avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 09, 2018, 09:45 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 13 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: Price of Portability  (Read 1537 times)


  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 426
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Price of Portability
« on: March 12, 2009, 08:06 AM »
I use quite a few apps that come in regular or portable versions. Without regards to speed, I would think that a portable installation would always be preferable. So, should I assume that using the registry is faster than a portable config file? Why offer two versions of the same software if a portable install would do the trick?

Yes, I know that Firefox portable is designed to not use a cache. So, there is an example of an app that is better with a normal install. Any others?


  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,134
  • [Well, THAT escalated quickly!]
    • View Profile
    • f0dder's place
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: Price of Portability
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2009, 10:35 AM »
The registry is safer than most standalone config systems, since writes are journalled. It's also faster, but that probably hasn't been relevant since the 80286 days (still gives a fuzzy feeling, though). It's not really hard supporting both registry and config-file support though, if you design your code properly and use a hierarchical/tree-structure configfile format like XML.

Offering two different versions shouldn't be necessary for most software, install-time (or even post-install) switching between regular and portable shouldn't be that difficult for a lot of stuff. Lots of application developers are either lazy or don't give much thought to this, though.
- carpe noctem