S
Sanford Aranoff
Guest
What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
A
Alias
Guest
Sanford Aranoff wrote:
>
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
CCleaner is just fine as long as you stay away from the registry fixer.
You can configure it to not nuke cookies and a few other features.
--
Alias
>
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
CCleaner is just fine as long as you stay away from the registry fixer.
You can configure it to not nuke cookies and a few other features.
--
Alias
B
Big_Al
Guest
Sanford Aranoff said this on 5/24/2010 1:40 PM:
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
I can only comment on CCleaner. I use it all the time. I like it.
You can select exactly what you want (of the options you have) to clean.
You can exclude cookies by choice so you don't lose stored data from
websites, and not clean history if you wish.
I use the uninstall part a lot since it displays much faster than
add/remove in control panel.
Also the registry cleaner is kinda good, for registry cleaners. A lot
of people call them snake oil, but if used with a bit of caution or
discretion you are better off. I've done a full backup and then let it
rip and I've had no issues. Now that all of the suspected errors are
gone, the new ones are obvious, like shortcuts that did not remove
caused I moved them after install etc. It works for me.
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
I can only comment on CCleaner. I use it all the time. I like it.
You can select exactly what you want (of the options you have) to clean.
You can exclude cookies by choice so you don't lose stored data from
websites, and not clean history if you wish.
I use the uninstall part a lot since it displays much faster than
add/remove in control panel.
Also the registry cleaner is kinda good, for registry cleaners. A lot
of people call them snake oil, but if used with a bit of caution or
discretion you are better off. I've done a full backup and then let it
rip and I've had no issues. Now that all of the suspected errors are
gone, the new ones are obvious, like shortcuts that did not remove
caused I moved them after install etc. It works for me.
W
W****n S.
Guest
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
It will also remove startup items that you have disabled so that it is a lot
cleaner there as well. "CC"
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
It will also remove startup items that you have disabled so that it is a lot
cleaner there as well. "CC"
U
Unknown
Guest
I wouldn't bother with either one. I use WSE (Windows Security Essentials)
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
P
PA Bear [MS MVP]
Guest
[Here we go again...]
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.
Sanford Aranoff wrote:
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
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.
Sanford Aranoff wrote:
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
D
Db
Guest
What do you think of paying for advice for $50 or using this nntp for free?
--
--
db·´¯`·...¸>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This NNTP newsgroup is evolving to:
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
--
--
db·´¯`·...¸>
DatabaseBen, Retired Professional
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This NNTP newsgroup is evolving to:
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
K
Ken Blake, MVP
Guest
On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
wrote:
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other programs like
that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as you don't use its
registry cleaning function.
Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
it may have.
Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
And also
http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
wrote:
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other programs like
that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as you don't use its
registry cleaning function.
Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of the
registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the registry alone and
don't use any registry cleaner. Despite what many people think, and
what vendors of registry cleaning software try to convince you of,
having unused registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner erroneously
removing an entry you need is far greater than any potential benefit
it may have.
Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
And also
http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
P
peter
Guest
CCleaner for free..........just be very very carefull with the registry
cleaner and
dont use it if you dont know what your cleaning out.
Everything else works like a charm
peter
--
If you find a posting or message from me offensive,inappropriate
or disruptive,please ignore it.
If you dont know how to ignore a posting complain
to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
cleaner and
dont use it if you dont know what your cleaning out.
Everything else works like a charm
peter
--
If you find a posting or message from me offensive,inappropriate
or disruptive,please ignore it.
If you dont know how to ignore a posting complain
to me and I will be only too happy to demonstrate
"Sanford Aranoff" wrote in message
news:4BFAB9F1.9CB55E39@analysis-knowledge.com...
> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
T
Twayne
Guest
OT: Re: PC TuneUp and CCleaner
In news:%23FBs343%23KHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,
PA Bear [MS MVP] typed:
> [Here we go again...]
