<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: [Review] WinUtilities 6.4</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842</link>
	<description>Professional Technologians</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:07:28 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: windowsexplorer</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-4274</link>
		<dc:creator>windowsexplorer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 06:24:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-4274</guid>
		<description>Thank you for your kind and prompt response.  I was afraid it might take longer if at all on this older review, but I was wrong.  dotTech rules!  Or maybe I should say Ashraf and/or PMnet and/or dotTech rules!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for your kind and prompt response.  I was afraid it might take longer if at all on this older review, but I was wrong.  dotTech rules!  Or maybe I should say Ashraf and/or PMnet and/or dotTech rules!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashraf</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-4256</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashraf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-4256</guid>
		<description>Different registry cleaning utilities will give you different results because the types of errors found are solely dependent on the guildlines set by the developer. Generally the only way to know which programs are &quot;safe&quot; are to look at reviews; look at the popular programs and see what people say. If the program causes problems you will find information on it via Google. As for the registry entries that are safe to remove: we are not robots so we can&#039;t possibly know if each and every registry entry is safe to remove. I put my trust in &quot;reliable&quot; programs to not screw up my computer.

I can say that WinUtilities is one of the best.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Different registry cleaning utilities will give you different results because the types of errors found are solely dependent on the guildlines set by the developer. Generally the only way to know which programs are &#8220;safe&#8221; are to look at reviews; look at the popular programs and see what people say. If the program causes problems you will find information on it via Google. As for the registry entries that are safe to remove: we are not robots so we can&#8217;t possibly know if each and every registry entry is safe to remove. I put my trust in &#8220;reliable&#8221; programs to not screw up my computer.</p>
<p>I can say that WinUtilities is one of the best.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: windowsexplorer</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-4248</link>
		<dc:creator>windowsexplorer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:48:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-4248</guid>
		<description>I like WinUtilities, too.  That said, it gives me pause for concern that it finds hundreds more of registry &quot;errors&quot; than any other of the registry cleaners in this list.  The only one I tested that found more was Fix-It Utilities which I got free from VNUnet, I think it was.  Anyway, it makes me wonder if they are checking some part of the registry that is ignored by the others, or suggesting removal of ones that it might be dangerous to the system to remove, or what?  I can remember having some problems with System Mechanic in this regard once, and also there was a website that would tell you there were thousands of registry entries that needed to be removed, as if I trusted them.  What do you suggest as a guideline for deciding which programs are safe to rely on and/or which registry entries are safe to let it remove?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like WinUtilities, too.  That said, it gives me pause for concern that it finds hundreds more of registry &#8220;errors&#8221; than any other of the registry cleaners in this list.  The only one I tested that found more was Fix-It Utilities which I got free from VNUnet, I think it was.  Anyway, it makes me wonder if they are checking some part of the registry that is ignored by the others, or suggesting removal of ones that it might be dangerous to the system to remove, or what?  I can remember having some problems with System Mechanic in this regard once, and also there was a website that would tell you there were thousands of registry entries that needed to be removed, as if I trusted them.  What do you suggest as a guideline for deciding which programs are safe to rely on and/or which registry entries are safe to let it remove?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashraf</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-3524</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashraf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 01:15:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-3524</guid>
		<description>WinUtilities 6.2 was given out 12/28/09 and 10/28/09 both. I reviewed it on 10/28/09 which is why the link is to the 10/28/09 page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WinUtilities 6.2 was given out 12/28/09 and 10/28/09 both. I reviewed it on 10/28/09 which is why the link is to the 10/28/09 page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jean-Luc Picard</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-3519</link>
		<dc:creator>Jean-Luc Picard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:38:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-3519</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a nitpick:
&lt;blockquote&gt;
WinUtilities was last given out on Dec 28, 2008 as version 6.2. I reviewed it like I do other giveaways. Today&#039;s version is 6.4
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
From the linked page:
&lt;blockquote&gt;
Giveaway of the day for October 30, 2008 is WinUtilities.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
What?  Two different dates...?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a nitpick:</p>
<blockquote><p>
WinUtilities was last given out on Dec 28, 2008 as version 6.2. I reviewed it like I do other giveaways. Today&#8217;s version is 6.4
</p></blockquote>
<p>From the linked page:</p>
<blockquote><p>
Giveaway of the day for October 30, 2008 is WinUtilities.</p></blockquote>
<p>What?  Two different dates&#8230;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Furqan</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-2085</link>
		<dc:creator>Furqan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:20:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-2085</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the review Ashraf :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the review Ashraf <img src='http://dottech.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashraf</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-2077</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashraf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-2077</guid>
		<description>As far as I know, yes they should. You should double check though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as I know, yes they should. You should double check though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neville</title>
		<link>http://dottech.org/gotdreviews/4842/comment-page-1#comment-2075</link>
		<dc:creator>Neville</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dottech.org/?p=4842#comment-2075</guid>
		<description>Ashraf,

  Do your free alternatives, specifically Tune Up Utilities 2007, Glary Utilities and or Advanced System Care work on Vista 64bit? Have a new computer coming with it, but don&#039;t think I&#039;ll get the computer today in time for today&#039;s giveaway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ashraf,</p>
<p>  Do your free alternatives, specifically Tune Up Utilities 2007, Glary Utilities and or Advanced System Care work on Vista 64bit? Have a new computer coming with it, but don&#8217;t think I&#8217;ll get the computer today in time for today&#8217;s giveaway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
