Re: Icons of program


>>>>> "Fred" == Fred Bacon <> writes:

    Fred> This is going to sound like a terribly naive question.  I've
    Fred> never used Microsoft Windows in any incarnation, 3.1, 95 or
    Fred> NT.  What is it with the Registry that is so difficult?
    Fred> People act as though it's the Devil's spawn.  I've never
    Fred> used it, so I honestly don't understand what's so evil about
    Fred> it.

The issue is this:  the Registry is a binary database (and a bad one
at that) with extremely buggy code; as a result, it corrupts itself on 
a regular basis, completely hosing the Windows box.  If it were a text 
database, you could fix it; if it were a real database with actual
tested code, it wouldn't corrupt itself.  It is neither, and so nobody 
ever wants to deal with it.  Incidentally, this is why the Berlin
project is catching so much flak for the Registrar, a program with a
similar ideal.

Binary DB's aren't inherently bad; just about every SQL database uses
one.  They get away with it by being actually tested and stuff, so
when somebody manages to get Postgres or MySQL to corrupt itself, it's 
a big deal and it gets fixed.  Plus, if you can somehow rebuild the
database (backups are ideal, but especially if the db is just meta
info, you can just remake it), then it's no big deal.

The Mac finder is reasonably bug free (as far as Macs go), and just
stores meta info, so if it gets screwed up you simply rebuild it.  I
could deal with a Gnome database that shared these characteristics.
- -- 
Graham Hughes <>
PGP Fingerprint: 36 15 AD 83 6D 2F D8 DE  EC 87 86 8A A2 79 E7 E6

Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]