Yes, here we go again: The closed minded idiots and closed minded dummies
who insist they are right in the face of millions of satisfied users and
mountains of evidence of the success of such things. That site he
references? Wrtten by one of "his" gang of cohorts amongst their silly
little group here who want to libel the companies that make such products.
He and his cohorts will lie and misinform to the very end even though most
any service shop makes good use of such tools and understands the realities
of "today".
The most interesting thing about these boobs is when you challenge them
to show some proof of their allegations, they point to the below useless
site or one other that exists which is the same thing, and call that proof.
They cannot even come close to describing the mechanism of their claims as
any professional or logical thinking person would be able to do.
HTH,
Twayne`
....
Boilerplate junk removed.
>
>
> Sanford Aranoff wrote:
>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>> free?
In news:%23FBs343%23KHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,
PA Bear [MS MVP] typed:
> [Here we go again...]
Yes, here we go again: The closed minded idiots and closed minded dummies
who insist they are right in the face of millions of satisfied users and
mountains of evidence of the success of such things. That site he
references? Wrtten by one of "his" gang of cohorts amongst their silly
little group here who want to libel the companies that make such products.
He and his cohorts will lie and misinform to the very end even though most
any service shop makes good use of such tools and understands the realities
of "today".
The most interesting thing about these boobs is when you challenge them
to show some proof of their allegations, they point to the below useless
site or one other that exists which is the same thing, and call that proof.
They cannot even come close to describing the mechanism of their claims as
any professional or logical thinking person would be able to do.
HTH,
Twayne`
....
Boilerplate junk removed.
>
>
> Sanford Aranoff wrote:
>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>> free?
T
Twayne
Guest
Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed minds
who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use of
same.
In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
Ken Blake, MVP typed:
> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
> wrote:
>
>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>> free?
>
>
> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far from
the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less aggressive
registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such as Undo and so
on, that are needed.
>
> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't nearly
as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest to
the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems this
closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of the
registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge registries and
erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated by a
small group of losers on this group.
Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references to a
few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them from
here because a thinking person is going to make the connections themselves
and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only hundreds
of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about this
from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as they do.
But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and you'll see
what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are some of the
worst places there are to get information from, especially when they're
no-names such as these folk.
>
> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
> any potential benefit it may have.
Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the hundreds
of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the need arises.
This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>
> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>
> And also
> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners. He's
quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed tools.
Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that time, there
would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of progress in every
area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly respected person in the
computer and www areas and often quoted by many thinking people.
If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have a
lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it appears
to qualify his misinformation.
Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things, long
before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those days.
Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would like an
intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local group of
dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh, and
he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart enough to say
so when there are unanswered questions asked.
I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a lot of
your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my point and
that's what I was interested in doing.
HTH,
Twayne`
who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use of
same.
In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
Ken Blake, MVP typed:
> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
> wrote:
>
>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>> free?
>
>
> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far from
the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less aggressive
registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such as Undo and so
on, that are needed.
>
> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't nearly
as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest to
the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems this
closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of the
registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge registries and
erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated by a
small group of losers on this group.
Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references to a
few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them from
here because a thinking person is going to make the connections themselves
and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only hundreds
of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about this
from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as they do.
But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and you'll see
what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are some of the
worst places there are to get information from, especially when they're
no-names such as these folk.
>
> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
> any potential benefit it may have.
Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the hundreds
of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the need arises.
This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>
> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>
> And also
> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners. He's
quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed tools.
Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that time, there
would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of progress in every
area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly respected person in the
computer and www areas and often quoted by many thinking people.
If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have a
lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it appears
to qualify his misinformation.
Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things, long
before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those days.
Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would like an
intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local group of
dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh, and
he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart enough to say
so when there are unanswered questions asked.
I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a lot of
your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my point and
that's what I was interested in doing.
