To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The point isn't that editing the registry is complex, the point is that it is a single point of failure for the whole OS!
I have a colleague of mine who was had to reinstall the whole OS because of a registry corruption, (the socalled 'backup' of the registry didn't work either).
So the GP is right: each time you edit the registry, there is a possibility to hose the whole OS which is an awful design..
System restore would have bailed your colleague out of his bind. Sure it might have taken him a bit farther back than he wanted to go, but it still would have been better than nothing. System restore is an often overlooked godsend and has saved my ass on more than one occasion.
//I have a colleague of mine who was had to reinstall the whole OS because of a registry corruption, (the socalled 'backup' of the registry didn't work either).//
Well, then, either your colleague is a complete dipshit, or he has crap-ass hardware and/or computing habits.
I've done registry backups/restores several times. Worked like a charm.
I would a have to disagre. Everytime you use sudo you are running as if you are the admin. So it is more like clicking OK or when UAC comes up, or just using your computer in an pre-Vista Windows OS. The Registry on the other hand is a binary mess that while changing it you can hose your system.






Member since:
2006-06-03
I think that, in reality, registry editing is no less dangerous than running 'sudo' commands in Linux. Sure, the registry is complex, and the Microsoft overengineered solutions to simple problems tend to muddy the waters some-what, but really, editing the registry is pretty trivial.