Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Windows Is Amazing

Reply
Thread Tools

Windows Is Amazing

 
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2009

"Enkidu" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4a0fa7ec$(E-Mail Removed)...
> impossible wrote:
>>
>> "Enkidu" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have had a number of things where I have had to go registry
>>>>> spelunking in Vista to get things to work that should have "just
>>>>> worked" but didn't (mounting a NAS drive being one of them).
>>>>
>>>> You probably could have Googled the solution much faster than
>>>> "spelunking" in the Registry. Try that next time -- if a Registry fix
>>>> is required, a script to genderate the needed Registry changes is
>>>> probably out there already.
>>>>
>>> Yeah right. Yeah, sure I'm going to download a script to make changes to
>>> the Registry.
>>>

>>
>> You can lead a horse to water....
>>

> I'm sure that you could put a registry script on the Internet, advertise
> it as "This will destroy your system. Do not run it!!" and thousands
> would.
>


There are reliable sources for everything. Learn to differentiate.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Stephen Worthington
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2009
On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:30:41 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:

>In message <gujm5a$e5p$(E-Mail Removed)>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> ... case in point: an article entitled "20 Registry Hacks", on pages
>> 94-96 of the May issue of APC Magazine.

>
>Another dazzling little nugget from there that I just have to share with
>you:
>
> 15: Change the Default Installation Folder
> Most installations default to the Program Files folder, but if you want
> to point this elsewhere, navigate to
> 'HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion', change the
> 'ProgramFilesDir' entry to point at your chosen folder and reboot.
>
>Deceptively simple, with that nice little touch at the end: that you have to
>reboot for your change to take effect. Imagine that: if you want installers
>for applications to default to a different location for the installation,
>it's not enough to change a Registry key that the installer could easily
>read, you also have to reboot your system as well! Because your running
>system needs to be kept informed of where installers might default to
>putting things! (And don't forget, you'll have to reboot again after doing
>each application installation anyway.)
>
>Open-source developers, as smart as they are, would never have thought of
>something like this in a million years. Doesn't that sort of sheer technical
>brilliance just bring tears to your eyes...


There is likely another registry key that is copied from that one to
be used while running. So changing both would allow you to change
where the installers put things while running. There might be
complications from some things having copies of the old location
though - it is safer to reboot.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2009
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Stephen Worthington
wrote:

> On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:30:41 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>
>>... if you wantinstallers for applications to default to a different
>>location for the installation, it's not enough to change a Registry key
>>that the installer could easily read, you also have to reboot your system
>>as well!

>
> There is likely another registry key that is copied from that one to
> be used while running.


Why?

> There might be complications from some things having copies of the old
> location though - it is safer to reboot.


What things? Would any subsystems be caching this information elsewhere? To
save that precious fraction of a second on each Registry lookup, perhaps?
Because we all know how much time Windows users spend on software
installations each day?

And even if they were caching it, isn't there a Registry API call to let a
process get an automatic notification when an entry is changed, so it knows
it needs to update its cached copy of that entry?

So tell me again, where is the excuse for this need to reboot?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce Sinclair
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2009
In article <guklo8$v94$(E-Mail Removed)>, Party Animal <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>greg wrote:
>> You are so amazing that you don't realise that no one actually gives a
>> toss about anything you ever say, as it's the same old recycled crap
>> complaining about every little thing.
>>

>
>So snip it.


1) don't read it
2) put the poster in the bit bucket
3) (for the OP) no top posting, thanks.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen Worthington
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
On Mon, 18 May 2009 11:25:13 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:

>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Stephen Worthington
>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:30:41 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>>
>>>... if you wantinstallers for applications to default to a different
>>>location for the installation, it's not enough to change a Registry key
>>>that the installer could easily read, you also have to reboot your system
>>>as well!

>>
>> There is likely another registry key that is copied from that one to
>> be used while running.

>
>Why?


Because that is how Microsoft has made Windows. There is a whole set
of registry entries that get copied to running versions.

>> There might be complications from some things having copies of the old
>> location though - it is safer to reboot.

>
>What things? Would any subsystems be caching this information elsewhere? To
>save that precious fraction of a second on each Registry lookup, perhaps?
>Because we all know how much time Windows users spend on software
>installations each day?


Last time I looked (Win2k), the API calls that access the registry
were incredibly slow. Using them a lot killed performance utterly. So
yes, programs tend to cache registry values while they are running.

>And even if they were caching it, isn't there a Registry API call to let a
>process get an automatic notification when an entry is changed, so it knows
>it needs to update its cached copy of that entry?


No idea - I write embedded code, not Windows.

>So tell me again, where is the excuse for this need to reboot?


When messing around with the registry, it is very difficult to track
down exactly what everything does. So the safest way to do it is to
change the base setting and then reboot and let Windows copy and use
that setting as it needs.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Stephen Worthington
wrote:

> When messing around with the registry, it is very difficult to track
> down exactly what everything does.


Conway's Law strikes yet again: every piece of software reflects the
organizational structure that produced it. So when you have an
organizational structure with different groups engaging in power struggles
with each other instead of cooperating
<http://blogs.zdnet.com/carroll/?p=1868>, then that dysfunction is
inevitably going to be reflected in the software they produce. QED.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
In message <guklo8$v94$(E-Mail Removed)>, Party Animal wrote:

> greg wrote:
>
>> You are so amazing that you don't realise that no one actually gives a
>> toss about anything you ever say, as it's the same old recycled crap
>> complaining about every little thing.

>
> So snip it.


Some of my opponents aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the chandelier,
are they.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen Worthington
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
On Mon, 18 May 2009 15:59:52 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:

>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Stephen Worthington
>wrote:
>
>> When messing around with the registry, it is very difficult to track
>> down exactly what everything does.

>
>Conway's Law strikes yet again: every piece of software reflects the
>organizational structure that produced it. So when you have an
>organizational structure with different groups engaging in power struggles
>with each other instead of cooperating
><http://blogs.zdnet.com/carroll/?p=1868>, then that dysfunction is
>inevitably going to be reflected in the software they produce. QED.


Hmmm... I did not think even Microsoft was that disfunctional.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Stephen Worthington
wrote:

> On Mon, 18 May 2009 15:59:52 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote:
>
>>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Stephen
>>Worthington wrote:
>>
>>> When messing around with the registry, it is very difficult to track
>>> down exactly what everything does.

>>
>>Conway's Law strikes yet again: every piece of software reflects the
>>organizational structure that produced it. So when you have an
>>organizational structure with different groups engaging in power struggles
>>with each other instead of cooperating
>><http://blogs.zdnet.com/carroll/?p=1868>, then that dysfunction is
>>inevitably going to be reflected in the software they produce. QED.

>
> Hmmm... I did not think even Microsoft was that disfunctional.


The guy who wrote that item was a Microsoft employee.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amazing windows! J Computer Support 9 12-04-2008 02:02 PM
Re: Amazing hardware, Amazing software, Amazing Stories Mike Painter HTML 0 11-02-2006 11:18 PM
Best Studying Matrial + Amazing Cost + 3 in price of 1 JohnCena MCSD 1 02-21-2006 10:42 AM
Best Studying Matrial + Amazing Cost + 3 in price of 1 JohnCena MCSD 0 01-11-2006 12:49 PM
Re: Bulk Newsgroup Poster - amazing result Malke Wireless Networking 0 01-17-2005 01:35 AM



Advertisments