registry
Claire Brucker
clean it?
Shenan Stanley
Claire Brucker wrote:
> Just what is the registry?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry
> Does it need regular cleaning? If so,
> how do you clean it?
No. In fact - if you have to ask what tthe registry is (even after you
learn it and can explain it to others) - the registry is better left alone
except in particular cases where you are following specific instructions to
add or remove specific things.
Although there are some fine registry tools out there - the ones that just
go through and find orphaned entries and then remove them for you should not
be utilized by the layman (or even the so-called expert) unless every single
entry is checked with a fine-tooth comb before removal of each and every one
and a full backup of the system was made before attempting it so you can
restore if things begin to fail. It's not worth the risk you take.
While I cannot say conclusively that cleaning out *any* registry will not
improve performance of *any* machine - I can say that most people - even
with machines that have been around since 2001 and have had each successive
service pack installed and every version of Microsoft and Open Office
installed since 2001 and removed - and assorted other packages (hundreds -
if not thousands) installed and removed multiple times - will not see any
marked improvement from a cleaned registry. They will not recover much (if
any) drive space and they will not gain much (if any) performance. (When I
say much for performance - nano, maybe milli seconds...)
--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Claire Brucker
anything.
"Shenan Stanley" <newsh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ewiGRIIK...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Leonard Grey
most of their configuration settings. A registry does NOT need cleaning,
despite all the hype you'll read to the contrary, so your last question
is moot.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est
"A Day in the Life of a Web 2.0 Hacker" - PC Magazine
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2330952,00.asp
Twayne
>
> Claire Brucker wrote:
>> Just what is the registry?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry
>
>> Does it need regular cleaning? If so,
>> how do you clean it?
>
> No. In fact - if you have to ask what tthe registry is (even after
> you learn it and can explain it to others) - the registry is better
> left alone except in particular cases where you are following
> specific instructions to add or remove specific things.
That's a little condescending, don't you think? Especially considering
the stated purpose of the post was to find out WHAT the registry is?
You never answered either question, although you gave a long boilerplate
spew about the perceived dangers of registry cleaners. Your only
purpose in answering thus had to be self-serving, with no consideration
of helping the OP.
Twayne
VanguardLH
> Just what is the registry? Does it need regular cleaning? If so, how do you
> clean it?
Go to your local library. Get a copy of Windows for Dummies. Read.
Ken Blake, MVP
<cbru...@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Just what is the registry?
It's a bunch of files that contain setting information, both for
Windows itself, as well as much of your hardware and most of your
applications. It's critical: without it, or if it gets screwed up,
your system won't run.
> Does it need regular cleaning? If so, how do you
> clean it?
Not only does it not *need* regular cleaning, registry cleaning is
very dangerous and more likely to hurt you than help you. Here's my
standard post on the subject:
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.
--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
John John (MVP)
>><answered inline>
>>
>>Claire Brucker wrote:
>>
>>>Just what is the registry?
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry
>>
>>
>>>Does it need regular cleaning? If so,
>>>how do you clean it?
>>
>>No. In fact - if you have to ask what tthe registry is (even after
>>you learn it and can explain it to others) - the registry is better
>>left alone except in particular cases where you are following
>>specific instructions to add or remove specific things.
>
>
> That's a little condescending, don't you think? Especially considering
> the stated purpose of the post was to find out WHAT the registry is?
>
> You never answered either question, although you gave a long boilerplate
> spew about the perceived dangers of registry cleaners. Your only
> purpose in answering thus had to be self-serving, with no consideration
> of helping the OP.
The OP asked three questions:
1- Just what is the registry?
2- Does it need regular cleaning?
3- If so, how do you clean it?
Shenan aswered questions 1 & 2, question 3 does not need an answer
because the registry does not need cleaning.
John
Leonard Grey
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est
"A Day in the Life of a Web 2.0 Hacker" - PC Magazine
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2330952,00.asp
I would steer clear of Twayne. S/He's on this crusade over registry
cleaners and won't be denied.
Shenan Stanley
> <answered inline>
Claire Brucker wrote:
> Just what is the registry?
Shenan Stanley wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry
Claire Brucker wrote:
> Does it need regular cleaning? If so,
> how do you clean it?
Shenan Stanley wrote:
> No. In fact - if you have to ask what tthe registry is (even after
> you learn it and can explain it to others) - the registry is better
> left alone except in particular cases where you are following
> specific instructions to add or remove specific things.
>
> Although there are some fine registry tools out there - the ones
> that just go through and find orphaned entries and then remove them
> for you should not be utilized by the layman (or even the so-called
> expert) unless every single entry is checked with a fine-tooth comb
> before removal of each and every one and a full backup of the
> system was made before attempting it so you can restore if things
> begin to fail. It's not worth the risk you take.
> While I cannot say conclusively that cleaning out *any* registry
> will not improve performance of *any* machine - I can say that most
> people - even with machines that have been around since 2001 and
> have had each successive service pack installed and every version
> of Microsoft and Open Office installed since 2001 and removed - and
> assorted other packages (hundreds - if not thousands) installed and
> removed multiple times - will not see any marked improvement from a
> cleaned registry. They will not recover much (if any) drive space
> and they will not gain much (if any) performance. (When I say much
> for performance - nano, maybe milli seconds...)
Twayne wrote:
> That's a little condescending, don't you think? Especially
> considering the stated purpose of the post was to find out WHAT the
> registry is?
> You never answered either question, although you gave a long
> boilerplate spew about the perceived dangers of registry cleaners. Your
> only purpose in answering thus had to be self-serving, with no
> consideration of helping the OP.
Twayne,
You are telling the world you missed my answer to "What is the registry?"
(even though you quoted the answer in your own reply?) Here is the link I
gave that explains it quite well (even includes a link at the bottom to
information on Registry Cleaners... But you'd have to read the information
given...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Registry
Af for 'condescending' - not at all. I gave facts based off my experience
with such things and the link I gave would lead to more information on the
matter if one wished to follow up on their own free time. That's it.
