> That doesn't mean CCleaner's behavior is correct, but it's probably a situation the developers haven't been able to test against.
So reading between the lines, you're saying that CCleaner is a bad idea simply because they cannot possibly understand the registry well enough to make the changes that they're making.
We agree completely.
Honestly if people want to use CCleaner to do jump lists, file history, and caches (although that last one is misguided) then I'm all for it. There's very little chance anything will break with those (it is hard to screw up!).
I just warn against the registry cleaner primarily, and just feel like with Disk Cleaner and Windows' automatic cleaning that has been integrated for a while you could live without using CCleaner (unless you still have a Windows 9x box).
you're saying that CCleaner is a bad idea simply because they cannot possibly understand the registry well enough to make the changes that they're making.
It sounds more like, "the software vendor is doing incorrect or incomplete things with the registry and CCleaner cannot possibly know that."
As a long-time Windows software developer, I've been stunned at how sloppy desktop programs and installers are, even today. People ignore Microsoft guidelines, somehow get the software to the "works for me" stage, and deploy it.
So reading between the lines, you're saying that CCleaner is a bad idea simply because they cannot possibly understand the registry well enough to make the changes that they're making.
We agree completely.
Honestly if people want to use CCleaner to do jump lists, file history, and caches (although that last one is misguided) then I'm all for it. There's very little chance anything will break with those (it is hard to screw up!).
I just warn against the registry cleaner primarily, and just feel like with Disk Cleaner and Windows' automatic cleaning that has been integrated for a while you could live without using CCleaner (unless you still have a Windows 9x box).