Need to know what is the best to fix XP registry

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

Can anyone tell me a good registry fix for my computer.
I have downloaded the ones that say they will do a scan to see how many
bad registries are on my computer.
Well they all say I have 71 or so But I am not sure what one will be
the best to spend money on to fix all my computer's problems that slow
it down to a crawl.
And I dont want to spend money on something that is worthless.
I need to know if there is a good probram out there that will fix
errors and bad registries to get my computer back to the way it was
when I bought it.
PLEASE!! HELP !! :confused: I am so confused


--
walleye
14 answers Last reply
More about need registry
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    Stay away form so called registry repair tools unless you know exactly what
    each registry item does and the effect on the change means.
    There is more to be lost and rarely little to gain if you do not know.

    Instead if you are having speed issues:
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/slowcom.htm

    --
    Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


    "walleye" <walleye.1kvp22@pcbanter.net> wrote in message
    news:walleye.1kvp22@pcbanter.net...
    >
    > Can anyone tell me a good registry fix for my computer.
    > I have downloaded the ones that say they will do a scan to see how many
    > bad registries are on my computer.
    > Well they all say I have 71 or so But I am not sure what one will be
    > the best to spend money on to fix all my computer's problems that slow
    > it down to a crawl.
    > And I dont want to spend money on something that is worthless.
    > I need to know if there is a good probram out there that will fix
    > errors and bad registries to get my computer back to the way it was
    > when I bought it.
    > PLEASE!! HELP !! :confused: I am so confused
    >
    >
    > --
    > walleye
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "walleye" wrote:

    > Can anyone tell me a good registry fix for my computer.
    > I have downloaded the ones that say they will do a scan to see how many
    > bad registries are on my computer.

    [...]

    Uh, what problems are you experiencing that you think are due to "bad"
    registry entries.

    Short answer: none. Leave your registry alone.

    Ken
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    On the 23/02/2005, walleye wrote:

    > Can anyone tell me a good registry fix for my computer.

    Give a try to the freeware EasyCleaner. It safely does quite a good
    job:
    http://personal.inet.fi/business/toniarts/ecleane.htm

    --
    Hugues-Antoine Suin
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "walleye" <walleye.1kvp22@pcbanter.net> wrote in message
    news:walleye.1kvp22@pcbanter.net...
    >
    > Can anyone tell me a good registry fix for my computer.
    > I have downloaded the ones that say they will do a scan to see how many
    > bad registries are on my computer.
    > Well they all say I have 71 or so But I am not sure what one will be
    > the best to spend money on to fix all my computer's problems that slow
    > it down to a crawl.
    > And I dont want to spend money on something that is worthless.
    > I need to know if there is a good probram out there that will fix
    > errors and bad registries to get my computer back to the way it was
    > when I bought it.
    > PLEASE!! HELP !! :confused: I am so confused
    >

    I have been using Registry First Aid for about 2 years now. I've never had
    any problems and it's kept my PC in top condition.

    Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are on...
    it's vital to keep that clean or you end up with a sluggish and unstable
    system.
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are on..."
    What we're on? The answer is...Experience.

    Most people have no business with such tools unless they have a good working
    knowledge of the registry.
    If they can not look at a registry entry and determine if it is good or bad,
    leave it be.
    There are better ways to efficiently maintain a computer and keep the
    computer from "end up with a sluggish and unstable system"
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/security.htm

    --
    Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


    "Snowman" <Yeah.Right@like.I.am.going.to.tell> wrote in message
    > I have been using Registry First Aid for about 2 years now. I've never
    > had any problems and it's kept my PC in top condition.
    >
    > Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are on...
    > it's vital to keep that clean or you end up with a sluggish and unstable
    > system.
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Snowman" wrote:

    > I have been using Registry First Aid for about 2 years now. I've never had
    > any problems and it's kept my PC in top condition.

    > Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are on...
    > it's vital to keep that clean or you end up with a sluggish and unstable
    > system.