HTH,
Twayne`
H
HeyBub
Guest
Big_Al wrote:
>
> Also the registry cleaner is kinda good, for registry cleaners. A
> lot of people call them snake oil, but if used with a bit of caution
> or discretion you are better off.
Exactly how are you better off?
>
> Also the registry cleaner is kinda good, for registry cleaners. A
> lot of people call them snake oil, but if used with a bit of caution
> or discretion you are better off.
Exactly how are you better off?
U
Unknown
Guest
Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
products.
You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
closed mind?
I suggest you study your ego.
"Twayne" wrote in message
news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed minds
> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use of
> same.
>
>
> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>> free?
>>
>>
>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>
> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>
>>
>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>
> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't nearly
> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge registries
> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated by
> a small group of losers on this group.
> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references to
> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them from
> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections themselves
> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only hundreds
> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>
>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>> any potential benefit it may have.
>
> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the need
> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>
>>
>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>
>> And also
>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>
> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
> thinking people.
> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have a
> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
> appears to qualify his misinformation.
> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would like
> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local group
> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart enough
> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>
> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a lot
> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my point
> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>
> HTH,
>
> Twayne`
>
>
products.
You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
closed mind?
I suggest you study your ego.
"Twayne" wrote in message
news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed minds
> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use of
> same.
>
>
> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>> free?
>>
>>
>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>
> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>
>>
>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>
> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't nearly
> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge registries
> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated by
> a small group of losers on this group.
> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references to
> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them from
> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections themselves
> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only hundreds
> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>
>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>> any potential benefit it may have.
>
> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the need
> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>
>>
>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>
>> And also
>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>
> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
> thinking people.
> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have a
> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
> appears to qualify his misinformation.
> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would like
> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local group
> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart enough
> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>
> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a lot
> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my point
> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>
> HTH,
>
> Twayne`
>
>
B
Big_Al
Guest
HeyBub said this on 5/25/2010 9:25 AM:
> Big_Al wrote:
>>
>> Also the registry cleaner is kinda good, for registry cleaners. A
>> lot of people call them snake oil, but if used with a bit of caution
>> or discretion you are better off.
>
> Exactly how are you better off?
>
>
"I" feel better. That's how.
The cleaner part is obvious, and the registry part is my feel good.
I've read enough to know the registry clean is not necessary, I used it
in a controlled condition with backup.
> Big_Al wrote:
>>
>> Also the registry cleaner is kinda good, for registry cleaners. A
>> lot of people call them snake oil, but if used with a bit of caution
>> or discretion you are better off.
>
> Exactly how are you better off?
>
>
"I" feel better. That's how.
The cleaner part is obvious, and the registry part is my feel good.
I've read enough to know the registry clean is not necessary, I used it
in a controlled condition with backup.
B
Bill in Co.
Guest
The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
Unknown wrote:
> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
> products.
> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
> closed mind?
> I suggest you study your ego.
>
> "Twayne" wrote in message
> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>> minds
>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>> of
>> same.
>>
>>
>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>> free?
>>>
>>>
>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>
>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>
>>>
>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>
>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>> nearly
>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>> registries
>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>> by
>> a small group of losers on this group.
>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references to
>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>> from
>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>> themselves
>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>> hundreds
>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>
>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>
>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>> need
>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>
>>>
>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>
>>> And also
>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>
>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>> thinking people.
>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have a
>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would like
>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>> group
>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart enough
>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>
>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a lot
>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>> point
>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>
>> HTH,
>>
>> Twayne`
one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
Unknown wrote:
> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
> products.
> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
> closed mind?
> I suggest you study your ego.
>
> "Twayne" wrote in message
> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>> minds
>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>> of
>> same.
>>
>>
>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>> free?
>>>
>>>
>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>
>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>
>>>
>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>
>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>> nearly
>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>> registries
>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>> by
>> a small group of losers on this group.
