features you disabled in Windows 7 and why?

[Udedenkz]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_searc..._search_engines

Fail.

[hdood]

Waste of money then, eh?

What do people have with antiquated technology?

XP is an inefficient slug compared to Windows 7.

XP will scroll a list-view with 20,000 items 10,000,000 times three milliseconds faster than 7.

[Guest xiphi]

Fail.

On what grounds? You said there were no alternatives when clearly there are.

XP will scroll a list-view with 20,000 items 10,000,000 times three milliseconds faster than 7.

Why not use XP then since your wasting your time and money by attempting to turn 7 into something it's not.

[Xilo]

Fail.

How is that fail? They are desktop search replacements.

I honestly don't see what the negativity towards the new search is. I use it all the time to find files. Hell, I don't even open explorer anymore. I just type the file name into search and open that way and also use it to find files by type, date, etc.

[hekkyUK]

I disabled Homegroup and Libraries in explorer so it only shows Favorites, Computer and Network down the left side :)

[Udedenkz]

Those do not replace Windows Search, those do not integrate themselves into Windows Explorer. I am talking about something that replaces Windows Search functionality (see top right corner of your Windows Explorer)

EDIT 1 & 2:

There are plenty of fast search alternatives otherwise.

Just finding one that makes itself part of and/or replaces part of Windows Explorer is hard.

Looking through the link you gave me, it seemed obvious that these were not what I was talking about.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Udedenkz

[Xilo]

Replace explorer then with something else or um, go back to XP?

[ToastGodSupreme]

Replace explorer then with something else or um, go back to XP?

One shouldn't be forced to use an older OS because the new one they bought had broken features that once worked in older versions.

Microsoft was so focused on being more like OSX with their search function that they killed so much of the usability with it. The fact that one has to go digging in help files or googling how to use the features of the search function is a sign that it's far too obscure for daily usage. Ever since XP SP3, microsoft has gone out of their way to pile on more **** and more garbage while reducing functionality (apparently they don't understand the "less is more" concept). Libraries are completely unneeded. We do not need to give average computer users the ability to create and use symbolic links. They're confused enough as it is where **** is on their computer. And we really need to do away with DEP, UAC, and all these other hand-holding mechanisms. Don't dumb down the OS, make the user smarter.

Granted, I skipped Vista and went from XP/2k3 right to Win7. So I didn't have that transitional period like many did. So maybe that has a part in it. But my experiences with Win7's search aren't isolated to just me. The search and indexing functions just aren't working how they should. Period. And honestly, the only reason I didn't keep 2k3 as my desktop OS is because I had to fight my ass off to get itunes to work on it, and even then, it didn't work right (the latest versions refuse to install on 2k3). I figured they'd at least keep supporting 2k3 for a while after xp was dead considering it's a server OS.

[Guest xiphi]

Libraries are completely unneeded. We do not need to give average computer users the ability to create and use symbolic links. They're confused enough as it is where **** is on their computer. And we really need to do away with DEP, UAC, and all these other hand-holding mechanisms. Don't dumb down the OS, make the user smarter.

You contradicted yourself and lost any credibility you had with those statements. It's obvious you have no idea what Libraries are. Suggesting that they do away with DEP and UAC is a completely moronic idea. Please, stop and think before you type your next post.

[Kirkburn]

DEP and UAC are "hand-holding mechanisms"? Ah, that's hilarious.

In any case, a lot of you have to stop and think for a moment: Microsoft do not design an OS specifically around you, They design it around what works best for the vast majority of people. They are also in a hell of a lot better position to 1) understand how the OS works 2) get feedback from all sectors of their customer base 3) prototype/test/deploy various solutions and see how they perform. It's not, as surprising as some of you may wish to believe, a bunch of monkeys typing Hamlet.

[BajiRav]

Aah! so much ignorance in this thread. All these "modders" and "tweakers" make me look smarter! :p

I disabled Homegroup and Libraries in explorer so it only shows Favorites, Computer and Network down the left side :)

If you disabled Libraries, then make sure your folders are added to indexed locations. Windows search will be really slow if your folders are not indexed.

[LiquidSolstice]

One shouldn't be forced to use an older OS because the new one they bought had broken features that once worked in older versions.

And what exactly is broken in Windows 7? If you move two generations up, and you already know that the driver compatibility broke with Vista for safety reasons, then you should be smart enough to know that not all XP programs will function correctly.

