Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Locking down a registry value?

Reply
Thread Tools

Locking down a registry value?

 
 
thanatoid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2010
TOP POSTED:
First of all, thanks to all who replied, and those who just
flamed each other or made moronic partition jokes, get some
lives, PLEASE. Too late for getting some brains.

chuckcar <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:Xns9D9E45EB2521Achuck@127.0.0.1:

> thanatoid <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:Xns9D9EEED07492thanexit@85.214.73.210:


<SNIP>

>> Specifically, I use one great program, but the layout
>> changes EVERY time I run it. It is not a REALLY big deal,
>> but I can think of several other instances where it would
>> be nice to "lock" a value as well.


<SNIP>

> What is the program? Perhaps I could do some research.


It's IARSN's "TaskInfo2000" ver 2,2,1,4 1998-2000. The problem
is that the vertical bar dividing the big list of processes and
all their characteristics from the several sys details panes on
the right moves a little to the left every time I run the
program (and I run it at least 5 times a day).

There is a setting in the registry (in pixels) for where that
line should be, and I have changed it several times, but it
might as well not exist since it has zero effect. It's a
fantastic and free (that version) program so I really shouldn't
complain.


Anti-registry rant follows:

I really believe the registry is one of the worst things MS has
ever done. I was astonished when I read that an early version of
it already existed in Win 3, but I have not had the time to do
an install of Win 3 on my old 486 to find out the gory details.

Easily half of the programs which store info in the registry do
not need to do so - the proof being that when you delete their
branches, they continue working perfectly. In fact, in at least
ONE case, the way to MAKE a program run perfectly again is to
delete its registry info (amusingly enough, I am speaking of
XNews as I am using it). Sometimes I get weird error messages
and all I have to do is delete the reg. info. NOTHING happens
except the program runs perfectly again. If it wasn't such a
PITA, it'd be funny.

In other cases, with use, programs develop small "misalignments"
and deleting the reg branch and restoring a perfectly-well-set-
up .reg file for that program will make it run perfectly again.
But that would be SO much easier by just overwriting an ini file
with a "perfect copy".

One could argue that one could make a "perfect copy" of the
/entire/ registry, and restore THAT in cases of trouble, but
even people who have a great DOS file manager (in my case, XTree
Gold) and do not have to go through the nightmare of playing
with the registry file attributes in the DOS command line will
/probably/ agree it is a gigantic PITA. (I don't know WHAT XP+
users do... And I hope never to have to find out... I guess they
/could/ boot into DOS (if they have it) and do the change as
described above except on the XP partition, with 5 times more
work).

BTW, if any of you have ever looked at the .dat files in a real
file viewer, you may have seen all sorts of things which do NOT
belong in there... Kind of like supposedly deleted stuff in Word
docs which you can only see when you look at the file in a real
file viewer, not in Word itself. WHAT is up with that?

Also, the registry is intentionally loaded with absolutely
useless stuff. WHO needs all the time zones of the world for a
computer which NEVER leaves its room, let alone country or
continent? And even if, is the correct time of a file such a big
deal? (Yes, I know sometimes it can be critical, but I am not
NASA).

As for "classes", AFA I have been able to /sense it/, they exist
mainly so that all the idiotic and bloated (/and/ additionally
bloated by the redundant classes branches) Microsoft (and MS-
friendly) programs (IE/OE and Office, mainly, but also over-
bloated expensive standards NO ONE can do without like
Photoshop) have reference options for "interacting with each
other" (like forcing you to open IE when you want to look at a
jpg image). And crap that used to be called OLE, whatever it is
called now. And other MS crap.

Anybody who needs to edit an image in their Word document and
believes that the correct way to do is to is to open the
document in Word (waiting for however long THAT takes), then
double click (or whatever) ON the image, have Photoshop open
(waiting for however long THAT takes), do the changes in
Photoshop, save or NOT save the image ITSELF (consequences to be
discovered later at the most inopportune moment) and then go
back to Word and resize the image so it fits in the page
(wrecking the correct dpi settings for printing etc.) instead of
planning ahead and doing things the right way (ie preparing ALL
the images, charts, etc properly FIRST and THEN placing them in
the final document, not to mention not using Word but a real DTP
application) should be put out of their misery by the most
painful means possible.

"X last used files" is a good idea, especially when the
programmer is smart/considerate enough to allow you to choose
HOW MANY. But what about programs which store the last 100 used
files, make NO reference to it in the program interface
whatsoever, /and/ - JUST in case you get REALLY lost but are
smart enough to know it's stored in the registry - paths are NOT
included. What is the *$%^$#@^ point?

