I'm a regular reader of this newsgroup. I've been helped some, learned
a lot and very occasionally try to help others. I do not claim to be
a PC guru but am a bit more than a casual user. I have observed that
bios update and registry cleaners seems to bring a chorus of advice.

Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time. Bios
updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
minutes after the update. Many of the same folks who advocate not
updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
drivers including video drivers. Bios updates when obtained from the
manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
difficult, no more dangerous and serves the same purpose: preventing
problems.

Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
problems. I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
But they are fun to use once in a while, can be a good learning tool
unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
the subject.

Thanks all.

Lou

Louis Rost wrote:
>
> Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and

Agreed.

Louis Rost wrote:
> I'm a regular reader of this newsgroup. I've been helped some, learned
> a lot and very occasionally try to help others. I do not claim to be
> a PC guru but am a bit more than a casual user. I have observed that
> bios update and registry cleaners seems to bring a chorus of advice.
>
> Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time. Bios
> updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> minutes after the update. Many of the same folks who advocate not
> updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> drivers including video drivers. Bios updates when obtained from the
> manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> difficult, no more dangerous and serves the same purpose: preventing
> problems.
>
> Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> problems. I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> But they are fun to use once in a while, can be a good learning tool
> unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
> Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> the subject.
>
> Thanks all.
>
> Lou
>
>

Don't know how many years you have been around but tinkering
with bioses is just like tempting Murphy's Law. In this case,
if something can go wrong, it will...sooner or later. And it
might be the instance of achieving a minimal return from the
bios flash job, such as correcting a typo in the POST screen,
that creates the most problem. But today, some of the better
bioses can self-recover. Still, if it ain't broke, no need to
fix it.

And as for Registry Cleaners...each computer is unique and all
the more reason to be careful in using them.

The primary reason that most don't suggest bios updates for most is if bios
flash botches, the whole PC may be rendered useless.

Other than the standard is the bios flash applicable to my bios chip, things
to consider before flashing:
will it fix anything
will it add something I may use
will it eliminate an option I like to use (they don't mention this, its
always a surprise)

If your PC has a backup bios chip, set it up so you can use the PC if the
flash botches the one chip. Don't be alarmed if you don't have such.

Another hosed item is many don't manually clear the cmos after the flash.

The backup current bios option is only useful if you can boot from the
floppy. This may not be possible if the PC is unable to do so after a
botched flash.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"Louis Rost" <junkie123ATlonepineDOTcom@> wrote in message
news:6n55o1dijouhf5l1peop8d1fgmg7ng4pah@4ax.com...
> I'm a regular reader of this newsgroup. I've been helped some, learned
> a lot and very occasionally try to help others. I do not claim to be
> a PC guru but am a bit more than a casual user. I have observed that
> bios update and registry cleaners seems to bring a chorus of advice.
>
> Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time. Bios
> updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> minutes after the update. Many of the same folks who advocate not
> updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> drivers including video drivers. Bios updates when obtained from the
> manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> difficult, no more dangerous and serves the same purpose: preventing
> problems.
>
> Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> problems. I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> But they are fun to use once in a while, can be a good learning tool
> unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
> Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> the subject.
>
> Thanks all.
>
> Lou
>
>

Comments inline

Louis Rost wrote:
> I'm a regular reader of this newsgroup. I've been helped some, learned
> a lot and very occasionally try to help others. I do not claim to be
> a PC guru but am a bit more than a casual user. I have observed that
> bios update and registry cleaners seems to bring a chorus of advice.
>
> Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time. Bios
> updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> minutes after the update. Many of the same folks who advocate not
> updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> drivers including video drivers. Bios updates when obtained from the
> manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> difficult, no more dangerous and serves the same purpose: preventing
> problems.
>

I have flashed the BIOS on hundreds of motherboards over a priod of many
years. It is rare that something will go wrong. When (not if) it does the
motherboard is junk until you install a new BIOS chip. Over that period of
years and hundreds of motherboards it has happened twice to me. Both times I
was following instructions. I have no idea why the updates didn't work. Once
I was able to order a new BIOS chip. It took two weeks to receive it. The
other time I had to replace the motherboard.

Sometimes a BIOS update is needed. When it is needed some precautions need
to be taken. Follow the instructions exactly. Before starting make sure the
power cord is fully seated at both ends. Make sure there is no chance the
power will accidently get switched off. Do not run the BIOS flash program
from Windows unless there is no other alternative method available.


> Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> problems. I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> But they are fun to use once in a while, can be a good learning tool
> unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
> Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> the subject.
>

Some registry cleaners can be a valuable tool in knowledgeable hands. All
registry cleaners can be easily misused in inexperienced hands. When misused
they can cause problems such that a clean install is the only fix. Again,
over many years in the computer business I have learned the hard way.

