jv16 PowerTools 2009 (1.9.1.606) available for testing

jv16

Here is an updated version of jv16 PowerTools 2009 with the bug fixed, and a few new under-the-hood components from PowerTools 2010. The new components for example make the Registry Cleaner faster and safer. Another that this version should address is Registry Cleaner errors that do not get removed even if the Remove button is used.

But because the new components are coming from still not even beta stage PowerTools 2010, this testing is needed before this version can be officially released. What I'm trying to say is: be careful with this version! Treat it as a beta version, not as a real version.

You can download it from:

http://www.macecraft.com/downloads/betas/jv16pt_setup_1.9.1.606.exe

(if the link doesn't work, it means the version is no longer available)

Update: Updated version 606 now available. This version has the issue fixed.

Please send all feedback about this version to this thread using the "Post Reply" button.

henry

Registry Cleaner Build 593 does not work on Windows 7 RC Build 7100. All setting are default (as installed) and Quick System Analysis was run. Here is what happens every time I run jv16 PT 593:

1. Start jv16 PT

2. Click on Registry Cleaner

3. Click on Start

4. An empty Results windows is immediately displayed without the Registry Cleaner scanning the Windows Registry.

I have gone back to Build 590.

jv16

Henry wrote
Registry Cleaner Build 593 does not work on Windows 7 RC Build 7100. All setting are default (as installed) and Quick System Analysis was run. Here is what happens every time I run jv16 PT 593:

1. Start jv16 PT

2. Click on Registry Cleaner

3. Click on Start

4. An empty Results windows is immediately displayed without the Registry Cleaner scanning the Windows Registry.

Could you try to wait a few minutes to see if only the progress panel is not visible, or whether the scan itself hasn't started at all?

leonardo

I restored (using jvPT registry backups) one of my Win-XP-P SP3 systems to the point before I start using jvPT-v590.

Booted the system and ran v593 reg.cleaning. Over 1500 errors found, I used the "fix" button, all errors fixed/removed except two ZA antivirus shared component entries. Again booted the system and everything seemed OK (both functional + performance).

Just for test purposes I uninstalled 4 product for which I receive newer versions in the meantime. After installing the new versions I rebooted and ran v593 reg.cleaning. Over 800 errors found and used again the "fix" button. After that rebooted and all seems OK ( both functional + performance).

It sure looks I have a stable XP-SP3 system again, which boosts my confidence in the JVPT2009 product beyond v590.

naiden

I have windows7 x64 installed(Final Code)

i get everytime a saftynet Error during the Scan. But the program does not Stop to work.

tullik

On x86 Vista -- with a registry that has already been aggressively "cleaned"

Registry Cleaner

593 ran a bit faster than 590. Times are from the "scan finished" messages:

590, 3 minutes 48 seconds

593, 3 minutes 27 seconds (91% of the 590 time)

That's a little surprising because I expected 593 to run slower because the 590 program and results were still in memory.

593 found fewer "File or directory does not exist" errors than 590.

jv16

Naiden wrote
I have windows7 x64 installed(Final Code)

i get everytime a saftynet Error during the Scan. But the program does not Stop to work.

Could you please tell me the exact version number from the About window of your PowerTools? Also, what does the error messages in fact say? Please give me the error code to work with.

jv16

tullik wrote

593 found fewer "File or directory does not exist" errors than 590.

How many fewer did it find?

The 593 contains new code from PowerTools 2010 designed to improve the safety, this can cause some items not to be listed. For example, a new feature from PT 2010 is a so called "important data filter" that is enabled in 593, it filters out all Registry Cleaner results that relate to important work relating software. With PT 2010 the feature can be disabled using the Scan Aggressivity thingie.

tullik

tullik wrote
On x86 Vista -- with a registry that has already been aggressively "cleaned"

Registry Cleaner

593 ran a bit faster than 590. Times are from the "scan finished" messages:

590, 3 minutes 48 seconds

593, 3 minutes 27 seconds (91% of the 590 time)

That's a little surprising because I expected 593 to run slower because the 590 program and results were still in memory.

593 found fewer "File or directory does not exist" errors than 590.

I repeated the above but ran 593 before 590, leaving the 593 program and results in memory during the 590 scan.

593, 3 minutes 12 seconds

590, 4 minutes 9 seconds

Using the "when run first" times, we get:

590, 3 minutes 48 seconds

593, 3 minutes 12 seconds (84% of the 590 time)

tullik

tullik wrote
On x86 Vista -- with a registry that has already been aggressively "cleaned"

Registry Cleaner

...

