A must have Jewel, a real keeper!

Note: If after a cleanup, your Add/Remove control panel dosen’t work, just download this reg file and merge it into your registry.

Now I need some help here.

I find the the FixAddRemove.reg is right within the downloaded zip file.

And it appears to be the same size and everything. and it does merge into the reg.

I will check further when I get my XP pro HD back in.

BillyBob

 

Hi all, I'm Thibaud, the author of RegSeeker.
I just wanted to thanks the ppl here who made some kind comments about this app.
As some mentionned, this application needs to be used with care, essentially when running the registry cleaner.
Before deleting any entry in your registry, I would highly recommend that you make a backup of it before and you should also check the bad entries listed by regseeker (just double-click on an item and it will open in the regedit)

Regseeker has been tested on a great number of PC's but since configuration are so differents ...
Some of you are scare about the huge number of bad entries listed ... just wait for the next release, you'll be terrified ;-)
I'm working on the cleaning part in order to improve it (as well as stability) and it should bring you more wrong entries.

Just to make a small comment about cleaning : you can clean anything listed in the History entries (cookies/find/search/open/old start menu etc...) without any problem.

I hope you enjoy RegSeeker.

Btw, if some of you are interesting in testing and helping me with the next beta version, please feel free to contact me (tdjian@glabouni.com). I'd prefer some ppl with different OS version.

Again, thanks for your kind messages.
Regards

 

Just tried it on 3 systems. Win95, 98SE, and XP Pro.
The XP pro system found 37 registry entries, and after a careful look, removed all with no problems.
On the 98 box, found 2447! This was an upgrade from 95 to 98 to 98SE. Removed all with no problems.
On the 95 box, found 252, removed all with no problems.

 

Hi, Mike ~

No, I had not installed or unzipped RegSeeker at that point. There are no problems w/ RegSeeker here.

Actually, it was mere coincidence that the 'Add/Remove' faculty failed and that line parser message points specifically to SP-1 visual styles and/or themes - I got it worked out on this end and I must apologize for jumping the gun on the post.

I changed to a visual style that I had pre-SP-1a that I had for years, but hadn't used or patched since the service release upgrade.


Now, Mike or Thibaud ~

RegSeeker is all you purport it to be - it's great! I do have a question. I am baffled by the entries found by RS.

There are a series of 'extensions not used', 'paths or files not valid', 'classes invalid or unused', etc. in which some are valid and some seem to be incorrect. How is the best way to determine if it is in fact valid or not? Some are obvious, but, going through them piecemeal is out of the question considering the number of entries.

I am no dummy, but considering the possible invalidity of finds, how can I be sure the validity stands for the other finds that are less-than-obvious one way or the other I might be more inclined to delete?

For point of reference, one example of the many would be '.bak' extension reported as being unused. Why, now I know this is simply not true since it is used with a semblance of regularity. Why would RS indicate entires as such?

 

Thank you Bruce for being honest.

Glad to read that you do have thing worked out.

As to Reg entries.

The first time I ran RegSeeker It showed several entries referring to Nero. Next couple of times it showed nothing for Nero.

Before the next time I used Regseeker I also used Nero to burn a CD. And the references showed up again.

I believe this indicates the possibility that some things get put back when a program is run.

And several others of the same idea that were not there before but were from some program that I had run.

BillyBob

 

Bruce,

as for the "open with" useless or "extension not used ", it's in fact because some files have been open with an application which is not registered to open those kind of files.
The extension itself is not invalid, it's the association between this extension and a specific program.

As for CLSID invalid, I've installed a tons of shareware/freeware/commercial demos etc on my PC then uninstall them just to check the keys left. Based on that, I'm looking thru the registry in order to track the lost (undeleted) entries and I'm doing some analysis in order to see if those keys can be deleted or not (also, I'm manually deleting them then restart my pc in order to see if all goes fine).
It's a bit complicated to explain it all (because they're also more rules before marking an entry as invalid) !
The ActiveX/CLSID cleaning part is the most sensible one (because of registered classes, com objects, shell integration etc...)

If you're not sure about a key, don't delete it ! For a safer clean, just uncheck the activex/com cleaning option.

