What is Happening to Windows 7?

Aug. 5, 2009 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

John Dvorack shoots for the gutter in his latest missive. Maybe this is just what he does now, I don't know.

Blame the tricky upgrade process—and, by extension, the Registry—for the backlash against Windows 7.

What backlash?

Industry puff-ball Walter Mossberg writes last week that XP users won't be able to do a traditional upgrade to Windows 7; they have to migrate instead. But this isn't news. (Mossberg isn't exactly timely, people.) We've know that for several months. And I actually first documented the XP to 7 migration process back in May--over two months before Mossberg did. So if there's "backlash," it's from people who simply aren't paying attention. You know, Mossberg's readers.

So what other "issues" does Dvorack raise here?

Studies and reports began to emerge about how businesses will not upgrade to Windows 7 ... 60 percent of businesses are going to hold off on Windows 7 implementation. And these are companies that probably did not upgrade to Vista.

Someone should alert Microsoft. Because as recently as last week, the software giant made the following claims about Windows 7:

Over 80 percent of IT pros plans to upgrade to Windows 7 within 30 months.
Over 8 million people downloaded the Windows 7 RC release.
50 percent of enterprise ITDMs plan to upgrade to Windows 7 as soon as it is available.

And let's remember that Microsoft isn't exactly hyperbolic when it comes to future trends. You know, what with being a public company and all.

And then there's this amazing claim.

The real problem is the idiotic Windows Registry and the architecture developed around the idea.

You know, making a Monday Morning Quarterback argument in this way is cute, and I'm sure we could do the same for any other number of Windows technologies that made sense at the time but look quaint now. (DLLs, for example. The poster child of this kind of pointless discussion. Oh, wait. He brings that up too.) But come on. I don't want to spend too much time on this, and I'm certainly not defending the Registry, but virtually everyone gets this wrong, and doesn't understand the point. Put simply, up until Windows 3.x, Windows configuration settings were handled largely through (*.ini) text files, similar to how it works in UNIX (and still does in all NIX-like OSes, such as Linux). Parsing a text file at run-time doesn't seem very elegant or performant, so the Registry was created. It actually did make sense. In 1992. Yes, it grew into a monster. But the Windows 3.x world into which it was born (the Registry did not debut in Windows 95, as many think), the Registry made sense. Seriously. You need to deal with that.

There have been rumors of XML-based Registry replacements in Windows; one was supposed to happen in Longhorn but disappeared, just like most of everything else that was planned for that release. I'm sure there were plans for WinFS-based Registry replacements. But here we are over 15 years later and the classic Registry still exists in Windows.

Is the Registry really what's wrong with Windows? Duh. No. And it's certainly not at the heart of the non-issue of Windows 7 somehow suddenly getting bad press. Windows 7 is a huge win. It's not a revolutionary technical update to the core OS (that was Vista). It's just a chance to nicely fine-tune something that, for some people, was a little off. (And for many others who never even tried it, they just assumed that the conventional "wisdom'--as dictated by ivory tower dinosaurs like Mossberg and Dvorack--was correct.)

Nothing to see here. Nothing at all. This is the Windows 7 equivalent of the "Fonts dialog" idiocy from Windows Vista. A complete non-event.