You snipped a lot of my posting in your response. Conveniently the parts
that skimmed the issue of question (3) and did not completely disagree with
what you mighht have to say (likely why you snipped it - you just wanted to
argue IMHO.)
You have your opinion, I have mine. Post yours if you like - but don't try
to pick a fight for no reason - it's not wise or mature.
I have included the entire text of my posting above. For those who wish to
trust an archival vs. anything I said I posted - you can find it all
archived indefinitely here:
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support/browse_frm/thread/9c7d937749b72a26/15e7e2f5bbabecdd#15e7e2f5bbabecdd
Otherwise - I have nothing more to say on the matter. The OP seems to have
gotten the information they requested and are welcomed to come back and ask
for more (or clarification) if they so desire.
Claire,
I hope you did get enough information.
I did see your response elsewhere in this conversation thanking me for the
answer. If you need to know more I suggest following up on the first link I
gave you about what the registry is. Near the bottom is more information
concerning registry cleaners and even a blurb about the 'argument' that
Twayne is obviously trying to propogate here.
If you read anything you feel you need translated from 'geek speak' to
normal human - come back and let someone here know. Nothing wrong with
wanting to learn - that's what we are all doing.
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
What is http://onecare.live.com/site/en-US/article/registry_cleaner_why.htm
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Claire Brucker" <cbru...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message news:uvK8zBIK...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Twayne
The "crusade" is really about misinformation; in this case against
closed minded zealots who refuse to verify/clarify/validate their claims
in any way. His adamancy is bolstered by absolutely nothing based in
fact and reality around the issue. Otherwise he would either accept the
challenge or admit to the "evidence" and other things I've provided him
over the last couple of years and tried to convince me otherwise with
facts rather than blind proclamations. When one becomes that closed
minded they become dangerous to anyone who might listen to them because
they don't reason things out.
Shenan Stanley
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. . wrote:
> and the daily double is:
>
> What is
> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-US/article/registry_cleaner_why.htm
I do love that link.
I like to think of it as the classic "right-hand knows not what the
left-hand is doing..."
For those who do not follow links, here is the web page - quoted...
(My favorite part is the question, "What if I accidentally remove something
I need in my registry?" The levels of irony there and proof that this is
not something to be taken lightly astound me. And then the carefree "Oh -
just use system restore, because that will never fail you" attitude is funny
too.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the registry?
--------------------------
The Windows Registry is the place on your PC where Windows stores
information it might need to retrieve later—for example, when you open an
application or change a system setting. The registry contains profiles for
each user, the applications installed on the computer and the types of
documents they create, what hardware exists on the system, and the ports
being used.
Why should I clean my registry?
----------------------------------------
Over time, the Windows Registry can begin to contain information that's no
longer valid. Maybe you uninstalled an application without using the Add or
Remove Programs function in the Control Panel, or perhaps an object or file
in the registry got moved. Eventually this orphaned or misplaced information
accumulates and begins to clog your registry, potentially slowing down your
PC and causing error messages and system crashes. You might also notice that
your PC's startup process is slower than it used to be. Cleaning your
registry is the easiest way to help avoid these common problems.
How do I clean my registry?
-----------------------------------
The Windows Live OneCare clean up scanner will find and remove any invalid
registry items on your PC. It's easy—it’s part of a full-service Windows
Live OneCare safety scan. Or, for a targeted approach, click Clean Up Scan
in the Clean Up Center. The clean up scan will check your registry and
locate any items that can be removed safely. You can then choose to remove
all the items the scanner finds or select items individually for removal.
Can't I just delete registry items on my own?
--------------------------------------------------------
We don't recommend trying to remove registry items on your own. It's often
difficult to determine which items correspond to which applications, and by
attempting to remove items yourself, you might accidentally remove a valid
registry item, causing software crashes and errors. The Windows Live OneCare
clean up scan is a safe and effective way to clean your Windows Registry.
And remember, when you want to remove a program or software application from
your PC, always use the Add or Remove Programs tool in the Control Panel.
Doing so ensures that any registry items associated with that application
are removed safely.
What if I accidentally remove something I need in my registry?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not to worry. Just like Microsoft Word, your PC has an "undo" option. In
this case, it's called System Restore. Once it's finished scanning, the
Windows Live Safety scanner creates a System Restore point on your PC. This
allows you to revert your system to its original state, before you performed
the scan, in case you inadvertently remove any valid registry items.
To access the System Restore Wizard in Windows XP:
1. Click Start, then select All Programs.
2. Select Accessories, then System Tools, then System Restore.
3. In the System Restore wizard, make sure Restore my computer to an
earlier time is selected, then click Next.
4. Now you can use the calendar to select the date you performed the
clean up scan and instruct your PC to revert to the way it was before you
ran the scan.
How often should I clean my registry?
----------------------------------------------
We recommend a complete Windows Live OneCare safety scan once a month. The
full-service scan checks your registry automatically.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah well. My advice still does not change, luckily. I don't believe it is
_necessary_, the performance difference is minimal at best (unless you can
tell you gained a nanosecond in most cases), if you properly managed what
you installed and how you removed it in most cases - you wouldn't have
orphaned values anyway (like not testing software on your production
machine - use a virtual machine (based off free software) to play - afer for
everyone) and if you do decide to 'clean' the registry - do it carefully.
Even this article that has to do with a Microsoft Product has foreboding
language and such in it - warning you of the dangers. ;-)
Not saying you should or should not - just saying you better understand what
you are doing before you jump in.
Bill in Co.
You haven't once provided any real *factual evidence* on this.
Oh, wait a minute, I stand corrected: you saw it as "factual evidence".
Point taken.
> When one becomes that closed
> minded they become dangerous to anyone who might listen to them because
> they don't reason things out.
Self-projection noted, once again. And you have my sympathies.
