I mean reg corruption,not tweaks. Remember WINSOCK issues? Yes. I am talking about some of these reg level corruption of the entries which makes XP or vista unusable. Upto Vista, it's easy to find that problem.
Never ever heard about it. I had BSODs on my nforce4 motherboard when trying to use nvidia's "hardware" firewall (which was a retarted piece of crap, requiring a full install of an apache httpd in order to manage settings locally... :rolleyes: ), and I've had BSODs from third-party firewall, VPN and antivirus products. Some of these seem to show winsock as the problem, but that's only if you look just at the top-level driver in the BSOD, not if you study the actual minidump with WinDbg. Also, I've never had filesystme or registry corruption from any of these "normal" BSODs. Got more information on the issue?
As for BSOD, had that problem after patching uxtheme.dll which we need while changing the themes for XP. It has nothing to do with reg but performance issue you wanted to see is there when you do modify shell stuff. To be honest, never had video driver issues, unless ofcourse it was from the hardware of HP (no complaints to MS for that).
Sure you didn't use some dodgy software to patch uxtheme, which installed malware on your machine? I've had it patched on XP, XP64, Vista64 and Win7-64 without trouble. It would be a very
weird cause of BSODs, since it's a usermode DLL.
Here's how I found out debugger issue. I installed the fresh XP and vista on different machines. Then used the typical programs without any problems. And after installation of VS, observed the problem with debugger. It has mostly due to .NET and the debugger issues IMO. So it's definitely not third party issue. Yet to find out how to get over that. But As I am not doing much VC/Sharp development, it's not needed for VS 2010 onwards. Web dev VS doesn't interfere with other programs.
I still kinda doubt that has anything to do with "the debugger" (unless the 3rd party software software refuses to run on a machine with developer/debugging tools installed) - but it could very well be that the software simply doesn't work with some versions of .NET runtime libraries... whether the particular VS versions upgrade or accidentally downgrade them. If there's one thing I've learned in my years as a developer, it's that you first blame yourself, then 3rd party vendors, and only then start suspecting Microsoft. Often saves your some embarassment :-)
Also mind telling me how do you get rid of all reg entries when you install VS PRO? I have yet to figure out complete removal of VS without leaving some traces behind.
Haven't looked at it, and honestly don't care - as long as the leftovers don't cause any trouble (which they haven't). Sure, it's not aesthetically pleasing that junk gets left behind, but even some megabytes worth of data wouldn't really affect the system.
It didn't worked for me upto vista. Patch list and security fixes keeps on increasing once we have VS installed. Windows 7 on the other hand is never showed the upgrade and patching problems.
Are you saying that updates failed to install, or that there were too many updates for your liking?
Haven't had much trouble with Windows Update except when running on heavily modified Windows versions. Sure, every once in a while I have to install updates a few at a time for whatever reason, as installing everything fails. Not a big deal, sometimes I have to compile programs from source on Linux, because default packages sometimes have conflicting dependencies, which luckily always turn out to be default settings I don't need. Fortunately it's been long enough that I can't remember any particular details, just like it's been long enough since I've had problems with Windows Update :-)
For some reason installers for .NET applications have a tendency to (occasionally) replace key .NET framework files as part of the install routine. There is an XML patch that I've had to reinstall over 30 times in the past year ... Simply because the EMR software that several of our clients use insists on "updating" (e.g. borking) this perticular patch every time they do an update.
Annoying. "xcopy" installs, or custom installers? MSI based installers are at least supposed
to make sure that doesn't happen (but I still loathe their insanely slow speed).