Discuss this Article 98

lketchum

on Aug 5, 2009

Paul is right to slam Dvorak and others about this. First, every commercial *nix copies Microsoft in regard to the registry - they use a klunky database to store ini files though, but they do try hard to emulate the functionality of the registry. The notion that the registry is "bad" is preposterous (at best) and guys like Dvorak suggesting otherwise reveal themselves to be pretty weak technically. The reality is that the *nix have adopted a binary database in vain efforts to copy the Windows registry – leaving them a staggering 31 years behind Windows! More... in Vista/Win7, the registry is virtualized - just as the entire named space is. It loads as a single page at start up and is extremely fast - certainly far faster than loading text files containing initialization information... Yet more... the entire named space in Vista/Win7 is virtualized. Therefore, data and files are written to %profile% and all user and apps data is virtualized to and or from virtual user space. It is very efficient and extremely fast and more importantly, all data are treated as objects - specifically, securable objects where access to them is brokered (UIPI) - making them very difficult to compromise. What was once known as WinFS became unnecessary as the virtualization of the entire named space progressed - it became unnecessary to abandon NTFS as the virtualization layer(s) were set down on top of the existing file system. Dvorak is reaching for problems that do not exist and calling back to long held, but false issues in Windows that actually make Windows far more performant and secure that its competitors. In Windows, all objects are virtualized “to” and or “from” named space and apps (or both) and objects/data may be bound simultaneously in other contexts. It is extremely efficient and “hard” in the sense that compromising or corrupting them is all but impossible. Similarly, as objects, each may be subject to very granular and multiple simultaneous policies. While there are some *nix purists that have resisted the evolution of a registry within their beloved distributions of choice, it isn’t because the idea of a registry loading as a single page is bad. On the contrary, it is because they have, as with so many things, implemented that which they have lifted from Windows very poorly and or it differs from what they are used to. The bottom line is that the registry, is not only a very good thing technically, in Vista and Windows 7 it is virtualized, refined, resistant to compromise and corruption, self-healing and blisteringly fast. It is three decades ahead of the copy the *nix are trying to make of it – and candidly, creating a half-baked version of it in a binary DB in the *nix is, well… kinda sad. One last thing…. Apple and their OS X? Yeah, they’re doing it, too and it ain’t pretty! Sorry, but them’s the facts and Paul’s write right to hammer Dvorak for suggesting otherwise. I like Dvorak, he’s funny, but he’s going to risk losing relevance if he doesn’t find some genius with the technical chops to help him keep from looking like an ass.

bluewiggle

on Aug 5, 2009

With regards to the registry. No one can deny that the concept leaves itself open to self destruction. Time and time again my PC has become slower in the months following a fresh install. I made it a ritual to re-install windows every 3 months to retain adequate performance. This process has however become a lot easier with windows now offering harddrive cloning in the operating system. I keep looking at my brother's Imac which had MacOS installed on it three years ago and it is still pretty nippy. I am quite fond of windows, but as nice as win 7 is, it still is only a minor update to vista, which i was happy with for the 3 years that it lasted. However MS asking for over 100 dollars in upgrade fees for what is essentially a clean up of vista ala snow leopard is not adequate. i think apple got it spot on with 29 dollars for an upgrade from leopard to snow leopard.

GoodThings2Life

on Aug 5, 2009

I won't go as far as to say that the Registry is a bad thing. Quite the opposite, definitely, and it's a great resource that solved a lot of issues. However, over the long term, I have seen the Registry become a bloated mess, and as an IT professional that has had more than my fair share of migration efforts, I do think XML/INI files are ultimately a better solution for most 3rd-party applications. I use FileZilla for FTP/SFTP transfers on a regular basis, and I love the fact that I can throw the C:\Program Files\FileZilla folder onto a flash drive and run it that way without any hassle from any system. Why? Because it uses XML/INI files for the configuration. Interestingly, however, it also offers an option for Registry use during first install. The problem isn't the Registry or DLL's, however, it's developer misuse of those technologies. If they would be consistent and responsible about keeping their settings and DLL's in their own exclusive locations rather than all over the file system and Registry, it wouldn't be an issue.

Waethorn

on Aug 6, 2009

"I like Dvorak, he’s funny, but he’s going to risk losing relevance if he doesn’t find some genius with the technical chops to help him keep from looking like an ass." Dvorak - he's like the Colbert of the computer world, except that unlike Colbert, Dvorak takes his truthiness seriously. "With regards to the registry. No one can deny that the concept leaves itself open to self destruction." Please explain your reasoning. "Time and time again my PC has become slower in the months following a fresh install." Please explain how your registry - something that on a heavily trafficked computer equates to approximately 40MB, but is allocated dynamically - somehow slows your computer down. Are you that desparate for RAM? The System Registry is like DRM. It's an answer to a problem that everybody is quick to criticize, but nobody has been able to offer a better alternative.

runner7775

on Aug 6, 2009

I read the Walt Mossberg article when Ed Bott blogged about it, but the video seems worse. You don't have to have the hard disk wiped when you upgrade to 7 from XP, you can have it transfer your old stuff to windows.old. Am I right?

runner7775

on Aug 6, 2009

Oops, nix that last comment, Walt does mention the Windows.old way of upgrading at the end of the video on his page. I still don't see how any of this is particularly hard or painful, though. I haven't seen any backlash against Windows 7 either.