Microsoft was so focused on being more like OSX with their search function that they killed so much of the usability with it.

Wrong, you're so focused on making it out to be an OSX copy that all you're doing is copying the Apple fanboy speeches on it. OMG WINDOWS SHRINK INTO THE CENTER WHEN CLOSE THEM OS X RIPOFF OMGOMGOMGOMG. Sheesh. Aero Peek. Superbar. That's it. That's all there is "new" as far as eye-candy goes, they didn't totally revamp the whole thing.

The fact that one has to go digging in help files or googling how to use the features of the search function is a sign that it's far too obscure for daily usage.

"Digging" through help files is not a sign of weakness or bad programming. Have you even LOOKED at the help files? They're geared towards totally new computer users who see a Question Mark button on the application they are on and they want to learn how to use it. Sheesh. Power-user arrogance (I call it PUA).

Ever since XP SP3, microsoft has gone out of their way to pile on more **** and more garbage while reducing functionality (apparently they don't understand the "less is more" concept). Libraries are completely unneeded. We do not need to give average computer users the ability to create and use symbolic links. They're confused enough as it is where **** is on their computer. And we really need to do away with DEP, UAC, and all these other hand-holding mechanisms. Don't dumb down the OS, make the user smarter.

<Snipped> What do you mean "piling on more garbage while reducing functionality"? Try installing a wireless printer out of the box on Windows XP. And then do it on 7. XP will take forever because you have to install third party bull**** which came with your printer and you have to wait for it to install, then it will find the printer on your network and only THEN will it be wireless, and first you have to connect it physically to begin with to install. On Windows 7, I don't even need to connect to a new printer via USB. I click Start, I type "Add A Printer", I select network printer, and it finds the printer, installs it, sets it as default if I wish, and prints a test page all with a few clicks, and all in the time it takes for your XP computer just to launch the installer for your crappy OEM printer apps. Again, PUA right there.

What do you mean "symbolic links"? Are you really this stupid? Do you even know what Libraries are for? They are collections, you dimwit. Not some rocket-science method of organization, just a collection. Instead of having many Picture folders scattered on your computer, you just add all those picture folders to the Pictures library, so no matter where the folder is physically, if you drop a picture into one of those folders, it will show in your library, consolidating where you keep everything. Applications which utilize this (Such as Picasa) make it a lot easier to archive all your pictures regardless of where you are.

Ha. DEP and UAC are quite important. I doubt you even know what DEP is, based on the fact you don't think it should exist. The average user will almost never see or hear of DEP while they use Windows 7. As for UAC, it's simple, it detects if a program requires elevated privileges to access your Windows/Program files directory or has to perform other system operations. Why? Because if for some reason some sort of freeware Painting program is asking you for rights, you immediately know something is up. In XP, anyone could embed a virus into a common program and put it up as a mirror and it would gladly run in the background and steal all your private files without you even noticing a thing.

Granted, I skipped Vista and went from XP/2k3 right to Win7.

Yeaaaaah. That explains a lot.

So I didn't have that transitional period like many did. So maybe that has a part in it. But my experiences with Win7's search aren't isolated to just me.

You're right, it's not just isolated to you, it's isolated to the many other archaic XP users who are just too stubborn to embrace new technology.

The search and indexing functions just aren't working how they should. Period.

No, they're working just how they should. Period. What they aren't doing is working how YOU want them to, there's a difference.

And honestly, the only reason I didn't keep 2k3 as my desktop OS is because I had to fight my ass off to get itunes to work on it, and even then, it didn't work right (the latest versions refuse to install on 2k3). I figured they'd at least keep supporting 2k3 for a while after xp was dead considering it's a server OS.

So...after categorically insulting Windows 7 and Microsoft, you're admitting that your XP-based Operating System is flawed because it can't run the most basic of applications, a multi-media management suite? That's written by Apple? Ha, you kiddies are hilarious.

Have fun.

Edited January 9, 2010 by Anaron

[zhangm Supervisor]

One shouldn't be forced to use an older OS because the new one they bought had broken features that once worked in older versions.

By all means, stick with XP, or Windows 98, or DOS if you want. The rest of us really don't care about your inability to adapt and learn.

And we really need to do away with DEP, UAC, and all these other hand-holding mechanisms. Don't dumb down the OS, make the user smarter.