 

Hi all

Sorry for so long getting back. I have been under the grindstone lately. I installed 12 broadband VPN tunnels at 4 locations over the weekend and am now setting up applications and teaching users how to connect and run.

First thanks Thibaud for taking the time to drop by. Hope you can do so again. Good job on RegSeeker.

HAWK (look what the cats dragged in) hi buddy, long time. Any way Hawk. In my original post and in one of the others that was exactly who I was addressing this entire thread to. The Pros and experts to use and to recommend to others as needed.

And with Guys like BillyBob, Reboot, Bruce, Lonnie and others that is who is here.

BillyBob one thing I will add to what Thibaud said.

It was not originally the intent of the designers of the Registry that some programs use the registry unnecessarily as in like a notepad or the temp folder. A lot of what gets written to the registry should actually be in an ini file in the programs folder.

Hence the entries you speak of that come back.

Also BillyBob, no I did not have an ME or 95 to test it on.

Bruce Thibaud answered you question but, as someone else was afraid of RegSeeker because it wanted to clean a JPG or something entry. There are a few Global associations but gif, jpg and bak are not. Many programs can use these associations. The key here is this particular entry is no longer linked to a program.

As in BillyBobs example a few unlinked entries get put in on program run but these will be rebuilt as they are temps and should be in an ini file.

OK hope I answered every ones questions. This thread has turned into a Bear.

Mike

 

Hey Bruce

You had your problems and I had mine. I copied the RegSeeger file to a floppy from this XP machine. Took it to the machine with 98FE on it. Tried to expand it and up came three little error boxes on the screen that I have no idea what they said other then the word RegSeeker. ( they were not in English )

Solution(s)

#1--XP did not copy the file properly ( it was about 10 bytes smaller than the original.

#2--Burned the file to a CD. Tried to unzip. Different error messages.

#3-- REBOOTED the machine. ALL was then well again. Removed about 200 entries.

4--Possible cause of problem ( in #2 ). Kids had been playing DOS games.

BillyBob

 

I noticed that too, although I had manually removed many of those types of entries, a few still showed up, and some appeared to be incorrect, because I DO have programs that use those extentions.
I decided to take it's default action, and remove them (after making backups), and then run all the programs.
Every single entry needed, is back, and the program no longer reports the entries as invalid, so no harm done. If a program needs to use an extention, it's rewritten into the registry as needed. This is under XP, which doesn't require a restart.
I have a feeling that under 98, things may be more complicated...
Paths or files not valid stems from shoddy uninstalls that don't remove the registry entries properly. Again, no problems.
Same with classes...they're just not needed, and if a program requires the class to be registered, it seems to put an entry back if necessary, and no problems.
Again, this may be different in 98, because it requires a restart to register the new component, XP does not.

 

I believe what reboot is referrring to is tha same as what I mentioned about NERO. The keys did not show up until I ran it again.

I agree to differences in XP Pro and 98.

In XP anything that was needed was put back without a restart.

And I also agree 100% to some ( no, a LOT OF ) problems being caused by Improper installs of or failure to restart Windows after an install.

reboot is correct. Win98 needs a restart to get thing properly seated in the registry. EVEN IF software does not suggest it

Same goes for un-installs. They may not be complete without a restart. Again, even if the software does not ask for a restart.

OR. I some cases ( yes, me too ) a failure to shutdown AV checking. Especially NORTON.

Not doing the above has caused a user ( me too ) to blame Windows. 95% of the time it is not Windows as the OS at all.

BillyBob

 

@Mike ~ No, this thread was great and your steering it back on course was par as well.

@Reboot ~ Thanks for confirming my suppositions of necessary entries being rewritten as needed.

@Thibaud ~ Thanks for RS. It is nice to have some open discussion with the author of apps. I am impressed with the entries found & removed after running 4 other similar progz consecutively on an already tight machine.

 

Hello again
for the new members
Registry cleaning is not normally needed please don't just try everything you see suggested here, unless someone like mike or the other great people here thinks its necessary,

And if you do use this tool check add-remove ,windows setup and help to see if ever still works ,,,
And remember if in the future something odd happens, theres always the backups.

