What to use instead of NTREGOPT?

[dencorso]

Please bear with me.

You had used:

 

runassystem64.exe "runfromtoken64.exe trustedinstaller.exe ntregopt.exe"

 

but ou should have used:

 

runassystem64.exe "runfromtoken64.exe trustedinstaller.exe 1 ntregopt.exe"

 

or a necessary parameter is missing... joakim's own example is quoted below:

 

RunFromToken.exe param1 param2 param3

 

where:    

    param1 is target process name

    param2 is session ID to start new process in

    param3 is the command line to execute

    

    Example:

    RunFromToken.exe trustedinstaller.exe 1 regedit

    do not forget the extension in param1

Have you fixed that and it still isn't working?

[jaclaz]

Well, basically that was what post #4 was about:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173822-what-to-use-instead-of-ntregopt/?p=1098823

 

maybe I should have written it more explicitly?

 

jaclaz

[dencorso]

...maybe I should have written it more explicitly?

I guess so.

[bphlpt]

It' sounds like it's all for a "feel good" factor then. Nothing wrong with that. But until someone comes along with before and after measurements that show an objective improvement in system responsiveness or SOMETHING, I'm afraid I'll remain unconvinced.

 

If I may, I do not believe that jaclaz, or anyone else in this thread, has ever argued that doing anything to the registry is usually either necessary or of "practical benefit, particularly on modern machines and recent MS OS's".  Rather, I think he has objected to your absolute statements that there is no benefit and that there is substantial risk to running apps such as NTREGOPT.

 

While it is true that there is always some small amount of risk of damage when you manipulate the registry in any way, not just by using registry tools, I think there is also some small amount of risk to the performance of your system and possible potential damage when your registry is inefficiently organized and has no longer needed information in it causing unnecessary bloat.

 

You have very clearly stated and shown that your experience has proven to you that doing anything to your registry does not seem to be needed to maintain continued good performance of your system.  You have a modern OS, including your past use of Window 7, and have multiple powerful CPUs, plenty of fast RAM, and a large and very fast RAID system of SSDs.  You also do what you can to minimize unnecessary services, do not install software that you do not know and trust, and actively monitor and maintain your system.  In my mind, that is equivalent to bizzybody's scenario of "If you set up a PC then never change anything, never uninstall software, never do anything that will leave orphan data in the registry ...", in that in both cases I think that everyone here will agree that "... there is no need to do anything to compact or clear out the junk."

 

However, jacalz has given you examples where compacting the registry has proven beneficial in specific situations, has shown where MS itself has shown how to accomplish the task without using 3rd party tools because "Registry hives that are in this state can cause various performance issues and errors in the system log.", and has given anecdotal evidence that performing the task occasionally on his many different systems over many years has never caused him a single problem. I also have performed registry compacting, along with minor registry "cleaning" using tools such as CCleaner, over many years on many systems and have also never had a single problem caused by doing so.

 

I won't begin to try to judge how your amount of experience compares to that of jaclaz.  I view both of your experience to be extensive, in different areas and with different tools, which along with the experiences of the other members of the board only improves the overall knowledge of the community as a whole.

 

So, just as jaclaz has not tried to convince you that you should be using registry tools on a regular basis, I appreciate that you have acknowledged that others use of recognized registry tools on an occasional basis should normally not cause any issues and might even do some good, even if it is often of the "feel good" type.  But as you have stated, using sufficient hardware for the task at hand will always make more of a noticeable improvement to your computing experience.

 

Cheers and Regards

[NoelC]

Well said, bphlpt. 

 

I can come across as overly emphatic and stubborn - and I'm sorry (it may come from trying to talk sense on some other forums where people do not know as much as many/most do here). 

 

The amount of ridiculous snake oil regarding this area of Windows maintenance ("cleaning") has long been a pet peeve of mine - as I'm sure it is to others in this thread.  I do sometimes remember - after having been nicely reminded (thanks to all here) - that there can be nuggets of goodness in it.

 

-Noel

[bphlpt]

The amount of ridiculous snake oil regarding this area of Windows maintenance ("cleaning") has long been a pet peeve of mine - as I'm sure it is to others in this thread.

That's the way I feel about OS "slimming". That had its purpose and real, noticeable, and measurable benefits back in the day, but not with today's hardware. It's no longer needed and is much more likely to cause problems by removing something you might need later.

 

That's not to say, depending on your hardware and your software requirements, that there aren't things that could be removed without impacting your day-to-day use of the system in any way and make installing and maintaining the system quicker while taking up less installed space.  Tools such as nuhi's NTLite can do a good job with this task, from what I have heard.  But for me, I'd just rather remove nothing, and simply disable what I don't need.  I believe I am likely to have fewer potential problems that way.  But, to each their own.