I suppose seat-belts and helmets also fall into this category. Obviously you don't use them because it's not like you're stupid enough to crash your car or bike, right? You must also remove the locks from your doors, after all, you have no intention of inviting someone into your house to steal your property. Yup, that's pretty smart of you. :rolleyes:

[ToastGodSupreme]

lol, the fanboys have come out to play.

The OS should provide functionality and ease of use as goal number 1. The features of the OS itself should be laid out clearly not hidden under obscure categorizations (control panel since WinXP) or simple lack of information (Win7 search). The search in Win7 is a great example of a failure to do this. I know I keep harping on this but some of you seem to act like it gives you handjobs every time it finds a file. I haven't had that experience and neither have people I've worked with on projects. It constantly FAILS to find what you're looking for where when the same project (it's directories and folders) are brought onto a Win2k3 box and searched again, they are found just fine and fast.

Libraries are forced on the user, both in the nav pane and the start menu. They operate pretty much exactly like symbolic links in that they are manipulated as directories and whatnot. And they are completely unneeded. Who cares if you have a lot of picture files stored through out your computer? Encourage users to be more organized, not give them a work around for being lazy. That also complicates matters when backing things up because users aren't aware of where their files really are most of the time.

UAC and DEP are unneeded. DEP is simply retarded. No normal user is going to sit there and read the warning it throws up. They want to run that program and they are so used to clicking ok, and next, and I accept that they don't pay attention to the majority of the **** that flies across their screen. What's the point of adding a seatbelt if the majority of people simply skip it? And UAC isn't doing anything for anyone these days. It's the same **** with DEP really. People are going to want to launch/run a program and will go through the steps of getting it to run even if it means compromising system security.

Edit: To LiquidSolstice, the limitation implemented that wouldn't allow itunes to run on 2k3 was put in by Appe, NOT microsoft. They intentionally left it out of their allowed OS' in the MSI files so you have to do some hackery to get things working. But even editing the main MSI files won't fix it completely. Previous versions of itunes ran just fine on 2k3 so it was simply apple not wanting to support that product on that OS anymore. It wasn't a limitation of the OS itself.

Edited January 9, 2010 by ToastGodSupreme

[hdood]

You are officially an idiot. What do you mean "piling on more garbage while reducing functionality"? Try installing a wireless printer out of the box on Windows XP. And then do it on 7. XP will take forever because you have to install third party bull**** which came with your printer and you have to wait for it to install, then it will find the printer on your network and only THEN will it be wireless, and first you have to connect it physically to begin with to install. On Windows 7, I don't even need to connect to a new printer via USB. I click Start, I type "Add A Printer", I select network printer, and it finds the printer, installs it, sets it as default if I wish, and prints a test page all with a few clicks, and all in the time it takes for your XP computer just to launch the installer for your crappy OEM printer apps. Again, PUA right there.

While I'm happy for you, I personally had to download a 300MB driver from HP to get my network printer to work. You can't make blanket statements like that.

Ha. DEP and UAC are quite important. I doubt you even know what DEP is, based on the fact you don't think it should exist. The average user will almost never see or hear of DEP while they use Windows 7. As for UAC, it's simple, it detects if a program requires elevated privileges to access your Windows/Program files directory or has to perform other system operations. Why? Because if for some reason some sort of freeware Painting program is asking you for rights, you immediately know something is up. In XP, anyone could embed a virus into a common program and put it up as a mirror and it would gladly run in the background and steal all your private files without you even noticing a thing.

That is a dangerous misconception spread by those that don't understand the subject. Anyone can embed malicious code in programs with 7 as well. UAC only prevents non-malicious software from gaining administrator rights. If a program you were installing on 7 had a virus, you would still click yes to the UAC prompt and give it administrator acess. Not just that, but a program really does not need administrator access at all to steal all your files, spy on you, make you part of a botnet, and so on. It can do all these things without ever triggering a UAC prompt. Having administrator rights is just a bonus, and if your malicious program is running as standard user it can actually hijack what you believe to be legitimate elevations and gain admin rights that way. Heck, this can even be as simple as just watching your downloads and replace the installer you were downloading with something malicious. You won't know. All you see in the prompt is "setup.exe." There is not enough detail to make an informed decision, and it is not a security barrier.

The second you run any code at all, you need to consider your system potentially compromised. It's that simple.

