about TuneUp Utilities 2006

[sweater]

I have just installed TuneUp Utilities 2006 and it looks good and functions well. But I am curious, if the Boot-skin, and other winstyler functions will be just as good and okay with their other features. I mean, did you experience problems using its winstyler features? ::) ???

I have windows xp sp2 pro...8)

[L Bainbridge]

-{ Quote: "I have just installed TuneUp Utilities 2006 and it looks good and functions well. But I am curious, if the Boot-skin, and other winstyler functions will be just as good and okay with their other features. I mean, did you experience problems using its winstyler features? ::) ???

I have windows xp sp2 pro...8)" }-

Tune Up utilities is a superb program, I've unused it since 2004 and pretty much all of it functions well.
Winstyler is fine- if a bit limiting.
The Bootskin function will import stardock bootskins and apply them without difficulty- if that's your thing.
I'm not so impressed with the Welcome/ Logon screens- you can only use Stardock logons or WinStyler logons and not LogonUI.exes. which I prefer.
It's also a bit unpredictable with the stardock logons in my experience and you can get the occasional BSOD.
I prefer using LogonLoader -http://logonloader.danielmilner.com/
for this function.
The System elements will import some Icon packages but not those made with the later versions of Stardock Icon Packager but its pretty easy to make your own from icon libraries -e.g. deviant art or Wincustomize for downloads.
The Visual Style bit works fine but again I prefer to patch the uxtheme.dll- try Neowin for Neopatcher for this as I think it gives me a bit more flexibility.
In the end it's 'horses for courses' but I tend to use Tune Up for system tweaking and its RegCleaning rather than for styling.

[L Bainbridge]

-{ Quote: "Tune Up utilities is a superb program, I've unused it since 2004 and pretty much all of it functions well.
Winstyler is fine- if a bit limiting.
The Bootskin function will import stardock bootskins and apply them without difficulty- if that's your thing.
I'm not so impressed with the Welcome/ Logon screens- you can only use Stardock logons or WinStyler logons and not LogonUI.exes. which I prefer.
It's also a bit unpredictable with the stardock logons in my experience and you can get the occasional BSOD.
I prefer using LogonLoader -http://logonloader.danielmilner.com/
for this function.
The System elements will import some Icon packages but not those made with the later versions of Stardock Icon Packager but its pretty easy to make your own from icon libraries -e.g. deviant art or Wincustomize for downloads.
The Visual Style bit works fine but again I prefer to patch the uxtheme.dll- try Neowin for Neopatcher for this as I think it gives me a bit more flexibility.
In the end it's 'horses for courses' but I tend to use Tune Up for system tweaking and its RegCleaning rather than for styling." }-


Actually, thinking about it- you can use Tune Up Styler2 for LogonUI.exes
but it is a bit 'hit and miss' which ones it will import and you might get a few BSODs - I find LogonLoader just a lot more reliable/ predictable.

[pvsurfer]

I've been using TuneUp Utilities 2006 since late last year and would agree with everything LB has said. No question in my mind that the real strength of the product is its thorough (and safe) file/reg cleaners and its startup manager.

[sweater]

When I tried to change the visual style in my pc, ProcessGuard reacted and its icon flashes red and has it warning bout it. :dry: :blink:

What did it mean...::) do I have to disable ProcessGuard everytime I have to use TuneUp's winstyler? or it's just natural and ok to be act way and I have to just leave ProcessGuard in protection mode? :shifty: ???

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "I have just installed TuneUp Utilities 2006 and it looks good and functions well. But I am curious, if the Boot-skin, and other winstyler functions will be just as good and okay with their other features. I mean, did you experience problems using its winstyler features? ::) ???

I have windows xp sp2 pro...8)" }-
TuneUp Utilities 2006 was still not good enough for me, because of the missing ignore function with multiple selections and I still don't have a registry cleaner that meets my wishes.
What I don't need, I find everywhere and what I want, I don't find anywhere. :)

[pvsurfer]

-{ Quote: "TuneUp Utilities 2006 was still not good enough for me, because of the missing ignore function with multiple selections and I still don't have a registry cleaner that meets my wishes.
What I don't need, I find everywhere and what I want, I don't find anywhere. :)" }-Granted, it does not provide the 'ignore feature' you would like to have, but (so far) I have not once found the need for that functionality - i.e., everything it deletes is junk.

[TonyW]

-{ Quote: "Granted, it does not provide the 'ignore feature' you would like to have, but (so far) I have not once found the need for that functionality - i.e., everything it deletes is junk." }-It largely depends on what software you have and which registry cleaner you have. For example, users of FirstDefense-ISR will find that RegSeeker flags up registry entries in its scan so to avoid deleting those and mucking up the system, they can be excluded from within the program. RegSupreme on the other hand doesn't flag those same entries.

[pvsurfer]

-{ Quote: "It largely depends on what software you have and which registry cleaner you have. For example, users of FirstDefense-ISR will find that RegSeeker flags up registry entries in its scan so to avoid deleting those and mucking up the system, they can be excluded from within the program. RegSupreme on the other hand doesn't flag those same entries." }-
I'm sure you are right about it being software dependant, but as I understand Erik he wants a cleaner that will allow him to establish a list of 'untouchables' so that he doesn't have to examine each and every scan-result to figure out which entries he wants to delete and which ones he does not.