The total years of experience for all the regular contributors to this
newsgroup must be in the thousands. It is very foolish to ignore that wealth
of experience. Both things you mention are not recommended for casual use
because they can and do cause irrepairable problems. If you are a hobbiest
and want to play go ahead, it is your system. Do not recommend procedures to
others that may damage their systems without warning them first.

Kerry

Louis Rost wrote:

> Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time.


I'm one of those who regularly advice against updating the BIOS unless you
need to. But I certainly don't give that advice because it's complex and
difficult. In fact, I don't recall anyone here ever suggesting that it was
complex or difficult. It isn't. As you say, it's very easy.

The reason I advise against it is because there's danger invoilved. If
something goes wrong while you're doing it (for example, a sudden loss of
power) you can be left with no workable BIOS at all and an unbootable
computer.

That's not the biggest risk in the world (and can be greatly lessened if you
use a UPS) but it *is* a risk. My advise is to do a BIOS Update if you need
to (because the old BIOS doesn't properly support your hardware), but not
just because one is available.


> Bios
> updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> minutes after the update.


Although your example is a relatively rare occurrence, there sometimes *is*
a need to update the BIOS. I don't think anyone would argue (certainly not
I) that you should never upgrade the BIOS. Do it when you have to, but don't
take the risk when you don't need to.


> Many of the same folks who advocate not
> updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> drivers including video drivers.


Not I. I recemmend getting a newer driver only when the old one is causing a
problem that the new one is known to fix.



> Bios updates when obtained from the
> manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> difficult,


True. In fact it's probably less difficult.


> no more dangerous


But that's false. The risk of something like a power failure while doing a
BIOS upgrade is much more signifiant than when updating a driver.


> and serves the same purpose: preventing
> problems.


> Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> problems.


All correct. Again, I don't claim that every time someone uses one of these
a problem will result. But the risk is always there. And the benefits of
using registry cleaners are very close to non-existent, the tradeoff of a
non-existent benefit for even a small risk is foolhardy.



> I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> But they are fun to use once in a while,


Using software that presents risks and accomplishes nothing, and calling it
"fun" is the mark of a tinkerer, someone who treats his computer as a toy,
rather than as a ueful tool. If you fall into that category, be my guest and
do all the tinkering you want. But advising others to do the same is
irresponsible.


> can be a good learning tool
> unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.


The enormous majority of computer users have no ability to discern what
should or should not be deleted. Moreover they have no interest in this kind
of learning tool. They are interested in the computer's working with a
minimum of fussing and attention.



> Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> the subject.


You are clearly a tinkerer. That's fine. Tinker to your heart's content. But
don't advise others who need their computer to always be there to do the
same.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup

Louis Rost wrote:
>
> >But that's false. The risk of something like a power failure while doing a
> >BIOS upgrade is much more signifiant than when updating a driver.
>
> UPS come to mind?

99% of pcs are not connected to a ups. Even so, the temporary glitch
would probably phark a bios flash.





--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

Jonny wrote:
>
> The primary reason that most don't suggest bios updates for most is if bios
> flash botches, the whole PC may be rendered useless.

Well, sometimes you have aka want to, to take the plunge to lets say,
get that new large hard drive working. Or, get a new controller card or
new motherboard. In that case, it's most often worth trying the bios
flash, assuming it addresses the issue you have.

> Other than the standard is the bios flash applicable to my bios chip, things
> to consider before flashing:
> will it fix anything
> will it add something I may use
> will it eliminate an option I like to use (they don't mention this, its
> always a surprise)
>
> If your PC has a backup bios chip, set it up so you can use the PC if the
> flash botches the one chip. Don't be alarmed if you don't have such.
>
> Another hosed item is many don't manually clear the cmos after the flash.
>
> The backup current bios option is only useful if you can boot from the
> floppy. This may not be possible if the PC is unable to do so after a
> botched flash.
>
> If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
> --
> Lil' Dave
> Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
> Else you will be absorbed
> "Louis Rost" <junkie123ATlonepineDOTcom@> wrote in message
> news:6n55o1dijouhf5l1peop8d1fgmg7ng4pah@4ax.com...
> > I'm a regular reader of this newsgroup. I've been helped some, learned
> > a lot and very occasionally try to help others. I do not claim to be
> > a PC guru but am a bit more than a casual user. I have observed that
> > bios update and registry cleaners seems to bring a chorus of advice.
> >
> > Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> > even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> > Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> > applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> > adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> > times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> > without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time. Bios
> > updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> > point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> > purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> > hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> > systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> > of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> > turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> > minutes after the update. Many of the same folks who advocate not
> > updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> > updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> > drivers including video drivers. Bios updates when obtained from the
> > manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> > difficult, no more dangerous and serves the same purpose: preventing
> > problems.
> >
> > Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> > do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> > problems. I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> > systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> > But they are fun to use once in a while, can be a good learning tool
> > unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
> > Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> > interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> > falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> > instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> > the subject.
> >
> > Thanks all.
> >
> > Lou
> >
> >

