've got the 64 version for my 7 machine too), and I would agree, it is
excellent - mainly because, AFAICT, it works on filenames only.

However, it might not help Ken's brother - _if_ his searches for
"versions of the same tune" rely on looking at the tags inside MP3
files. (Which I'd have said any such search should do, in case the
filename has been corrupted or is just something like "track 10".)

Everything does look good, though.

I don't know if my brother-in-law even uses tags, but I have a project
in mind where tags would be used, especially on photos. I've not
looked at the Windows searching and indexing abilities deep enough to
know if it will even search on tags. I do know I'm not, at this point,
impressed with the ease of use to enter tags.

Windows explorer can at least display MP3 tags as a column (from Vista
on, I think). I don't know if it can _search_ on them, though. Your BIL
may not himself use tags, but assuming at least some of those files he
has were downloaded, they may well already have some tags.

As for editing tags: for MP3 files, I find (an old version - 5.x - of)
WinAmp is good (you double-click on the scrolling bit: _not_ obvious, I
grant you!), and VLC is fair. For photos/images, I use IrfanView, but I
just tend to edit the comment field (Just bring up the image in IV, then
type I then C); it does have facilities for some other fields. A
dedicated EXIF tag editor:
http://www.friedemann-schmidt.com/software/exifer/ is an old one that
serves my needs, and that page also has links to lots of others.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Religion is a name for opinion that cannot be argued about. [Heard on Radio 4,
2010-10-18, 9:xx.]

On 3/28/15 6:58 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Springer
writes:
On 3/28/15 5:47 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 08:20:09 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote:

I think, depending on what you have on your computer and what you use a
computer for, indexing could be a good thing. Like my brother-in-law
who probably has 5,000+ music files (literally) and searches for all
versions of the same tune, indexing may find those files for him much
faster.

If index based searches seem fast, he obviously hasn't tried Everything,
from www.voidtools.com. With Everything, searching isn't fast, it's
immediate.

On your recommendation, I've just installed Everything (here on XP, but
I've got the 64 version for my 7 machine too), and I would agree, it is
excellent - mainly because, AFAICT, it works on filenames only.

However, it might not help Ken's brother - _if_ his searches for
"versions of the same tune" rely on looking at the tags inside MP3
files. (Which I'd have said any such search should do, in case the
filename has been corrupted or is just something like "track 10".)

Everything does look good, though.

I don't know if my brother-in-law even uses tags, but I have a project
in mind where tags would be used, especially on photos. I've not
looked at the Windows searching and indexing abilities deep enough to
know if it will even search on tags. I do know I'm not, at this point,
impressed with the ease of use to enter tags.

Windows explorer can at least display MP3 tags as a column (from Vista
on, I think). I don't know if it can _search_ on them, though. Your BIL
may not himself use tags, but assuming at least some of those files he
has were downloaded, they may well already have some tags.

I've found the tag system in Windows to be rather cumbersome, up to this
point. It's easily possible I've not found the best way to deal with
them yet, since I'm not ready to start adding tags.

As for editing tags: for MP3 files, I find (an old version - 5.x - of)
WinAmp is good (you double-click on the scrolling bit: _not_ obvious, I
grant you!), and VLC is fair. For photos/images, I use IrfanView, but I
just tend to edit the comment field (Just bring up the image in IV, then
type I then C); it does have facilities for some other fields. A
dedicated EXIF tag editor:
http://www.friedemann-schmidt.com/software/exifer/ is an old one that
serves my needs, and that page also has links to lots of others.

What I think would be nice is if there was a way to select X number of
files in a utility, click on "Edit Tags", and then just walk through
them one by one until done. I can do this with a 3rd party service on
my Mac, so that may be the way I do it, and not bother with doing it in
Windows.

One irritating thing I've found is different programs and OSes call the
same EXIF field by different names. I halfheartedly tried to sort that
out but didn't come find a definitive answer.

For that matter, what is a "tag"? The Windows definition and the Mac
definition seem to be different. I'm using Mountain Lion (10.8), but
newer OS X versions have tags, and I don't know what they do with the
"tags" they support.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 36.0.4
Thunderbird 31.5
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

In message , Ken Springer
writes:
On 3/28/15 6:58 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[]
Windows explorer can at least display MP3 tags as a column (from Vista
on, I think). I don't know if it can _search_ on them, though. Your BIL
may not himself use tags, but assuming at least some of those files he
has were downloaded, they may well already have some tags.

I've found the tag system in Windows to be rather cumbersome, up to
this point. It's easily possible I've not found the best way to deal
with them yet, since I'm not ready to start adding tags.