 

Cheers and Regards

Edited May 9, 2015 by bphlpt

[bizzybody]

net stop trustedinstaller
net start trustedinstaller
runassystem64.exe "runfromtoken64.exe trustedinstaller.exe 1 ntregopt.exe"

 

No difference, except with the 1 there it doesn't run ntregopt if the batch file is run as administrator. Still denied access to all hives.

[dencorso]

Try running:

 

runassystem64.exe "runfromtoken64.exe trustedinstaller.exe 1 cmd.exe"

 

to open a DOS Box as the Trusted Installer, and then run the batch from that DOS Box.

 

This, if anything, may work.

[jaclaz]

@bhplt

Yep, you perfectly explicited the point.

 

Everyone of us has his/her own experience and has seen different things, you wouldn't believe what I have seen (nor what I have done ) on some machines/installs, or what some (badly coded but "necessary") programs may do to a poor, innocent, Registry hive.

 

A machine that has been maintained by an experienced user, that has rarely installed "experimental" or alpha or beta software if not his/her own coded ones, cleverly avoided the sh*tload of crappy apps/tools, particularly adware and trialware available in the wild, has resoloved an issue as soon as possible and correctly will not obviously benefit by a defragmentation of a hive, basically because the hive is already not fragmented or not fragmented much, but I have seen - like Bizzibody reported - Hives grown out of control that would be reduced in size by 20% or more, as well but this is another thing, if you check n systems you will likely find n-1 Registries with just ControlSet001 and ControlSet002 and 1 with also ControSet003 but I have seen machine with up to ControlSet025 and more, AFAICR the record is ControlSet052, but maybe there were worst cases .

 

Anyway the point at hand is that cleaning a Registry is different from defragmenting it, the first removes data, the second simply re-arranges them, the first, if the "wrong" program is used or it is used by the "wrong" operator, can represent a risk, often even a substantial one, the second does not, and specifically the defragmentation is carried essentially through making a backup of the hive and then replacing the backup at next boot, and processing errors (if any) will happen before the replacement takes place, so that one has always a "way back" (as long as there is an alternate boot OS).

 

jaclaz

[bizzybody]

Try running:

 

runassystem64.exe "runfromtoken64.exe trustedinstaller.exe 1 cmd.exe"

 

to open a DOS Box as the Trusted Installer, and then run the batch from that DOS Box.

 

This, if anything, may work.

 

Nope. CMD immediately quits. So next I called the batch file to run ntregopt with the trusted installer token from the batch file that launches CMD with it. Still blocked.

[jaclaz]

 

Nope. CMD immediately quits. 

This should not happen.

If you run CMD.EXE, no matter how you launch it, it should remain an open command prompt/window.

 

jaclaz

[Dubiaku]

Well said, bphlpt. 

 

I can come across as overly emphatic and stubborn - and I'm sorry (it may come from trying to talk sense on some other forums where people do not know as much as many/most do here). 

 

The amount of ridiculous snake oil regarding this area of Windows maintenance ("cleaning") has long been a pet peeve of mine - as I'm sure it is to others in this thread.  I do sometimes remember - after having been nicely reminded (thanks to all here) - that there can be nuggets of goodness in it.

 

-Noel

 Well, having read this thread, I'd have to say that overall, I'll put my eggs in your basket. I really don't blame the people who try to make a buck by selling all kinds of cures for diseases that don't exist. But it should be kept in mind that there are smart people in Redmond who have a vested interest in making Windows run as well and as fast as possible out of the box.

 

  I've tried multiple "registry tools" over the years, some seemingly doing some good, some making my machines unbootable.

 

  I still use only one - Auslogics Registry Defrag. Not sure that is does anything at all, but gives that "feelgood" feeling.

 

  An analogy I use sometimes about the registry in order to disabuse people of the notion that its size or degree of "fragmentation" has any bearing on access speed is to point out that if you go to a restaurant, you are led to the table that you will use. If the other tables in the room are filled to the brim or not, your speed in getting to your table is unaffected because you don't start at the first one and move through them all until you get to yours. And if the room gets bloated by having an addition added on, that has no effect, either. That is the way binary databases work.

 

  But, for those who really want to spend time on this, there does exist a registry benchmarking tool. The speed changes are extremely small, generally. And, it's a work-in-progress.

 

http://www.bitsum.com/regbench.php

 

  (It should be noted that the system hive is loaded to RAM by the bootloader, right after the kernel, the HAL, and vgaoem.fom. The hive then has random access and there is no difference in speed between different locations' access time.)

Edited May 14, 2015 by Dubiaku

[martinjones]

I use since long ago the freeware "Wise Registry Cleaner" for the same purpose. You may try it. Maybe it would be enough for your needs.

 

HTH

 

You could try regace available at regace dot com. It offers a trail version. You could also try many of its alternatives listed 

 

http://www.similarto.us/regace.com/

 

I haven't tried all of them but i am sure they offer similar functionality.