This tool does not work correctly on my windows ME system ,
HP PC 6746c (if that matters) still don't know why.



=============on another matter===============
"And I also agree 100% to some ( no, a LOT OF ) problems being caused by Improper installs of or failure to restart Windows after an install.
reboot is correct. Win98 needs a restart to get thing properly seated in the registry. EVEN IF software does not suggest it
Same goes for un-installs. They may not be complete without a restart. Again, even if the software does not ask for a restart.
OR. I some cases ( yes, me too ) a failure to shutdown AV checking. Especially NORTON.
============================================
Thanks for bringing that up,,
Ive learned that the hard way,,

where windows update,,

if any program update or install, uninstall doesn't suggest a restart go ahead and do it anyway, and maybe even again before installing or UN something else.and dont forget to turn off your virus scanner even if there seams to be no problem not doing so, eventualy there will be problems.
ON 9X systems

Lonny

 

That is a response that I sort of expected from a ME user.

I see two possible reasons.

#1 it is an HP OEM machine which may do things quite differently than a Home built machine. I have had access to two of them and I WILL NOT touch either one. I would crash them in about 2 minutes. Mainly because I would start a serious house cleaning.

#2 Windows ME. That is an animal quite different than 95, 98. Windows ME should never have been invented. ME is ( or was for me ) worse to control than XP PRO.

So therefore from my own personal experience with ME ( both on my own machine and one of a Family member ) I would not judge RegSeeker or other software of the type while using ME.

After I found the MACHINE problem on the 3rd one I had no problems whatsoever in 98FE , 98SE or XP PRO.

And BTW. I did not look to even see what was shown. I just selected all items ( 450 in XP. 250 in 98SE and 200 in98 FE ) and hit the delete key. And if that did not cause problems the sofware must be pretty good stuff.

BillyBob

 

I have run Regseeker on Win98se with no problems to report yet...Regseeker pulled up 243 entries...I removed all of them after checking the backup option. I had already been using RegClean & CleanSystemDirectory!

J. M.

 

Hi

Maybe your misunderstanding me I do like this tool and will use it , cautiously ,, selectively..

BB aren't most PC's out there OEM's whatever the OS ?

Isn't there more windows ME system's than o say win 95 and possible win 98 first edition?
You seam to resent windows ME and its users
"That is a response that I sort of expected from a ME user "
Not my fault windows me was invented, and I'm stuck with it.

I have no experience with any other operating systems to com
except win 95 for a little while,, but I can see how when a person
gets used to win 98 and forcing it to do as you wish, taking control ,really you'd have to or software would, not to mention MS.
then switching to ME would really be strange..with no sfc ,just to mention one thing. I guess thats why XP has sfc. along with a way to revert to a previous driver.
Once windows ME has one it tends to not let go.Though Ive found out how to turn off SPF, Ive never had to.
Best to let the beast have its way

I was once just looking at the current vid driver with the update driver wizard ,windows kindly told me it couldn't install this driver it might cause the system to become unstable well gee,, this is what is actually already installed,, that was just looking at it I hadn't even tried to update anything.

J. M. please use caution with any registry tool ,, they cant make them compatible with every setup ,, and everyones setup is different,, you might not even notice a problem four months
By then it would be almost impossible to diagnose,, same go's for software installs --updates and Installs.. and really there no need for two or three,, No need either to use them but once every couple months or so.
============================================

On another note, Note this was before trying these tools in this thread,

I had lost or turned off the sound when IE opens a page or finishes loading a page.. I saw somewhere here on windows BBS
IT may have been when I installed AVG ..
about two weeks ago I had chosen a sound( cant figure out how to for just IE) wndows calls it (ME) windows explorer
complete navigation, and all worked fine yesterday I changed it to ding wave --- now our Internet Explorer is faster than ever
zippy even,, its not just my imagination it really is faster,,
I wonder why ?
There seams to be a slight incompatibility between MS multi media sounds and the MS themes package.when mixed with user.
and the windows me user

Best regards
Lonny

 

BB aren't most PC's out there OEM's whatever the OS ?