As for editing tags: for MP3 files, I find (an old version - 5.x - of)
WinAmp is good (you double-click on the scrolling bit: _not_ obvious, I
grant you!), and VLC is fair. For photos/images, I use IrfanView, but I
just tend to edit the comment field (Just bring up the image in IV, then
type I then C); it does have facilities for some other fields. A
dedicated EXIF tag editor:
http://www.friedemann-schmidt.com/software/exifer/ is an old one that
serves my needs, and that page also has links to lots of others.

What I think would be nice is if there was a way to select X number of
files in a utility, click on "Edit Tags", and then just walk through
them one by one until done. I can do this with a 3rd party service on
my Mac, so that may be the way I do it, and not bother with doing it in
Windows.

For MP3 tags (they're called something like "IDv3" and "IDv2" inside
some editors, certainly WinAmp), there certainly are utilities that
will, for example, set the "album" or "artist" tag for several files at
once.

One irritating thing I've found is different programs and OSes call the
same EXIF field by different names. I halfheartedly tried to sort that
out but didn't come find a definitive answer.

Indeed (-:

For that matter, what is a "tag"? The Windows definition and the Mac
definition seem to be different. I'm using Mountain Lion (10.8), but
newer OS X versions have tags, and I don't know what they do with the
"tags" they support.

Hmm. When I started writing the above, it did occur to me that I'm
making assumptions about what it meant that might not be correct. What
_I_ am meaning by the term is fields within an actual file (i. e. they
stay with the file if it is copied or moved), that contain relevant
information - for an .mp3 file, things like track name, artist, album,
genre, and so on, and for a .jpg, things like camera model, date taken,
shutter speed, and so on (as well as GPS data these days).

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Being punctual makes people think you have nothing to do.

On 3/28/15 10:49 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Springer
writes:
On 3/28/15 6:58 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[]
Windows explorer can at least display MP3 tags as a column (from Vista
on, I think). I don't know if it can _search_ on them, though. Your BIL
may not himself use tags, but assuming at least some of those files he
has were downloaded, they may well already have some tags.

I've found the tag system in Windows to be rather cumbersome, up to
this point. It's easily possible I've not found the best way to deal
with them yet, since I'm not ready to start adding tags.

As for editing tags: for MP3 files, I find (an old version - 5.x - of)
WinAmp is good (you double-click on the scrolling bit: _not_ obvious, I
grant you!), and VLC is fair. For photos/images, I use IrfanView, but I
just tend to edit the comment field (Just bring up the image in IV, then
type I then C); it does have facilities for some other fields. A
dedicated EXIF tag editor:
http://www.friedemann-schmidt.com/software/exifer/ is an old one that
serves my needs, and that page also has links to lots of others.

What I think would be nice is if there was a way to select X number of
files in a utility, click on "Edit Tags", and then just walk through
them one by one until done. I can do this with a 3rd party service on
my Mac, so that may be the way I do it, and not bother with doing it in
Windows.

For MP3 tags (they're called something like "IDv3" and "IDv2" inside
some editors, certainly WinAmp), there certainly are utilities that
will, for example, set the "album" or "artist" tag for several files at
once.

If you right click and select properties of a music file, there's a tab
you click on that lets you fill in all that information. But just one
at a time. I did some experimenting a long time ago doing this, found
it to be a PITA. I don't think I did any image files at the time.

One irritating thing I've found is different programs and OSes call the
same EXIF field by different names. I halfheartedly tried to sort that
out but didn't come find a definitive answer.

Indeed (-:

For that matter, what is a "tag"? The Windows definition and the Mac
definition seem to be different. I'm using Mountain Lion (10.8), but
newer OS X versions have tags, and I don't know what they do with the
"tags" they support.

Hmm. When I started writing the above, it did occur to me that I'm
making assumptions about what it meant that might not be correct. What
_I_ am meaning by the term is fields within an actual file (i. e. they
stay with the file if it is copied or moved), that contain relevant
information - for an .mp3 file, things like track name, artist, album,
genre, and so on, and for a .jpg, things like camera model, date taken,
shutter speed, and so on (as well as GPS data these days).

That is the metadata within each file, and the content is different for
each type of file. The information you listed is for music files (and
there may be other pieces of information). For image files, you can
have file type, orientation of the camera, what camera was used, f stop
setting, lots of other data.

Let's consider image files... In Photo Gallery, or whatever MS is
calling it now that will change tomorrow to confuse everyone, there is
the "tags" field shown on the bottom center of the window. On my Mac,
one program calls that information "comments", and I've forgotten what
the other program calls it.