Twayne
>
> What is
> http://onecare.live.com/site/en-US/article/registry_cleaner_why.htm
>
>
> news:uvK8zBIK...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Just what is the registry? Does it need regular cleaning? If so,
>> how do you clean it?
Good answer; that covers it all.
Kayman
> Just what is the registry? Does it need regular cleaning? If so, how do you
> clean it?
AUMHA Discussion: Should I Use a Registry Cleaner?
http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099
Note the comments from Dr. Mark Russinovich and the reference concerning
ERUNT.
Why I don’t use registry cleaners!
http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000643.html
CCleaner - Free
Cleans temporary internet files, cookies, history, recent urls, application
MRUs, etc. ... (Tune out the registry scanning/fixing option!)
http://www.filehippo.com/download_ccleaner/
If Windows Defender is utilized go to Applications, under Utilities uncheck
"Windows Defender" (so it won't delete the history of WD);
Followed by:
NTREGOPT
http://www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/
Bruce Chambers
> Just what is the registry?
The registry contains all of the operating system's "knowledge" of
the computer's hardware devices, installed software, the location of the
device drivers, and the computer's configuration. A misstep in the
registry can have severe consequences. One should not turn loose a
poorly understood automated "cleaner," unless he is fully confident that
he knows *exactly* what is going to happen as a result of each and every
change.
> Does it need regular cleaning?
No, it most certainly does not!
> If so, how do you
> clean it?
>
>
Why do you even think you'd ever need to clean your registry? What
specific *problems* are you actually experiencing (not some program's
bogus listing of imaginary problems) that you think can be fixed by
using a registry cleaner?
If you do have a problem that is rooted in the registry, it would
be far better to simply edit (after backing up, of course) only the
specific key(s) and/or value(s) that are causing the problem. After
all, why use a chainsaw when a scalpel will do the job? Additionally,
the manually changing of one or two registry entries is far less likely
to have the dire consequences of allowing an automated product to make
multiple changes simultaneously. The only thing needed to safely clean
your registry is knowledge and Regedit.exe.
Having repeatedly seen the results of inexperienced people using
automated registry "cleaners," I can only advise all but the most
experienced computer technicians (and/or hobbyists) to avoid them all.
Experience has shown me that such tools simply are not safe in the hands
of the inexperienced user. If you lack the knowledge and experience to
maintain your registry by yourself, then you also lack the knowledge and
experience to safely configure and use any automated registry cleaner,
no matter how safe they claim to be.
More importantly, no one has ever demonstrated that the use of an
automated registry cleaner, particularly by an untrained, inexperienced
computer user, does any real good, whatsoever. There's certainly been
no empirical evidence offered to demonstrate that the use of such
products to "clean" WinXP's registry improves a computer's performance
or stability. Given the potential for harm, it's just not worth the risk.
Granted, most registry "cleaners" won't cause problems each and
every time they're used, but the potential for harm is always there.
And, since no registry "cleaner" has ever been demonstrated to do any
good (think of them like treating the flu with chicken soup - there's no
real medicinal value, but it sometimes provides a warming placebo
effect), I always tell people that the risks far out-weigh the
non-existent benefits.
I will concede that a good registry *scanning* tool, in the hands
of an experienced and knowledgeable technician or hobbyist can be a
useful time-saving diagnostic tool, as long as it's not allowed to make
any changes automatically. But I really don't think that there are any
registry cleaners that are truly safe for the general public to use.
Experience has proven just the opposite: such tools simply are not safe
in the hands of the inexperienced user.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
Twayne
OH yes, I have. You just don't recall it and are too lazy to look for
it. It's there and Brucey boy knows it because he half responded to
one, ignored the others.
>
>> When one becomes that closed
>> minded they become dangerous to anyone who might listen to them
>> because they don't reason things out.
>
> Self-projection noted, once again. And you have my sympathies.
I think you need to get down where the air supply to your brain is a
little better; t'ain't working.
Bill in Co.
this than Dr. Mark Russinovich? For shame, boy!
ROFL.
Kayman wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 09:27:31 -0400, Claire Brucker wrote:
>
>> Just what is the registry? Does it need regular cleaning? If so, how do
>> you
>> clean it?
>
> AUMHA Discussion: Should I Use a Registry Cleaner?
> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=28099
> Note the comments from Dr. Mark Russinovich and the reference concerning
> ERUNT.
>
> Why I don┤ use registry cleaners!
Dave M
registry cleaner in an product they call the free Live OneCare Safety Scanner
which has seen absolutely *NO* Microsoft maintenance or support since 2006,
yet that is the only Safety Scanner function not also provided as a part of
the Live OneCare subscription product that is supported functionally by
Microsoft. Particularly considering the recommendation to run regular
monthly registry cleanings in that referenced article, you would think
Microsoft's smart marketing folks would have sweetened the subscription
OneCare pot by throwing the scheduled run of a Registry Cleaner in too.
Perhaps they were concerned with having to actually support the repair of
broken registries... do you think?
--
Regards, Dave
"db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." wrote:
Kayman
> Oh, come on now. Don't you know by now that Twayne knows much more about
> this than Dr. Mark Russinovich? For shame, boy!
>
> ROFL.
:-)
Marianne
If these cleaners are so darn good why are none of the MVPs or other
experts recommending them? It's quite a stretch for us to think that
you are right and that all the others who have a wealth of experience
and an immense collective amount of expertise are all wrong! The fact
is that there are only two or three persons here who think these
cleaners are worthwhile and all the others think that they provide
little to no benefits and that they do at times cause great damage. We
do see people posting reports of problems that they have had after using
these cleaners, these posters are not zealots with closed mind trying to
obfuscate the issues, they are real people with real problems caused by
those cleaners. I will take my advice from the pros and not use these
products, I have used them in the past but now my own experience tells
me that they do nothing at all to improve performance and reading posts
from those who have problems after using these programs is enough to
convince me that the pros are right and that you are wrong.
