Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Windows Xp Registry errors

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 5:56:03 PM

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

Hi;

The fauls in windows Xp Registry may slow you PC down or make it hanging.

I hav tried several different programs witch offer resolving thise problems.

The best produkt I have found is TuneUp link: http://www.tune-up.com/

I have bought this produkt because I want to get rid of the registry fauls.

WinTune also optimise a lot af settings in the registry. It is good.
Download an try it for free. My PC is working better than ever after using
WinTune.

--------------
Best regards
David Jabaroth
Denmark
-----------
August 16, 2005 12:19:54 AM

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

David Jabaroth wrote:

> Hi;
>
> The fauls in windows Xp Registry may slow you PC down or make it
> hanging.
>
> I hav tried several different programs witch offer resolving thise
> problems.
>
> The best produkt I have found is TuneUp link: http://www.tune-up.com/
>
> I have bought this produkt because I want to get rid of the registry
> fauls.
>
> WinTune also optimise a lot af settings in the registry. It is good.
> Download an try it for free. My PC is working better than ever after
> using WinTune.

This is the second time you've posted this. One time may be just
enthusiasm for a product and you want to share. Twice is suspiciously
spam-like, particularly when the registry in XP does not "slow down" in
the way you describe. Registry cleaners are unnecessary in XP and in
the wrong hands, positively dangerous. There is no need to pay for
third-party registry cleaners or tune-up programs if you are running
XP.

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
Anonymous
August 16, 2005 2:01:07 PM

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

To Malke.

Oh really!!!

I've have been a mainframe system developer since 1973. I'm not a novice you
can impress.

Do you know MS REGCLEANER??? Why have MS developed this product???

Even after a clean install of Windows XP there is a lot af fauls in the
registry.

Please understand that my words are true:

WinTune also optimise a lot af settings in the registry. It is good.
My PC is working better than ever after using WinTune.

I'm not trying to sell the product, and have no interest in others to get
the product.

And who do you thing you are, telling me to do and what not to do???

I can write what I like and place my words in both Windows XP General and in
Windows XP, if I like.

I do not like peoble who think that only their way of thinking is the right.

Best regard
David Jabaroth


--
Best regards
David Jabaroth
Denmark


"Malke" wrote:

> David Jabaroth wrote:
>
> > Hi;
> >
> > The fauls in windows Xp Registry may slow you PC down or make it
> > hanging.
> >
> > I hav tried several different programs witch offer resolving thise
> > problems.
> >
> > The best produkt I have found is TuneUp link: http://www.tune-up.com/
> >
> > I have bought this produkt because I want to get rid of the registry
> > fauls.
> >
> > WinTune also optimise a lot af settings in the registry. It is good.
> > Download an try it for free. My PC is working better than ever after
> > using WinTune.
>
> This is the second time you've posted this. One time may be just
> enthusiasm for a product and you want to share. Twice is suspiciously
> spam-like, particularly when the registry in XP does not "slow down" in
> the way you describe. Registry cleaners are unnecessary in XP and in
> the wrong hands, positively dangerous. There is no need to pay for
> third-party registry cleaners or tune-up programs if you are running
> XP.
>
> Malke
> --
> Elephant Boy Computers
> www.elephantboycomputers.com
> "Don't Panic!"
> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
>
Related resources
Anonymous
August 16, 2005 5:32:40 PM

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

Tuning Registry values is an completely different topic from cleaners.
Just look at Kelly's site and how many Tweaks or Fixes she offers
via the Registry. None could be considered either cleaners/removers.

Microsoft RegClean was developed and offered for use with the 9X
& ME products, not NT/2000/XP/Vista. The Registry structure is
very different between the two code bases.

On a fresh XP install there are no Registry "Faults". Perhaps keys or
values that aren't fully referenced - but cannot be considered faults.

The unspoken rule here is "Do no harm". Recommending a Registry
cleaner has to be discouraged. Google returns 865,000 matches for
"Registry Cleaner". If only 1 out of 100 Registry cleanings results in
an unbootable PC then that's too great a risk.