>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references to
>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>> from
>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>> themselves
>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>> hundreds
>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>
>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>
>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>> need
>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>
>>>
>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>
>>> And also
>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>
>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>> thinking people.
>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have a
>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would like
>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>> group
>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart enough
>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>
>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a lot
>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>> point
>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>
>> HTH,
>>
>> Twayne`
U
Unknown
Guest
By golly, I think you hit the nail on the head.
"Bill in Co." wrote in message
news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>> products.
>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
>> closed mind?
>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>
>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>> minds
>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>>> of
>>> same.
>>>
>>>
>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>> free?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>
>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>
>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>> nearly
>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>> registries
>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>>> by
>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>> to
>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>> from
>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>> themselves
>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>> hundreds
>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>
>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>
>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>> need
>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>
>>>> And also
>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>
>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>>> thinking people.
>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have
>>> a
>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>> like
>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>> group
>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>> enough
>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>
>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>> lot
>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>> point
>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>> Twayne`
>
>
"Bill in Co." wrote in message
news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>> products.
>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
>> closed mind?
>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>
>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>> minds
>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>>> of
>>> same.
>>>
>>>
>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>> free?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>
>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>
>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>> nearly
>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>> registries
>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>>> by
>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>> to
>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>> from
>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>> themselves
>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>> hundreds
>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>
>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>
>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>> need
>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>
>>>> And also
>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>
>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>>> thinking people.
>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have
>>> a
>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>> like
>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>> group
>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>> enough
>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>
>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>> lot
>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>> point
>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>> Twayne`
>
>
U
Unknown
Guest
BTW-----How's the weather in Pueblo?
"Bill in Co." wrote in message
news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>> products.
>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
>> closed mind?
>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>
>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>> minds
>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>>> of
>>> same.
>>>
>>>
>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>> free?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>
>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>
>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>> nearly
>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>> registries
>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>>> by
>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>> to
>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>> from
>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>> themselves
>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>> hundreds
>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>
>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>
>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>> need
>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>
>>>> And also
>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>
>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>>> thinking people.
>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have
>>> a
>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>> like
>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>> group
>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>> enough
>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>
>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>> lot
>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>> point
>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>> Twayne`
>
>
"Bill in Co." wrote in message
news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>> products.
>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
>> closed mind?
>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>
>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>> minds
>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>>> of
>>> same.
>>>
>>>
>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>> free?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>
>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms such
>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>
>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of complaints
>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>> nearly
>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally attest
>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the problems
>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use of
>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>> registries
>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>>> by
>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>> to
>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>> from
>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>> themselves
>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>> hundreds
>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days, are
>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>
>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>
>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>> need
>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>
>>>> And also
>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>
>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>>> thinking people.
>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have
>>> a
>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>> like
>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>> group
>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>> enough
>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>
>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>> lot
>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>> point
>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>>
>>> Twayne`
>
>
B
Bill in Co.
Guest
It's a bit warm (but at least it's a dry heat) here. How about over where
you are?
I don't think it's reached 90 or 100 today, which is nice.
Unknown wrote:
> BTW-----How's the weather in Pueblo?
> "Bill in Co." wrote in message
> news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
>> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>>
>> Unknown wrote:
>>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>>> products.
>>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
>>> closed mind?
>>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>>
>>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>>> minds
>>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>>>> of
>>>> same.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>>> free?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>>
>>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms
>>>> such
>>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>>
>>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of
>>>> complaints
>>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>>> nearly
>>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally
>>>> attest
>>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the
>>>> problems
>>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use
>>>> of
>>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>>> registries
>>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>>>> by
>>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>>> to
>>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>>> from
>>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>>> themselves
>>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>>> hundreds
>>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days,
>>>> are
>>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>>
>>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>>
>>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>>> need
>>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>>
>>>>> And also
>>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>>
>>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>>>> thinking people.