M
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
he controdicts himself when
he says leave the registry alone,
but creates a freeware to
defrag it.
so he is a hypocrite and
manipulative or confused.
while he was still in diapers,
many of us were serving our
country in the military and have
already been using computers.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Kayman" <kaymanDe...@operamail.com> wrote in message news:eYuMXhRK...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
scanner is a web interface,
so its engineering is different
from that which is fully installed
and integrated with the o.s.
on the h.d.
plus if one is going to pay
for something, then paying
customers always get priority.
likewise, wealthy citizens always
get priority with government while
poor ones do not.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Dave M" <dpmo...@junoSPAM.com> wrote in message news:B433AF24-8DC9-43BA...@microsoft.com...
John John (MVP)
built-in registry cleaner? If this is as important as you claim surely
one would thing that it would be part of the "paid for" package? It
looks like you are contradicting yourself...
John
Twayne
Your ability to count is certainly lacking. Also "MVP" means nothing
other than the fact that they passed a test and got the title handed to
them. It's easy enough to read about it on their site if you're really
interested. MVPs are also people; they are good, bad and indifferent
just like everyone else and there have been the occasional bad apples
and posers along the lines, too. Being an MVP doesn't make one a "PRO",
it simply means they demonstrated some knownledge of whatever area of
the computer they chose to take the test in. Most anyone can become an
MVP. That includes closed minded people who have NO evidence for the
things they post, and who also never have shown any valid representation
of what they are claiming. Be cautious or you'll end up being a sock
puppet for the wrong person; it's easy to do if you're too gullible and
don't bother to verify the claims that anyone, not just MVPs, make on
groups and around the 'net.
Actually, there is only one MVP with the ignorance and ego to have to
post years-old boilerplate about registry software and says it's all
"snake oil". Most of the other MVPs are reasonable, thinking people who
are intelligent and seldom simply concentrate on only one application,
registry cleaners, and who will paint the entire world a single color.
I tend to appreciate MVPs when I know one has his certificate based on
the area I may be seeking assistance with. Some however, think that
because they are certified for networks say, also feel it enables them
to hand out misinformation in any area they wish to, whether it relates
to their area of expertise or not.
I have no problem with you or your opinion of the MVP situation;
that's your perogative. I do urge you however to verify information and
not just take it on blind faith because they put a title after their
name. I have a few titles too, but I don't find the need to advertise
them or worse yet use them as some kind of tool to make people think I'm
greater than I am. There are a couple of MVPs that would do well to
remember that for themselves, and to re-read their "rules of the road"
for MVPs. I won't but some people would report them for almost any
infraction. But I'm not out to punish; in tihs case I'm only out to
stop misinformation, which the "all registry cleaners are bad" line is;
it's pure bunk and the one touting that line even knows it.
Regards,
Twayne
Tom [Pepper] Willett
"Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:e1LAlbYK...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
:
:
Edward W. Thompson
it is. Your long and tiresome posts and tirades advocating the usefulness
of Registry Cleaners are to most nothing other then nonsense, surely even
you must have detected that from the responses you have received. If
Registry Cleaners are as useful as you seem to think it would be very
obvious to all and their usefulness would be simply verifiable and no debate
would be necessary, in fact that is not the case. Further, I would think
that those that market these programs would by now have devised a very
simple 'test' to show how useful their programs are, as far as I know no
such test or demonstration of their efficacy exists. I know you have made
such an offer but you have no credibility. From your responses to your
critics it appears you must believe there exists some sort of conspiracy to
discredit these programs. Why would that be the case?
We all know by now how much you faith you have in these programs, please
give the 'unconverted' the courtesy to know you are totally wrong in
everything you have said on the subject.
Marianne
Maybe you are right, I said that only two or three persons in these
groups recommend these utilities, in reality there are only two persons
who recommend them, you and that horrible person who goes by the
initials "db". db is suffering from disillusions, he now thinks that he
knows more about these things than Dr. Russinovich!
As for your comments about MVPs all I can say is that they certainly
know more about Windows than you or I do so I'll take their word before
yours. I said that "none of the MVPs or other experts" are recommending
these cleaners, the "other experts" includes all the other very
knowledgeable persons here who aren't MVPs, I don't see any of them
supporting your position so please excuse me but I think that you are
wrong about these cleaners.
M
Marianne
>
> he controdicts himself when
> he says leave the registry alone,
> but creates a freeware to
> defrag it.
>
> so he is a hypocrite and
> manipulative or confused.
>
> while he was still in diapers,
> many of us were serving our
> country in the military and have
> already been using computers.
Oh the irony of it all. Now you are the one in diapers and you still
don't know anything about computers!
Unknown
" db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote
in message news:ekiIHkVK...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Tom [Pepper] Willett
"Unknown" <unk...@unknown.kom> wrote in message
news:UjqHk.2106$W06....@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
: What specifically is your background with computers?
: >
:
:
John John (MVP)
sessions with Eliza. The sessions didn't help any...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
you know nothing
about mvp's.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Marianne" <nog...@notvalid.com> wrote in message news:gcl6r7$d5l$2...@aioe.org...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
MVP's are nothing
more than people
with ego's and unpaid
help for the microsoft
corporation.
where do you get you
information that mvp's
are experts?
is there a college degree
or certification for being
an mvp?
perhaps, you should further
review what qualifies anyone
to become an mvp.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Marianne" <nog...@notvalid.com> wrote in message news:gcl6qq$d5l$1...@aioe.org...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
and the other morons
and trolls, i have analyzed
the registry files utilizing
database methodologies.
and it is a gaurantee that
for anyone who does not
maintain the registry either
manually or with a an auto-
mated software, "will" eventually
surcome to system failure.
advocating the advice of others
because one lacks skills for
validating the crap being fed
to morons is simply moronic,
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Edward W. Thompson" <thom...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message news:ukAq7ddK...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
enlist and figure it out
for yourself.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Tom [Pepper] Willett" <t...@youreadaisyifyoudo.com> wrote in message news:OvbtG5iK...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Tom [Pepper] Willett
purple heart, and the Army Commendation Medal.