The perceived need for Registry Cleaning comes from poorly written
or implemented uninstall routines. Programs leave behind all sorts of
remnants. That's not a Windows issue but one for 3rd-party software
vendors to address. The Registry is complex, intertwined database
that depends on proper linking between elements (Hives). The issue
with cleaning the Registry is knowing when to stop. It's like death by
a thousand cuts. Rip out part of the Registry today and you may not
experience the damage for days, weeks or months. When it is found
trying to repair it is nearly impossible.

If it works for you, that's good - but you'll never promote one in
XP General that you won't get quick and multiple rebuttals.


"David Jabaroth" <DavidJabaroth@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EFD81209-530E-4C2D-A8A4-97ADA77D2964@microsoft.com...
> To Malke.
>
> Oh really!!!
>
> I've have been a mainframe system developer since 1973. I'm not a novice
> you
> can impress.
>
> Do you know MS REGCLEANER??? Why have MS developed this product???
>
> Even after a clean install of Windows XP there is a lot af fauls in the
> registry.
>
> Please understand that my words are true:
>
> WinTune also optimise a lot af settings in the registry. It is good.
> My PC is working better than ever after using WinTune.
>
> I'm not trying to sell the product, and have no interest in others to get
> the product.
>
> And who do you thing you are, telling me to do and what not to do???
>
> I can write what I like and place my words in both Windows XP General and
> in
> Windows XP, if I like.
>
> I do not like peoble who think that only their way of thinking is the
> right.
>
> Best regard
> David Jabaroth
>
>
> --
> Best regards
> David Jabaroth
> Denmark
>
>
> "Malke" wrote:
>
>> David Jabaroth wrote:
>>
>> > Hi;
>> >
>> > The fauls in windows Xp Registry may slow you PC down or make it
>> > hanging.
>> >
>> > I hav tried several different programs witch offer resolving thise
>> > problems.
>> >
>> > The best produkt I have found is TuneUp link: http://www.tune-up.com/
>> >
>> > I have bought this produkt because I want to get rid of the registry
>> > fauls.
>> >
>> > WinTune also optimise a lot af settings in the registry. It is good.
>> > Download an try it for free. My PC is working better than ever after
>> > using WinTune.
>>
>> This is the second time you've posted this. One time may be just
>> enthusiasm for a product and you want to share. Twice is suspiciously
>> spam-like, particularly when the registry in XP does not "slow down" in
>> the way you describe. Registry cleaners are unnecessary in XP and in
>> the wrong hands, positively dangerous. There is no need to pay for
>> third-party registry cleaners or tune-up programs if you are running
>> XP.
>>
>> Malke
>> --
>> Elephant Boy Computers
>> www.elephantboycomputers.com
>> "Don't Panic!"
>> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
>>
August 16, 2005 5:32:41 PM

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

R. McCarty wrote:

> Tuning Registry values is an completely different topic from cleaners.
> Just look at Kelly's site and how many Tweaks or Fixes she offers
> via the Registry. None could be considered either cleaners/removers.
>
> Microsoft RegClean was developed and offered for use with the 9X
> & ME products, not NT/2000/XP/Vista. The Registry structure is
> very different between the two code bases.
>
> On a fresh XP install there are no Registry "Faults". Perhaps keys or
> values that aren't fully referenced - but cannot be considered faults.
>
> The unspoken rule here is "Do no harm". Recommending a Registry
> cleaner has to be discouraged. Google returns 865,000 matches for
> "Registry Cleaner". If only 1 out of 100 Registry cleanings results in
> an unbootable PC then that's too great a risk.
>
> The perceived need for Registry Cleaning comes from poorly written
> or implemented uninstall routines. Programs leave behind all sorts of
> remnants. That's not a Windows issue but one for 3rd-party software
> vendors to address. The Registry is complex, intertwined database
> that depends on proper linking between elements (Hives). The issue
> with cleaning the Registry is knowing when to stop. It's like death by
> a thousand cuts. Rip out part of the Registry today and you may not
> experience the damage for days, weeks or months. When it is found
> trying to repair it is nearly impossible.
>
> If it works for you, that's good - but you'll never promote one in
> XP General that you won't get quick and multiple rebuttals.
>

What he said. Well done, couldn't ever have said it better myself. The
OP can run all the registry cleaners he wants, but it isn't necessary
and if you don't know how to hand-edit the registry, you shouldn't be
messing with it.

