Windows without a registry?

[Chrono Archangel]

Would it be possible for Microsoft to develop a Windows without a registry? or are they so dependant of it that it would be nearly impossibleto remove it?
the registry always seems to be a pain in the *** an IIRC MacOS doesnt have one(?)...

It just seems like we wouldbe better off without it...any opinions?

[Kellicros]

I see your point, but I think there's a reason they are keeping it. If they indeed killed the registry in a later windows, they will have to redo everything, many softwares will not be able to function properly since most of them use registry...

[Kane]

MAC OS will have a registry of sorts.
The registry as it is works fine. Sure tweaks need to be made, but no operating system is really without a registry of some sort.

[Chrono Archangel]

so the current MacOS really dont have a registry...
what about Linux? (i dont know much when it comes ot Linux)

[RF]

How about windows 3.1/95 ?

Edit: Oh, if you need on the fly changes to the registry, in windows xp close the explorer process and go back into the task manager to run it as a new task.

[Chrono Archangel]

Originally Posted by Reichfuher

How about windows 3.1/95 ?

Edit: Oh, if you need on the fly changes to the registry, in windows xp close the explorer process and go back into the task manager to run it as a new task.

3.1 and 95 didnt have a registry? lol didnt know that. 3.1 has always been good with me its still installed on my 486
edit: oh and Reich....Flames lost

[tookers]

As far as my knowledge with linux is, it doesnt have a registry.
Although all programs installed (via RPM which is kinda like a windows MSI file) are stored in a RPM DB file which allows you to know which programs have been installed and allows you to remove them from the system etc. There have been a few errors with the RPM DB becoming corrupt due to unfinished installations or uninstallations.

[gameman733]

Originally Posted by Chrono Archangel

3.1 and 95 didnt have a registry? lol didnt know that. 3.1 has always been good with me its still installed on my 486
edit: oh and Reich....Flames lost

IIRC, thats not right. Windows 95 had a registry and 3.1 had a simplified version that only kept track of file extensions.

[Kane]

The problem is that you don't understand what the registry really is.
It's a centralised database of file associations, services essential files, user details, and much more. Even if MacOS and Linux etc say they don't have a registry, they do of a sort. They have something silmilar to tell it what to do.
Win95 simply cetralised the database that Win 3.1 from the multitude of ini files to a single location.

[Vanit]

I think we're stepping away from the actual task at hand here. Microsoft should just better organise the registry. I, for one, suffered greatly from bad blocks on my hard drive which absolutely ****ed a lot of valuable files up and replaced them with fake gigs of random gibber files.

[Chrono Archangel]

Originally Posted by Kane-Sama

The problem is that you don't understand what the registry really is.
It's a centralised database of file associations, services essential files, user details, and much more. Even if MacOS and Linux etc say they don't have a registry, they do of a sort. They have something silmilar to tell it what to do.
Win95 simply cetralised the database that Win 3.1 from the multitude of ini files to a single location.

I do understand what the registry is...but cant they store all that data in there respected installed folder, as ini or configuration files? If we didnt have a registry we wouldnt need uninstall programs...we would only have to flush the folder. (IMO that is much better)

[RPGWizard]

It's really a matter of on-the-fly checking for bad sectors as well as having sufficient backups of the Registry and other important system files. I don't think that Windows would be better off without a registry, but I do believe that there's always room for improvement within it.

[scottlc]

Linux apps use seperate config files, not a centralised registry.

[Quark]

Originally Posted by Chrono Archangel

I do understand what the registry is...but cant they store all that data in there respected installed folder, as ini or configuration files? If we didnt have a registry we wouldnt need uninstall programs...we would only have to flush the folder. (IMO that is much better)

Then you can have little of the interconnections present in current Windows systems. Want to use Internet Explorer but don't use Outlook or Outlook Express as your default E-mail? Tough luck, IE won't know how to handle mailto links.

How about, for instance, Blizzard Games. For each game you'd need a seperate file containing info for the battle.net servers and connection settings, etc. Instead, you just have a few registry entries that each game can access.

Also, WinAPI has registry functions built in. Without it, developers would have to come up with their own file system to store small amounts of data. Then another comes in to work on the project, and has no idea how the system is designed. The registry is easily understandable and referenced, thus making it easier to read/modify other people's code.