Mark
Please do not post such self-correcting mails anymore. I had read your
message skipping the quoted text. Without your correction I wouldn't have
noticed the swearing! :-)
Gosh I'm so sorry I have offended you with my humor. Please accept my
sincerest apology.
--
Neal
Hello Mark Partous everyone else,
on 04-Dez-2005 at 07:40 you (Mark Partous) wrote:
Well, I have a lot of software that I only need to use a few times a
year. These settings are loaded every time Windows is being started. I
would have preferred a situtation where one would have the choice
On Sunday, December 4, 2005, 7:40:43, Mark Partous wrote:
These settings are loaded every time Windows is being started.
No, they aren't. Registry settings are read-in when the application first
needs them, and they stay cached for a while (registry works similarly to
disk cache, however it's
Dear Neal,
@2-Dec-2005, 19:38 -0900 (03-Dec 04:38 here) Neal Laugman [NL] in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
NL Friday, December 2, 2005, 6:21:36 AM, you quoted:
DA It's just a bull reason to have another product, based on the
DA same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
NL not a
Hi Marck
snip
I detect a vigilante in our midst! A self flagellating one at that.
Hmmm...
Yes - you've all made quite an immpression on me g.
--
Neal Laugman
Using The Bat! v3.63.06 (Beta) and Bayes Filter Plugin v2.0.4 on Win2000 SP4
Hello Michael Schneider everyone else,
on 03-Dez-2005 at 00:01 you (Michael Schneider) wrote:
Why all these queries at the same moment? What is going on there? Is
this needed? I don't think so.
Why do *YOU* worry about the registry? You're using Thunderbird on Linux,
anyway. Please go
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Why do *YOU* worry about the registry? You're using Thunderbird on Linux,
anyway. Please go elsewhere to rant about Windows, the registry, and
Ritlabs.
Oh sorry. Didn't I tell you that I have three TheBat! licences and I'm
running windows and linux on different
Hello Neal,
Saturday, December 3, 2005, 5:38:43 AM, you wrote:
NL Please do not quote swearing members on this list. This is a clear
NL violation of the list rules and will not be tolerated. The audience
NL here is a mixed bunch and this is as much a matter of polite
NL consideration for others
Hello Jernej,
Friday, December 2, 2005, 11:03:05 PM, you wrote:
JS Registry slow? Get RegMon from sysinternals, and look at the number of
JS transactions Registry handles per second - (I get an average of 870 on my
JS computer). Now imagine that all of these were instead querying normal files
JS
Hello Alexander,
Friday, December 2, 2005, 10:59:49 PM, you wrote:
ASK Thats a common myth, and it never happened to me even once in 5 1/2 years
ASK of using different Windows systems.
Good to know the crashes I had and the problems I currently have were due to
a common myth! :-)
--
Best
Hello Michael,
Friday, December 2, 2005, 11:43:42 PM, you wrote:
MS How about moving to a new workstation? With configuration-files you just
MS have to backup your application and your configuration, copy both on
MS your new machine and your done. Try this one with applications that need
MS the
Hallo Graham,
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 12:47:58 + (UTC)GMT (2-12-2005, 13:47 +0100,
where I live), you wrote:
GF b) If the answer to a) is no not really - then why bother with it. Why not
GF just put the INI file features into mainstream TB! and have this extra
GF (useful) feature in the main
Roelof Otten wrote:
For a multi user environment on one system the registry is the most
logical place to store settings per user.
Sorry but that's pure nonsense. Or you want to tell me that every OS
without a registry (= all OS exept windows) won't run properly.
My poor Linux and OS/2 ...
Graham wrote:
I'm rather dubious about Voyaer for a couple of reasons:-
--snip--
What am I missing?
It's just a bullshit reason to have another product, based on the
same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Dimitry Andric wrote:
It's just a bullshit reason to have another product, based on the
same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
Ah, you think, THAT's the reason there was no v4 this year? It was too
obvious so it's better to release a spin-off? ;-
Interessting thought :-D
Hello Dimitry,
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 14:21:36 +0100 GMT (02/12/2005, 20:21 +0700 GMT),
Dimitry Andric wrote:
What am I missing?
DA It's just a bullshit reason to have another product, based on the
DA same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
People have been asking for a portable TB.
Thomas Fernandez wrote:
It's just a bullshit reason to have another product, based on the
same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
People have been asking for a portable TB. There is a demand out
there, which is being met. It's a wise decision.
