"Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:uYG9ZilIJHA.4692@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> I challenge you to a registry cleaner duel.
>
> We will set up a reg file to import and seriously inflate our
> working registries.  Such inflation not to cause any inability to
> boot or run the machines.
>
> We'll take say 3 popular registry cleaners and "clean" our
> registries xx number of times, say ten, for each cleaner.
>
> We'll agree on a method and take measurements of timng changes,
> removal rates and any damage that requires having to Restore,
> restore froma saved System State, or  re-image our drives to get it
> workable again.
>
> Let me know how you want to start.
>
> If you're worried about my lying, as I am about you, then we can
> instead make a pact to document and report each and every fix we do
> of a registry issue on any XP machine over say the next x months;
> you pick the number.
>
> Or, you could just go ahead and provide any of the evidence you
> claim to have supporting your posit that all cleaners are 'snake
> oil'.  AFAIK you have NEVER provide a single bit of anything to
> support your contention on registry cleaners, not even a definition
> of what constitutes a registry cleaner.  A quick look thru my
> archives shows that you've been asked to do that over time by at
> least 3 different people but you never even responded to them let
> alone provide anything useful to back up your claims.  I also have
> the archive where I provide you with my own findings, because you
> kept harping about it, to which you never even responded.
>
> If you have a better way to prove who's right, let's hear it. I'm
> open to reasonable, workable  and relevant proposals.
>
> Twayne

"D. Spencer Hines" wrote:

> Capital!
>
> CCleaner
> Disk Cleanup
> NTREGOPT.EXE
> PerfectDisk 2008
>
> THOSE are the best tools to use.
> --
> DSH
> Lux et Veritas et Libertas
> Vires et Honor
>
> "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:uYG9ZilIJHA.4692@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >
> > I challenge you to a registry cleaner duel.
> >
> > We will set up a reg file to import and seriously inflate our
> > working registries.  Such inflation not to cause any inability to
> > boot or run the machines.
> >
> > We'll take say 3 popular registry cleaners and "clean" our
> > registries xx number of times, say ten, for each cleaner.
> >
> > We'll agree on a method and take measurements of timng changes,
> > removal rates and any damage that requires having to Restore,
> > restore froma saved System State, or  re-image our drives to get it
> > workable again.
> >
> > Let me know how you want to start.
> >
> > If you're worried about my lying, as I am about you, then we can
> > instead make a pact to document and report each and every fix we do
> > of a registry issue on any XP machine over say the next x months;
> > you pick the number.
> >
> > Or, you could just go ahead and provide any of the evidence you
> > claim to have supporting your posit that all cleaners are 'snake
> > oil'.  AFAIK you have NEVER provide a single bit of anything to
> > support your contention on registry cleaners, not even a definition
> > of what constitutes a registry cleaner.  A quick look thru my
> > archives shows that you've been asked to do that over time by at
> > least 3 different people but you never even responded to them let
> > alone provide anything useful to back up your claims.  I also have
> > the archive where I provide you with my own findings, because you
> > kept harping about it, to which you never even responded.
> >
> > If you have a better way to prove who's right, let's hear it. I'm
> > open to reasonable, workable  and relevant proposals.
> >
> > Twayne
>
>
>

> I challenge you to a registry cleaner duel.
>
> We will set up a reg file to import and seriously inflate our working
> registries.  Such inflation not to cause any inability to boot or run
> the machines.
>
> We'll take say 3 popular registry cleaners and "clean" our registries
> xx number of times, say ten, for each cleaner.
>
> We'll agree on a method and take measurements of timng changes,
> removal rates and any damage that requires having to Restore, restore
> froma saved System State, or  re-image our drives to get it workable
> again.
> Let me know how you want to start.
>
> If you're worried about my lying, as I am about you, then we can
> instead make a pact to document and report each and every fix we do
> of a registry issue on any XP machine over say the next x months; you
> pick the number.
>
> Or, you could just go ahead and provide any of the evidence you claim
> to have supporting your posit that all cleaners are 'snake oil'. AFAIK
> you have NEVER provide a single bit of anything to support your
> contention on registry cleaners, not even a definition of what
> constitutes a registry cleaner.  A quick look thru my archives shows
> that you've been asked to do that over time by at least 3 different
> people but you never even responded to them let alone provide
> anything useful to back up your claims.  I also have the archive
> where I provide you with my own findings, because you kept harping
> about it, to which you never even responded.
>
> If you have a better way to prove who's right, let's hear it. I'm open
> to reasonable, workable  and relevant proposals.
>
> Twayne

> I challenge you to a registry cleaner duel.
>
> We will set up a reg file to import and seriously inflate our working
> registries.  Such inflation not to cause any inability to boot or run
> the machines.
>
> We'll take say 3 popular registry cleaners and "clean" our registries
> xx number of times, say ten, for each cleaner.
>
> We'll agree on a method and take measurements of timng changes,
> removal rates and any damage that requires having to Restore, restore
> froma saved System State, or  re-image our drives to get it workable
> again.
> Let me know how you want to start.
>
> If you're worried about my lying, as I am about you, then we can
> instead make a pact to document and report each and every fix we do
> of a registry issue on any XP machine over say the next x months; you
> pick the number.
>
> Or, you could just go ahead and provide any of the evidence you claim
> to have supporting your posit that all cleaners are 'snake oil'. AFAIK
> you have NEVER provide a single bit of anything to support your
> contention on registry cleaners, not even a definition of what
> constitutes a registry cleaner.  A quick look thru my archives shows
> that you've been asked to do that over time by at least 3 different
> people but you never even responded to them let alone provide
> anything useful to back up your claims.  I also have the archive
> where I provide you with my own findings, because you kept harping
> about it, to which you never even responded.
>
> If you have a better way to prove who's right, let's hear it. I'm open
> to reasonable, workable  and relevant proposals.
>
> Twayne