[TonyW]

-{ Quote: "I'm sure you are right about it being software dependant, but as I understand Erik he wants a cleaner that will allow him to establish a list of 'untouchables' so that he doesn't have to examine each and every scan-result to figure out which entries he wants to delete and which ones he does not." }-A number of registry cleaners do allow one to ignore/exclude, but I think what Erik is looking for is one that allows you to ignore as a group rather than individually.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "I'm sure you are right about it being software dependant, but as I understand Erik he wants a cleaner that will allow him to establish a list of 'untouchables' so that he doesn't have to examine each and every scan-result to figure out which entries he wants to delete and which ones he does not." }-
That's right and with reasons.
WinXPproSP2 and any other legitimate software install VALID unused registries that are reported by registry cleaners for some reason by the author.
Depending on the author's "skills", one registry cleaner will report more or less than the other and all of them report very differently, because I have tested 13 popular registry cleaners on winXPproSP2 only.
They reported, going from 11 upto 200+ winXPproSP2-registries for cleaning, they even report themselves, really funny.

That's why I decided NOT to clean these valid unused registries and there is nothing wrong with keeping them, because they were installed by legitimate softwares.
Registry cleaners are nothing but a collection of opinions for cleaning registries from different authors.
Are these reported registries really superfluous? Maybe they become usefull in the future? How can I know this for sure? Can I trust the author? All questions with no clear answers and I'm not an expert in thousands of registries and I wonder how many people are an expert.

Because I'm doing this PER software, I have to IGNORE these reported registries, because I don't want them appear again in the next report when I install the next software.
If I install winXPproSP2 and my registry cleaner reports 100+ registries, I'm not going to ignore them one by one and that's why I need an ignore function with multiple selection and the same for undoing ignore.

I'm not asking for miracles, if cleaning can be done in group, why not ignore in group and undo ignore in group. That doesn't make any difference for a professional programmer.
Why is that function so hard to find, because the majority of users consider and use a registry cleaner as a periodical cleaning tool. The more a registry cleaner cleans, the better.
I need a better reason to remove registries than just for cleaning purposes.
I will use my registry cleaner in a different way and my arguments aren't any better or worse than of other users.

Lots of users consider a backup function as a must in a registry cleaner. That's right.
But when your windows or other softwares start acting weird a few days or weeks later, will you know or even remember, that your registry cleaner was responsible. Maybe you think your computer is infected and run all your scanners.

[ronjor]

May be of some interest to some on this topic.

Backing Up and Restoring the Windows XP Registry

http://www.theeldergeek.com/windows_xp_registry.htm

[sweater]

Since I installed TuneUp utilities I didn't experience any problem with it...;) the winstyler features is cool. Look at my Spybot S&D interface, it turns into gold...;D

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Since I installed TuneUp utilities I didn't experience any problem with it...;) the winstyler features is cool. Look at my Spybot S&D interface, it turns into gold...;D" }-
LOL. Looks more like a color from the butt, than gold to me.

[wilbertnl]

-{ Quote: "That's why I decided NOT to clean these valid unused registries and there is nothing wrong with keeping them, because they were installed by legitimate softwares." }-
I can agree with you, I understand that registry cleaners are promoted to clean out keys that are left behind after uninstalls.
I prefer re-installation of Windows over uninstallation of software that I decide to retire.

Have you tried Amust Registry Cleaner (http://www.amustsoft.com/registrycleaner/)?

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "I can agree with you, I understand that registry cleaners are promoted to clean out keys that are left behind after uninstalls.
I prefer re-installation of Windows over uninstallation of software that I decide to retire.

Have you tried Amust Registry Cleaner (http://www.amustsoft.com/registrycleaner/)?" }-
Yes I'm using it right now and I made a suggestion in their forum to expand the ignore function with multiple selections and they would consider it in the next version(s). AMUST RC has an ignore function already but only one-by-one.
It doesn't really matter which registry cleaner I use as long I have a good ignore function and do it my way, which is IMO the safest way for less-knowlegdeable users. Experts and experienced users don't need my method, they are supposed to know what they are doing.

[Sputnik]

@sweater
:o You really enjoy such theme, my g*d... :o

[securityx]

-{ Quote: "@sweater
:o You really enjoy such theme, my g*d... :o" }-

What's wrong with it? Sweater likes it and that's what counts. I think it's pretty cool myself.

---securityx---

[sweater]

-{ Quote: "@sweater
:o You really enjoy such theme, my g*d... :o" }-


Just trying out...;D there are lots of visual styles...maybe after several days I'll change the themes..

What's yours? ::) ??? ;D

[Sputnik]

-{ Quote: "What's yours? ::) ??? ;D" }-
No mean to offence you, and taste is a personal thing. Personally I'm using "Windows Classic" as theme in Windows XP, and "Plastik" theme in KDE.

I've been taking a look at TuneUp's themes, and in my opinion they're all ugly. Who makes those things? :P ;)

[sweater]

Anyway, ugly or not it doesn't really matter. The important thing for me was that at least it gives me some options to "safely" change something with a look rather than staying on the boring XP themes...;D ;) 8) I am not a techno, you know, and we need something we can lean on to put pieces together with a safety net. I tried resetting it to their previous settings of default XP and it's just works fine. :D

I have some question here...the Bootskin and Welcome Screen using the TU 2006 has bigger memory than the default Xp's...Will it also allocate and constantly consumes its memory when the pc is running? ??? or it will just consumes when it starts and will not be run or eat up memory with other programs in our system? :dry: ???