That's why I wonder just what the definition of a "tag" would be. And,
when using a particular program, which field is getting the data and
what's the correct name by whatever standard is used for the naming of
the data fields.

And now that I'm thinking about this, it would be nice to be able to
export all of the image metadata and the photo into a data base program.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 36.0.4
Thunderbird 31.5
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

In message , FredW
writes:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 12:34:16 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:
[]
Can you tell me how you think that compares with (the free version of)
Revo? [In particular, how good is it on things that have already been
uninstalled?]

When I switched to Windows 64-bit, I found out that Revo Uninstaller
Free is not compatible for 64-bit programs.

GeekUninstaller is compatible with 64-bit and also portable.
(just one single file geek.exe)
I never used Revo anymore.

I never used the Force Removal in GeekUninstaller,
I cannot tell how it works.

OK, thanks.

Any comments on how they compare _in operation_?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Anything else you'd like me to do while I'm at it? Paint the sky green? Bury
the odd elephant I find lying around ..."
- Tidy, the Android - Earthsearch II, part 2. (1982-5-2)

On Sun, 29 Mar 2015 10:49:06 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Any comments on how they compare _in operation_?

http://www.davescomputertips.com/rev...k-uninstaller/

In message , mechanic
writes:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2015 10:49:06 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Any comments on how they compare _in operation_?

http://www.davescomputertips.com/rev...k-uninstaller/

Wow, thanks! Just what I was after. (Pity the website has a broad grey
bar over the top of all pages that, in my browser, stays where it is as
I scroll the page, thus obscuring most of it, but I persevered.)

So the differences "dave" found:
o Revo removes very slightly more registry entries.
o Revo defaults to hiding Windows Updates, so initially Geek seems to
detect more installed things.
o Revo _free_ does not detect 64-bit prog.s at all (so the choice is
_fairly_ obvious if you've a 64-bit system - unless you think 64b s/w
has better uninstallers, which I see no reason to suspect).
o Revo's _default_ is to create a restore point before each uninstall.
o Geek (portable) is only a single 1.75MB executable.
o Geek runs as a 64-bit app. on 64-bit systems.

That's the end of the comparison, though he also provides links to a few
other uninstallers. (What he _didn't_ do is say anything about the two
utilities' abilities _after_ an uninstallation has already been run -
probably because, I suspect, neither has much if any ability in that
situation.)

But thanks for the link.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Intelligence isn't complete without the full picture and the full picture is
all about doubt. Otherwise, you go the way of George Bush. - baroness Eliza
Manningham-Buller (former head of MI5), Radio Times 3-9 September 2011.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

mechanic wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Any comments on how they compare _in operation_?

http://www.davescomputertips.com/rev...k-uninstaller/

So the differences "dave" found:
o Revo removes very slightly more registry entries.
o Revo defaults to hiding Windows Updates, so initially Geek seems to
detect more installed things.
o Revo _free_ does not detect 64-bit prog.s at all (so the choice is
_fairly_ obvious if you've a 64-bit system - unless you think 64b s/w
has better uninstallers, which I see no reason to suspect).
o Revo's _default_ is to create a restore point before each uninstall.
o Geek (portable) is only a single 1.75MB executable.
o Geek runs as a 64-bit app. on 64-bit systems.

Note the datestamp on the article:

June 15, 2012

So it's old at almost 3 years - and 13 months older than the release of
the last free version of Revo Uninstaller. A bigger blunder is the
total absence of mentioning which *versions* were reviewed.

Revo's free version is NOT the latest version crippled. It is an old
version. The free version is at 1.95 (20 months ago) while their paid
Pro version is at 3.1.1 (5 months ago). So you're not even getting the
prior version as a crippled free version but you get a crippled version
that is 2 major versions old.

I have the free 1.95 version installed. I found no update option (other
than to move to the paid Pro version). I was hoping the version was for
the program and that it would still retrieve updates to a programs
database so it would be current. Doesn't look like it, so you're stuck
with a stale programs database that is 20 months old now.

Since the free version is so old, it's likely that it still does not
support removal of 64-bit programs. It doesn't know how to find the
entries in the registry (which is the 64-bit section under a 64-bit OS)
probably continues to work on 32-bit programs via the automatic
redirection to the WOW64 registry section. Worse is if it somehow
overrides the redirection and ends up making changes in the wrong
registry section (deleting keys in the non-WOW64 section for 32-bit
programs). Revo Uninstaller free 1.95 will install on 64-bit Windows
but I can't find anything that says it will remove 64-bit programs.