--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

Some will take operability over chance use of new hardware via a bios flash.
The new bios may fix whatever, that's not what you addressed, but you said
in response to something that's not the issue or argued.

--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed
"Plato" <|@|.|> wrote in message
news:43841fae$1$265$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
> Jonny wrote:
> >
> > The primary reason that most don't suggest bios updates for most is if
bios
> > flash botches, the whole PC may be rendered useless.
>
> Well, sometimes you have aka want to, to take the plunge to lets say,
> get that new large hard drive working. Or, get a new controller card or
> new motherboard. In that case, it's most often worth trying the bios
> flash, assuming it addresses the issue you have.
>
> > Other than the standard is the bios flash applicable to my bios chip,
things
> > to consider before flashing:
> > will it fix anything
> > will it add something I may use
> > will it eliminate an option I like to use (they don't mention this, its
> > always a surprise)
> >
> > If your PC has a backup bios chip, set it up so you can use the PC if
the
> > flash botches the one chip. Don't be alarmed if you don't have such.
> >
> > Another hosed item is many don't manually clear the cmos after the
flash.
> >
> > The backup current bios option is only useful if you can boot from the
> > floppy. This may not be possible if the PC is unable to do so after a
> > botched flash.
> >
> > If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
> > --
> > Lil' Dave
> > Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
> > Else you will be absorbed
> > "Louis Rost" <junkie123ATlonepineDOTcom@> wrote in message
> > news:6n55o1dijouhf5l1peop8d1fgmg7ng4pah@4ax.com...
> > > I'm a regular reader of this newsgroup. I've been helped some, learned
> > > a lot and very occasionally try to help others. I do not claim to be
> > > a PC guru but am a bit more than a casual user. I have observed that
> > > bios update and registry cleaners seems to bring a chorus of advice.
> > >
> > > Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> > > even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> > > Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> > > applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> > > adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> > > times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> > > without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time. Bios
> > > updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> > > point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> > > purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> > > hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> > > systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> > > of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> > > turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> > > minutes after the update. Many of the same folks who advocate not
> > > updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> > > updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> > > drivers including video drivers. Bios updates when obtained from the
> > > manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> > > difficult, no more dangerous and serves the same purpose: preventing
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> > > do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> > > problems. I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> > > systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> > > But they are fun to use once in a while, can be a good learning tool
> > > unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
> > > Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> > > interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> > > falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> > > instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> > > the subject.
> > >
> > > Thanks all.
> > >
> > > Lou
> > >
> > >
>
> --
> http://www.bootdisk.com/
>
>