Dipsh t Admin

on Aug 6, 2009

bluewiggle, I don't know what you are doing that causes your computer to suffer such a performance hit that you need to reinstall every three months, but that is certainly not the norm. I'm typing this on a 4 year old XP computer that is still the original OEM install, and this being my work computer, it has been used hard, with countless installs and uninstalls of software, drivers and patches. It still runs good. Likewise, it has been a rare feat that a full reinstall is needed to be done on any of the computers in my office. These things require maintenance, but so does everything to keep it in tip-top shape. The problem with the registry has more to do with a historical rememberance from years past, rather than a current reality. It is certainly true that registry corruption was far more prevalent pre-XP, but it still gets dinged for that old reputation. Quite frankly, there was a LOT of things wrong with 9x, which *caused* the problems with the registry, not the other way around. And Paul is certainly right. Ask the founders of NT why they did what they did, and it certainly made sense then. Difference choices would be made now, no doubt, but it was the right choice at that point in time. "The problem isn't the Registry or DLL's, however, it's developer misuse of those technologies." Exactly. That is often the problem with so many things. Vista nVidia drivers anyone?

rr0de74@live.com

on Aug 6, 2009

Ahhh winsuperslant at again. The 60% number was NOT his idea and it was covered when it came out by many but I guessed you missed that Paul? http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSTRE56C0NC20090713?feed... http://www.businessinsider.com/six-in-ten-companies-will-not-buy-windows... http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10285117-56.html http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/07/25/the-vista-myth-why-windows-7-wo... http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/study_60_companies_plan_skip_windo... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/microsoft/5818878/Windows-7-six-in... http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2350082,00.asp There are more, if you use Google, Bing somehow missed that news and so did Paul. Of course we missed the Microsoft numbers here at the superslant as well. Its pure Irony that Paul accuses Dvorak of slanted journalism, pure irony. Oh how one could reach back in Paul's world and pull out all of the "Apple is dead" comments and full blown articles with ease.

gfryesc1

on Aug 6, 2009

Paul seems to have an awful case of diaper rash over this 'non event'. I'd suggest more talcum next time. I can guarantee that Dvorack will never read this. Thurrott just doesn't rate high enough, so ultimately Paul is just pissing in the wind on this one. That's ok, that's what he does. Still, it reads that Paul agrees with John that the registry is a boondoggle but Paul cannot fathom criticism of any core function of Windows... as surely as if he had coded it himself. He's a kept man but his advice is good when one accounts for the partisan source it comes from. At least Dvorack's living isn't based on just one company, which means he can be snarky about everyone equally [which he frequently is]. That is a more honorable position than Thurrott enjoys.

Dipsh t Admin

on Aug 6, 2009

In regards to Mossy, there is often half truths as he looks at everything with fruit colored glasses. I especially found the following comment extremely rich from his article on 7: "the easiest solution may be to buy a new PC preloaded with Windows 7, if they can afford such a purchase in these dire economic times." Funny, no mention of dire economic times when talking about Apple products. In fact, he is quite dismissive of the additional costs in his review of the sealed battery MacBooks.

Dipsh t Admin

on Aug 6, 2009

rr0de74, the reports were totally misread. Once again, Ed Bott does a very good analysis of this. http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1181 "The primary goal of this survey was to assess the impact of the weak economy on IT infrastructure projects and we found that, despite its impact on short-term plans, 41% of organizations plan a wholesale migration to Windows 7 by the end of 2010. This is actually a strong adoption rate when compared to the historical adoption rate of Windows XP in its first year which was cited as 12-14%." So, the 60% number is just for 2010, forgetting that many years occur after that before Windows 8. The 41% cited in the report is actually a HUGE number given the glacial pace of IT departments. Of course, many believe that everyone will immediately upgrade, all billion of them, in 2009-2010. How people could assume this is the case is beyond me. Irony indeed.

Delmont

on Aug 6, 2009

Again, the corporate world does not "upgrade". They RE IMAGE! Next story please.