I remember first seeing "Microsoft Foundation Classes (blah
blah)" on the splash screen of the 95B version of WordPad, I
think. Truly a dark day. I have not gotten around to trying it
(although I have mentioned this once before), but I would LOVE
to delete the %#*&%^@)&^% classes branch and see what happens.
Someone else tried it and the %#*&%^@)&&^% registry will not
allow that first of 5 (in 9x) branches to be deleted.

I WILL some day get around to deleting what I can of the
registry - especially from the first of the 5 main branches -
just to see what happens. Not that anyone but me cares, of
course.

I could go on but luckily for all who have gotten /this/ far,
I'm a little tired today.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
VanguardLH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2010
thanatoid wrote:

> I am pretty sure the answer is "no way", but is there any way to
> make a specific value in the (goddamned ****ing nightmare
> inflicted on everyone by those bastards at MS) registry
> /permanent/?
>
> Specifically, I use one great program, but the layout changes
> EVERY time I run it. It is not a REALLY big deal, but I can
> think of several other instances where it would be nice to
> "lock" a value as well.
>
> FWIW, the system is running 98SE Lite, ie 3 main system files
> are from 95B.


You could change the permissions on the registry entry. Select the
registry key, right-click, and select to change its permissions. Then
remove admins and your own accounts as having permissions to change the
values. If you need to change them later, re-add yourself or the
Administrators group (if your account is in that group).

You aren't making anything permanent. You are removing yourself (and
the apps that you run) as having permissions to alter a registry key's
data item values. You cannot change permissions for a particular data
item, only on a registry key (that can 1, or more data items and their
values). That means ALL data items under that registry key will have
their permissions changed (because you changed the permissions on their
holding object).
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
thanatoid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2010
VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:hvpkja$7cc$(E-Mail Removed):

<SNIP>

> You could change the permissions on the registry entry.
> Select the registry key, right-click, and select to change
> its permissions. Then remove admins and your own accounts
> as having permissions to change the values. If you need to
> change them later, re-add yourself or the Administrators
> group (if your account is in that group).


<SNIP>

Had you read the thread, you would know this is not possible -
at least not on 98SE Lite. It MAY be possible on "normal" 98SE,
and it IS possible on XP+.

Thanks in any case.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Desk Rabbit
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2010
On 22/06/2010 03:20, thanatoid wrote:
> TOP POSTED:
> First of all, thanks to all who replied, and those who just
> flamed each other or made moronic partition jokes, get some
> lives, PLEASE. Too late for getting some brains.
>
> chuckcar<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:Xns9D9E45EB2521Achuck@127.0.0.1:
>
>> thanatoid<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> news:Xns9D9EEED07492thanexit@85.214.73.210:

>
> <SNIP>
>
>>> Specifically, I use one great program, but the layout
>>> changes EVERY time I run it. It is not a REALLY big deal,
>>> but I can think of several other instances where it would
>>> be nice to "lock" a value as well.

>
> <SNIP>
>
>> What is the program? Perhaps I could do some research.

>
> It's IARSN's "TaskInfo2000" ver 2,2,1,4 1998-2000. The problem
> is that the vertical bar dividing the big list of processes and
> all their characteristics from the several sys details panes on
> the right moves a little to the left every time I run the
> program (and I run it at least 5 times a day).
>
> There is a setting in the registry (in pixels) for where that
> line should be, and I have changed it several times, but it
> might as well not exist since it has zero effect.


Which sort of suggests that there is a bug in the program. i.e. it can
set the value in the registry but is not reading it or acting on it
correctly. Contact the author and report it as a bug.
 
Reply With Quote
 
VanguardLH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2010
thanatoid wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> You could change the permissions on the registry entry.
>> Select the registry key, right-click, and select to change
>> its permissions. Then remove admins and your own accounts
>> as having permissions to change the values. If you need to
>> change them later, re-add yourself or the Administrators
>> group (if your account is in that group).

>
> Had you read the thread, you would know this is not possible -
> at least not on 98SE Lite. It MAY be possible on "normal" 98SE,
> and it IS possible on XP+.


Missed the last line (got distracted by chuckcar subthread). Since you
are asking about a 9x-based version of Windows, there are no permissions
to manage. You'll have to migrate to a more mature version of Windows.
Been a decade since I bothered with the toy versions. Tis easy to miss
with my "reading eye" when someone notes an ancient kernel version of
Windows that was developed when pterodactyls still flew around.

While not a solution for every time you run the program, something you
could do when you start Windows would be to run a .reg file with the
registry values you want. Use "regedit.exe /s <file>.reg" to eliminate
the warning prompt. Or you could wrap your app's executable in a .bat
file where you run the .exe followed by the .reg file to reset the
registry values back to what you want.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Meat Plow
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2010
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 02:20:54 +0000, thanatoid ǝʇoɹʍ:

> On principle, I do not install ANYTHING with the extension MSI.