"Louis Rost" <junkie123ATlonepineDOTcom@> wrote in message
news:l547o1h4dmvbr635k1q11gift3kc4jln4c@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:19:06 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
> <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:
>
> >Louis Rost wrote:
> >
> >> Bios update: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It is a complex and
> >> even dangerous thing to attempt. Don't do it. I disagree strongly!
> >> Updating a bios is no more difficult than installing most
> >> applications. It is much easier to update the bios than most video
> >> adaptors. You download the bios update from the manufacturer and many
> >> times simply run the self-extracting exe file and the bios is updated
> >> without exiting Windows. Less than one minute of run time.
> >
> >
> >I'm one of those who regularly advice against updating the BIOS unless
you
> >need to. But I certainly don't give that advice because it's complex and
> >difficult. In fact, I don't recall anyone here ever suggesting that it
was
> >complex or difficult. It isn't. As you say, it's very easy.
> >
> >The reason I advise against it is because there's danger invoilved. If
> >something goes wrong while you're doing it (for example, a sudden loss of
> >power) you can be left with no workable BIOS at all and an unbootable
> >computer.
> >
> >That's not the biggest risk in the world (and can be greatly lessened if
you
> >use a UPS) but it *is* a risk. My advise is to do a BIOS Update if you
need
> >to (because the old BIOS doesn't properly support your hardware), but not
> >just because one is available.
>
> And did you obtain your computer knowledge by avoiding all unecessary
> risks?
>
> >
> >
> >> Bios
> >> updating can prevent problems when installing new hardware. Case in
> >> point. Installed a new WD800J drive on my daughter's computer for
> >> purposes of backup using Norton Ghost 10. Norton Ghost took about 1
> >> hour 20 minutes for the backup but from prior experience with similar
> >> systems, I knew it should run in 20 minutes or less. After many hours
> >> of trouble shooting attempting to find out what the conflict was it
> >> turned out to be the bios needed to be updated. Norton Ghost ran in 9
> >> minutes after the update.
> >
> >
> >Although your example is a relatively rare occurrence, there sometimes
*is*
> >a need to update the BIOS. I don't think anyone would argue (certainly
not
> >I) that you should never upgrade the BIOS. Do it when you have to, but
don't
> >take the risk when you don't need to.
> >
> Any why not if it will prevent problems in the future? It is more
> important to know the risk, know precautions that can be taken, than
> to be told, 'If it ain't broken, don't fix it."
>
> >
> >> Many of the same folks who advocate not
> >> updating the bios are quick to point out that Windows should be kept
> >> updated. Same folks are quick to suggest getting the latest device
> >> drivers including video drivers.
> >
> >
> >Not I. I recemmend getting a newer driver only when the old one is
causing a
> >problem that the new one is known to fix.
> >
> >
> >
> >> Bios updates when obtained from the
> >> manufacturer and installed according to the instructions is no more
> >> difficult,
> >
> >
> >True. In fact it's probably less difficult.
> >
> >
> >> no more dangerous
> >
> >
> >But that's false. The risk of something like a power failure while doing
a
> >BIOS upgrade is much more signifiant than when updating a driver.
>
> UPS come to mind?
> >
> >
> >> and serves the same purpose: preventing
> >> problems.
> >
> >
> >> Registry Cleaners on Windows XP: Not needed. Don't use them. They
> >> do not improve performance, do not save space and can cause serious
> >> problems.
> >
> >
> >All correct. Again, I don't claim that every time someone uses one of
these
> >a problem will result. But the risk is always there. And the benefits of
> >using registry cleaners are very close to non-existent, the tradeoff of a
> >non-existent benefit for even a small risk is foolhardy.
> >
> >
> >
> >> I've used various cleaners often enough to agree that on my
> >> systems performance is not improved, insignificant space is reclaimed.
> >> But they are fun to use once in a while,
> >
> >
> >Using software that presents risks and accomplishes nothing, and calling
it
> >"fun" is the mark of a tinkerer, someone who treats his computer as a
toy,
> >rather than as a ueful tool. If you fall into that category, be my guest
and
> >do all the tinkering you want. But advising others to do the same is
> >irresponsible.
> >
> >
> >> can be a good learning tool
> >> unless one simply blindly deletes any and every thing listed.
> >
> >
> >The enormous majority of computer users have no ability to discern what
> >should or should not be deleted. Moreover they have no interest in this
kind
> >of learning tool. They are interested in the computer's working with a
> >minimum of fussing and attention.
> >
>
> And probably do not come here asking about registry cleaners. The
> ones who do ask have shown an interest and motivation and should be
> given proper advice, not told, "Do not do it."
>
> >
> >> Computers are merely tools for many but for many they are also
> >> interesting and a semi-hobby. Registry cleaners, in my opionion,
> >> falls in the semi-hobby category and interested users should be
> >> instructed how to use them rather than castigated for even mentioning
> >> the subject.
> >
> >
> >You are clearly a tinkerer. That's fine. Tinker to your heart's content.
But
> >don't advise others who need their computer to always be there to do the
> >same.
>
> I do/did not advise anyone to update their bios or use registry
> editors. I simply believe that sticking ones head in the sand does
> nothing to improve ones knowledge of computers. Risks must be taken.
> It is better and less demeaning to be told the risks and appropriate
> precautions than merely be told, "If it ain't broken, don't fix it."

And I, like you, have suffered a bios flash that ended up being corrupted.
Despite an UPS and backing up the current bios was unsalvagable, couldn't
boot the corrupted bios. I did learn how to hot swap a removable bios chip
in the process. Something I don't recommend to anyone.

Maybe this falls under, if its broke, replace it, don't fix it?

--
Lil' Dave
Beware the rule quoters, the corp mindset, the Borg
Else you will be absorbed

Plato wrote:

> Louis Rost wrote:
>>
>>> But that's false. The risk of something like a power failure while
>>> doing a BIOS upgrade is much more signifiant than when updating a
>>> driver.
>>
>> UPS come to mind?
>
> 99% of pcs are not connected to a ups. Even so, the temporary glitch
> would probably phark a bios flash.


