Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Settings backup software?

<< < (3/6) > >>

Carol Haynes:
Even if you are happy tinkering in the registry it is really hard to back up applications settings as there is no easy way to determine what needs to be backed up.

I suppose one way you could do it is to use Total Uninstall (or similar app) to monitor the registry while you set up and configure an application. Once that is done you can check through the resulting backup to find out which folders it creates, which files it adds/removes/swaps and which registry entries are altered/added/removed. It would then not be a difficult task to write a plugin for Genie-soft's Backup Manager Pro - they are just text files with a list of what to back up.

There isn't any obvious automatic way to do this - short of someone writing all the details you require for every application as almost no two programs do the same thing in the same way.

This is one of the big headaches of the Windows System - everything gets scattered about all over the place as the programmer see fit. OK there are guidelines set out by Microsoft about what should and shouldn't be done but MS is often on of the worst culprits at breaking those guidelines - some MS apps add literally thousands of registry entries - the thought of trying to track them all down is a nightmare. Some of these registry changes (like entering serial codes and activation details) are often hidden from registry monitoring apps - and some don't even seem to use the registry at all (or files accessible to the Windows File System).

Whoever designed the stupid registry system should be shot - resuscitated and then shot again! It would be much simpler if every application had a simple structure - one folder containing all necessary files, individual INI files to store each users settings stored in an easily accessible place within each user's profile or a user defined place. Specific user data (such as email archives) store where the user wants them. The only reason for any sort of central registry is for registering an interest in shared activity (such as OLE applications) between applications and services and for filetype administration - though the latter could probably be done more effectively with an effective system tool.

Trouble is backward compatibility means we are stuck with the mess ad-inifinitum - as shown by the pointless inclusion of SYSTEM.INI etc. in current versions of Windows.

edbro:
Carol, it only gets worse with Vista. In Vista, all the ini and other config files that programs write to their program folder get redirected to a virtual "program files" directory. You end up with some configuration data in the registry, some in the virtual folders and some in "ProgramData" folder. You have to hunt all over the place to find things like plugins, *.cfg, etc.

I advocate using TotalUnistall also. I use it for most installs. It is especially good if you download any of the GiveAwayoftheDay (http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/) software as you can record the registration information for reinstallations. I still use the older, freeware version of TotalUninstall. It still fits my needs.

Josh:
edbro, surely you cant blame microsoft for developers not using the proper setup for their file storage right? I mean, microsoft made user profile folders in NT for a reason, so that user specific settings could be stored in a central place. Developers still used program files for storage because microsoft never FORCED you to store it elsewhere. Well, now they do, and rightfully so, so that users can have a single place to look for settings.

edbro:
I didn't blame anybody. I'm just saying what the situation is.

Carol Haynes:
Josh, the problem is that if you go back to Windows 3.1 onwards there have been a variety of solutions. Until recently vendors were supposed to write software that was compatible with Windows 9x, NT, 200x, XP and now Vista. OK most are now dropping support for pre-NT systems but until recently there were no consistent user profile folders and INI files were the norm for settings in Windows alongside registry entries.

Microsoft is entirely responsible for the mess that now exists - they designed it and have forced backwards compatability decisions on their own code and other software vendors.

IMHO a rational approach for XP, Vista or the next version would have been to draw a line under history and design a new system from scratch. That way a rational and efficient system could be put in place and the present hideous mess dropped for good. An optional abstracted compatibility layer (almost a built in Virtual Machine - like VMWare or VirtualPC but more tightly integrated) could be included for a couple of versions of Windows with advanced notice that support will be removed at a specified date. That way developers would perhaps have two versions of Windows in which to port all applications to native mode and the compatibility layer could be dropped in a future build altogether. Users could retain the right to run an older version of Windows for long term legacy apps - or run them under a VMWare type solution not integrated my MS.

In case anyone thinks this is a far fetched idea it is precisely what Apple did with MacOS when they move to 'nix based OS and they even dared to do it again when they moved to the Intel platform. You don't hear Mac developers or users bellyaching over this. There would be a short term head scratching in the 'doze community but they'd get over it and see the benefits. It would also probably mean that Windows wouldn't need 8Gb of disk space just to load the installation!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page