A
Adam Albright
Guest
Re: Best Registry Cleaner for vista
On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 15:15:23 -0400, "Daave"
<dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>Adam Albright wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 14:06:45 +0100, Alun Harford
>> <devnull@alunharford.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> The tool is even more dangerous than doing it manually.
>>>>> Most users decide against the idea when confronted with the
>>>>> registry editor, because they realise that they don't know what
>>>>> they're doing. With a tool, most users go "Nice pretty wizard.
>>>>> Next, next, next, next, finish. Oh dear, my system doesn't boot
>>>>> any more." Only then do they realise that they didn't know what
>>>>> they were doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alun Harford
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're entitled to your opinion even if it isn't factual. The whole
>>>> point behind Registry Cleaners is to avoid deleting something by
>>>> mistake. Of course any tool used improperly isn't very smart. What
>>>> you avoid saying is Registry Tools while most have some automatic
>>>> feature also show you a list of what it is about to remove BEFORE
>>>> it actually does, allowing the user to decide what to delete and
>>>> what not to. Of course if anybody just haphazardly removes things
>>>> without knowing why that is dumb. However suggesting people
>>>> manually scan tens of
>>>> thousands of lines in the Registry looking for "bad" things on their
>>>> own is in my opinion equally risky and very time consuming. Stop
>>>> being anal.
>>>
>>> plonk
>>
>> When presented with facts, just plonk. How typical of fanboys.
>
>I'm anything but a "fanboy," but I would like to see you present these
>facts.
The fact is Registry Cleaners work when used properly is well
documented. All that's required is learning how to use Google and
you'll find countless articles from some REAL experts, not the fakers
that hang out here that confirm it.
On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 15:15:23 -0400, "Daave"
<dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:
>Adam Albright wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 14:06:45 +0100, Alun Harford
>> <devnull@alunharford.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> The tool is even more dangerous than doing it manually.
>>>>> Most users decide against the idea when confronted with the
>>>>> registry editor, because they realise that they don't know what
>>>>> they're doing. With a tool, most users go "Nice pretty wizard.
>>>>> Next, next, next, next, finish. Oh dear, my system doesn't boot
>>>>> any more." Only then do they realise that they didn't know what
>>>>> they were doing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alun Harford
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're entitled to your opinion even if it isn't factual. The whole
>>>> point behind Registry Cleaners is to avoid deleting something by
>>>> mistake. Of course any tool used improperly isn't very smart. What
>>>> you avoid saying is Registry Tools while most have some automatic
>>>> feature also show you a list of what it is about to remove BEFORE
>>>> it actually does, allowing the user to decide what to delete and
>>>> what not to. Of course if anybody just haphazardly removes things
>>>> without knowing why that is dumb. However suggesting people
>>>> manually scan tens of
>>>> thousands of lines in the Registry looking for "bad" things on their
>>>> own is in my opinion equally risky and very time consuming. Stop
>>>> being anal.
>>>
>>> plonk
>>
>> When presented with facts, just plonk. How typical of fanboys.
>
>I'm anything but a "fanboy," but I would like to see you present these
>facts.
The fact is Registry Cleaners work when used properly is well
documented. All that's required is learning how to use Google and
you'll find countless articles from some REAL experts, not the fakers
that hang out here that confirm it.