    Not so. Registry cleaners do not result in transparent, measurable
    improvements in performance or stability, and there isn't a shred of vidence
    to the contrary. If anything, if you use a registry cleaner, you are
    playing Russian roulette with your system, especially if you allow the
    program to delete keys for you instead of making the selections yourself by
    hand.

    Ken
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

    > "Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are on..."
    > What we're on? The answer is...Experience.

    > Most people have no business with such tools unless they have a good working
    > knowledge of the registry.

    > If they can not look at a registry entry and determine if it is good or bad,
    > leave it be.

    > There are better ways to efficiently maintain a computer and keep the
    > computer from "end up with a sluggish and unstable system"

    Exactly. I have yet to see a single shred of evidence that these "registry
    cleaners" actually improve performance and stability -- that is, when they
    don't make a mistake and wreck someone's system.

    Ken
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
    news:%231MomBiGFHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > Snowman wrote:
    >> I have been using Registry First Aid for about 2 years now. I've
    >> never had any problems and it's kept my PC in top condition.
    >>
    >> Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are
    >> on... it's vital to keep that clean or you end up with a sluggish and
    >> unstable system.
    >
    > If you believe keeping your registry clean is actually making a difference
    > in overall performance, you should consider the following to actually make
    > a difference:

    Everytime I move something in my start menu (I like to group programmes in
    meaningful folders rather than have a list 3 pages long of all the
    programmes I have installed in no order) it leaves a registry entry pointing
    to where the old shortcut was.

    everytime I move a video or music file that I've downloaded from the desktop
    (where I put it for ease of virus checking it) to where I actually want to
    store it, a registry entry is left poitning to where the file once was.

    I'd suggest that periodically getting rid of these useless and misleading
    registry entries makes sense and does improve my PC's performance. Registry
    First Aid makes this safe and automatic, hence I'd highly advocate it's use.

    >
    > Microsoft has these suggestions for Protecting your computer from the
    > various "bad things" that could happen to you/it:

    <SNIP>

    28kb of, admittedly good advice, chopped. Er, you posted this earlier, why
    repeat it? I do ALL this anyway. Yes it makes a difference. But other
    things also make a difference that aren't "Microsoft" approved. like moving
    your internet temp files folder (the internet cache) out of the windows
    folder and onto the root folder of a drive (eg move it from
    C:\Windows\Temporary Internet Files to C:\Temporary Internet Files). This
    WILL drastically improve your performance. and clean out the dead and
    misleading entries in your registry.

    just my 2p worth.
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Snowman" wrote:

    > Everytime I move something in my start menu (I like to group programmes in
    > meaningful folders rather than have a list 3 pages long of all the
    > programmes I have installed in no order) it leaves a registry entry pointing
    > to where the old shortcut was.

    So what. How much time does having this entry, or others like it, in your
    registry actually cost you in performance and stability (the answer is
    virtually none), as opposed to how much time you spend running Registry First
    Aid to delete this entry (the answer is a few minutes -- unless the program
    screws up and makes a major mistake)? Do the math and ask yourself whether
    you are actually saving yourself time and effort -- or not. And that's
    leaving aside the registration fee that you also have to pay for Registry
    First Aid.

    > everytime I move a video or music file that I've downloaded from the desktop
    > (where I put it for ease of virus checking it) to where I actually want to
    > store it, a registry entry is left poitning to where the file once was.

    Same comment.

    > I'd suggest that periodically getting rid of these useless and misleading
    > registry entries makes sense and does improve my PC's performance. Registry
    > First Aid makes this safe and automatic, hence I'd highly advocate it's use.

    Registry First Aid is one of the safest and best of these programs, but the
    cold reality is that it isn't improving your PC's performance -- or if it
    did, you can measure the improvement in milliseconds that you are humanly
    incapable of noticing, while the time that it takes you to realize these
    improvements is measured in minutes each time you run the program -- and each
    time you run it and allow it to make decisions about which keys to delete,
    you are also playing Russian roulette with your registry.