>>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have
>>>> a
>>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>>> like
>>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>>> group
>>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>>> enough
>>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>>
>>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>>> lot
>>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>>> point
>>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>>
>>>> HTH,
>>>>
>>>> Twayne`
you are?
I don't think it's reached 90 or 100 today, which is nice.
Unknown wrote:
> BTW-----How's the weather in Pueblo?
> "Bill in Co." wrote in message
> news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others what
>> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>>
>> Unknown wrote:
>>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>>> products.
>>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has a
>>> closed mind?
>>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>>
>>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>>> minds
>>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good use
>>>> of
>>>> same.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>>> free?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>>
>>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's far
>>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms
>>>> such
>>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>>
>>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of
>>>> complaints
>>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>>> nearly
>>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally
>>>> attest
>>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the
>>>> problems
>>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use
>>>> of
>>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>>> registries
>>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie perpetrated
>>>> by
>>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>>> to
>>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>>> from
>>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>>> themselves
>>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>>> hundreds
>>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links and
>>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days,
>>>> are
>>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>>
>>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>>
>>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>>> need
>>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>>
>>>>> And also
>>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>>
>>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by many
>>>> thinking people.
>>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would have
>>>> a
>>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since those
>>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>>> like
>>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>>> group
>>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance. Oh,
>>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>>> enough
>>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>>
>>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>>> lot
>>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>>> point
>>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>>
>>>> HTH,
>>>>
>>>> Twayne`
U
Unknown
Guest
Last couple of days, right at 90 degrees but will cool down this weekend..
"Bill in Co." wrote in message
news:%23wVhFwF$KHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> It's a bit warm (but at least it's a dry heat) here. How about over where
> you are?
> I don't think it's reached 90 or 100 today, which is nice.
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> BTW-----How's the weather in Pueblo?
>> "Bill in Co." wrote in message
>> news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others
>>> what
>>> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>>>
>>> Unknown wrote:
>>>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>>>> products.
>>>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has
>>>> a
>>>> closed mind?
>>>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>>>
>>>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>>>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>>>> minds
>>>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good
>>>>> use
>>>>> of
>>>>> same.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>>>> free?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>>>
>>>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's
>>>>> far
>>>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms
>>>>> such
>>>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>>>
>>>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of
>>>>> complaints
>>>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>>>> nearly
>>>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally
>>>>> attest
>>>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the
>>>>> problems
>>>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use
>>>>> of
>>>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>>>> registries
>>>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie
>>>>> perpetrated
>>>>> by
>>>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>>>> to
>>>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>>>> from
>>>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>>>> themselves
>>>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>>>> hundreds
>>>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links
>>>>> and
>>>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days,
>>>>> are
>>>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>>>> need
>>>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And also
>>>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by
>>>>> many
>>>>> thinking people.
>>>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would
>>>>> have
>>>>> a
>>>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since
>>>>> those
>>>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>>>> like
>>>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>>>> group
>>>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance.
>>>>> Oh,
>>>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>>>> enough
>>>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>>>
>>>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>>>> lot
>>>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>>>> point
>>>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> HTH,
>>>>>
>>>>> Twayne`
>
>
"Bill in Co." wrote in message
news:%23wVhFwF$KHA.980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> It's a bit warm (but at least it's a dry heat) here. How about over where
> you are?
> I don't think it's reached 90 or 100 today, which is nice.
>
> Unknown wrote:
>> BTW-----How's the weather in Pueblo?
>> "Bill in Co." wrote in message
>> news:OonQp9C$KHA.5168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> The term for this behavior is "projection": one projects onto others
>>> what
>>> one denies lies within oneself (it's just a defense mechanism).
>>>
>>> Unknown wrote:
>>>> Please provide us the source of the data that proves millions of sold
>>>> products.
>>>> You keep speaking of closed minds. Everyone who disagrees with you has
>>>> a
>>>> closed mind?
>>>> I suggest you study your ego.