You're a ****ing ignoramus. When you install anything you're using the MS
installer. Most applications unpack to an .msi in a temporary folder and
then run.
 
Reply With Quote
 
thanatoid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2010
Desk Rabbit <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:hvprls$f49$(E-Mail Removed):

<SNIP>

> Which sort of suggests that there is a bug in the program.
> i.e. it can set the value in the registry but is not
> reading it or acting on it correctly. Contact the author
> and report it as a bug.


I know it's a bug but this version is ten years old and I doubt
it has not been fixed by now.
I also doubt the author will rewrite a free version from ten
years ago just to make one person happy.

Thanks for the suggestion anyway.

 
Reply With Quote
 
thanatoid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2010
Alec Lourmier <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 02:20:56 +0000 (UTC), thanatoid
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>BTW, if any of you have ever looked at the .dat files in a
>>real file viewer, you may have seen all sorts of things
>>which do NOT belong in there... Kind of like supposedly
>>deleted stuff in Word docs which you can only see when you
>>look at the file in a real file viewer, not in Word itself.
>>WHAT is up with that?

>
> My guess is Word's "track changes" feature.


My last sentence had to do with the stuff in registry which
should not be in there, not the ridiculous overbloated and
perfectly oversold to everyone piece of crap known as Word.

The Word problem has been discussed many times in many places. I
only used it to illustrate the same problem with the registry.
Anyone using Word gets what s/he deserves, but no one using
Windows is free from the ****ing registry.

 
Reply With Quote
 
thanatoid
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2010
VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:hvpu0o$leq$(E-Mail Removed):

<SNIP>

> Missed the last line (got distracted by chuckcar
> subthread). Since you are asking about a 9x-based version
> of Windows, there are no permissions to manage. You'll
> have to migrate to a more mature version of Windows.


Mature? A little inversion there, methinks. Something ten years
old is NOT more mature than something 15 years old. Not to
mention that even if we ignore that error, /every/ new version
of Windows is dumbed down for the new "computer sub-literates".
BOB lives on in Win 6 and 6.1. Woof, woof.

So thanks, but no thanks. Even 98SE Lite is only bearable
because of the Lite modification. If not for that, I would still
be using 95B, as I did until about a year and a half ago, or I
would have switched to Linux.

> Been a
> decade since I bothered with the toy versions.


I respect your input to this group too much to make any of the
multitude of possible sarcastic comments that statement fully
deserves.

> Tis


'Tis

> easy to
> miss with my "reading eye" when someone notes an ancient
> kernel version of Windows that was developed when
> pterodactyls still flew around.


No, actually it was quite a few million years later.

> While not a solution for every time you run the program,
> something you could do when you start Windows would be to
> run a .reg file with the registry values you want. Use
> "regedit.exe /s <file>.reg" to eliminate the warning
> prompt. Or you could wrap your app's executable in a .bat
> file where you run the .exe followed by the .reg file to
> reset the registry values back to what you want.


Now there is some useful information for a change. Thank you
very much. It is useful /in general/ - I don't think it will be
useful in this case, since if I change the reg value, do NOT run
the program, reboot, and run the program, and the divider is way
off to the left again, obviously it's either a major bug or an
intentional bug to make you register for the few extra features
which are useless to me - in fact I tried the registered version
with a "password off the web" and I dislike the way it behaves
more than I dislike the divider bar behavior, so I am running
the free version, and have for ten years.

Thanks for the above suggestions - they will be filed for future
reference/use.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter Foldes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2010
+10 for that answer . Great answer and right on the money

thanatoid
You are aware that in W98 SE and also in W95 you have a reg tool from MS that you
can use. I forgot the name since I have not used either one of those OS's since many
years



--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"thanatoid" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Xns9D9ED92E66413thanexit@85.214.73.210...
> TOP POSTED:
> First of all, thanks to all who replied, and those who just
> flamed each other or made moronic partition jokes, get some


 
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
Locking locking resolution Frontpage raiderhawk General Computer Support 0 01-08-2008 01:42 AM
increase in cpu usage on locking and locking the system sowmya.rangineni@gmail.com Computer Support 0 06-15-2007 12:06 PM
Application locking to support optimisitc locking ? Timasmith Java 4 11-01-2006 12:42 AM
Interpretation of registry log of tweakui produced registry alteration vincemoon@rcn.com ASP .Net 0 01-10-2005 02:53 AM
Reading registry key throws "Requested registry access is not allowed." HK ASP .Net 1 04-01-2004 04:44 PM



Advertisments