    If you really want better performance, taking care of your hard drive
    (regular routine of error checking, cleaning up the junk and any malware, and
    defragging) and having a secure machine with a powerful CPU and lots of RAM
    will get you 99.9 percent of the way there. The rest is simply not worth the
    effort or the risk of error.

    Ken
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Ken Gardner" <KenGardner@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:2E69AA2E-7C7D-4105-BD94-3DCAD654E639@microsoft.com...
    > "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:
    >
    >> "Dunno WHAT those others who are saying don't clean your registry are
    >> on..."
    >> What we're on? The answer is...Experience.
    >
    >> Most people have no business with such tools unless they have a good
    >> working
    >> knowledge of the registry.
    >
    >> If they can not look at a registry entry and determine if it is good or
    >> bad,
    >> leave it be.
    >
    >> There are better ways to efficiently maintain a computer and keep the
    >> computer from "end up with a sluggish and unstable system"
    >
    > Exactly. I have yet to see a single shred of evidence that these
    > "registry
    > cleaners" actually improve performance and stability -- that is, when they
    > don't make a mistake and wreck someone's system.
    >

    I have been using Registry First Aid (RFA) for 2 years now and have never
    had a single episode where it resulted in an unstable or wrecked system. I
    know that my PC is running as fast as it did the day I first built it and
    installed WinXP on it. which is more than can be said for the one before
    that which I didn't use a registry cleaner on (although I did do everything
    else that Shenan recommends, see posts above). Does that constitute a shred
    of evidence?

    Admittedly, I have a working knowledge of what RFA is doing and always check
    it's results before I let it make any changes. But I am no where near an
    expert on WinXP.

    anyway, that's my 2p worth. Hope it's helped the OP to decide on a reg
    cleaner.
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Snowman" wrote:

    >I have been using Registry First Aid (RFA) for 2 years now and have never
    > had a single episode where it resulted in an unstable or wrecked system. I
    > know that my PC is running as fast as it did the day I first built it and
    > installed WinXP on it. which is more than can be said for the one before
    > that which I didn't use a registry cleaner on (although I did do everything
    > else that Shenan recommends, see posts above). Does that constitute a shred
    > of evidence?

    Maybe you feel that it is running as well as on the day your installed XP,
    but the plain fact is that the registry is loaded into your super fast RAM at
    startup anyway. This means, as a practical matter, that if invalid registry
    entries are slowing you down at all, you can measure the delay in
    milliseconds (which are not noticable to human beings), while the time it
    takes you to run the software to eliminate the entries takes minutes (RFA in
    particular is a bit slower than other registry cleaners, which is probably a
    good thing).

    For what it's worth, I also do regular maintenance on my two computers, I
    don't use registry cleaners, and they are running as well today as they did
    when I installed XP. Now, both computers have powerful CPUs and lots of
    RAM, I keep them free of crudware, I don't install suspect software even if
    it isn't technically crudware, I do perform regular maintenance of my hard
    drives, and I do check Event Viewer regularly and fix any errors that it
    reports.

    > Admittedly, I have a working knowledge of what RFA is doing and always check
    > it's results before I let it make any changes. But I am no where near an
    > expert on WinXP.

    Good. If you decide that you still want to use this software, at least let
    it select the candidates for deletion but you make the actual decisions
    yourself after checking each entry.

    Ken
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Ken Gardner" <KenGardner@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:6AD42A9E-7CD4-428C-B985-16E32E3946ED@microsoft.com...
    > "Snowman" wrote:
    >
    > >I have been using Registry First Aid (RFA) for 2 years now and have never
    >> had a single episode where it resulted in an unstable or wrecked system.
    >> I
    >> know that my PC is running as fast as it did the day I first built it and
    >> installed WinXP on it. which is more than can be said for the one before
    >> that which I didn't use a registry cleaner on (although I did do
    >> everything
    >> else that Shenan recommends, see posts above). Does that constitute a
    >> shred
    >> of evidence?
    >
    > Maybe you feel that it is running as well as on the day your installed XP,
    > but the plain fact is that the registry is loaded into your super fast RAM
    > at
    > startup anyway. This means, as a practical matter, that if invalid
    > registry
    > entries are slowing you down at all, you can measure the delay in
    > milliseconds (which are not noticable to human beings), while the time it
    > takes you to run the software to eliminate the entries takes minutes (RFA
    > in
    > particular is a bit slower than other registry cleaners, which is probably
    > a
    > good thing).

    it's milliseconds per invalid entry, but over time these milliseconds add up
    and do become noticable, in my humble opinion.