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
Anonymous
August 16, 2005 7:26:50 PM

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

On 2005-08-16, Malke <invalid@not-real.com> wrote:
> R. McCarty wrote:
>
>> Tuning Registry values is an completely different topic from cleaners.
>> Just look at Kelly's site and how many Tweaks or Fixes she offers
>> via the Registry. None could be considered either cleaners/removers.
>>
>> Microsoft RegClean was developed and offered for use with the 9X
>> & ME products, not NT/2000/XP/Vista. The Registry structure is
>> very different between the two code bases.
>>
>> On a fresh XP install there are no Registry "Faults". Perhaps keys or
>> values that aren't fully referenced - but cannot be considered faults.
>>
>> The unspoken rule here is "Do no harm". Recommending a Registry
>> cleaner has to be discouraged. Google returns 865,000 matches for
>> "Registry Cleaner". If only 1 out of 100 Registry cleanings results in
>> an unbootable PC then that's too great a risk.
>>
>> The perceived need for Registry Cleaning comes from poorly written
>> or implemented uninstall routines. Programs leave behind all sorts of
>> remnants. That's not a Windows issue but one for 3rd-party software
>> vendors to address. The Registry is complex, intertwined database
>> that depends on proper linking between elements (Hives). The issue
>> with cleaning the Registry is knowing when to stop. It's like death by
>> a thousand cuts. Rip out part of the Registry today and you may not
>> experience the damage for days, weeks or months. When it is found
>> trying to repair it is nearly impossible.
>>
>> If it works for you, that's good - but you'll never promote one in
>> XP General that you won't get quick and multiple rebuttals.
>>
>
> What he said. Well done, couldn't ever have said it better myself. The
> OP can run all the registry cleaners he wants, but it isn't necessary
> and if you don't know how to hand-edit the registry, you shouldn't be
> messing with it.
>
> Malke

If the need for cleaning the registry is based on poorly written code,
then ms does poorly written code (not a surprise).

I don't know if the registry listing for the "Remote Access Connection"
still contain a listing of all websites one has visited/accessed but
I disable the "feature" each time I have to reinstall windows & have
continued to do so. ms had stated that it was to "help" accessing
the website quicker & clearing the browser's history, cache & dropdown
listing didn't clean-out the registry of the websites.

After finding the situation by accident, I've always gone into the
registry to disable the service for RAC. I do not believe that
leaving the websites in the registry is "do no harm".
Anonymous
August 16, 2005 8:48:50 PM

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

Can you post the Key name for me. As far as I know the only web
type data that gets stored in the Registry is P3P values for Cookie
handling and IE Zone sites.

Again I think we are mixing things up a bit. The Registry does have
and maintain a number MRU (Most Recently Used) tables. Clearing
those presents no operational threats to XP. In the case you sight -
you're clearing something that will be repopulated with use, not removing
it entirely from the Registry.

I'm not against specific Registry cleanup utilities from software vendors.
Symantec probably makes better clean-up tools than the products
themselves. Roxio also has a Cleanup called RoxioZAP. If created
by the company themselves - they should know what to remove from
the Registry. It's the automated Registry Cleaners for general use that
may be hazardous to your PC's health.



