Do we ever need to format/install. . .

On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:48:52 -0400, "Ed H"
<edandsandy RemoveThis @NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote:

> Can we keep Vista healthy enough, after years of use, to keep running
> optimally by cleaning, defragging etc. without needing to format/re-install
> Vista?


Certainly.


> Seems that was the norm under Win 98 but is frowned upon in Xp and
> Vista. Trying to see if I'm reading ya'll correctly.


It was never the norm under Windows 98 either. It was done only by
people who erroneously thought it was necessary, or who maintained
their computer poorly.

Here's my standard post on this subject:

With a modicum of care, it should never be necessary to reinstall
Windows (Vista or any other version). I've run Windows 3.0, 3.1, WFWG
3.11, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and now
Windows Vista each for the period of time before the next version came
out, and each on two or more machines here. I never reinstalled any of
them, and I have never had anything more than an occasional minor
problem.

It's my belief that this mistaken notion stems from the technical
support people at many of the larger OEMs. Their solution to almost
any problem they don't quickly know the answer to is "reformat and
reinstall." That's the perfect solution for them. It gets you off the
phone quickly, it almost always works, and it doesn't require them to
do any real troubleshooting (a skill that most of them obviously don't
possess in any great degree).

But it leaves you with all the work and all the problems. You have to
restore all your data backups, you have to reinstall all your
programs, you have to reinstall all the Windows and application
updates,you have to locate and install all the needed drivers for your
system, you have to recustomize Windows and all your apps to work the
way you're comfortable with.

Besides all those things being time-consuming and troublesome, you may
have trouble with some of them: can you find all your application CDs?
Can you find all the needed installation codes? Do you have data
backups to restore? Do you even remember all the customizations and
tweaks you may have installed to make everything work the way you
like? Occasionally there are problems that are so difficult to solve
that Windows should be reinstalled cleanly. But they are few and far
between; reinstallation should not be a substitute for
troubleshooting; it should be a last resort, to be done only after all
other attempts at troubleshooting by a qualified person have failed.

And perhaps most important: if you reformat and reinstall without
finding out what caused your problem, you will very likely repeat the
behavior that caused it, and quickly find your back in exactly the
same situation.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

This message is not archived

No, just confused.

Ed


"Mick Murphy" <MickMurphy.RemoveThis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AD52FCAE-391C-4C28-96AD-199E2AA001ED@microsoft.com...
> Why have you posted the same question about XP Operating System in the XP
> newsgroups?
> Are you bored?
> --
> Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia
>
>
> "Ed H" wrote:
>
>> Can we keep Vista healthy enough, after years of use, to keep running
>> optimally by cleaning, defragging etc. without needing to
>> format/re-install
>> Vista? Seems that was the norm under Win 98 but is frowned upon in Xp and
>> Vista. Trying to see if I'm reading ya'll correctly.
>> --
>>
>> Windows Vista Home Premium 64-BIT SP1
>> Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83GHz
>> 4.00 GB RAM
>> 300 GB HDD
>>
>>
>>

Thanks Ken, that's a great summary and makes a lot of sense.
--

Windows Vista Home Premium 64-BIT SP1
Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83GHz
4.00 GB RAM
300 GB HDD