Waethorn

on Aug 6, 2009

Going with a pure XML registry is a bad idea, unless it was contained in a secured binary file, but then it wouldn't be much different than it is today, with XML elements only replacing the existing key structures. ASCII based file formats are just not a good idea to contain program settings, but having each program have it's own configuration file doesn't make a lot of sense either. If programs were to offer an integration of each of their separate configuration files, virtualized as a single registry, it might be a little more secure, but you wouldn't have the benefit of binary compression, or encryption, and there are performance implications to breaking the registry up into multiple files. No, the system registry is the best idea at this time. People that argue that it's a performance drain on the system don't know what they're talking about. This is the same reason why experts will tell you that registry cleaners don't do anything positive for the system, and certainly don't improve your system performance.

Waethorn

on Aug 6, 2009

"Again, the corporate world does not "upgrade". They RE IMAGE!" It's the best practice approach that MDT defaults to - using USMT to backup settings and doing a full install.

shark47

on Aug 6, 2009

"rr0de74, the reports were totally misread. Once again, Ed Bott does a very good analysis of this." They were. Even ScriptLogic's website had a different interpretation of it. Mossy should stick to fawning over Apple products. Dvorak should probably switch to celebrity gossip.

chuckb84

on Aug 6, 2009

First, I have to laugh every time Paul refers to Microsoft as "the software giant". Lately, it has the sound of whistling past the graveyard. Microsoft is certainly not in the same place as beleaguered Dell, but it isn't the company of old either. On the specific point here, it isn't like I'm an expert on Windows architecture, but the registry puts all settings files in a single location, so it is susceptible to a single point failure, right? That is just a bad idea, and there is no "performant" argument that balances that bad design choice. Microsoft seems to believe this is the way to do things; it's also how Entourage (Outlook as well?) stores email, which is one of the many reasons I won't go near that program. "The bottom line is that the registry, is not only a very good thing technically, in Vista and Windows 7 it is virtualized, refined, resistant to compromise and corruption, self-healing and blisteringly fast." I can't judge this, but how much does "blisteringly fast" matter? How much of the total time of any program is spent reading a configuration file? I'd say that robust matters a lot more than fast.... "Its pure Irony that Paul accuses Dvorak of slanted journalism, pure irony. Oh how one could reach back in Paul's world and pull out all of the "Apple is dead" comments and full blown articles with ease." Exactly right. "Paul's world" is pretty different that the one where the rest of us live. Here's just one quote, "Apple's market share is 1.88 percent today, and as your own math showed you, it will be 1.7 percent or lower in 2004. Why is this so hard for Mac advocates to understand? The Mac market is ending." Actually, using Paul's own beloved marketshare numbers, the Mac has DOUBLED in size since he wrote that and Apple has grown from 10% of Microsoft's market cap to 70% of Microsoft, larger than Google, 5 times the size of Dell. Paul could not have been more wrong. The faux outrage over Dvork is quite funny.

mikefarinha3

on Aug 6, 2009

They way I always understood it was the the registry was critical to how Group Policy works... which is how you manage client computers through Active Directory. In that sense what is a more efficient way of implementing Group Policy without a single monolithic collection of settings?

Waethorn

on Aug 6, 2009

"On the specific point here, it isn't like I'm an expert on Windows architecture, but the registry puts all settings files in a single location, so it is susceptible to a single point failure, right?" Except that when it's well designed and respected by users (or programs) it's a much more secure way of doing it - kinda like keeping user data off of workstations and putting it all on the server, and then just requiring a backup of the server, rather than all the workstations. It's easier to maintain and manage, and more secure. Or, you could just let programs handle their own configuration data with whatever permissions they see fit and see where that leads....