I didn't find it useful. At best, it shortens my remnant registry and
file/folder cleanup but I still find remnants after using it so I'm
still stuck doing my own manual cleanup. So I'll uninstall Revo and
also do my typical remnant registry and file cleanup after uninstalling
it and run CCleaner's registry cleaner to review its list to see if
there are orphaned or invalid entries still remaining that I missed.

From what I can see, the free version of Revo Uninstaller is way too
old, comes packaged with a stale programs database, won't uninstall
64-bit programs, and I still end up having to do the remnant cleanup.
If the non-expert user only has 32-bit programs that were released over
20 months ago then Revo Uninstaller Free is okay as it would be safer in
its cleanup than neophytes digging into the registry.

That's the end of the comparison, though he also provides links to a few
other uninstallers. (What he _didn't_ do is say anything about the two
utilities' abilities _after_ an uninstallation has already been run -
probably because, I suspect, neither has much if any ability in that
situation.)

Only an uninstaller that runs a background uninstaller to monitor
changes in the registry and file system during an installation would
know what to remove whether the program was not yet uninstalled or
already had been uninstalled. The free version of Revo Uninstaller does
not include their monitor. I saw no mention of a monitor for the Geek
Uninstaller. However, even when using a monitor, it tracks all changes
made between the before-install and after-install snapshots. That means
their install log might record more changes than made by just the
installer. I remember using a before- and after-snapshot uninstaller
(doesn't work on 64-bit Windows) and had to review its log to remove
entries that had nothing to do with the installed program. That was to
ensure that later when I used that log to uninstall that I didn't remove
stuff for other software or Windows. In one case, and because I didn't
know Windows Updates had been set to automatic, the uninstaller recorded
a huge number of changes for updates to Windows. If I had used that log
to do an uninstall then Windows may have gotten into an unstable or
unusable state. Recording all changes made during an install, even
after exiting all user-mode applications is not a safe logging to use
for a later uninstall unless you review the log and edit out the changes
that are not applicable to an install.

As yet, I haven't heard of any uninstaller programs that hook into the
file I/O stack to insert their own handler that will monitor changes to
the registry and file system made ONLY by specified processes or any
child processes they may start. Uninstallers don't dig that deep. They
rely on "surface knowledge" on how to uninstall a program.

On 2015-03-29 13:07, VanguardLH wrote:

[snip]

Only an uninstaller that runs a background uninstaller to monitor
changes in the registry and file system during an installation would
know what to remove whether the program was not yet uninstalled or
already had been uninstalled. The free version of Revo Uninstaller does
not include their monitor. I saw no mention of a monitor for the Geek
Uninstaller.

The pro version of Geek is said to have a monitor...

However, there is no mention of how Geek works on their website. Without
the monitor, it has to use a database, which is useless because it will
always be incomplete. And with the monitor, like you said, if it logs
all changes regardless of the process that makes them, it will catch
plenty of things that it should not. Personally I haven't had a need for
an uninstaller for a long time (I had one on Win95, forget its name) -
most software uninstalls fine, and I can always go fish for remnants if
needed (e.g. ProgramData, HK*/Software, AutoRuns). Besides, a few
remaining registry keys don't really hurt.

However, even when using a monitor, it tracks all changes
made between the before-install and after-install snapshots.

Hopefully it has some filters, like looking only at file associations,
HK*/Software, etc. Some things could be left behind sometimes (like a
stray device) but at least it would not start deleting keys it should not...

That means
their install log might record more changes than made by just the
installer. I remember using a before- and after-snapshot uninstaller
(doesn't work on 64-bit Windows) and had to review its log to remove
entries that had nothing to do with the installed program. That was to
ensure that later when I used that log to uninstall that I didn't remove
stuff for other software or Windows. In one case, and because I didn't
know Windows Updates had been set to automatic, the uninstaller recorded
a huge number of changes for updates to Windows. If I had used that log
to do an uninstall then Windows may have gotten into an unstable or
unusable state. Recording all changes made during an install, even
after exiting all user-mode applications is not a safe logging to use
for a later uninstall unless you review the log and edit out the changes
that are not applicable to an install.

As yet, I haven't heard of any uninstaller programs that hook into the
file I/O stack to insert their own handler that will monitor changes to
the registry and file system made ONLY by specified processes or any
child processes they may start. Uninstallers don't dig that deep. They
rely on "surface knowledge" on how to uninstall a program.

Best Regards,

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain /
! (o o) Member-+-David-Suzuki-Foundation/EFF/Planetary-Society-+-
oO-( )-Oo "With all due respect ... BEGONE! ... Sir." -Worf

PC Mag likes IOBit Uninstaller.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2461161,00.asp