I also know enough about computers to know that you are not very credible.
" db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote
in message news:edVyyejK...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
: perhaps you should
: > :
: > :
: >
: >
:
John John (MVP)
registry, the BS is coming out of your ears sideways!
Bill in Co.
Unknown
Unknown
curiosity how old are you?in message news:eQ5zsbjK...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Bill in Co.
It's often this way, M. (The empty glasses make the most noise). And
those who spew off about their so-called "knowledge" are just "empty
glasses" - that's why they feel the need to boast about it. (Psych 101)
Unknown
John John (MVP)
John John (MVP)
when he was 20 years old. Nice people grow old gracefully, jerks become
cranky old farts!
Swifty
> advocating the advice of others
> because one lacks skills for
> validating the crap being fed
> to morons is simply moronic,
I would normally ignore stuff like this on principle, but I couldn't
resist the old childish jibe: "It takes one to know one".
--
Steve Swift
http://www.swiftys.org.uk/swifty.html
http://www.ringers.org.uk
Unknown
trying to make an impression albeit erroneously.
IE He hasn't learned yet.
"John John (MVP)" <aude...@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:gclko9$960$1...@aioe.org...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
is, that you do not normally
ignore stuff like this.
so don't flatter yourself.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Swifty" <Steve....@gmail.com> wrote in message news:OQMUEXkK...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Twayne
>
> Maybe you are right, I said that only two or three persons in these
No, that's text that is nowhere in any of the above quoted material nor
anything I recall from a previous comment either.
> groups recommend these utilities, in reality there are only two
> persons who recommend them, you and that horrible person who goes by
> the initials "db". db is suffering from disillusions, he now thinks
> that he knows more about these things than Dr. Russinovich!
1. I have NOT recommended them. But I also never said they were "snake
oil" or anything else that they are not. You apparently cannot read.
2. I don't know or care about "db". I only care about misinformaiton
here, which is something you ignorantly have chosen to assist with by
taking on the form of sock puppet.
>
> As for your comments about MVPs all I can say is that they certainly
> know more about Windows than you or I do so I'll take their word
1. No, they do not know more than I do. In some areas I know more than
them, in other areas, they know more than me. But you in particular
have absolutely nothing, nada, zilch, as a way of knowing what anyone
here knows, other than yourself.
2. It matters not to me, whose word you take any longer since you
choose to believe things based on ... hmm, I don't know WHAT you based
your decision on; nothing valid, that's nearly certain.
> before yours. I said that "none of the MVPs or other experts" are
> recommending these cleaners,
"none", huh? Have you communicated with every existing MVP? Or are you
taking the ignorant tact that there are more saying "this", so it has to
be true.
"
Wrong does not cease to be wrong
because the majority share in it. -Tolstoy
"
comes to mind; nothing new.
the "other experts" includes all the
And how do you know who the "other experts" are? I dare say I doubt you
even know the area of expertise that any particular MVP here received
his letter from MS for would be. I'll go even further and say that you
don't yet know what an MVP is, or what the letters in this context stand
for. Taking even one more leap, I suspect you may not even know what
the word "expert" actually means, nor how it applies to anyone else
here. It does not mean that the person knows all there is to know about
windows or XP.
> other very knowledgeable persons here who aren't MVPs, I don't see
> any of them supporting your position so please excuse me but I think
> that you are wrong about these cleaners.
lol, no excuses necessary. People who like to parrot and join the the
majority for no good reason are a dime a dozen. I will however
congratulate you on having moved from my opinion of being a thinking
individual to one that has to parrot or be sock pupeted to function
well. Hold onto that ego; you're going to need it. I notice you've
managed to quiver your liver quite a bit in other posts here; have fun.
>
> M
T
Twayne
So correct it, use whatever word you like or even the corrected one for
showing proficiency in a certain area that MVPs use to show their
proficiency. Or don't you know? I do.
Twayne
>>
> Your BS is no more useful than the BS of others although you seem to
> think it is. Your long and tiresome posts and tirades advocating the
> usefulness of Registry Cleaners are to most nothing other then
> nonsense, surely even you must have detected that from the responses
> you have received.
Not at all, although I have noted a considerable amount of ignorance.
Where's the proof? Let's see you post something useful to support your
parroting.
If Registry Cleaners are as useful as you seem to
> think
I don't think; I know and I also know misinformation when I see it.
it would be very obvious to all and their usefulness would be
> simply verifiable and no debate would be necessary, in fact that is
> not the case. Further, I would think that those that market these
> programs would by now have devised a very simple 'test' to show how
> useful their programs are, as far as I know no such test or
> demonstration of their efficacy exists. I know you have made such an
> offer but you have no credibility. From your responses to your
> critics it appears you must believe there exists some sort of
> conspiracy to discredit these programs. Why would that be the case?
> We all know by now how much you faith you have in these programs,
> please give the 'unconverted' the courtesy to know you are totally
> wrong in everything you have said on the subject.
Ahh, Tolstoy personified. Misinformation is bad. Parrots and sock
puppets are even worse. Actually, normally I wouldn't bother with
respoinding to tripe like this, but I had a few extra minutes tonite.
Be back ina few more days too probably but not sure you'll be one of the
ones I waste good information on. Even your pal Brucey Boy has no proof
of his postulations and prophecies; do you?
Twayne
> and the other morons
> and trolls, i have analyzed
> the registry files utilizing
> database methodologies.
>
> and it is a gaurantee that
> for anyone who does not
> maintain the registry either
> manually or with a an auto-
> mated software, "will" eventually
> surcome to system failure.
>
> advocating the advice of others
> because one lacks skills for
> validating the crap being fed
> to morons is simply moronic,
I wouldn't go quite so far as to state it that way, but for the norm
it's certainly the case.
Twayne
> registry, the BS is coming out of your ears sideways!