"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake.TakeThisOut@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:b3no941pjahvkamcp0tubccdqq8van5mb4@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:48:52 -0400, "Ed H"
> <edandsandy.TakeThisOut@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Can we keep Vista healthy enough, after years of use, to keep running
>> optimally by cleaning, defragging etc. without needing to
>> format/re-install
>> Vista?
>
>
> Certainly.
>
>
>> Seems that was the norm under Win 98 but is frowned upon in Xp and
>> Vista. Trying to see if I'm reading ya'll correctly.
>
>
> It was never the norm under Windows 98 either. It was done only by
> people who erroneously thought it was necessary, or who maintained
> their computer poorly.
>
> Here's my standard post on this subject:
>
> With a modicum of care, it should never be necessary to reinstall
> Windows (Vista or any other version). I've run Windows 3.0, 3.1, WFWG
> 3.11, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and now
> Windows Vista each for the period of time before the next version came
> out, and each on two or more machines here. I never reinstalled any of
> them, and I have never had anything more than an occasional minor
> problem.
>
> It's my belief that this mistaken notion stems from the technical
> support people at many of the larger OEMs. Their solution to almost
> any problem they don't quickly know the answer to is "reformat and
> reinstall." That's the perfect solution for them. It gets you off the
> phone quickly, it almost always works, and it doesn't require them to
> do any real troubleshooting (a skill that most of them obviously don't
> possess in any great degree).
>
> But it leaves you with all the work and all the problems. You have to
> restore all your data backups, you have to reinstall all your
> programs, you have to reinstall all the Windows and application
> updates,you have to locate and install all the needed drivers for your
> system, you have to recustomize Windows and all your apps to work the
> way you're comfortable with.
>
> Besides all those things being time-consuming and troublesome, you may
> have trouble with some of them: can you find all your application CDs?
> Can you find all the needed installation codes? Do you have data
> backups to restore? Do you even remember all the customizations and
> tweaks you may have installed to make everything work the way you
> like? Occasionally there are problems that are so difficult to solve
> that Windows should be reinstalled cleanly. But they are few and far
> between; reinstallation should not be a substitute for
> troubleshooting; it should be a last resort, to be done only after all
> other attempts at troubleshooting by a qualified person have failed.
>
> And perhaps most important: if you reformat and reinstall without
> finding out what caused your problem, you will very likely repeat the
> behavior that caused it, and quickly find your back in exactly the
> same situation.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

A reinstall every 6 months would be beneficial to get rid of potential
malware other means do not detect. Ideally, you'd zero out the drive, redo
the partitions if any, and reinstall an image of your first fresh install -
or install from an updated installation disk.
Of course, you would have one backup set of your documents and whatever on
another internal HDD so you can access them readily - and risk reinstalling
malware
It also depends how and for what you use that particular machine. If you
install and uninstall lots of programs, update frequently, allow other
people to use the machine and so on, some junk will accumulate eventually;
to what extent that justifies a reinstall or refresh it's up to you.

Michael

"Ed H" <edandsandy.TakeThisOut@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:u1CqqjP%23IHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Can we keep Vista healthy enough, after years of use, to keep running
> optimally by cleaning, defragging etc. without needing to
> format/re-install Vista? Seems that was the norm under Win 98 but is
> frowned upon in Xp and Vista. Trying to see if I'm reading ya'll
> correctly.
> --
>
> Windows Vista Home Premium 64-BIT SP1
> Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83GHz
> 4.00 GB RAM
> 300 GB HDD
>
>

Comparing a system that has been properly diagnosed for malware and repaired
if necessary to one that's is flattened in the manner you describe, there's
hardly a whit of difference. You techniques do no more to guarantee the
system's "cleanliness" than a proper diagnosis for malware and repair as
necessary. The key is proper diagnosis & repair

Otherwise, both methods leave the system still with possible infections,
and, in fact, the formal diagnosis for malware would actually be more likely
to catch something like that.

This is a good place to start:
http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"Phillips" <afn18721.RemoveThis@afn.org> wrote in message
news:B34E50B2-C5A8-49A1-8056-A52BF8F0B5CD@microsoft.com...
>A reinstall every 6 months would be beneficial to get rid of potential
>malware other means do not detect. Ideally, you'd zero out the drive, redo
>the partitions if any, and reinstall an image of your first fresh install -
>or install from an updated installation disk.
> Of course, you would have one backup set of your documents and whatever on
> another internal HDD so you can access them readily - and risk
> reinstalling malware
> It also depends how and for what you use that particular machine. If you
> install and uninstall lots of programs, update frequently, allow other
> people to use the machine and so on, some junk will accumulate eventually;
> to what extent that justifies a reinstall or refresh it's up to you.
>
> Michael
>
> "Ed H" <edandsandy.RemoveThis@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
> news:u1CqqjP%23IHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Can we keep Vista healthy enough, after years of use, to keep running
>> optimally by cleaning, defragging etc. without needing to
>> format/re-install Vista? Seems that was the norm under Win 98 but is
>> frowned upon in Xp and Vista. Trying to see if I'm reading ya'll
>> correctly.
>> --
>>
>> Windows Vista Home Premium 64-BIT SP1
>> Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T5550 @ 1.83GHz
>> 4.00 GB RAM
>> 300 GB HDD
>>
>>
>