UAC and DEP are unneeded. DEP is simply retarded. No normal user is going to sit there and read the warning it throws up. They want to run that program and they are so used to clicking ok, and next, and I accept that they don't pay attention to the majority of the **** that flies across their screen. What's the point of adding a seatbelt if the majority of people simply skip it? And UAC isn't doing anything for anyone these days. It's the same **** with DEP really. People are going to want to launch/run a program and will go through the steps of getting it to run even if it means compromising system security.

You are confusing DEP with Administrator Approval Mode, which is the part of UAC that gives you the prompts. DEP is a feature that lets you mark pages of memory as either containing code or data, and is an important security feature implemented by all modern operating systems. You really don't want to disable this, and the protection it offers is something you cannot replicate yourself with any amount of common sense or experience, as it is related to bugs in software that will be unknown to you.

[Udedenkz]

I have indeed googled on how to use the current search - luckily all I need to know is "ext:"

DEP never did anything for me, positive or negative. Having it on or off seems to have no effect at all. Although, DEP = Data Execution Prevention - **** sounds serious.

I found UAC to be irrelevant. Using brain is a better option.

Come to think of it, I use libraries just like normal folders - so - their functionality is irrelevant to me. I have all my movies in one folder, all my downloads in one folder, etc.

For me comparing Windows 7 Search vs Classic Search is like Comparing Windows 7 Copy/Move GUI vs TeraCopy GUI.

Windows 2003 is XP pretty much. Slightly newer I think. Drivers and whatnot that worked on XP will work on 2003. Apple = @$$holes is a long standing fact.

[Guest xiphi]

lol, the fanboys have come out to play.

The OS should provide functionality and ease of use as goal number 1. The features of the OS itself should be laid out clearly not hidden under obscure categorizations (control panel since WinXP) or simple lack of information (Win7 search). The search in Win7 is a great example of a failure to do this. I know I keep harping on this but some of you seem to act like it gives you handjobs every time it finds a file. I haven't had that experience and neither have people I've worked with on projects. It constantly FAILS to find what you're looking for where when the same project (it's directories and folders) are brought onto a Win2k3 box and searched again, they are found just fine and fast.

I've yet to have ANY issues finding ANYTHING with Windows Search in either Vista or 7. Anything I need to search for, be it a phrase in a file, or a certain bitrate of mp3s, it finds instantly. Which is something XP never could do.

Libraries are forced on the user, both in the nav pane and the start menu. They operate pretty much exactly like symbolic links in that they are manipulated as directories and whatnot. And they are completely unneeded. Who cares if you have a lot of picture files stored through out your computer? Encourage users to be more organized, not give them a work around for being lazy. That also complicates matters when backing things up because users aren't aware of where their files really are most of the time.

Libraries definitely aren't "exactly like symbolic links". They actually provide a decent way to keep your files backed up. I keep everything on external drives and just add them to my Libraries and set them as the default. Here's something to consider: What's organized to you isn't organized to someone else, and vice versa. So, with that in mind, why should MS encourage users to be "organized"?

UAC and DEP are unneeded. DEP is simply retarded. No normal user is going to sit there and read the warning it throws up. They want to run that program and they are so used to clicking ok, and next, and I accept that they don't pay attention to the majority of the **** that flies across their screen. What's the point of adding a seatbelt if the majority of people simply skip it? And UAC isn't doing anything for anyone these days. It's the same **** with DEP really. People are going to want to launch/run a program and will go through the steps of getting it to run even if it means compromising system security.

Stop talking about DEP like you have a remote clue as to what it is. You act like it's similar to UAC, when it's been in Windows since XP SP2. I suggest you look it up before continuing to embarrass yourself.

UAC is nothing like a seatbelt, or even a locked door. Yes, people will launch said application, but only if they're aware of what it does. Trust me, UAC works to make people aware of what's being ran on their on their pc's. I know from personal experience as well as second hand experience where people click "No" to a program they're unsure of. People, including me, like the fact UAC lets them know what's going on with their computers. It's like a home security system. Wouldn't you like to know when someone is intruding into your home? UAC also makes it easier to run limited accounts, and that's a damn good thing considering limited accounts were pretty much useless on XP.

I found UAC to be irrelevant. Using brain is a better option.

If using a brain is a better option, that would include keeping UAC enabled. Read my above statements.