<plew@csus_abcdefg.edu> wrote in message
news:mdOdnV-t7pSX0Z_eRVn-gw@comcast.com...
> On 2005-08-16, Malke <invalid@not-real.com> wrote:
>> R. McCarty wrote:
>>
>>> Tuning Registry values is an completely different topic from cleaners.
>>> Just look at Kelly's site and how many Tweaks or Fixes she offers
>>> via the Registry. None could be considered either cleaners/removers.
>>>
>>> Microsoft RegClean was developed and offered for use with the 9X
>>> & ME products, not NT/2000/XP/Vista. The Registry structure is
>>> very different between the two code bases.
>>>
>>> On a fresh XP install there are no Registry "Faults". Perhaps keys or
>>> values that aren't fully referenced - but cannot be considered faults.
>>>
>>> The unspoken rule here is "Do no harm". Recommending a Registry
>>> cleaner has to be discouraged. Google returns 865,000 matches for
>>> "Registry Cleaner". If only 1 out of 100 Registry cleanings results in
>>> an unbootable PC then that's too great a risk.
>>>
>>> The perceived need for Registry Cleaning comes from poorly written
>>> or implemented uninstall routines. Programs leave behind all sorts of
>>> remnants. That's not a Windows issue but one for 3rd-party software
>>> vendors to address. The Registry is complex, intertwined database
>>> that depends on proper linking between elements (Hives). The issue
>>> with cleaning the Registry is knowing when to stop. It's like death by
>>> a thousand cuts. Rip out part of the Registry today and you may not
>>> experience the damage for days, weeks or months. When it is found
>>> trying to repair it is nearly impossible.
>>>
>>> If it works for you, that's good - but you'll never promote one in
>>> XP General that you won't get quick and multiple rebuttals.
>>>
>>
>> What he said. Well done, couldn't ever have said it better myself. The
>> OP can run all the registry cleaners he wants, but it isn't necessary
>> and if you don't know how to hand-edit the registry, you shouldn't be
>> messing with it.
>>
>> Malke
>
> If the need for cleaning the registry is based on poorly written code,
> then ms does poorly written code (not a surprise).
>
> I don't know if the registry listing for the "Remote Access Connection"
> still contain a listing of all websites one has visited/accessed but
> I disable the "feature" each time I have to reinstall windows & have
> continued to do so. ms had stated that it was to "help" accessing
> the website quicker & clearing the browser's history, cache & dropdown
> listing didn't clean-out the registry of the websites.
>
> After finding the situation by accident, I've always gone into the
> registry to disable the service for RAC. I do not believe that
> leaving the websites in the registry is "do no harm".
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 12:36:06 AM

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

Don't know what the "key" is but the name is "Remote Access

Auto Connection Manager". I know that it had website urls in
win95, win98se & possibily nt4 (don't remember) and were listed under
"remote access" as part of the name in the registry.

Even the description of the remote access auto connection manager
says that it "creates a connection to a remote network whenever a
program references a remote DNS or Netbios name.

It has been quite a few years since my encounter or even had used
win95, win98se or even nt4.

On 2005-08-16, R. McCarty <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Can you post the Key name for me. As far as I know the only web
> type data that gets stored in the Registry is P3P values for Cookie
> handling and IE Zone sites.
>
> Again I think we are mixing things up a bit. The Registry does have
> and maintain a number MRU (Most Recently Used) tables. Clearing
> those presents no operational threats to XP. In the case you sight -
> you're clearing something that will be repopulated with use, not removing
> it entirely from the Registry.
>
> I'm not against specific Registry cleanup utilities from software vendors.
> Symantec probably makes better clean-up tools than the products
> themselves. Roxio also has a Cleanup called RoxioZAP. If created
> by the company themselves - they should know what to remove from
> the Registry. It's the automated Registry Cleaners for general use that
> may be hazardous to your PC's health.
>
>
>
><plew@csus_abcdefg.edu> wrote in message
> news:mdOdnV-t7pSX0Z_eRVn-gw@comcast.com...
>> On 2005-08-16, Malke <invalid@not-real.com> wrote:
>>> R. McCarty wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tuning Registry values is an completely different topic from cleaners.
>>>> Just look at Kelly's site and how many Tweaks or Fixes she offers
>>>> via the Registry. None could be considered either cleaners/removers.
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft RegClean was developed and offered for use with the 9X
>>>> & ME products, not NT/2000/XP/Vista. The Registry structure is
>>>> very different between the two code bases.
>>>>
>>>> On a fresh XP install there are no Registry "Faults". Perhaps keys or
>>>> values that aren't fully referenced - but cannot be considered faults.
>>>>
>>>> The unspoken rule here is "Do no harm". Recommending a Registry
>>>> cleaner has to be discouraged. Google returns 865,000 matches for
>>>> "Registry Cleaner". If only 1 out of 100 Registry cleanings results in
>>>> an unbootable PC then that's too great a risk.
>>>>
>>>> The perceived need for Registry Cleaning comes from poorly written
>>>> or implemented uninstall routines. Programs leave behind all sorts of
>>>> remnants. That's not a Windows issue but one for 3rd-party software
>>>> vendors to address. The Registry is complex, intertwined database
>>>> that depends on proper linking between elements (Hives). The issue
>>>> with cleaning the Registry is knowing when to stop. It's like death by
>>>> a thousand cuts. Rip out part of the Registry today and you may not
>>>> experience the damage for days, weeks or months. When it is found
>>>> trying to repair it is nearly impossible.
>>>>
>>>> If it works for you, that's good - but you'll never promote one in
>>>> XP General that you won't get quick and multiple rebuttals.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What he said. Well done, couldn't ever have said it better myself. The
>>> OP can run all the registry cleaners he wants, but it isn't necessary
>>> and if you don't know how to hand-edit the registry, you shouldn't be
>>> messing with it.
>>>
>>> Malke
>>
>> If the need for cleaning the registry is based on poorly written code,
>> then ms does poorly written code (not a surprise).
>>
>> I don't know if the registry listing for the "Remote Access Connection"
>> still contain a listing of all websites one has visited/accessed but
>> I disable the "feature" each time I have to reinstall windows & have
>> continued to do so. ms had stated that it was to "help" accessing
>> the website quicker & clearing the browser's history, cache & dropdown
>> listing didn't clean-out the registry of the websites.
>>
>> After finding the situation by accident, I've always gone into the
>> registry to disable the service for RAC. I do not believe that
>> leaving the websites in the registry is "do no harm".
>
>
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 3:16:56 AM