Waethorn

on Aug 6, 2009

Dvorak - as relevant as the PC Magazine that he writes for. Ditto for Mossbeard and the WSJ for that matter.

dalezjc

on Aug 6, 2009

I enjoy reading Dvorak, and have for a long time. Is he always correct? Of course not, but he' s not paid to be politically correct. I actually enjoy reading this blog as well, though Thurrott chugs the kool-aid a bit much some days, and can't see through his Microsoft vision goggles. Face it, Thurrott makes his money by saying nice things about Microsoft products, so he can't bite the hand that feeds him. And even though the registry is really a legacy function at this point, it *was* a bad design decision from the beginning. I work for a very large federal government agency, and we *just started* rolling out Vista to workstations and laptops. It will be three to four years before we see Windows 7, and by that time Windows 15 will be out?! *That's the reality*.

tylamb

on Aug 6, 2009

So are there any REAL test on the registry slowing down a computer. I've always pointed at crapware and process's running in the background. Anyone have any links to some test that have been ran? Back with 2000 we had at least 1 computer a week have registry issues (200+ machines here) XP was a little better but still a pain. I haven't seen a Vista issue yet. I really haven't seen any XP problems since SP2. I think it's a non issue. What ever replaces it will be massive and slow.

rr0de74@live.com

on Aug 6, 2009

@dipshit, I agree with you. I never stated when I though corporations would switch, I know mine probably will start our testing of Windows 7 in mid 2010, and that should take 3-6 months they we will discuss go/no-go and then a date for the start. If I had to guess that would be early 2011. My point is Paul is digging on Dvorak about the 60% quote like Dvorak made it up, when it was widely talked about when it came out, except for here because that would probably not go well with Paul and his pro-MS world. Much like we have not heard from him on the year end results for MS, which in the world of MS should be HUGE NEWS since MS has NEVER posted an annual loss. Irony indeed.

shark47

on Aug 6, 2009

Oooh, the good 'ol Apple is killing the big, bad Microsoft, eh, chuck? "...which in the world of MS should be HUGE NEWS since MS has NEVER posted an annual loss." Huh? Did MS actually post a loss?

rr0de74@live.com

on Aug 6, 2009

There is no denying that as you install more software on a Windows box and the registry gets larger and larger that Windows performance suffers over time. Hence the practice of re-loading Windows for PC enthusiast every so often. I have even read that some corporations, will refresh Windows clients on a regular basis to speed things up. There is nothing quite like a clean install of Windows with no apps installed when it comes to Windows performance. Whom ever said corporations re-image is dead on. No corporation is going to install Windows 7 even over the top of Vista SP2, if they know what they are doing. I have loooooooong been an advocate of clean installs at home as well, and that is with any OS from any company. @Chuck, Entourage is a offline only connection to Exchange. Much like Outlook is with a POP/IMAP account. Data is stored locally in one file, the same for Outlook on a PC, it uses a .pst file, or .ost file. Outlook in non-cached mode connects directly to the Exchange server database. The problems of the Entourage are no different than a Outlook user that lives out of a .pst file. Hopefully the Snow Leopard Mail/iCal/Address book compatibility with Exchange will end Entourage for good.

lotsamystuff

on Aug 6, 2009

I love how you call Dvorak "a smart and experienced guy" when he's baiting Macintosh users, but when he criticizes The Precious, you turn on him like a circus tiger that suddenly sees his trainer as dinner. But the best part of this post is here: "Windows 7 is a huge win. It's not a revolutionary technical update to the core OS (that was Vista). It's just a chance to nicely fine-tune something that, for some people, was a little off." You're saying that Microsoft is charging up to $219 for some "fine tuning" of a product that was "a little off"? Seriously? That's remarkable. It's almost as remarkable as your conclusion that if everyone just read the Supersite for Windows and Microsoft PressPass pages, there would be no need for any other tech journalism. Talk about hubris...

lotsamystuff

on Aug 6, 2009

@rr0de74@live.com: MS posted a quarterly loss, and revenues were down year-over-year, but they did not post an annual loss. It was, however, their first quarterly loss in the software giant's history. So you're partially correct. Kind of. Ten seconds of research (there's this site called "Google"...) will help you: http://www.channelweb.co.uk/crn/news/2241061/microsoft-posts-first-ever

meason

on Aug 6, 2009

Whats the world wide percentage of Businesses going to OS X?