[Glassed Silver]

UAC - ugh... thanks, but I know what I do on my computer and I never had problems e.g. on XP or before that UAC would have prevented

Firewall - *yawn* couldn't care less about win f/w tbh...

Backup - Windows is actually just my Gaming OS, my main OS is Snow Leopard and both run backupless.

My external HDD doesn't need to be stuffed with system files I can simply reinstall if something breaks.

I mean, it's a gaming OS, the only real "saves" are game saves and I don't need a whole system service to backup those. xDDD

Glassed Silver:win

[hdood]

DEP never did anything for me, positive or negative. Having it on or off seems to have no effect at all. Although, DEP = Data Execution Prevention - **** sounds serious.

How do you know? How do you know that it didn't prevent an overflow bug in a program you have from being exploitable? You're just being ignorant now.

[Kirkburn]

UAC - ugh... thanks, but I know what I do on my computer and I never had problems e.g. on XP or before that UAC would have prevented

Firewall - *yawn* couldn't care less about win f/w tbh...

Backup - Windows is actually just my Gaming OS, my main OS is Snow Leopard and both run backupless.

My external HDD doesn't need to be stuffed with system files I can simply reinstall if something breaks.

I mean, it's a gaming OS, the only real "saves" are game saves and I don't need a whole system service to backup those. xDDD

Glassed Silver:win

UAC: once again, a stunning argument for usage or non-usage. It didn't happen to me, therefore it's not needed.

Firewall: so I'm assuming you have a different one? As long as you actually have some kind of firewall, fine.

Backup: fair enough that you don't backup a gaming OS. But you just said your main OS doesn't have backups either. Uh...? In any case, backups are something you manually configure - if you don't, they do nothing. Do you mean system restore and shadow copies?

[Udedenkz]

How do you know? How do you know that it didn't prevent an overflow bug in a program you have from being exploitable? You're just being ignorant now.

I didn't notice anything with it off in XP - same performance / stability. Many times I heard that it might interfere with correct functionality of software (the reason to turn it off) but, I didn't have any problems with it on either - same performance / stability. For me it didn't do anything either way.

As you are questioning my claim that it sounds serious - well it does sound serious. And as it doesn't do squat either way, one might as well not bother touching it.

UAC: once again, a stunning argument for usage or non-usage. It didn't happen to me, therefore it's not needed.

Firewall: so I'm assuming you have a different one? As long as you actually have some kind of firewall, fine.

Backup: fair enough that you don't backup a gaming OS. But you just said your main OS doesn't have backups either. Uh...? In any case, backups are something you manually configure - if you don't, they do nothing. Do you mean system restore and shadow copies?

The "It didn't happen to me, therefore it's not needed" is valid. UAC and other security features seem like wearing a bullet proof vest in real life for an office job. It is safer to wear it, surely the guy in the next cubicle might shoot you... but is it likely or just paranoia? It didn't happen to me, it is not logical that it will happen to me, therefore it is not needed.

I don't understand the necessity of it on Home Setups. Firewall, UAC, Anti-Virus. As long as you know what you are doing, nothing bad will happen. All I ever get after I do a virus scan are cookies. Some people do need it as they have no experience with computers and have no idea what is safe and what is not. I sail security-free, I have even turned off the firewall and whatnot that my router provides (it upped my ping). Problems? Malicious Software? NADA. All I have is a scan-only antivirus which I run manually once a month.

In terms of backups, a system image is the best. Second is a registry backup. System Restore sucks as it sometimes deletes all the restore points.

[hdood]

I didn't notice anything with it off in XP - same performance / stability. Many times I heard that it might interfere with correct functionality of software (the reason to turn it off) but, I didn't have any problems with it on either - same performance / stability. For me it didn't do anything either way.

As you are questioning my claim that it sounds serious - well it does sound serious. And as it doesn't do squat either way, one might as well not bother touching it.

Please read what I wrote. You will not "notice" DEP. It is a completely transparent feature that simply denies attempts to execute pages that are marked as data. It does not improve performance or stability, it simply prevents programs from doing this. It doesn't pop up any dialogs or play any sounds, there is no user interaction. As for your claim that it does nothing, again, that is patently false. It does what I describe, and stops a certain class of exploits. This is a demonstrable fact, and not something that is subject to your misguided personal opinion.

Your belief that it is a good idea to disable security measures that were put in place to help prevent software bugs from being exploitable is simply insane. Are you counting on the software you run being bug-free?