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

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:49:48 -0700, Malke <invalid@not-real.com>
wrote:


>What he said. Well done, couldn't ever have said it better myself. The
>OP can run all the registry cleaners he wants, but it isn't necessary
>and if you don't know how to hand-edit the registry, you shouldn't be
>messing with it.
>
>Malke

RegsupremePro found over 600 invalid reg entries in my registry. How
long would that take you to find and cull by hand? Oh, and it did no
harm to my XP install when I had it delete the invalid registry
entries. I've been using RegsupremePro for about two years with no ill
effects yet. You do it your way and I'll do it mine. My way is a *lot*
faster.
August 17, 2005 3:16:57 AM

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

Praxiteles Democritus wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:49:48 -0700, Malke <invalid@not-real.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>What he said. Well done, couldn't ever have said it better myself. The
>>OP can run all the registry cleaners he wants, but it isn't necessary
>>and if you don't know how to hand-edit the registry, you shouldn't be
>>messing with it.
>>
>>Malke
>
> RegsupremePro found over 600 invalid reg entries in my registry. How
> long would that take you to find and cull by hand? Oh, and it did no
> harm to my XP install when I had it delete the invalid registry
> entries. I've been using RegsupremePro for about two years with no ill
> effects yet. You do it your way and I'll do it mine. My way is a *lot*
> faster.

I'm sure it is. But it is unnecessary. Unlike older MS operating
systems, having extra entries in the registry (and I'm not talking
about malware entries) does not slow down the computer. I've never
cleaned out the registry for maintenance purposes on any of my Windows
machines and they are just as fast as the day I installed the os. But
if you're happy doing that sort of thing, that's great. I'm all about
choice; it's A Good Thing.

Malke
--
MS-MVP Windows User/Shell
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic"
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 3:20:39 AM

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

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:48:50 -0400, "R. McCarty"
<PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote:


> I'm not against specific Registry cleanup utilities from software vendors.
>Symantec probably makes better clean-up tools than the products
>themselves.

Symantec's is one of the worst. There are better reg cleaners out
there. Yes, I've used Symantec's reg cleaner, and yes, it has screwed
my system.
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 9:06:23 PM

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

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:41:19 -0700, Malke <notreally@invalid.com>
wrote:


>I'm sure it is. But it is unnecessary. Unlike older MS operating
>systems, having extra entries in the registry (and I'm not talking
>about malware entries) does not slow down the computer. I've never
>cleaned out the registry for maintenance purposes on any of my Windows
>machines and they are just as fast as the day I installed the os. But
>if you're happy doing that sort of thing, that's great. I'm all about
>choice; it's A Good Thing.
>
>Malke

So you're saying the registry in XP can be as big as it wants to be
with no ill effect? I still prefer to keep mine clean.
!