If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
That does not really work if the two computers do not have exactly the same hardware.
"sgopus" wrote in message ... | just get Acronis True Image once you have your install up and working, make | an image/clone your set. | | "Skybuck Flying" wrote: | | What Microsoft should (try) to do is: | | 1. Make it possible for users to install all applications into a "disk" | image. | | 2. All settings are stored inside the "disk" image as well. | | 3. Somehow mount the disk image in windows. | | 4. When the disk image is mounted windows reads all the "registry" tweaks | and integrates it into windows. | | 5. When the disk image is unmounted windows remove it again. | | This would allow transferring of software installation by simply | copieing/transferring one single file ! | | Easy to do for users and much more "thrustworthy". | | You know everything was transferred ! | | Bye, | Skybuck. | | | | |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
What two computers? he only mentioned one. just mounting and unmounting a
drive. "Richard in AZ" wrote: That does not really work if the two computers do not have exactly the same hardware. "sgopus" wrote in message ... | just get Acronis True Image once you have your install up and working, make | an image/clone your set. | | "Skybuck Flying" wrote: | | What Microsoft should (try) to do is: | | 1. Make it possible for users to install all applications into a "disk" | image. | | 2. All settings are stored inside the "disk" image as well. | | 3. Somehow mount the disk image in windows. | | 4. When the disk image is mounted windows reads all the "registry" tweaks | and integrates it into windows. | | 5. When the disk image is unmounted windows remove it again. | | This would allow transferring of software installation by simply | copieing/transferring one single file ! | | Easy to do for users and much more "thrustworthy". | | You know everything was transferred ! | | Bye, | Skybuck. | | | | |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
2 PCs are suggested in the header, and, specifically stated in the original
post text. "Skybuck Flying" subsequent reply did not contain the original post. Of which, is the subsequent thread content from there, and, listed below. -- Dave 2008 Focus , 5 spd no frills coupe- to date per fillup - 33 mpg low - 39 mpg high. How much CO footprint to remove and transport basic materials for batteries and to manufacture the batteries for the Ford Fusion and any other hybrid? "sgopus" wrote in message ... What two computers? he only mentioned one. just mounting and unmounting a drive. "Richard in AZ" wrote: That does not really work if the two computers do not have exactly the same hardware. "sgopus" wrote in message ... | just get Acronis True Image once you have your install up and working, make | an image/clone your set. | | "Skybuck Flying" wrote: | | What Microsoft should (try) to do is: | | 1. Make it possible for users to install all applications into a "disk" | image. | | 2. All settings are stored inside the "disk" image as well. | | 3. Somehow mount the disk image in windows. | | 4. When the disk image is mounted windows reads all the "registry" tweaks | and integrates it into windows. | | 5. When the disk image is unmounted windows remove it again. | | This would allow transferring of software installation by simply | copieing/transferring one single file ! | | Easy to do for users and much more "thrustworthy". | | You know everything was transferred ! | | Bye, | Skybuck. | | | | |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
Yeah,
The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! Bye, Skybuck. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
"Skybuck Flying" wrote:
Yeah, The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! You're a moron. What you want to do is impossible for a bazillion reasons. You're just too stupid to realize it. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
Skybuck Flying wrote: Yeah, The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! Bye, Skybuck. The ONLY applications that would would work in that scenario are the few utilities that don't rely on registry entries to function. That probably is something on the order of less than 1/10 of one percent of the software out there. In other words, not going to work in any real non-diagnostic situation. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
Bob I wrote:
Skybuck Flying wrote: Yeah, The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! Bye, Skybuck. The ONLY applications that would would work in that scenario are the few utilities that don't rely on registry entries to function. That probably is something on the order of less than 1/10 of one percent of the software out there. In other words, not going to work in any real non-diagnostic situation. Not really, you could have an application hive that stores all that and gets loaded dynamically. Windows already has something similar with the user entries. The only real issue would be OS compatibility. You can't guarantee the new OS can support the old API interfaces; and that the applications could support the new OS items, such as file security, etc. This is bound to cause problems eventually. James |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
James Kosin wrote: Bob I wrote: Skybuck Flying wrote: Yeah, The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! Bye, Skybuck. The ONLY applications that would would work in that scenario are the few utilities that don't rely on registry entries to function. That probably is something on the order of less than 1/10 of one percent of the software out there. In other words, not going to work in any real non-diagnostic situation. Not really, you could have an application hive that stores all that and gets loaded dynamically. Windows already has something similar with the user entries. The only real issue would be OS compatibility. You can't guarantee the new OS can support the old API interfaces; and that the applications could support the new OS items, such as file security, etc. This is bound to cause problems eventually. James In other words ONLY by changing the current method of maintaining that information. So there is U3 and INI files already. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
Bob I wrote:
James Kosin wrote: Bob I wrote: Skybuck Flying wrote: Yeah, The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! Bye, Skybuck. The ONLY applications that would would work in that scenario are the few utilities that don't rely on registry entries to function. That probably is something on the order of less than 1/10 of one percent of the software out there. In other words, not going to work in any real non-diagnostic situation. Not really, you could have an application hive that stores all that and gets loaded dynamically. Windows already has something similar with the user entries. The only real issue would be OS compatibility. You can't guarantee the new OS can support the old API interfaces; and that the applications could support the new OS items, such as file security, etc. This is bound to cause problems eventually. James In other words ONLY by changing the current method of maintaining that information. So there is U3 and INI files already. Yes, but Windows has gotten to dislike INI files and the like for supporting the registry. Windows 3.11 and Windows 95 used INI files heavily. Windows 98 supported registry and after Windows Vista supports some of the registry hives... maybe Windows XYZ will have the support for dynamic application (install/uninstall on use) when needed. Could save a lot of DISK space by allowing the OS to uninstall an application automatically that wasn't used often and later be able to re-install when the use arose again. James |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Transferring files to a new computer (Good solution idea)
James Kosin wrote: Bob I wrote: James Kosin wrote: Bob I wrote: Skybuck Flying wrote: Yeah, The idea is to store applications and settings inside a disk image seperated from the operating system itself. Therefore new computers can come with new operating systems. And then simply the old application disk image will be transferred to the new operating system and "installed" (= mounted) there. Saving tremendous ammounts of time ! Bye, Skybuck. The ONLY applications that would would work in that scenario are the few utilities that don't rely on registry entries to function. That probably is something on the order of less than 1/10 of one percent of the software out there. In other words, not going to work in any real non-diagnostic situation. Not really, you could have an application hive that stores all that and gets loaded dynamically. Windows already has something similar with the user entries. The only real issue would be OS compatibility. You can't guarantee the new OS can support the old API interfaces; and that the applications could support the new OS items, such as file security, etc. This is bound to cause problems eventually. James In other words ONLY by changing the current method of maintaining that information. So there is U3 and INI files already. Yes, but Windows has gotten to dislike INI files and the like for supporting the registry. Windows 3.11 and Windows 95 used INI files heavily. Windows 98 supported registry and after Windows Vista supports some of the registry hives... maybe Windows XYZ will have the support for dynamic application (install/uninstall on use) when needed. Could save a lot of DISK space by allowing the OS to uninstall an application automatically that wasn't used often and later be able to re-install when the use arose again. James We already have terabyte drives and where/what exactly are you going to "re-install" from? Sounds a lot like the "great idea for a RAM drive". Whole lot of monkey motion for a net loss of resources. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|