You are of course free to do whatever you want, but no one else should follow your example. You think you know and understand what you are doing, but you really don't.

[Kirkburn]

The "It didn't happen to me, therefore it's not needed" is valid. UAC and other security features seem like wearing a bullet proof vest in real life for an office job. It is safer to wear it, surely the guy in the next cubicle might shoot you... but is it likely or just paranoia? It didn't happen to me, it is not logical that it will happen to me, therefore it is not needed.

If you want to create such a fine analogy, it should be pointed out that most people's PCs are essentially in a war zone (the internet). There is a lot of malware out there.

If we want to go for another hilarious analogy: guy drives home drunk one night. He didn't get stopped or have an accident. This means he can always drive home drunk.

I don't understand the necessity of it on Home Setups. Firewall, UAC, Anti-Virus. As long as you know what you are doing, nothing bad will happen. All I ever get after I do a virus scan are cookies. Some people do need it as they have no experience with computers and have no idea what is safe and what is not. I sail security-free, I have even turned off the firewall and whatnot that my router provides (it upped my ping). Problems? Malicious Software? NADA. All I have is a scan-only antivirus which I run manually once a month.

In terms of backups, a system image is the best. Second is a registry backup. System Restore sucks as it sometimes deletes all the restore points.

You don't understand the necessity of a firewall or antivirus in a home setup? Jeez.

You yourself admit that some users don't have the experience to deal with the issues that could arise. Yes, where "some" is the vast majority of people, especially those on "home setups". I'm sorry, but your logic is baffling.

System image is indeed one of the best types of backup, as long as you have regular copies.

[DEP] It doesn't pop up any dialogs or play any sounds, there is no user interaction

Actually, not quite true - it does pop up notices when it blocks something. You can get it with certain games (e.g. I've had it with Team Fortress 2, had to set an exception). I'm not certain who to blame, but I think it's very likely Valve's coding.

[Udedenkz]

but no one else should follow your example.

Eh?

See here,

one might as well not bother touching it.

I haven't bothered touching it (In other words, I have it enabled).

*snip*

That analogy is not a valid counter point. Working as an office drone and driving drunk are two different behaviors, one of which is bad while other is normal.

My logic seems fine to me. Majority of users are - forgive the language - idiots and therefore majority of the users will benefit from extensive protection. You can say that most people do drive drunk...

Huh. I never had that happen to me.

[LiquidSolstice]

I didn't notice anything with it off in XP - same performance / stability. Many times I heard that it might interfere with correct functionality of software (the reason to turn it off) but, I didn't have any problems with it on either - same performance / stability. For me it didn't do anything either way.

It doesn't really matter what you think it does or doesn't do. You obviously have no idea what DEP is. No, it does not interfere with correct functionality of software.

The "It didn't happen to me, therefore it's not needed" is valid. UAC and other security features seem like wearing a bullet proof vest in real life for an office job. It is safer to wear it, surely the guy in the next cubicle might shoot you... but is it likely or just paranoia? It didn't happen to me, it is not logical that it will happen to me, therefore it is not needed.

Again, it REALLY doesn't matter what you think will happen to you, where the majority of us non-tweaking users find fault is when you start telling people to disable it.

I don't understand the necessity of it on Home Setups. Firewall, UAC, Anti-Virus. As long as you know what you are doing, nothing bad will happen. All I ever get after I do a virus scan are cookies. Some people do need it as they have no experience with computers and have no idea what is safe and what is not.

Yeah, was going to respond to that, but with the red parts above, I'm pretty sure you did that for me already.

I sail security-free, I have even turned off the firewall and whatnot that my router provides (it upped my ping). Problems? Malicious Software? NADA. All I have is a scan-only antivirus which I run manually once a month.

Once again, this is why we don't want you giving people advice. Let's tell the public at large not to use any form of security. Yes.

In terms of backups, a system image is the best. Second is a registry backup. System Restore sucks as it sometimes deletes all the restore points.

A system image takes too long, a registry backup is useless unless you have the exact same programs installed (which you won't if you have to clean install), and System Restore by default doesn't backup to an external hard drive, and therefore deletes backups after a certain point. At any rate, if you need to restore to a Restore Point earlier than 3 points back (or however many the default limit is) then you're not using your computer right and need to go and take a computer class.

Honestly. You're sounding more and more clueless each minute. Like I said; PUA. (Power-User Arrogance)