Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

ghacks.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 276 posts

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#101

Post by Bjartr »

gemjam wrote: post #48
Waterluvian wrote: post #37

I just booted up a windows 10 machine earlier today for the first time in many months. It absolutely bewilders me how terribad the UI is. You have this fancy UI but if you ever click one or two options deep you end up getting these alternately styled legacy interfaces. It's so incoherent. It really makes windows 10 feel like a skin on top of windows xp. So when the article says Microsoft wants to push users into wind…

One super useful hidden feature but terrible ui is you can start typing as soon as Win 10 start menu is open... example 'notepad'... I used to install classic shell just to get the [run] input box

It is absolutely useful and exists as far back as Vista. Also WinKey+R will open the run dialog.

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#102

Post by la_barba »

robocat wrote: post #83
gemjam wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One super useful hidden feature but terrible ui is you can start typing as soon as Win 10 start menu is open... example 'notepad'... I used to install classic shell just to get the [run] input box

Except if you start typing just after booting, the search service (or something) isn't running yet and it doesn't give you any results even if you wait... I hate using Windows 10 because I am constantly hitting new unique bugs in the UI, and regularly enough I run into complete show-stoppers. Windows UI is just so broken. I do run into bugs on Ubuntu, but usually there is a workaround. And I have lower expectations w…

Wow.. I have never found a showstopper bug in either of those OSs, but I have found a couple of ICE bugs in MSVC which I'm kinda proud of. B-)

Any repro steps for the bugs?

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#103

Post by la_barba »

godson_drafty wrote: post #12

Omitting automatic registry backups is a defensible policy. Telling the user that a backup was completed while a 0 byte file was saved is lying. Seems like a criminal act under the circumstances.

Wait till you hear about how they also lie about Windows 10 being Windows 7 so that old programs can run.

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#104

Post by kyberias »

inlined wrote: post #67

How the heck are you supposed to use the backup without the registry? You might as well just handpick which document folders you want to back up. Without the registry you can’t even load a DLL; interfaces are loaded via UUID which seeks to the registry to find the dll and its threading model.

The Microsoft response tells you this: you use a system restore point.

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#106

Post by judge2020 »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #49
plopz wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this mean practically when even something as old as XP got a patch just a few months ago?

Patches might happen, but don't hold your breath. It's at Microsoft's discretion. If they are asked why don't they do something about a new vulnerability on an old OS, they'll say they don't support it anymore, users should upgrade, and that will be that. (Did XP ever get Spectre or Meltdown patches?) Maybe more importantly, third parties will notice that MS isn't supporting it and is telling people to upgrade, so th…

Companies will continue to pay for support for Windows 7 for at least another 5 years, so I don't see why Microsoft wouldn't push things like 0-day fixes to all existing computers when they fix exploits for paying businesses.

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#107

Post by opportune »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #85
wrs wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a skin on a skin on a skin on a skin. Its always been this way. By clicking on “advanced” buttons you can easily end up with four different eras of UI on the screen, including different system fonts and different font rendering algorithms! I can tell you first-hand from trying to get some of that fixed years ago, there’s just so much STUFF in Windows that is hardly ever seen, or should only be seen by “IT profes…

Microsoft is a big company and Windows is a big product. Is fully remaking the Control Panel really such a monumental task? The Control Panel isn't that deep. It's not as though Microsoft needs to create a UI for every advanced Group Policy setting. The new Settings app was introduced with Windows 8 in 2013. That means Microsoft has had six years to complete the transition.

A lot of the windows UI code is ancient by software standards, some of it written before desktop GUI frameworks even existed. And much of that code is still being used across versions.

Rewriting in a way that is 100% backwards compatible (any less compatible is unacceptable) would be a massive endeavor and very hard to justify given the cost.

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#108

Post by sterlind »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #85
wrs wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a skin on a skin on a skin on a skin. Its always been this way. By clicking on “advanced” buttons you can easily end up with four different eras of UI on the screen, including different system fonts and different font rendering algorithms! I can tell you first-hand from trying to get some of that fixed years ago, there’s just so much STUFF in Windows that is hardly ever seen, or should only be seen by “IT profes…

Microsoft is a big company and Windows is a big product. Is fully remaking the Control Panel really such a monumental task? The Control Panel isn't that deep. It's not as though Microsoft needs to create a UI for every advanced Group Policy setting. The new Settings app was introduced with Windows 8 in 2013. That means Microsoft has had six years to complete the transition.

I'm a weirdo but I kinda like the archaeological deep dive-type feelings I get, seeing two decades of OS history rewind as I'm reaching further into the guts of the beast.

My only gripe with the old school is accessibility (scaling in particular, ugh), but even that's not so bad.

(Disclaimer: I work for MS, but not on Windows)

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#109

Post by gruez »

Bartweiss wrote: post #31
docker_up wrote: post #6

I'm still on Windows 7 on a 2012 desktop. There's no reason for me to change. I've yet to run into any situation that has required me to upgrade. Since the world is generally web-first, the only thing that matters is Chrome and Firefox. Even running 4K video just required a codec upgrade as opposed to CPU upgrade. Yes there are security concerns but I'm pretty vigilant. I haven't run a virus scanner in 15 years, I'm…

> I'm still on Windows 7 on a 2012 desktop... I haven't run a virus scanner in 15 years, I'm just extremely paranoid over what I click on and which sites I visit. I run an ad-blocker and pi-hole to decrease any attack vectors. To be blunt, this is a bad idea. I'm sympathetic to the general motivation. I think the value and effectiveness of antivirus is generally overstated; it's often a replacement for vigilant brows…

>we've seen zero-days compromising servers and numerous other threats that could affect you indirectly. If your machine was Lenovo, it quite possibly came with malware. If you've used Sennheiser's setup app, your root certificate store may be poisoned. Further back, if you put Sony BMG music CDs into your machine, they may have given you a rootkit.

>But I think it's valuable to have something that keeps up with the history of other known screwups to help protect me against other, stranger threat vectors.

I don't think antiviruses protect you against 0days. If the attacker is going through the trouble of using a 0day, they're probably going to make their payload FUD as well. As for rest, I don't think they'll get picked up either, or at least, they'll only get picked up after a massive media shitstorm. Most

Re: Microsoft explains the lack of Registry backups in Windows 10

#110

Post by velosol »

la_barba wrote: post #100
outworlder wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you backup etc and home, you can pretty much restore a linux machine back to working order. Yes, you might be missing packages in a brand new install, but then the extra files are harmless. People put etc in git even: https://joeyh.name/code/etckeeper/ The registry is much more magical and it is difficult to find and remove cruft, so I suppose there's an argument against it.

>If you backup etc and home, you can pretty much restore a linux machine back to working order. Hmm, I've never done this. In terms of config files, are there never any breaking changes between versions? Like ..is a v1.0 config file always guaranteed to work with v2.0 and vice versa? I guess and a related question - what is the best way to determine if an /etc/ config file isn't required?

Usually breaking changes are highlighted in your update cycle and if something is added or slightly modified you might find a *.conf.rpmnew or similar. rpmconf [1] helps with those sorts of updates.

[1]: https://github.com/xsuchy/rpmconf

Post reply on HN