Registry repair for OS X??

[maxhdrm]

Ok so we have all seen the episode (yes I am assuming to those who answer) in which veronica talks about some disk deframenting software for the OS X due to its non internal ability to degfrag. So here is my question.

I have found Registry cleaners very useful in a Windows environment and wanted to know A.) is there such a thing for Mac and B.) Is there any relevance or advantages compared to using it on a PC device?

[danzilla]

There is no registry on the Mac, and as such, there are no registry cleaners. :)

[tehboris]

As danzilla says there is no registry on the mac (and, originally, there wasn't going to be one on Vista). The registry a good example of bad operating system design.

The closest equivalent to the registarty on the mac is the hidden configuration directories in your home directory. They hold the configuration for nearly every thing. Having unnecessary configuration directories does not slow any thing down.

[burkhartmj]

The registry was fine in the days of simple computing, it's just suffering from old age. Things won't end well if any version after Windows 7 still has it, though of course killing it in that version would be awesometastic.

[ArmpitOfDeath]

Yes there is in effect - and it's not a registry cleaner, but it's a whole different range of stuff to go wrong on a Mac.

The system maintenance required on a Mac is slightly different to that of a PC. A PC needs less small maintenance to just keep on working until it becomes time to do some major housekeeping on it after say a year. On a Mac, if you don't do a range of small maintenance tasks on a regular basis you'll be bugged by minor errors on a frequent basis. Well actually - in a Vista vs Leopard comparison right now, you'll be more bugged by minor errors on a frequent basis in OS X regardless of how well it's working. It's just that most Apple users will too SteveZombified and Appler-than-thou to realise it.

You can download Onyx, which automates a lot of the frequent maintenance on a Mac. So although it should be done fairly frequently, it'll be pretty painless.

http://www.titanium.free.fr/pgs2/english/download.html

[pod_pilot]

The registry was fine in the days of simple computing, it's just suffering from old age. Things won't end well if any version after Windows 7 still has it, though of course killing it in that version would be awesometastic.

speaking as someone who worked in the industry (and still does) when the registry came out it was a bad idea then as it is now.

MS constantly tried to tell you that it was so much better than autoexec.ncf files novell had.

plus the sysadmin guides would always tell you not to touch the registry, but then flip the page and to turn on logging you had to edit the registry (thinking NT 3.5 RAS service logging as an example)

but back to the topic.


there are .plist files that can tend to scatter around, especilaly if you test & delete random applications they can stack up out there. Your ~/Library directory can get full.

Appzapper is good for nuking those. but in general unless I'm moving to a new computer I don't tend to prune those.

[jukey]

If you're worried about random files filling up your hard drive, check out appzapper (http://www.appzapper.com/) (lots of really nice features, but costs $12.95), appcleaner (http://www.freemacsoft.net/AppCleaner/index.php) (a free app zapper with fewer features), or apptrap (http://konstochvanligasaker.se/apptrap/) (asks you if you want to delete files when you move an application to the trash)

[maxhdrm]

Thanks to all with your input and sorry for the delay in response. This has given me great incite and another reason why I am loving the apple OS X. Not biased because I have a PC at home but if MS would design something to take the needless small maintannence crap out of the way, it would free up a whole lot more time to concentrate on the challenging issues.

[jeois]

if MS would design something to take the needless small maintannence crap out of the way, it would free up a whole lot more time to concentrate on the challenging issues.
If you mean the maintenance that you yourself have to do, then I'm not sure I follow you. I haven't had to do any maintenance besides running CCleaner a few times (and all that involved was right-clicking my bin, selecting run, and it was done in seconds in the background), and I haven't rebooted this computer in months. But then again, I'm running WinXP. If you mean all the hotfixes and patches that MS puts out, then yes, I see what you are saying.

I think the main problem with getting rid of the registry is probably because of the backwards compatibility issues involved. For instance, drivers and applications use it to store stuff that's needed. Compatibility is also probably why we didn't get that brand new filesystem or some other stuff that we thought we were going to get with longhorn.

well actually - in a Vista vs Leopard comparison right now, you'll be more bugged by minor errors on a frequent basis in OS X regardless of how well it's working. It's just that most Apple users will too SteveZombified and Appler-than-thou to realise it.
I don't know about all of that, but as Apple gains more market share, and more applications and malware are written for OS X; we are bound to see more problems and such.

As for that whole attitude acquired when one buys an Apple product, I just don't get it. I heard that the UI is more "intuitive," but I've recently tried to use a Macbook to edit a spreadsheet, and it was hellish. The other Apple product I used to own was an iPod mini, but I got rid of it because I kept on having to switch out the battery. Why are people willing to pay so much more money so they can have the letter "I" in front of their applications and pretty molded plastic/metal? In fact, this might be a good question for the show... Nobody steal it.

Maybe I'm just jealous because I can't try it out because I use .NET for development (VB/ASP--don't ask, it ain't my choice) and am too lazy to fix my desktop box. But then again, I'd would just dual-boot that sucker into BSD and XP because I can't install OS X on it... or can I?

[cacogen]

As for that whole attitude acquired when one buys an Apple product, I just don't get it. I heard that the UI is more "intuitive," but I've recently tried to use a Macbook to edit a spreadsheet, and it was hellish. The other Apple product I used to own was an iPod mini, but I got rid of it because I kept on having to switch out the battery. Why are people willing to pay so much more money so they can have the letter "I" in front of their applications and pretty molded plastic/metal? In fact, this might be a good question for the show... Nobody steal it.

Maybe I'm just jealous because I can't try it out because I use .NET for development (VB/ASP--don't ask, it ain't my choice) and am too lazy to fix my desktop box. But then again, I'd would just dual-boot that sucker into BSD and XP because I can't install OS X on it... or can I?

Install OS X on what?

I've managed to get Leopard booting on an older P4 of mine. I like some things about it, but the GUI isn't one of them -- I don't really know how to describe it; it's just too picky, fussy, particular, controlling... I've spent enough hours on Leo now that I should be starting to "get" the GUI. Quite the contrary.

I guess I can't be trusted to configure things the way I want them, seeing as the way I want to do things isn't a product of extensive usability studies. Who the Hell do I think I am, anyhow? Lord Jobs knows best.

Will likely wipe the drive and try out that Fedora 10 alpha.

[jeois]

I've managed to get Leopard booting on an older P4 of mine. I like some things about it, but the GUI isn't one of them -- I don't really know how to describe it; it's just too picky, fussy, particular, controlling... I've spent enough hours on Leo now that I should be starting to "get" the GUI. Quite the contrary.

I guess I can't be trusted to configure things the way I want them, seeing as the way I want to do things isn't a product of extensive usability studies. Who the Hell do I think I am, anyhow? Lord Jobs knows best.

O rly? I my box is/was a core 2. I guess I'm still not used to the whole idea of Macs running on Intel hardware yet.

I didn't really like fedora. It had that redhat feel to it last time I tried. Sorry for the digression, we'll take it over to the linux forum now.

[cacogen]

O rly? I my box is/was a core 2. I guess I'm still not used to the whole idea of Macs running on Intel hardware yet.

I didn't really like fedora. It had that redhat feel to it last time I tried. Sorry for the digression, we'll take it over to the linux forum now.

SSE3 Core 2? In that case, you might be able to use the vanilla kernel, which makes upgrading far less a pain in the ass. But, uh, I'll leave it at that in case Rev3 is uninterested in having Hackintoshery discussed on their boards.