Registry
in [Windows XP]
|
From: Nil on 11 Jul 2010 19:10 On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown(a)unknown.kom> wrote in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general: > Absolute fact. If you have been monitoring this news group for the > last six years you would know that. Registry cleaners have been > labeled 'snake oil'. I personally had a problem with a registry > cleaner and will not use one ever again. Absolute horseshit. If you weren't just spouting your hyperbolic opinion, you wouldn't say "hundreds". I challenge you to produce any number even close to 100 such reports from this group.
From: HeyBub on 11 Jul 2010 19:41 Eddie wrote: > PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote: >> If you ever think your Registry needs to be cleaned, repaired, >> boosted, tuned-up, cured, tweaked, fixed, or optimized (it doesn't), >> read http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099 and draw your own >> conclusions. > > > Hi Pa, > > I have followed and respected your replies to posts for years, and > also your affiliation toward ms products. > > I do have a question though regarding this thread, but first, an > excerpt from the link you posted re: O/P. > ------\/ > > "Microsoft has a freebie online program at > http://onecare.live.com/site/en-us/default.htm. Being the Godfather's > program it should be safe....theoretically. It didn't do me any harm. > I strongly recommend that you, or anyone else, avoid using the onecare > registry cleaner > > Here's why: > > The onecare cleaner offers no chance to backup what is removed and > whatever it removes is gone, forever. Should it mistakenly remove a > key or value needed by your operating system or software it's gone > along with your program or operating system. I've seen onecare's > registry cleaner completely hose systems." > ------ > > My question is: WHY did Bill/Micro allow this program to be written in > the first place? Why are ppl saying to Avoid it at all costs? (yet it > is written by M/S) > Lastly, and again, .. why did micro put it out there for all to see > Knowing Full Well that NO registry cleaner works at all.. and > especially considering each persons computer is different due to > d/loads and software and blah blah. > I personally think the OneCare Registry Cleaner does nothing. It's a placebo. It whirs and clanks. The lights flash. Things happen on the screen. It has everything except flames. Like a medical placebo, it makes people "feel" better that they've actually done something to cure an imaginary pain. It was developed, in my opinion, to satisfy a clamor for a MS "approved" registry cleaner. "Find a need and fill it" is Microsoft's motto!
From: Unknown on 11 Jul 2010 19:58 Don't be so stupid. You know very well I cannot do that simply because they were deleted. You poll all other posters for their positions. "Nil" <rednoise(a)REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message news:Xns9DB2C316628E1nilch1(a)130.133.4.11... > On 11 Jul 2010, "Unknown" <unknown(a)unknown.kom> wrote in > microsoft.public.windowsxp.general: > >> Absolute fact. If you have been monitoring this news group for the >> last six years you would know that. Registry cleaners have been >> labeled 'snake oil'. I personally had a problem with a registry >> cleaner and will not use one ever again. > > Absolute horseshit. If you weren't just spouting your hyperbolic > opinion, you wouldn't say "hundreds". I challenge you to produce any > number even close to 100 such reports from this group.
From: Unknown on 11 Jul 2010 19:59 Then you haven't been on this newsgroup very long. "Nil" <rednoise(a)REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message news:Xns9DB2C24E381F0nilch1(a)130.133.4.11... > On 11 Jul 2010, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudgeon(a)earthlink.net> wrote > in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general: > >> If you have been monitoring these newsgroups (including Win98) >> over several years, you will recall that there indeed have been >> MANY such posts (although not all "rendered inoperative", but >> indeed having resulting isssue and problems as a consquence of >> running them, with some being quite serious). > > I have, and there are some such posts. But not even close to > "hundreds".
From: Bill in Co on 11 Jul 2010 21:33
I can't say if it was hundreds, but it was definitely in the several dozen range, and not just a handful or two (I'm talking about over ALL the years I've been monitoring them). Nil wrote: > On 11 Jul 2010, "Bill in Co" <surly_curmudgeon(a)earthlink.net> wrote > in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general: > >> If you have been monitoring these newsgroups (including Win98) >> over several years, you will recall that there indeed have been >> MANY such posts (although not all "rendered inoperative", but >> indeed having resulting isssue and problems as a consquence of >> running them, with some being quite serious). > > I have, and there are some such posts. But not even close to > "hundreds". |