I consider an OEM machine as being GateWay, HP, Dell, Compaq etc.

Isn't there more windows ME system's than o say win 95 and possible win 98 first edition?

That I can not answer. All I can say it that I have read in a couple of places that even Microsoft does not care to hear about ME.

As to more ME users than 98 FE or SE I can not answer that for sure either. All I can say ( and be honest ) is that I have converted several family and Friends machines back to ( or up to )98SE and they are mucho many times happier.

You seam to resent windows ME and its users

No I do not resent ME USERS. I just feel sorry for those that got stuck with a not so nice OS. And if you have been doing much reading in other posts here I believe you may find that to be a general opinion of ME. ( I maybe wrong but I think so )

"That is a response that I sort of expected from a ME user "

That is true. As I know first hand that there are MANY very good apps such as RegSeeker type that do no work well in ME. If a user knows how to turn off a lot of the stuff that ME wants to run in the background then it may not be so bad. But if they do not know it will FIGHT YOU EVERY STEP of the way.

Is was actually WORSE than XP.

Not my fault windows me was invented, and I'm stuck with it.

True. You did not invent it.

And NO YOU ARE NOT stuck with Windows ME. Especially if you happen to have a home built machine. If you have an OEM then it may be a different story. They may be hard to convert. Because they may contain proprietory hardware.

But as always, the make up of the machine itself Starting with the Motherboard, CPU, other hardware can make a lot of difference as to how ANY OS behaves.

The combination of Hard and software can make a big difference also.

Darn. I forgot to look before I replyed here but I think if you will look at the number of threads in 98 vs ME you may have your answer.

I will submit this reply and go look and be back.

Yep. I looked. I am back, And the answer seems clear to me.

If those numbers mean anything I think some version of 98 may be in use far more than ME.

BillyBob

 

I consider Win95, just a GUI on top of DOS. Easy to mess up, easy to fix.
Win98, SE, 2K, and XP are "tweakable" OS's, they'll bow to your will, once you know what you want, and how to go about it.
ME is what I consider a NON-tweakable OS. If you have it installed, leave it. Don't try and get fancy with it. Don't try and move the swap file, or set it manually. Don't mess with the GUI using 3rd party programs, and don't try going into DOS to fix anything. Also, don't try and add a second hard drive with a primary partition on it, to an existing ME system.
It's an "install it, and use it" OS. Period. If that's the way it's done, many people have had excellent luck with ME, and those are usually the ones that love pretty desktops, and fancy icons, eye candy, and don't care that it's slow, cumbersome, and untweakable.
On the flip side, XP is the most tweakable, with 98SE running a close second.
From my experience, there are FAR more 98 and 98SE systems still around than ME ones. The postings on various boards, suggest about a 15-1 ratio.

 

That is well said Jim.

On your steps thru the operating system versions!

I never really thought about it but you put it in perspective.

Yeah I also agree on the 98 to Me ratio.

I also believe the ratio of 98 (FE and SE) to XP, be about 5 (98) to one XP with XP accelerating. No real stats just a feeling from BBS threads and my own eval of the network makeups that I deal with.

Mike

 

they'll bow to your will, once you know what you want, and how to go about it.

That I believe is an important key to getting any version of Windows working to USERS liking.

Also, don't try and add a second hard drive with a primary partition on it, to an existing ME system.

Just for info sake. Doesn't that apply to any OS unless special conditions exist ? I believe it does any way. I have made a mistake and done it with both 95 and 98SE.

Once I got over being SCARED of XP, got it installed and have beaten the heck out of it I do have to fully agree with that.

But I also had to install and remove it twice before I got it installed TO MY LIKING

Not XPs liking but Dear Ol' BillyBobs' liking. And I find it MUCH easier to handle than I thought.

BillyBob

 

Well BB it does not nessesarilly apply to any OS.

It is a good practice not to put a second primary on any in my humble opinion, but XP and 2K especially can handle them well. And there can be reasons for doing it.

98 can handle to too with proper setup. But ME goes ballistic. Probably would work with some kind of partition mgr , but then again with ME it may not like the Partition mgr. Smile!

mike