I didn't make any misinformation. You made misinformation one time, I made probably "omisinformation" one time. As for the ban thing, mods already edited my post, no need to come with that again and again.
Other tool bundled with different features: Puran Boot Defrag. I believe Hungry Man used that as well.
Not going to argue semantics. The way the information was presented made registry defragmentation look like a far more valid performance method than it actually is. That's my problem with it. It's borderline scareware. Hope someone who reads this learns something at least. edit: J_L, I did use Puran. Thanks for the recommendation in case I hadn't said so earlier.
I'll use a safe one just to keep things tidy always run it after a install or a uninstall whatever you are installing or uninstalling leaves a mess in the registry, I just like to keep things tidy do you have to have it? NO "that is if you do not mind having a dirty house"
I agree. With physical defragmentation many guys liked to say it is "snake oil", until Microsoft improved defrag process in Windows Vista and Seven (specially here)...
If you make a full backup of your registry with an app like ERUNT (or a full system backup) there's no risk in trying registry compacting, cleaning, and optimizing tools. I for one like to keep a good, clean, optimized registry, free of MRUs and usage tracks. Like many other things with Windows, you can get a small increase in performance and a slight reduction in wear. It's when you have all of the pieces of your system optimized, compacted, defragged, etc and your system is tuned with the unnecessary bloat and services disabled or removed that the performance increases go from slight to quite noticeable or very obvious. Temperatures go down and parts start lasting longer. The registry is just one piece of the puzzle. On my 98 system, I boot up with a completely clean, compacted, and optimized registry that's free of all MRUs every time. The whole process is automated, something I wish was possible on XP or 2K. Don't expect miracles or big changes from a registry app unless your registry has been sorely neglected for a long time, but don't think that some of them don't do some good. Just as with the rest of your system, a little maintenance goes a long way, and Windows maintenance of the registry leaves something to be desired.
In Windows Vista, the Registry has been Virtualized, and hence unlike XP, does not tend to suffer from bloat. The same has been continued in Windows 7. Virtualization basically means that, applications are prevented from writing to System Folders in Vista or Windows 7's file system and ALSO to the 'machine wide keys' in the registry. However, this does not prevent standard user accounts from installing or running applications. In Windows Vista, the Registry has been Virtualized, and hence unlike XP, does not tend to suffer from bloat. The same has been continued in Windows 7. Virtualization basically means that, applications are prevented from writing to System Folders in Vista or Windows 7's file system and ALSO to the 'machine wide keys' in the registry. Source
None - because I don't believe in using registry cleaners/optimizers. Aside from the claims of registry program developers, I have never seen any evidence of performance improvement resulting from their use ...and their is a substantial risk associated with their use! Aaron
@Mr.PC: Indeed, but only with UAC enabled. Too bad many people disable it, because of dumb repetitive prompts by default. @Aaron Here: We're talking about Registry Defrag/Compact/Compress, which is an entirely different process. Far less risks, with very little rewards. Still might be worth using though.
I do realize that and therefore included 'optimizers' (i.e., defraggers/compactors) in my remarks. Aaron
I would think that if your computer is "defragging" the registry and it crashes partway through for any of the million reasons that it can happen you can damage the registry and OS?