I even pointed out, in my message to which he replied, that using a UPS
reduces the risk. I said "That's not the biggest risk in the world (and can
be greatly lessened if you use a UPS) but it *is* a risk."

As you say, even if you use a UPS, that just reduces the risk rather than
eliminate it.

He's clearly someone who came here to argue, not to learn. I don't think
anything any of us say will convince him of anything, so I didn't reply to
him further. He's welcome to his opinions.


--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 08:47:26 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:

>Plato wrote:
>
>> Louis Rost wrote:
>>>
>>>> But that's false. The risk of something like a power failure while
>>>> doing a BIOS upgrade is much more signifiant than when updating a
>>>> driver.
>>>
>>> UPS come to mind?
>>
>> 99% of pcs are not connected to a ups. Even so, the temporary glitch
>> would probably phark a bios flash.
>
>
>I even pointed out, in my message to which he replied, that using a UPS
>reduces the risk. I said "That's not the biggest risk in the world (and can
>be greatly lessened if you use a UPS) but it *is* a risk."
>
>As you say, even if you use a UPS, that just reduces the risk rather than
>eliminate it.
>
>He's clearly someone who came here to argue, not to learn. I don't think
>anything any of us say will convince him of anything, so I didn't reply to
>him further. He's welcome to his opinions.

You are partially correct. You are wrong: I did not come her to
argue. You are right: I did not come here to learn.

This particular time, I came here to state that I disagree strongly
with responders who take the attitude of "If it ain't broken, don't
fix it" using two topics: bios update and registry cleaners, as
talking points.

I recognized your name as well as Kerry Brown and R McCarty's name
within this thread. I did not review old posts to check out the
"facts", I simply recall thinking you three providing good information
in the past as you have done in this thread.

I agree with R. McCarty that XP general is sort of a classroom.
Without grades thankfully. But disagree with his opinion that "don't
do it" is acceptable as "don't do it because ..." That was perhaps
the sole point of my starting this thread.

Adios

Lou

Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
>
> As you say, even if you use a UPS, that just reduces the risk rather than
> eliminate it.

Exactly.

Still, when dealing with any thread re: bios flashing. One often hears
from people who never had a single problem/niggle. That's OK and fine.
Heck, many of those folks just flash with the latest version for the
heck of it. OK, that's part if their hobby, again, OK and fine. Those
folks perhaps generally understand the risks, and take them accordingly.

What we dont see, however, are the folks who flashed "for the heck of
it" or just "because the latest version was out" and LOST access to
their pc. As they cant even start up their pc now. Especially those
without 1.44s who cant even get back to the original backup of their
bios.

Plato wrote:
> Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
>>
>> As you say, even if you use a UPS, that just reduces the risk rather
>> than eliminate it.
>
> Exactly.
>
> Still, when dealing with any thread re: bios flashing. One often hears
> from people who never had a single problem/niggle. That's OK and fine.
> Heck, many of those folks just flash with the latest version for the
> heck of it. OK, that's part if their hobby, again, OK and fine. Those
> folks perhaps generally understand the risks, and take them
> accordingly.
>
> What we dont see, however, are the folks who flashed "for the heck of
> it" or just "because the latest version was out" and LOST access to
> their pc. As they cant even start up their pc now. Especially those
> without 1.44s who cant even get back to the original backup of their
> bios.

Both times I had a BIOS flash go wrong there were no power problems.
Something just went wrong with the procedure. Both times the flash program
exited ok. On reboot there was no post, no display, nothing. It required a
new chip or re-flashing the chip with an eeprom burner. A floppy backup of
the old BIOS was no use.

Kerry

Plato wrote:

> Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
>>
>> As you say, even if you use a UPS, that just reduces the risk rather
>> than eliminate it.
>
> Exactly.
>
> Still, when dealing with any thread re: bios flashing. One often hears
> from people who never had a single problem/niggle.


Even *I* have flashed BIOSs numbers of times and never had a single
problem/niggle. But that doesn't mean that I don't recognize that there is
risk.

As I said, problems are rare, but that doesn't mean they are nonexistent.
Flashing a BIOS involves risk. I certainly don't say never flash a BIOS; I
say do it and take the risk only if you *need* to.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


> That's OK and fine.
> Heck, many of those folks just flash with the latest version for the
> heck of it. OK, that's part if their hobby, again, OK and fine. Those
> folks perhaps generally understand the risks, and take them
> accordingly.
>
> What we dont see, however, are the folks who flashed "for the heck of
> it" or just "because the latest version was out" and LOST access to
> their pc. As they cant even start up their pc now. Especially those
> without 1.44s who cant even get back to the original backup of their
> bios.