    Further to your other post in answer to mine, yes RFA cost money. But the
    OP was trying to decide which solution he should purchase. I'm giving him
    my opinion on what I consider a good and worthwhile solution. I was
    guessing he was willing to pay anyway.

    >
    > For what it's worth, I also do regular maintenance on my two computers, I
    > don't use registry cleaners, and they are running as well today as they
    > did
    > when I installed XP. Now, both computers have powerful CPUs and lots of
    > RAM, I keep them free of crudware, I don't install suspect software even
    > if
    > it isn't technically crudware, I do perform regular maintenance of my hard
    > drives, and I do check Event Viewer regularly and fix any errors that it
    > reports.
    >
    >> Admittedly, I have a working knowledge of what RFA is doing and always
    >> check
    >> it's results before I let it make any changes. But I am no where near an
    >> expert on WinXP.
    >
    > Good. If you decide that you still want to use this software, at least
    > let
    > it select the candidates for deletion but you make the actual decisions
    > yourself after checking each entry.
    >

    Yep, that's what I do. Hint for the OP there.

    Finally, I do admit that I used RFA on Win98 before I upgraded to WinXP. On
    '98 it was an absolute necessity to run a registry cleaner, perhaps it's
    less so on 'XP. For me, I'm gonna stick with using what I know works.
    Beside, I learn stuff about what's happening inside my PC doing so.
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Snowman" wrote:

    > it's milliseconds per invalid entry, but over time these milliseconds add up
    > and do become noticable, in my humble opinion.

    So do the minutes that you spend running Registry First Aid to gain these
    milliseconds, except that they add up much faster. :)

    > Further to your other post in answer to mine, yes RFA cost money. But the
    > OP was trying to decide which solution he should purchase. I'm giving him
    > my opinion on what I consider a good and worthwhile solution. I was
    > guessing he was willing to pay anyway.

    If I was inclined to use a registry cleaner/optimizer, I would choose RFA as
    well. Back when I used to use such software, I tried several optimizers and
    eventually settled on RFA as the safest and best of the group. I used it
    for over a year without any problems.

    > Finally, I do admit that I used RFA on Win98 before I upgraded to WinXP. On
    > '98 it was an absolute necessity to run a registry cleaner, perhaps it's
    > less so on 'XP. For me, I'm gonna stick with using what I know works.
    > Beside, I learn stuff about what's happening inside my PC doing so.

    I agree. A product like RFA was much more valuable back in the Windows 9x
    days. And if nothing else, it is a neat tool to learn about what is going on
    with XP under the hood. If someone used it primarily for that reason, other
    than because he thinks his machine would run better, I would have no problem
    with it.

    Incidentally, if you run Ad Aware, it is also a registry cleaner of sorts,
    although it is limited to crudware registry keys (absolutely no reason to
    allow them to reside in the registry!) and MRU keys (which are harmless, but
    always low hanging fruit for the registry optimizers).

    Ken
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.perform_maintain (More info?)

    "Snowman" wrote:

    > So, in answer to the Original poster... If you wanna use a registry
    > cleaning tool, we'd recommend Registry First Aid (along with doing ALL the
    > stuff Shenan advocates in his lengthy post). Just take your time to read
    > through what RFA reports and don't allow it to do anything you're not happy
    > with.

    > BTW, cheers for the conversation Ken.

    Same here.

    Ken
Ask a new question

Read More

Computers Registry Windows XP