Wishful thinking? Why don't you give us some idea of what YOU know?
What's YOUR level of expertise? What makes it so that YOU know he
speaks malarky? How do you know he doesn't know anything? You don't;
that's obvious. Now come in, impress us with YOUR knowledge.
Twayne
What: The crock of malarky comment? I agree. Do you read as well as
you write?
Bruce Chambers
> What specifically is your background with computers?
>
Judging by the apparent maturity level of most of his posts, he sneaks
onto his parents' system whenever they're out of the house.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
Bruce Chambers
>>
>
> Your ability to count is certainly lacking.
Not nearly as lacking as is your knowledge of the MVP program.
> Also "MVP" means nothing
> other than the fact that they passed a test and got the title handed to
> them.
Totally incorrect. There is no test. The MVP title is an award for
having consistently offering accurate and helpful technical advice for
the past year.
> It's easy enough to read about it on their site if you're really
> interested.
Which you've clearly not done. Either that or you're deliberately lying.
> MVPs are also people; they are good, bad and indifferent
> just like everyone else and there have been the occasional bad apples
> and posers along the lines, too.
Yes, MVPs are human, and can make mistakes. While some are more
stubborn then others, all that I've ever known will correct their
responses after a mistake has been pointed out.
> Being an MVP doesn't make one a "PRO", ...
Not necessarily, no. Nevertheless, many are IT professionals.
> ... it simply means they demonstrated some knownledge of whatever area of
> the computer they chose to take the test in.
Again, there is no test. The award is based solely on proven past
performance.
> Most anyone can become an
> MVP.
If they offer consistently accurate and helpful technical advice, yes.
> That includes closed minded people who have NO evidence for the
> things they post,
Then why aren't *you* an MVP? You've certainly *NEVER* offered any
evidence to support your claims about the benefits of using registry
cleaners. The most you've ever done, when challenged, has been to offer
links to worthless and weak marketing/advertising copy.
Remaining drivel snipped.....
John John (MVP)
>>What crock of malarchy! You don't know anything at all about the
>>registry, the BS is coming out of your ears sideways!
>
>
> Wishful thinking? Why don't you give us some idea of what YOU know?
> What's YOUR level of expertise? What makes it so that YOU know he
> speaks malarky? How do you know he doesn't know anything? You don't;
> that's obvious. Now come in, impress us with YOUR knowledge.
It is a crock of malarchy! The registry will not "eventually
surcome to system failure unless you maintain the registry either
manually or with a an auto-mated software", that is pure fiction! I
have some machines at work that are almost 10 years old and we never
bother with the registry and those machines have not "surcome" [sic] to
failure! But then it isn't very surprising that db would say something
like that, he's the one who claims that the registry "collects data" and
that "if you leave a computer running 24/7 the registry will collect too
much data and crash".
And you're the not so bright one who claims that merging files to the
registry creates duplicate entries, something that is absolutely
impossible! The two of you together are no smarter than a bag of ball
pein hammers! Go preach your cleaner gospel somewhere else to those who
care to listen, no one here believes a word of the nonsense that the two
of you are spreading.
John
Marianne
That is always your answer to those who disagree with you. Maybe you
should be the one to shut up as you hardly ever have anything of value
to contribute in any of your posts.
> MVP's are nothing
> more than people
> with ego's and unpaid
> help for the microsoft
> corporation.
>
> where do you get you
> information that mvp's
> are experts?
>
> is there a college degree
> or certification for being
> an mvp?
What would it matter if they did have certifications? You would still
claim to know more and better than they do. Dr. Russinovich holds B.S.
and Ph.D. degrees in computer engineering and he is a foremost Windows
expert yet you toss his certifications and expertise aside and you try
to pretend that you know more than he does. I expect that you will soon
claim to also know more about Windows XP than both Bill Gates and Dave
Cutler collectively do and that you are also smarter than both Albert
Einstein and Stephen Hawking!
> perhaps, you should further
> review what qualifies anyone
> to become an mvp.
"Microsoft Most Valuable Professionals (MVPs) are exceptional technical
community leaders from around the world who are awarded for voluntarily
sharing their high quality, real world expertise in offline and online
technical communities. Microsoft MVPs are a highly select group of
experts that represents the technical community's best and brightest,
and they share a deep commitment to community and a willingness to help
others."
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
That is a lot more than you have ever demonstrated in any of your posts!
M
Tom [Pepper] Willett
"Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:e2hsitmK...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
:> MVPs don't take *tests*
:
:
:
Tom [Pepper] Willett
He
probably
can't
read
your
posts
because
your
words
are
in
sentences
that
go
across
the
screen.news:gcn4kl$8ti$1...@aioe.org...
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
but don't take it personal.
but the truth of the matter is,
what you think mvps should
be is not the same as what
they are.
perhaps, you should
review the information
provided by the mvp
organization and make
your own assessment.
also, if you keep digging
you will find a code of
conduct specially aimed
towards mvp's.
there wasn't one a few
years ago, but you can
thank me later.
do you want to be an
mvp? it is highly possible
if you like to brown nose
mvp's, especially when they
are wrong, unhelpful and
rude.
further, you might try revewing
these newsgroups archives to
see how many of the mvp's have
been called, trolls, manipulative,
misleading, unprofessional,
etc.....
however, the truly professional
mvp's have better things to do
than to read some of the crap
posted by their peers.
but when these true professionals
do post their opinion or advice,
you will likely find the information
very informative, not misleading and
they do not utilize fear mongering.
can you apply the above attributes
to some of the postings of mvp's
you've read recently?
good luck with your endeavors
in your search for the truth, ie
your personal search and not
that which is fed to you.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Marianne" <nog...@notvalid.com> wrote in message news:gcn4kl$8ti$1...@aioe.org...
Bruce Chambers
> Marianne:
> He
> probably
> can't
> read
> your
> posts
> because
> your
> words
> are
> in
> sentences
> that
> go
> across
> the
> screen.