MLomasIcomm

on Aug 6, 2009

Fairly obviously, Dvorak is making these articles because he has a vested interest - he was one of those that predicted that Microsoft would 'junk up' Windows 7 by the time the final release came around (back in the early days of Beta when everyone said how good it was). Now that it's gone RTM, and with many people about to get their hands on it via MSDN and Technet, Dvorak is clearly wanted to 'prove himself right' - by creating a set of negative articles drawing on whatever sources he can get his hands on to somehow prove that he was in some way right all along. Of course, he isn't, and we know that Dvorak is basically a ranty link-baiter. Don't give him the satisfaction.

lotsamystuff

on Aug 6, 2009

techman.merb

on Aug 6, 2009

What is Happening to Windows 7 is exactly my question. It's Aug 6th and I'm still waiting for the RTM to go live on technet. This is the date it was announced for isn't it? That's really the only news I'm waiting for at this point. On topic: Dvorak has been irrelevant for years. He just a cranky guy who is never happy and will find fault with anything and everything. Nothing he says really matters in the end anyways. But it does get some people mad though!

rr0de74@live.com

on Aug 6, 2009

@lotsamystuff you are correct, I was wrong. I did know it was a 3rd quarter loss, down from last years 3rd quarter, so annually but only for the 3rd quarter:) It will be interesting to see the annual results.

rr0de74@live.com

on Aug 6, 2009

"Fairly obviously, Dvorak is making these articles because he has a vested interest - he was one of those that predicted that Microsoft would 'junk up' Windows 7 by the time the final release came around (back in the early days of Beta when everyone said how good it was)." That is hilarious!!!!! Paul has a book to sell, Windows 7 Secrets. To make that book half way decent he surely has to keep in the good grace with someone at Microsoft, so that he can get good product information, that hopefully for him know one else has or does not get before him. (Paul will let you know when he is first, trust me). To do that I am sure Paul has to be a tad pro-Microsoft....just a tad. Its called "follow the money". In this case Paul's money trail is a lot more relevant than Dvorak's.

Dipsh t Admin

on Aug 6, 2009

I can't find the information regarding the creation of the registry and the reasons, but Raymond Chen does provide some information regarding it, and compares it to XML and INI files. http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2007/11/26/6523907.aspx "but the registry puts all settings files in a single location" No, it is actually in several files in the system32\config directory, and the user settings are in additional files in your user profile directory. The Registry Editor just allows you to control all of them from one place, and they are all treated as the same place through the registry API's. The key to the registry is security granularity. That is something you can' t achieve with text or XML files. "Huh? Did MS actually post a loss? " Not that I'm aware of. "Microsoft is charging up to $219" I got it for $39.

lotsamystuff

on Aug 6, 2009

"It will be interesting to see the annual results." I'm sure they'll bounce back just fine. The new version of Vista will be sure to give them a substantial boost, as long as they don't pee the profits down the drain promoting Bing.

chuckb84

on Aug 6, 2009

"Oooh, the good 'ol Apple is killing the big, bad Microsoft, eh, chuck?" No. I'm asserting----using this thing I like to call "data"----that Paul's gleeful squealing about Apple's pending extinction was totally wrong. And that's good for you, because some entity has to exist to keep Microsoft honest. If you feel that Microsoft plays a reciprocal role with Apple, fine. Hegemony is a bad thing. ""On the specific point here, it isn't like I'm an expert on Windows architecture, but the registry puts all settings files in a single location, so it is susceptible to a single point failure, right?" Except that when it's well designed and respected by users (or programs) it's a much more secure way of doing it - kinda like keeping user data off of workstations and putting it all on the server, and then just requiring a backup of the server, rather than all the workstations. It's easier to maintain and manage, and more secure." Debatable, as is the performance point. File access to a single binary file is faster than to many ASCII files, however they are formatted. But, how much does it matter for overall performance? Not much, because config files are read at program startup and written at program exit, and perhaps accessed a little bit while the program is running when the user changes some pref setting. As a user, I much prefer distributed and robust over centralized systems that can be corrupted in their entirety by one mistake in one program. lotsa, "Windows 7 is a huge win. It's not a revolutionary technical update to the core OS (that was Vista). It's just a chance to nicely fine-tune something that, for some people, was a little off." Yep. Funny. Paul has ranted for years over $129 when OS X is upgraded, but the $219 is a-okay. He knows who butters his toast.