>>>>
>>>> "Twayne" wrote in message
>>>> news:%23ZJhfT6%23KHA.5280@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Here's one of your major puppetmasters of this small group of closed
>>>>> minds
>>>>> who wish to malign and libel the companies that have sold millions of
>>>>> product to many, including those who repair computers and make good
>>>>> use
>>>>> of
>>>>> same.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In news:ksrlv5lcdgejms4f2mo53pdv0v1r7l5k94@4ax.com,
>>>>> Ken Blake, MVP typed:
>>>>>> On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:01 -0400, Sanford Aranoff
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for
>>>>>>> free?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I recommend staying far away from PC Tuneup and other
>>>>>> programs like that. CCleaner is a good program, as long as
>>>>>> you don't use its registry cleaning function.
>>>>>
>>>>> PCTuneup is actually not a bad program. It's not the best, but it's
>>>>> far
>>>>> from the worst either. CCleaner is also good, and one of the less
>>>>> aggressive registry cleaners, but has all the protection mechanisms
>>>>> such
>>>>> as Undo and so on, that are needed.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Registry cleaning programs are *all* snake oil. Cleaning of
>>>>>> the registry isn't needed and is dangerous. Leave the
>>>>>> registry alone and don't use any registry cleaner. Despite
>>>>>> what many people think, and what vendors of registry
>>>>>> cleaning software try to convince you of, having unused
>>>>>> registry entries doesn't really hurt you.
>>>>>
>>>>> If that were true, wouldn't you think there would be a lot of
>>>>> complaints
>>>>> being lodged and sales would fall to nearly nothing? People aren't
>>>>> nearly
>>>>> as stupid as this closed mind likes to think and I can personally
>>>>> attest
>>>>> to the fact that no registry cleaner has EVER caused any of the
>>>>> problems
>>>>> this closed mind likes to claim. I repair machines and often make use
>>>>> of
>>>>> the registry cleaner for eliminating 20S pauses, unwieldly huge
>>>>> registries
>>>>> and erroneous entries. The above para is an out and out lie
>>>>> perpetrated
>>>>> by
>>>>> a small group of losers on this group.
>>>>> Ask for any bona fide explanations and all you'll get are references
>>>>> to
>>>>> a few people who blame anything they can for their problems or biased
>>>>> self-serving sites such as are recommended below. I don't remove them
>>>>> from
>>>>> here because a thinking person is going to make the connections
>>>>> themselves
>>>>> and figure out what's up with these closed minded egotists. Only
>>>>> hundreds
>>>>> of millions of people disagree with them; you'd think you'd hear about
>>>>> this from a LOT more people than this tiny group acting like morons as
>>>>> they do. But, they're the only source of such BS. Check their links
>>>>> and
>>>>> you'll see what I mean. And blogs, being a dime a dozen these days,
>>>>> are
>>>>> some of the worst places there are to get information from, especially
>>>>> when they're no-names such as these folk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The risk of a serious problem caused by a registry cleaner
>>>>>> erroneously removing an entry you need is far greater than
>>>>>> any potential benefit it may have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, in over a decade it hasn't happened to me yet, or any of the
>>>>> hundreds of machines I've used cleaners on, including my own when the
>>>>> need
>>>>> arises. This is quite a group of miscreants, believe me, lol.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And also
>>>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin.../02/registry-junk-a-windows-fact-of-life.aspx
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark, BTW, has rescinded his opinion of not needing registry cleaners.
>>>>> He's quite cautious about their use, but he does say they are needed
>>>>> tools. Besides, 2005 is so long ago that even if it were true at that
>>>>> time, there would be nothing to say it's still true today; a LOT of
>>>>> progress in every area that exists has been made. Mark R is a highly
>>>>> respected person in the computer and www areas and often quoted by
>>>>> many
>>>>> thinking people.