593 found fewer "File or directory does not exist" errors than 590.

jv16 wrote
... How many fewer did it find?

The 593 contains new code from PowerTools 2010 designed to improve the safety, this can cause some items not to be listed. For example, a new feature from PT 2010 is a so called "important data filter" that is enabled in 593, it filters out all Registry Cleaner results that relate to important work relating software. With PT 2010 the feature can be disabled using the Scan Aggressivity thingie.

590 found 5. 593 found 1

These are the four not shown by 593. The 590 program grouped the last three in the "MRU/History" category. All four are completely safe to remove:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 ; File created by TBackupTool ; Component version: 1.4.2 ; Component used by: jv16 PowerTools 2009 ; Program version: 1.9.0.590 ; File Description: ; Date: 30.09.2009 ; Time: 06 localPath="C:\\Users\\Owner\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\aax4597.tmp" C:\\Users\\Owner\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\is-SM19V.tmp\\is-23VBR.tmp="Setup/Uninstall" C:\\Users\\Owner\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\is-CB3PV.tmp\\is-HMR7H.tmp="Setup/Uninstall"

C:\\Users\\Owner\\AppData\\Local\\Temp\\is-BEHBN.tmp\\is-5D1VF.tmp="Setup/Uninstall"

stavkirke

Hi,

Just general feedback and thanks for addressing the loss of functionality bug in the previous build (which didn’t affect my system).

System = XP SP3. Have only used the registry cleaner (I have no problems to sort out and don’t use other features very often). Does not seem any quicker (did not time, but this is not a key issue for me). Always run at setting above most aggressive. The new build listed more items. Some of these were previously only listed under the most aggressive setting in the previous build. I judged these items were safe to remove under the old build, but left them intact (only about 8 and will eventually be recreated through use). Have done four test runs of the “new” registry cleaner and apart from selecting “fix” on the first occasion (only one fix out of a couple of hundred items), have always chosen “delete”. Reboots etc. seem to indicate everything OK. Running the most aggressive setting directly after the next most aggressive detected no additional items.

Over the years, PT (and whatever it was called before that) has been invaluable to me. I regard the above results as very good.

Would be nice if PT could be used to “mass rename” file extensions. I do have a tool for this, but forget I have it. I thus end up using DOS – not a problem, but I sometimes struggle to remember the commands (should write them down – and forget where I’ve written them).

BR,

tullik

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

jv16

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

leonardo

Registry cleaning comparison between jvPTv590 and jvPTv593; same settings, same system, same "aggressive mode"

v590 found 140 errors (36 keys and 104 entries),

v593 found 26 errors (0 key's and 26 entries).

addition: Using "upload attachment" I uploaded the two files:

v593_ 26errors_00keys_26entries.txt and

V590_140 errors_36keys_104entries.txt

or is there a better/easier way to do this?

jv16

Leonardo wrote
Registry cleaning comparison between jvPTv590 and jvPTv593; same settings, same system, same "aggressive mode"

v590 found 140 errors (36 keys and 104 entries),

v593 found 26 errors (0 key's and 26 entries).

Could you PM me the two lists so I could compare? Or, you could also send them here to this thread if you don't mind the privacy issue.

tullik

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

leonardo

jv16 wrote
Leonardo wroteRegistry cleaning comparison between jvPTv590 and ch the filesjvPTv593; same settings, same system, same "aggressive mode"

Or, you could also send them here to this thread if you don't mind the privacy issue.

I am willing but HOW to attach!

Using the "Upload attachment" tab, every file extention I tried, even no extention, is reported back as "Extention not allowed"

redseujac

Sorry, we encountered an error while displaying this content. If you're a user, please try again later. If you're an administrator, take a look in your Flarum log files for more information.

tullik

Thanks, redseujac. That's even easier. 8)

tullik

Leonardo wrote
jv16 wrote
Leonardo wroteRegistry cleaning comparison between jvPTv590 and ch the filesjvPTv593; same settings, same system, same "aggressive mode"

Or, you could also send them here to this thread if you don't mind the privacy issue.

I am willing but HOW to attach!

Using the "Upload attachment" tab, every file extention I tried, even no extention, is reported back as "Extention not allowed"

Suppose you created the individual lists for 590 and 593 using File-->Save list as .... You then would have two .txt files.

You have to copy the two files into a .zip "folder" which can be attached if it's not too large.

You get the .zip folder with a right click on your desktop and select New-->Compressed (zipped) folder.

If your "New" menu does not have that option, create an empty .txt document then change its file extension from .txt to .zip.