freakyfelt

on Aug 6, 2009

"They way I always understood it was the the registry was critical to how Group Policy works... which is how you manage client computers through Active Directory." Actually GPO's are downloaded in separate files stored in the inf and sysvol folders on a refresh. They are then run through RSOP (resultant set of policies) to deliver a final policy. At least that's how I understand it. You could easily replicate it using XML-based documents if you wanted to. But I think the better bet is a hybrid solution. Store and load OS configuration items in a database since those will be accessed constantly. The rest should be stored in separate files so they can be more easily managed and don't take up memory unless they are needed. I like Mac OS X's namespaced preference plist files (stored in ~/Library/Preferences) since it's easy to find the preferences for your particular program and delete it without running through a confusing hierarchy of registry keys, but that's an advanced user thing.

LuxZg

on Aug 6, 2009

"The problem isn't the Registry or DLL's, however, it's developer misuse of those technologies. If they would be consistent and responsible about keeping their settings and DLL's in their own exclusive locations rather than all over the file system and Registry, it wouldn't be an issue." I agree with this one completely. If devs were keeping to the rules, many problems wouldn't exist. As for Windows slowing down with time - COME ONE! It's not like we're using WinMe! Windows don't slow down because of registry problems. Whole computer slows down because of: - many unneeded background processes from 3rd party apps wasting a) memory b) CPU cycles - disk fragmentation There are probably more reasons to it, but these two certainly make more impact in the entire "slownes" scheme than any registry or general Windows problems.

johnbaxter

on Aug 6, 2009

Paul, you could at least spell John D's name correctly. Dvorak's style of being as irritating as possible has served him well through his writing career (longer than Paul's by something like a factor of 3). There was a multi-year period when he slammed Apple in his back page columns in an Apple-specific publication while at the same time slamming Microsoft in his back page columns in a PC-specific one. In each case saying how much better the "other side" was.

GabeR

on Aug 6, 2009

My problems with the registry are: - If there is a problem with an application's preferences (something has become corrupted and the application doesn't run), there is no easy way to just trash this application's preferences and let the application rebuild them at next run. I once had a problem with a Nero update messing up my system and I had to edit the registry manually (deleting all Nero references that I could find) before the installer allowed me to reinstall. - There is no way to delete the registry and let it rebuild itself (using defaults) if there is corruption. Remember how the old Mac OS (pre OS X) used the desktop database to know which applications were installed, where they were located, and which types of files they could open? If it became corrupted you could just delete it and then you had to wait a little while for the system to rebuild it. - Applications have to be installed and uninstalled by an installer program in order to update the registry and many times they leave behind garbage when they are uninstalled. - You cannot easily copy an application's preferences to another computer.

LuxZg

on Aug 6, 2009

BTw, while we're at Win7 - shouldn't it be on MSDN/TechNet for the "chosen partners"? I guess my company isn't in the right "partner" category, despite being an ISV :/

heran

on Aug 6, 2009

"Whats the world wide percentage of Businesses going to OS X?" Who cares? Those numbers don't matter unless you're a sheep, mindlessly following the herd. If they DO matter to you, I suggest you purchase your next car, MP3 player, hamburger and soda on marketshare numbers. Forget about quality, taste, or personal preference. Heck, maybe you might want to move to China. They have the most people, so it must be the best place to live, right? =================== This is sh*t. If US can grant US passports to anyone in China without asking a question how many people do you think there would be still in China? In a FREE market, people choose the product/service which maximise his/her utilities (including quality, taste or what ever). This is just basic theory of economics. Don't let someone else to educate you for this; you can learn by yourself if you really interested and want to learn it before posting some silly posts right? People do vote, with their $. BTW, please tell me how Mr Obama (who has the most share of recent election) is lack of quality or taste or whatsoever.

heran

on Aug 6, 2009

"bluewiggle, I don't know what you are doing that causes your computer to suffer such a performance hit that you need to reinstall every three months, but that is certainly not the norm. I'm typing this on a 4 year old XP computer that is still the original OEM install" ============ Same here. I have been using a XP machine (for work, otherwide I'd use vista) for nearly 3 years without noting any slowing down issue. Of course I have installed/uninstalled numerous softwares on this machine.