>>>>> If Mark R has anything to say that supports his claim, it would
>>>>> have
>>>>> a
>>>>> lot more recent date than 2005; this dummy simply used it because it
>>>>> appears to qualify his misinformation.
>>>>> Actually, Mark is the one that got me to thinking about these things,
>>>>> long before 2005, and I've researched the information a lot since
>>>>> those
>>>>> days. Mark's blog is actually well worth reading for those who would
>>>>> like
>>>>> an intelligent and verifiable sets of information. Unlike this local
>>>>> group
>>>>> of dummies, Mark can back up what he says in almost every instance.
>>>>> Oh,
>>>>> and he's smart enough to not only admit when he's wrong, but smart
>>>>> enough
>>>>> to say so when there are unanswered questions asked.
>>>>>
>>>>> I won't spar with you Ken, because I know you'll simply retort with a
>>>>> lot
>>>>> of your double-talk and mindless so called information. I've made my
>>>>> point
>>>>> and that's what I was interested in doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> HTH,
>>>>>
>>>>> Twayne`
>
>
D
Doum
Guest
OT: Re: PC TuneUp and CCleaner
"Twayne" écrivait
news:#DjO6D6#KHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:
> In news:%23FBs343%23KHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,
> PA Bear [MS MVP] typed:
>> [Here we go again...]
>
> Yes, here we go again: The closed minded idiots and closed minded
> dummies who insist they are right in the face of millions of satisfied
> users and mountains of evidence of the success of such things. That
> site he references? Wrtten by one of "his" gang of cohorts amongst
> their silly little group here who want to libel the companies that
> make such products. He and his cohorts will lie and misinform to the
> very end even though most any service shop makes good use of such
> tools and understands the realities of "today".
> The most interesting thing about these boobs is when you challenge
> them
> to show some proof of their allegations, they point to the below
> useless site or one other that exists which is the same thing, and
> call that proof. They cannot even come close to describing the
> mechanism of their claims as any professional or logical thinking
> person would be able to do.
>
> HTH,
>
> Twayne`
> ...
>
> Boilerplate junk removed.
>
>>
>>
>> Sanford Aranoff wrote:
>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
>
>
>
Out of curiosity, I downloaded and installed Ccleaner. After making an
image of my system drive, I ran CC registry cleaner, it found a lot of
stuff, associated extensions, useless DLLs, etc. I let it do what it
suggested.
AFAICT, there's nothing broken but I don't see any performance
improvement so I think I'm gonna leave the registry alone in the future
but I will check out CC other features.
"Twayne" écrivait
news:#DjO6D6#KHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:
> In news:%23FBs343%23KHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl,
> PA Bear [MS MVP] typed:
>> [Here we go again...]
>
> Yes, here we go again: The closed minded idiots and closed minded
> dummies who insist they are right in the face of millions of satisfied
> users and mountains of evidence of the success of such things. That
> site he references? Wrtten by one of "his" gang of cohorts amongst
> their silly little group here who want to libel the companies that
> make such products. He and his cohorts will lie and misinform to the
> very end even though most any service shop makes good use of such
> tools and understands the realities of "today".
> The most interesting thing about these boobs is when you challenge
> them
> to show some proof of their allegations, they point to the below
> useless site or one other that exists which is the same thing, and
> call that proof. They cannot even come close to describing the
> mechanism of their claims as any professional or logical thinking
> person would be able to do.
>
> HTH,
>
> Twayne`
> ...
>
> Boilerplate junk removed.
>
>>
>>
>> Sanford Aranoff wrote:
>>> What do you think of PC TuneUP for $50 or CCleaner for free?
>
>
>
Out of curiosity, I downloaded and installed Ccleaner. After making an
image of my system drive, I ran CC registry cleaner, it found a lot of
stuff, associated extensions, useless DLLs, etc. I let it do what it
suggested.
AFAICT, there's nothing broken but I don't see any performance
improvement so I think I'm gonna leave the registry alone in the future
but I will check out CC other features.
