5 ms·

The registry's implementation is bad, sure. However, a global key/value store is extremely useful. I changed the default background color in Windows from 'White

The registry's implementation is bad, sure. However, a global key/value store is extremely useful. I changed the default background color in Windows from 'White' to 'Light Gray,' and it works for almost every application I use. Visual Studio, Explorer, even some webpages! For years, I turned the brightness of my monitor down, but that severely hinders readability of some color schemes. How would global shared settings look without a registry? Like Unix configuration files. This is a step backwards, as there is no unified way to read Unix configurations. Some things are stored in environment variables, some things are stored in XML files, some things are represented as special files, and some things are stored in INI-style files. Something like window color would be handled by the display manager, but other configuration settings would need to be hunted down at runtime. What's really better, "read system.window.background.default_color.[rgb] as ints," or "parse /etc/x/conf/x.conf as an .ini file, look for the variable background_color. It is stored in the format (r,g,b). If it is not present, the default is (255,255,255)."?

rleisti 17y ago
You could create a library to read the setting, and everyone could just use the library. I like the Unix way better myself, as it's more about building up functionality through composition, rather than setting out to create grand unified architecture. Speaking (possibly too) generally, I find large architectures tend to be harder to fix.
- FooBarWidget 17y ago
  > You could create a library to read the setting, and everyone could just use the library. You've just described the registry conceptually.
glymor 17y ago
The article was arguing that the Windows registry implementation is bad. He thankfully avoided the usual unix vs windows philosophizing. Basically it's a boring debate as Linux does have a number of X windows related registries. For example GConf and X resources (xrdb).
- bitwize 17y ago
  "Linux does have a number of X windows related registries" There's your problem right there. The correct number is ONE. ONE registry, ONE widget set, ONE global, standard, accepted set of keybindings. That's what the Linux community needs to make happen in order to be taken seriously as a desktop OS.
  - Luyt 17y ago
    I'm glad I have some choices left. Your wish to have only ONE of anything sounds a bit constrained to me.
  - FooBarWidget 17y ago
    As opposed to Mac OS X, where many apps can't agree on which key binding to use for switching tabs to the left or right? Alt+Cmd+Left/Right in TextMate and Firefox, Alt+Left/Right in Adium and iTerm, Apple's own apps use Alt+[/]. Or Windows where there are a gazillion of widget sets that only happen to look like each other? MFC, WinForms, VCL, Fox, FLTK, Tk, WTL, etc. not to mention that almost every commercial app thinks it's cool to use custom controls that don't look or behave like the rest of the system. And these are supposed to be serious desktop OSes?

rleisti 17y ago

You could create a library to read the setting, and everyone could just use the library. I like the Unix way better myself, as it's more about building up functionality through composition, rather than setting out to create grand unified architecture. Speaking (possibly too) generally, I find large architectures tend to be harder to fix.

FooBarWidget 17y ago
> You could create a library to read the setting, and everyone could just use the library. You've just described the registry conceptually.

glymor 17y ago

The article was arguing that the Windows registry implementation is bad. He thankfully avoided the usual unix vs windows philosophizing. Basically it's a boring debate as Linux does have a number of X windows related registries. For example GConf and X resources (xrdb).

bitwize 17y ago
"Linux does have a number of X windows related registries" There's your problem right there. The correct number is ONE. ONE registry, ONE widget set, ONE global, standard, accepted set of keybindings. That's what the Linux community needs to make happen in order to be taken seriously as a desktop OS.
- Luyt 17y ago
  I'm glad I have some choices left. Your wish to have only ONE of anything sounds a bit constrained to me.
- FooBarWidget 17y ago
  As opposed to Mac OS X, where many apps can't agree on which key binding to use for switching tabs to the left or right? Alt+Cmd+Left/Right in TextMate and Firefox, Alt+Left/Right in Adium and iTerm, Apple's own apps use Alt+[/]. Or Windows where there are a gazillion of widget sets that only happen to look like each other? MFC, WinForms, VCL, Fox, FLTK, Tk, WTL, etc. not to mention that almost every commercial app thinks it's cool to use custom controls that don't look or behave like the rest of the system. And these are supposed to be serious desktop OSes?