|
Post by irvsp on Nov 20, 2014 13:28:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by GuiltySpark on Nov 20, 2014 16:16:58 GMT
It should be pointed out that a lot of those Android "boosters" etc, will actually drain the battery far quicker. (no mention of that as far as I can see)
Good post Irv, do you think techrepublic may have been paid to say a lot of these things?
|
|
|
Post by irvsp on Nov 20, 2014 16:44:48 GMT
Irv, do you think techrepublic may have been paid to say a lot of these things? I sure hope not? This might be a single writer though. Get paid to do it? Doubt it as both articles have more than one app, so I can't see all paying him? I respect the site and the 'reporters' generally. I have met Ed Bott before when he was trying to get me and another person to write for him on PC Mag at the time. Very trustworthy and respected. It could very well be that is what 'people' want to know about? The articles really had no 'meat' to them it seems, just generalities. Comments were more telling than the article. Almost all of these will produce no lasting results, and some can cause serious problems with their aggressiveness. I have NEVER seen 'proof' that any of these have done immediate improvements (I mean data before and after, and then a few weeks later after computer usage) but have seen many that show little or no improvements. Some other articles on this stuff: www.pcworld.com/article/149951/registry_cleaner.htmlwww.makeuseof.com/tag/registry-cleaner-difference/www.howtogeek.com/171633/why-using-a-registry-cleaner-wont-speed-up-your-pc-or-fix-crashes/Fairly old but a good read, www.edbott.com/weblog/2005/04/why-i-dont-use-registry-cleaners/Google searches will find a lot about this, basically Registry Cleaner's, but no real supporting data that it will help the overwhelming vast majority of users.
|
|
|
Post by GuiltySpark on Nov 20, 2014 17:05:30 GMT
I agree with you in terms of little or no major performance its really just a little bit of cleaning up of obsolete files etc, which is why I really hate it when people call them Boosters - RAM Boosters, Speed Boosters etc I always ask them "How exactly does it 'Boost' anything?"
The same goes for Optimizers. How does a program know how YOU(generalization of you that is) want your system optimized? And who decides what the default optimization should be? Do they research millions of systems to achieve this answer?
Or are they just saying "Use Default settings"?
|
|
|
Post by irvsp on Nov 20, 2014 18:16:37 GMT
The same goes for Optimizers. How does a program know how YOU(generalization of you that is) want your system optimized? And who decides what the default optimization should be? Do they research millions of systems to achieve this answer? Or are they just saying "Use Default settings"? Some 'optimizations' are OK. Most programs are built for the average user. Firefox for instance and its network connections. Same goes for swapper size and disk space 'reserved'. Space for system restore points, and other stuff that has no way of knowing what you have/use. Now some settings 'should' be set based on the install system spec's, like Restore space vs. a set percentage. However too many of the optimization programs go 'full bore' and optimize things you might want out of existence, like windows animations. Some of the Firefox network settings can even slow you down. OS version and system specs are very important when deciding how to optimize.
|
|