I got a good chuckle out of this. I don't use reg tools because of the many I have used in the years I have been computing, I can't say that I have seen an performance improvement. I have seen improvements from fixing the registry, as in removing context menus etc using ShellEx, but not from "defragging" or "optimizing". Maybe others found a noticable difference, but I have not. I appreciate how UAC is supposed to virtualize the registry, but is it really virtual? All that you do in this virtual registry is actually kept in a registry key. Although it is not writing to the real HKLM, it is writing to the real registry. So what is virtual in this case, the fact that the UAC reg values are kept in HKCU and virtualized? If this is so, then how is this virtualization technique any different in regards to this topic? It still writes to the registry, just in a different location, yes? Unless I am mistaken and the virtualizing is done in memory and written to the physical registry later or something. I personally don't want the virtualized registry area. I would much prefer it to be located in the real HKCU or HKLM, so that I know where it is and don't have to root around more than I have to. It is one of many reasons why I disable UAC (and as you mentioned all the prompts which I hate any more), and also why I don't use a few other features that are available to virtualize applications. I am comfortable doing anything I please in the registry, and really don't want a program "optimizing" it nor "virtualizing" it. I would personally rather learn how to fix a problem, and why it happens in the first place, rather than relying on a tool that I don't really know what it is going to do. Sort of like network optimizers - you can tweak it yourself if you have the desire to do so, and then you know what you did. Sul.
I have REGSEEKER and i love it (Removes un-needed entries in the reg) First time i used it,IT REMOVED OVER 850 KEYS!! Very good........ www.hoverdesk.net/freeware.htm
"Other specific Registry Defrag/Compact/Compress tool" : Torchsoft Registry Workshop (x64) Version 4.5.0 (June 5, 2011) www.torchsoft.com/en/rw_information.html
Currently using jv16 powertools 2010 which i scored for free. Seems to do an ok job without screwing up my system. Personally i dont notice any difference from when i used the standard, unmodified windows registry to now where i have it defragged and compacted.
If I have to compact the registry I will use registry defrag bundled with Tuneup Utilities. But nowadays I am not using it as I don't feel the need for it. Also some security software don't like these registry tools. Bitdefender won't allow registry compression. Even Auslogics which works on boot time didn't work. Mcafee gets corrupted after registry compact. So for me the risk is not worth taking.
Most (good) tools advise to disable any running software, ESPECIALLY AntiVirus, during the analysis/compacting procedure...
Auslogics Registry Defrag works as professional on the boot, but i not see much difference in performance.
I’m well versed in registry defragmentation / compacting / compression, I do computer repairs and maintenance and have been for several years. The performance gains are often incredible, and the hives compact ratio way more than a mere 5MB files reduction. But honestly that is to be expected when computers not been maintained in over a year. I wouldn’t expect much .. if any gain from those who ever only checks e-mails and visits news sites, these not the type of people that cross my path often. XP systems tend to be more acceptable to getting dirty hives faster, in a shorter period of time. Vista and Win7 systems aren’t impervious, just takes more time for them, also these computers that are designed for Vista and Win7 systems have much more resources to work with, a dirty hive has to be fairly bad for Vista and Win7 users to begin minding. Those who wants to-do a thorough job (and are familiar with registry cleanups), clean the registry of the invalid & left behinds first and then hives defragging ... bigger ratio and better performance gains (the user Carver has it right!) . I honestly don’t see how anyone could argue countless articles and from reputable people and places, ... I should be use to this.., but I still find it amazing! I don’t know if it was by sheer of luck or what, but Hungry Man said something that I can concur to, there’s potential for severe Windows problems when doing a registry defrag. For severals years of been doing peoples computers and registry defragging, I never experienced a anomaly after having defragged a system, but thats because I have a procedure of doing things. If your hard drive is failing, and you do a registry defrag, you can end up causing Windows not to boot. As it was already stated, there are some very good freeware choices for registry defraggers, I wouldn’t personally purchase a product to do this, but I would donate if the product was exceptional. Anyways all the ones I’ve seen does backing, I don’t ever remember seeing one that didn’t! Does someone know of one that doesn’t cover this aspect? Anyways, ... for technicians who are familiar with working outside of Windows, ... no problem, but for a regular Joe .. this could be catastrophic!
As far as I'm concerned my arguments were all sound. Feel free to refute them individually. I'd also be interested in how much space you've managed to save. One of the more "Extreme" examples posted in here showed 10% fragmentation... saving a total of 1.4~MB of RAM. And performance benchmarks/ some sorta objective evidence is always appreciated. Happy to be proved wrong.
