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 !! I am so confused


--
walleye

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. [Note: this IS a rhetorical question.]

Short answer: none. Leave your registry alone.

Ken

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 !! 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.

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

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.

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

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.

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