>
ROFTMAO!!! Brilliant, Tom.
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
yes, it would be for
someone of your great
intellectual inaptitude.
so if you are done, perhaps
you might get off of the floor.
someone might place
a pet dish for you.
btw: are you still an
mvp?
you haven't provided
the un-professional courtesy
of responding to my
sincere inquiries.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Bruce Chambers" <bcha...@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message news:uksdpQv...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Unknown
Unknown
information about his spread.
"Bruce Chambers" <bcha...@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
Twayne
>> What specifically is your background with computers?
>>
>
>
>
> Judging by the apparent maturity level of most of his posts, he sneaks
> onto his parents' system whenever they're out of the house.
Ahh, Bruce! Your'e back! When are we going to see some of that
voluminous proof of yours? Lots of innuendo but no facts. And
apparently a fear of being upstaged by accepting a logically issued
challenge where you could have even set a lot of the conditions. You
don't have a damned bit of "evidence" as you like to call it, do you?
I'd go so far as to say you don't even have any real-world experience,
since you've never given any semblence of anything to back up your
claims. I wouldn't like it, but I have no big problem with being shown
where I'm wrong; why do you? Is it simply because you know I'm not
wrong? I suspect so.
Twayne
Twayne
>>>
>>
>> Your ability to count is certainly lacking.
>
> Not nearly as lacking as is your knowledge of the MVP program.
>
>> Also "MVP" means nothing
>> other than the fact that they passed a test and got the title handed
>> to them.
>
>
> Totally incorrect. There is no test. The MVP title is an award for
> having consistently offering accurate and helpful technical advice for
> the past year.
Use whatever word you like for the proficiency end of things. It's not
really relevant.
>
>
>> It's easy enough to read about it on their site if you're really
>> interested.
>
>
> Which you've clearly not done. Either that or you're deliberately
> lying.
Which I have done, in fact, and used its resources a time or two even.
You are in serious violation of some of the requirements to be an MVP,
but don't worry about it; I'm not that kind of person unless the
problems are much worse than yours are. So, what you're "clearly"
assuming is nothing more than syntax. There is a lot more to it than
simply having "helped" people for a year. And unless things have
changed in the last probably a year, it's not very hard to become an MVP
aka sock puppet for MS. Hey, you brought it up, I didn't. Most MVPs
take their titles seriously and that speaks well for them, but in your
case, well, ... .
>
>
>> MVPs are also people; they are good, bad and indifferent
>> just like everyone else and there have been the occasional bad apples
>> and posers along the lines, too.
>
>
> Yes, MVPs are human, and can make mistakes. While some are more
> stubborn then others, all that I've ever known will correct their
> responses after a mistake has been pointed out.
You have not known many then. I can think of 3 right off the top of my
head, one who was stripped of his title good reason, and another who
simply gave up and didn't keep his listing current.
>
>
>> Being an MVP doesn't make one a "PRO", ...
>
>
> Not necessarily, no. Nevertheless, many are IT professionals.
And many are not. And most IT professionals are not MVPs; that's a poor
connection.
>
>
>> ... it simply means they demonstrated some knownledge of whatever
>> area of the computer they chose to take the test in.
>
>
> Again, there is no test. The award is based solely on proven past
> performance.
In the sense that you had to be nominated, be chosen from a group of
other MVPs and sometimes I've heard an MS presence during that, the
overall "review" turns out to be a LOT like passing a test IMO. So,
like I've said before, call it what you want. A rose is a rose is a ...
. You do not, as you implied, become an MVP by simply answering
questions on a newgroup for a year. and a year. and a year. I am
certain of what I say here. I am also just as certain that being an MVP
is area-related to one's own expertise areas. So yes, I have read it.
You do NOT want me to read it again, believe me, because then I will
be armed with the information I need to display your violations of the
requirements for being an MVP.
And again, use whatever language you would like. I've watched the MVP
program since around the mid 80's to early 90's I think it was, and it
used to be a great organization in those early days. Even when it hit
its hayday, it never got the accolades and attention it thought it
deserved. And that was the beginning of some ends for it as it slipped
back into obscurity. I think a lot of folk with the MVP title would be
pretty dismayed to discover just how many people don't really recognize
"mvp" or any of its variations, including the "aumha" end of it. I've
received assistance in the past from soem excellent MVPs though, and
found aumha... to have a lot of good information. But when I find a
closed mind like yours with a "snake oil" mentality on top of it,
putting out misinformation as though it were gospel and heaven forbid
anyone should have a different opinion, AND the spew is time after time
MISINFORMATION, I have a tendency to say so. It's pretty simple,
really; I say what I mean, and I mean what I say.
>
>
>> Most anyone can become an
>> MVP.
>
>
> If they offer consistently accurate and helpful technical advice, yes.
>
>
>> That includes closed minded people who have NO evidence for the
>> things they post,
>
>
> Then why aren't *you* an MVP? You've certainly *NEVER* offered any
> evidence to support your claims about the benefits of using registry
> cleaners. The most you've ever done, when challenged, has been to
> offer links to worthless and weak marketing/advertising copy.
I am not an MVP because by the time I actually considered it, it felt
like more of an entrapment than anything else. My time would be spent
on Microsoft newsgroups rather than spread anywhere and anywhen I felt
like. So I simply dropped the idea as when I got closer to it, I felt
more like a free employee for MS than doing what I wanted to do, which
was assisting those in need.
Now, as for never having offered any evidence to support my claims,
1. That's a lie and you know it.
2. The information exists in my archives and though it coulen't hold up
in a court of law, I could "prove" it if I were so inclined.
OTOH, you were challenged first to provide same, and I have NEVER seen
anything from you either. And, I'm not the only one to have asked you
to show verification or source for your claims, but I WAS one of the
first. In fact, when you first started this crap, I was one of the
first to want to know your sources and what you based your opinion on.