There was never any reason for The
Leif Gregory wrote:
That's part of the point. This is supposed to be a portable app. If I
want to sit down at my friend's machine, pop in my flash drive and
check my e-mail then I wouldn't have a home directory. It would get
written to the home directory of whatever user is logged in (my
Hello Michael Schneider everyone else,
on 02-Dez-2005 at 14:18 you (Michael Schneider) wrote:
There's no need at all for user applications to put their settings into
something like the windows registry!
Except that it is the way MS has designed Windows. :)
Configurations can easily be put
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Configurations can easily be put into the user's home directory as a
plain text file, an ini or for the advanced as XML.
But how would the application sense oh, I'm running from a flash drive
now (which meams it should not store the settings in the user profile)
Hello Michael Schneider everyone else,
on 02-Dez-2005 at 19:33 you (Michael Schneider) wrote:
So your question has nothing to do with what I was saying.
And what you were saying has nothing to do with Voyager. ;-)
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
I
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
So your question has nothing to do with what I was saying.
And what you were saying has nothing to do with Voyager. ;-)
*rolling eyes*
Roellof said something about local applications and their need to use
the registry. I answered him my opinion on *THAT* topic.
Hello Michael Schneider everyone else,
on 02-Dez-2005 at 21:46 you (Michael Schneider) wrote:
Roellof said something about local applications and their need to use
the registry.
You happily omitted quoting me saying that Windows was designed that way.
I assume we agree that the goal is to
On Friday, December 2, 2005, 19:13:32, Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
There's no need at all for user applications to put their settings into
something like the windows registry!
Except that it is the way MS has designed Windows. :)
Maybe, but Microsoft has deprecheated the use of Registry quite a
On Friday, December 2, 2005, 22:21:57, Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Other operation systems put them into one single directory (instead of a
single file) called /etc or whatever.
That isn't true - on *nix, /etc is used for system-wide settings only
(%ALLUSERPROFILE% and HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE in
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
MS chose to put all these configuration files into one big file called
registry from W95 on. And in the multiuser capable versions of Windows,
the user specific part of the registry (user.dat, thats where TB stores
its settings) resides in the users home directory.
Hello Jernej Simončič everyone else,
on 02-Dez-2005 at 22:41 you (Jernej Simončič) wrote:
That isn't true - on *nix, /etc is used for system-wide settings only
Whatever. I don't know the correct names. I could have written Alfred
instead of registry just as well, it makes no difference.
--
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Whatever. I don't know the correct names. I could have written Alfred
instead of registry just as well, it makes no difference.
That shows that you have no idea what you are talking about...
mod, close ;)
Michael
--
Jabber [EMAIL PROTECTED] - OpenPGP 0xE59FD50D
Um
Hello Michael Schneider everyone else,
on 02-Dez-2005 at 22:44 you (Michael Schneider) wrote:
The windows registry is slow
Things have changed dramatically since W95. Make yourself aware of how
WXP works with the registry. There a big difference to W2k and older
versions.
possibility that
Hello Michael Schneider everyone else,
on 02-Dez-2005 at 22:53 you (Michael Schneider) wrote:
That shows that you have no idea what you are talking about...
You are a very kind and friendly person, indeed.
--
Best regards,
Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981)
The first Myth
On Friday, December 2, 2005, 22:44:08, Michael Schneider wrote:
The windows registry is slow, possibility that one single application
smashes the whole thing is very high, it's hard to maintain.
Registry slow? Get RegMon from sysinternals, and look at the number of
transactions Registry
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Thats a common myth, and it never happened to me even once in 5 1/2 years
of using different Windows systems.
Ah and because it never happend to you it's a myth. :)
I for one have no problem to navigate regedit to HKCU/Software/RIT/TB, not
more or less than
Jernej Simončič wrote:
Registry slow? Get RegMon from sysinternals, and look at the number of
transactions Registry handles per second - (I get an average of 870 on my
computer). Now imagine that all of these were instead querying normal files
on disk - your disk cache would be trashed, and
Thomas and Dimitry,
What am I missing?
DA It's just a bullshit reason to have another product, based on the
DA same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
People have been asking for a portable TB. There is a demand out
there, which is being met. It's a wise decision.
If I could
Hello Neal
Friday, December 2, 2005, 6:21:36 AM, you quoted:
DA It's just a bull reason to have another product, based on the
DA same source code. I.e. the reason is more money. ;)
not a moderator
Note: This non-moderator's interjection is a note to all readers and
not just to the person
35 matches
Mail list logo
