0

I used to refer to Windows as "The Infinitely Rebooting OS" and it has improved some over earlier versions but today was a different story and reminded me of those thrilling days of yesteryear. My question is why, Windows, why? Why must I reboot when I install a desktop application? Why must I reboot again when that application receives an update? I have to reboot for patches, applications, updates and installing Internet Explorer's latest version. Come on, give me a break. There has to be an easier way.

I hear what you're saying, "There is an easier way, Ken, you can use Linux." Well, that is true in almost every case except where my employer is concerned. The company standard is Windows and I have to comply with that standard.

But, that really isn't the problem. The problem isn't what I use or that I use it. The problem is that it's ridiculous to reboot all the time. If the wind blows from the East, I have to reboot. If my wife sneezes, I have to reboot. If someone uses Windex, anywhere in the world, I have to reboot.

Why can't Microsoft fix this?

And, no, I don't believe it's a feature. It's a flaw.

I don't hate Windows. I don't hate Microsoft. They deserve to exist, to make a profit, to flourish but the product they deliver needs to be something more than just a thing I have to fix between reboots.

If it's necessary to reboot because of some stupid DLLs needing to be refreshed with a reboot, then make them dynamically unloadable and reloadable. It shouldn't take a reboot, which, even on the best machines can take ten minutes before the system is ready for use.

And, no, Windows <insert latest incarnation number, name or letters here> still has to be rebooted almost every time I use it.

Dear Microsoft, please fix your !@#$%^& operating system.

Or don't. I'll run it in a VirtualBox VM with Ubuntu 10.10 as soon as it comes out.

What do you think? Is it possible that Microsoft has overlooked the user's point-of-view when building operating systems?

10
Contributors
13
Replies
45
Views
7 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by RobertHDD
1

Ken, when it comes down to it I think it comes down to money. True Microsoft has about 63.796% of all the world's money but still this problem will simply cost them too much to fix. As long as the lion share of the market still tolerates and pays for their products they will assume that it is 'good enough'

0

I know but all I did was install Visio. Good grief. How hard is it to program a system that doesn't require a reboot after installing Visio?

0

I too think that it is a flaw that Windows keep rebooting or asks to reboot every time a change occurs. It's almost like Microsoft itself. Everytime someone brings out something new (like Firefox, Chrome, Google Spreadsheet), they have to go back to the basics and start all over again.
But I dont hate MIcrosoft either and just wish they will fix this problem. I don't think there is any excuse for it. It is NOT costly to fix the problem. Their engineers simply overlooked this detail. Win & offers some respite from this, but not completely.

0

That is one of the reason I choose Linux and among others. Reboot, virus, malware, spyware, clean-up, defrag and the list goes on. If you need to use Window, why not try dual boot or use virtualisation. I believe there is a lot of software for that. Better still convince you company to adopt Linux. After all it cost them almost nothing.

0

4 years, I know...
I may as well state my part because it's obvious threads don't dimply disappear after 4 years...
if they did, all that valuable information disappears with it.
(this is why I'm highly against the "death of threads" syndrome)

as far as MS is concerned with the restarts, it's actually a "fix".
all registry settings are loaded into the RAM at runtime (on boot) but havn't been given access for changes, most programs that make any changes to the registry (almost any program now) won't see those changes until you reboot.

I agree this is a design flaw, programs should be allowed to see their changes.
Linux lacks a good registry which is also a design flaw.
the registry is good for globals in a well defined place.
linux rather uses a portion of the filesystem as the registry.

though I'm not downling linux for lack of design... it's only more messy, but still just as functional.

I have to agree though, if they havn't yet, you should get them to consider linux.
you get 3x more support for software, even though the linux software base is much smaller.

you can actually have support for most of the software that works with XP as well as the software that works with current windows.
(linux doesn't outdate to cause hastle like Windows)

dropping WinXP was MS's biggest mistake.
(especiallly when WinXP x64 was the most secure and supported newer systems)

0

Don't know that much about the registry and the lack thereof in Linux. I use both Windows and Linux but mostly for everyday stuff, I prefer Linux. My flavor of Linux is what I have settled on after trying many different ones since 2007. It works but if there are problems I have always relyed on the friendly, useful forum with my Linux. The only things that I keep Window XP, & 7 around for are Quickbooks and Excel. I use Libreoffice Calc most of the time but sometimes have to use Excel because of familiarity of how to do things. I use Gnucash in Linux for my personal finances but need Quickbooks for some entities that I work with. I have used QB for many years and familiarity and the types of reports are what keeps me on board with it.

0

The reboot makes the RAM image match the disk files. The changes are on the disk, but are not active in the running copy in the RAM until you reboot.

0

I believe it is the exact opposite. It isn't until you shut sown that registry changes are committed to disk. That is why if you get a BSOD or just power off without shutting down some changes go away.

0

Regarding the BSOD...

Its been a while that i've looked at this (blue screens were common in the NT 4 platform)... but if i recall, the registry has three copies of the "Control Control Set".. the active and two copies. After you sucessfully log on, the previous is copied to the active. If you blue screen the recommended approach is to restart and during the boot process, hit F8 and choose "Last Known Good Configuration". This will load the last known good configuration that was working. If you proceed and login, the last known good will be overridden.

We were taught and it was on several MSCE exams... do not login after a blue screen. try to load the last known good first.

I cant say for sure if any of this has changed over the years, but i though i'd throw this in to the discussion in the event that someone else can add or clarify.

0

Well either way you put it, the RAM and the disk should both be updated to match, that way you won't have to restart.

but as for the registry, which is entirely loaded into the RAM when windows boots, the fact that only 1 of the 2 images is updated is the design flaw.

0

the fact that only 1 of the 2 images is updated is the design flaw.

It's not a bug. It's a feature designed to prevent a catastrophic corruption of the active registry from propogating to disk.

Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.