To my knowledge and experience, you have NEVER responded to ANYONE with
ANY sort of "evidence" to use your own term, verifying, resourcing,
clarifying or even intimating a basis for your claims. You are
consistant, I'll give you that. But you also spew baseless
misinformation over and over with boilerplate no less, in language that
any thinking person would only consider to be ego-projection at the
least. There are two things that catch my attention quickly these days:
Lying and giving misinformation. You are guilty of both in this one
post alone.
So why don't you either s__t or get off the pot? Either you have the
information to back up your claims or you don't. My suspicions are that
you do not. Else you would have parted with them long ago and before
you earned the reputation of being such an egotist that you had to stick
by anything you said regardless of the correctness of it. I know I have
about 3 different versions of your boilerplate tucked away in the
archives; care to try for a 4th?
On the off-chance that you DO have such qualifying information, I'll
stil be very glad to read it. And unlike you I'll read it with more
intent than a pre-meditated intent to prove wrong before even starting.
Your are wrong Bruce, and you know it.
Twayne
Twayne
challenges. But I know you won't, which is really too bad. Doesn't
help the ego when you know you're wrong, does it?
Twayne
Twayne
>
> yes, it would be for
> someone of your great
> intellectual inaptitude.
>
> so if you are done, perhaps
> you might get off of the floor.
>
> someone might place
> a pet dish for you.
>
> btw: are you still an
> mvp?
>
> you haven't provided
> the un-professional courtesy
> of responding to my
> sincere inquiries.
I suspect not. You could find out at, I think, mvps.org if you really
wanted to put in the effort. Personally I don't think it's worth the
effort but ymmv I'm sure.
Twayne
Twayne
make an exception here since I'm enjoying a few spare mintues tonite.
> db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. . wrote:
>> oh, just shut up.
>
> That is always your answer to those who disagree with you. Maybe you
> should be the one to shut up as you hardly ever have anything of value
> to contribute in any of your posts.
Hmm, that sounds just like some one of the MVPs around here said. Are
you parroting now?
>
>
>> MVP's are nothing
>> more than people
>> with ego's and unpaid
>> help for the microsoft
>> corporation.
>>
>> where do you get you
>> information that mvp's
>> are experts?
>>
>> is there a college degree
>> or certification for being
>> an mvp?
>
> What would it matter if they did have certifications?
It could matter a LOT depending on who does the certifying.
You would still
> claim to know more and better than they do.
So now your'e clairvoyant?
Dr. Russinovich holds
> B.S. and Ph.D. degrees in computer engineering and he is a foremost
> Windows expert yet you toss his certifications and expertise aside
> and you try to pretend that you know more than he does.
I had not seen anyone make that claim in any way. You are
1. Reading into things whatever feels good to you now, and
2. I seriously doubt you know who that is other than the recent mention
in the posts here.
I expect
> that you will soon claim to also know more about Windows XP than both
> Bill Gates and Dave Cutler collectively do and that you are also
> smarter than both Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking!
Now, here's an area you need to be careful in. You could be pretty
disappointed in what Mr. Gates knows about using XP. The information is
right there for you to read, if you have the gumption to bother to look
for it. You should be more careful about your rationalizations.
It's also a nice try at redirection to bring these last three
irrelevants into the picture. Now you wouldn't be trying to redirect
the thread to another subject so you can keep on arguing, would you?
Does that give you joy? Maybe you need to go check up on what it takes
to become an MVP; after all, it's easy, and most of them admit it. Oh,
never mind, you don't qualify for other reasons.
>
>> perhaps, you should further
>> review what qualifies anyone
>> to become an mvp.
>
> "Microsoft Most Valuable Professionals (MVPs) are exceptional
> technical community leaders from around the world who are awarded for
> voluntarily sharing their high quality, real world expertise in
> offline and online technical communities. Microsoft MVPs are a highly
> select group of experts that represents the technical community's
> best and brightest, and they share a deep commitment to community and
> a willingness to help others."
Gosh, a quoted, uncredited, plagairism right from some web site like the
MVPs web site. Now, they wouldn't be just a bit prejudiced, would they?
Either that or it's some hype one of the MVPs here fed you; I'm not sure
but it's not hard to see none of it is yours, even though you didn't
credit the author. And I'll bet that's a copyright violation if my
suspicions are right.
Ah, that's where you got it; now I see:
>
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
parroting and not thinking for yourself is a bad thing, especially when
you use clearly prejudiced sources. You must be a politician's dream
come true!
>
> That is a lot more than you have ever demonstrated in any of your
> posts!
Now, how could you know that? I suspect you never even heard of him
until you got into this thread. So how could you possibly know what he
has "ever" accomplished anywhere, including on this group?
YOu're too emotional and too determined; get rid of some of the
emotion and you might make more sense, might even start to think for
yourself and determine the ACTUAL status of things like "registry
cleaners". Nah, probably not.
T
>
> M
Leonard Grey
not feed the trolls.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est
"A Day in the Life of a Web 2.0 Hacker" - PC Magazine
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2330952,00.asp
Claire Brucker
Claire Brucker (who started all this nonsense.)
Shenan Stanley
> ENOUGH ALREADY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Claire Brucker (who started all this nonsense.)
Claire,
I am copying this here in case you cannot see it through the mess the
innocent question you asked has become.
I hope you did get enough information from the answers.
I did see your response elsewhere in this conversation thanking me for my
answer. If you need to know more I suggest following up on the first link I
gave you about what the registry is. Near the bottom is more information
concerning registry cleaners and even a blurb about the 'argument' that
others are obviously trying to propagate here.
If you read anything you feel you need translated from 'geek speak' to
normal human - come back and let someone here know. Nothing wrong
with wanting to learn - that's what we are all doing.
Please - don't let the obstinacy of others hinder your curiosity and thirst
for information. Please ask more questions if you have them. The key to
newsgroups and sanity is not letting anything get under your skin and
let those who wish to try to do so - work alone (without you. ;-) )
--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
just poking for fun
and re-tri-bu-tion.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message news:ezmZmSyK...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...