lotsamystuff

on Aug 6, 2009

"Don't let someone else to educate you for this; you can learn by yourself if you really interested and want to learn it before posting some silly posts right?" Clearly you missed the point. Not surprising, given the rambling nature of your response. You don't need to give me a lecture on economics when I was using an absurd example to illustrate the absurdity of the original poster's point. Do you get it now? Or shall I draw you a picture?

lotsamystuff

on Aug 6, 2009

"I got it for $39." So what? That doesn't change the fact that Microsoft is charging (please note the key words that follow) UP TO much more than that. I'll admit that I was wrong in quoting the "$219.00" number though. It can actually set you back much more. My apologies for the error: http://store.microsoft.com/microsoft/Windows-7-Professional/product/B985...

heran

on Aug 6, 2009

"Do you get it now? Or shall I draw you a picture?" I was just saying that, and I'm saying this again, in a free market people choose the product/service which maximise his/her utilities. Any problem? Funny though I was investigating the choice model recently. Maybe I'm missing something. Then please draw me a picture, please.

heran

on Aug 6, 2009

So what? That doesn't change the fact that Microsoft is charging (please note the key words that follow) UP TO much more than that. ============== By your logic, one should say people still buy it because its high quality better taste etc.

Satchmo Bevins

on Aug 6, 2009

Screw you, Dvorak!!!

subzerohitman721

on Aug 6, 2009

Paul, Dvorak is that crazy ass uncle that nobody wants around unless there's a family feud. Mac fans love him when he's ranting against Windows and all things Microsoft. Windows fans love him when he's ranting all things OS-X and Apple. In the huge scheme of things, just like PC Magazine, Dvorak has been non-existent for years. I know a lot of people who would love to be in Dvorak's position. Writing about technology, being able to check out the latest and greatest, and envisioning the future. But the man always has a complaint, no matter how well the product is made. Just another fool who complains about everything because he can't sit back and be glad that he's even got the opportunity. If the man is so angry and so un-satisfied with all things computer tech, maybe he's in the wrong field. Dvorak's rants reminds me of Macbeth. The very famous soliloquy called, "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow..." Its how I feel about people getting vile about Apple and Microsoft. They're just companies trying to sell products and make money. "She should have died hereafter; There would have been a time for such a word. To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow, Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, To the last syllable of recorded time; And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury Signifying nothing." — Macbeth Dvorak and a couple of respondents on here need to step back, unplug, step outside, smell the roses, take a walk, and realise its not a big deal. Dvorak's articles aren't going to change a company's IT plans, my purchase plans, or even any Mac users purchase plans. Let Dvorak fret on stage. In a few months or a year, Mac fans will want his head for something he doesn't like about OS-X, Safari, the iPhone, whatever. A tale told by an idiot, full of Dvorak's sound and fury that signifies nothing. Folks, I'm going on vacation for 12 days in Northern California starting Friday afternoon. Have fun ranting, raving, and ripping each others heads off. Peace!

weedmonk

on Aug 6, 2009

Dvorak is going through his Applepheliac phase. He's probably notices that his MS Flaming "analysis" seems to be getting more hit traffic than his previous Mac flame shticks. Nothing to really see here. If you watch last weeks Cranky Geeks, he tried to peddle this same half baked theory and gets shot down by the panel especially Garnet Lee.

Dipsh t Admin

on Aug 6, 2009

lotsa, I was well aware of the UP TO. However, most people will just need to spend $119 for the Home Upgrade. Only if you are building a computer yourself will you need the full version that you quote. And remember, in the never ending quest to show how the Snow Leopard upgrade is only $29, if you didn't upgrade to Leopard, it will cost you much more.

Showing 1-50 of 98 items

Discuss this Article 98

Please Log In or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Office 365 InfoCenter

What I Use

What I Use: On the Road 21

What I Use: March 2013 33

WinSuperSite.com

Site Features

Penton

Follow Paul

Search WinSuperSite.com

Related Penton Sites

What is Happening to Windows 7?

Discuss this Article 98

Please Log In or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Office 365 InfoCenter

What I Use

What I Use: On the Road 21

What I Use: March 2013 33

WinSuperSite.com

Site Features

Penton

Follow Paul

Search WinSuperSite.com

Related Penton Sites