features you disabled in Windows 7 and why?

[Udedenkz]

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.

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.

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

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.

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)

I don't care what DEP is. I do not need to know this, it is irrelevant. All I need to know - 1. It is a security feature, 2. It doesn't do anything that negatively effects stability, performance. Therefore it should be ignored - left enabled.

I invite you to trace back this discussion to see why we are talking about firewall / security. Also read my previous post, you seem to have missed it

I don't really care about the average user either.

Actually, depends. System Restore might actually delete all your restore points. Actually it is really frustrating, sometimes making backup b4 messing something up, and then trying to access that point (an hour later) to find it missing. Although this Windows 7 forum is mostly dead, this seems to be a problem for other users too. Relying on System Restore might not be a good idea.

I don't think importing a registry file actually removes information (unless specified otherwise) - it merely can add or changes stuff (unless it is locked). I haven't noticed it removing information about installed entities - might be just me. :?

Edited January 10, 2010 by Udedenkz

[Kirkburn]

I don't care what DEP is. I do not need to know this, it is irrelevant.

And thus, we render most of this conversation redundant as you stubbornly refuse to even learn about the very things you are essentially advocating disabling.

Truly your mindset is beyond most of us. It's sounding more and more like an irrational obsession than a real attempt to "improve" Windows.

Strange that you think this forum is "mostly dead". That's certainly not how it looks to me. Tens of threads updated in the past 24 hours isn't "dead".

[Udedenkz]

And thus, we render most of this conversation redundant as you stubbornly refuse to even learn about the very things you are essentially advocating disabling.

Where the **** did I advocate disabling DEP?

EDIT: Ah, if you mean, indirectly one can draw the conclusion that it is useless from my posts?

Edited January 10, 2010 by Udedenkz

[LiquidSolstice]

Where the **** did I advocate disabling DEP?

EDIT: Ah, if you mean, indirectly one can draw the conclusion that it is useless from my posts?

You're still fixated on the idea that we're specifically talking about DEP, which isn't the case. He's saying the bigger picture is that you're advocating the act of removing prime components of Windows and you really have no other justification other than "it doesn't do anything that I can see" or "just be smart".

[Kirkburn]

Where the **** did I advocate disabling DEP?

EDIT: Ah, if you mean, indirectly one can draw the conclusion that it is useless from my posts?

I suppose it's one of the issues of a public forum - obviously you can hold opinions, but the problem for many is that once you start publically declaring them, others will take them as advice (or fact) and act on them, regardless of whether you intended it as advice or even mere thoughts in the first place.

[zhangm Supervisor]

I don't care what DEP is. I do not need to know this, it is irrelevant. All I need to know - 1. It is a security feature, 2. It doesn't do anything that negatively effects stability, performance. Therefore it should be ignored - left enabled.

Oh yes, this definitely sounds like a smart user. So smart in fact, that what DEP actually is or does is beneath him. :rolleyes:

I don't think importing a registry file actually removes information (unless specified otherwise) - it merely can add or changes stuff (unless it is locked). I haven't noticed it removing information about installed entities - might be just me. :?

Just for kicks, what does this do (save it as MightDeleteImportantKeys.reg and import it)?

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[―HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft]

Also, the whole notion that you'll be fine if you are smart, knowledgable, and cautious is something that I used to advocate. Then I realized that it was a pile of horse****. For example, you can live your life by being intelligent, i.e. not jumping out in front of cars, always wearing a seatbelt while driving, staying away from the serial killer next door, etc, but that won't prevent you from being assassinated by ninjas. There are things you can avoid, and things that you won't see coming. It is utterly stupid to dispense with precautionary measures to protect you against them.

Edited January 10, 2010 by Relativity_17

[Udedenkz]

EDIT: I also suggest removing that code snippet. That is arguably the most dangerous thing posted in this thread.

I invite you to find in your latest .reg backup anything that starts with,

[-

Importing a registry backup does not delete keys. An exported registry file DOES NOT have anything of that sort.

Please read before replying.

[Xilo]

Please read before replying.

Please read what you are actually posting before replying. What you posted previously and what you are arguing about now are completely different. No where in your previous post did you mention registry backups.

[Udedenkz]

Please read what you are actually posting before replying. What you posted previously and what you are arguing about now are completely different. No where in your previous post did you mention registry backups.

Eh?

Second is a registry backup.

a registry backup is useless unless you have the exact same programs installed (which you won't if you have to clean install)

I don't think importing a registry file actually removes information (unless specified otherwise) - it merely can add or changes stuff (unless it is locked). I haven't noticed it removing information about installed entities - might be just me. :?

Just for kicks, what does this do (save it as MightDeleteImportantKeys.reg and import it)?

EDIT: I also suggest removing that code snippet. That is arguably the most dangerous thing posted in this thread.

I invite you to find in your latest .reg backup anything that starts with,

[-

Importing a registry backup does not delete keys. An exported registry file DOES NOT have anything of that sort.

Please read before replying.

[Xilo]

I don't care what DEP is. I do not need to know this, it is irrelevant. All I need to know - 1. It is a security feature, 2. It doesn't do anything that negatively effects stability, performance. Therefore it should be ignored - left enabled.

I invite you to trace back this discussion to see why we are talking about firewall / security. Also read my previous post, you seem to have missed it

I don't really care about the average user either.

Actually, depends. System Restore might actually delete all your restore points. Actually it is really frustrating, sometimes making backup b4 messing something up, and then trying to access that point (an hour later) to find it missing. Although this Windows 7 forum is mostly dead, this seems to be a problem for other users too. Relying on System Restore might not be a good idea.

I don't think importing a registry file actually removes information (unless specified otherwise) - it merely can add or changes stuff (unless it is locked). I haven't noticed it removing information about installed entities - might be just me. :?

Please. Tell me where in this post you mention registry backups because I don't see it. Relativity_17 was quoting and replying to THIS post.

[Udedenkz]

Please. Tell me where in this post you mention registry backups because I don't see it. Relativity_17 was quoting and replying to THIS post.

See post #259

EDIT: You are in a different time zone I think.

[Xilo]

His post was refuting your claim that a registry file can't remove registry entries and was quoting the exact post where you make no mention of backups.

If you want people to start taking you seriously, learn to read and follow posts correctly...

[Udedenkz]

His post was refuting your claim that a registry file can't remove registry entries and was quoting the exact post where you make no mention of backups.

It is called taking things out of context. I have provided the context summary for you.

Also,

(unless specified otherwise)

What I mean by the above was: unless specified otherwise or added by a user otherwise a .reg backup does not have any code to remove registry things.

EDIT: There is nothing left to discuss here.

Edited January 10, 2010 by Udedenkz

[zhangm Supervisor]

His post was refuting your claim that a registry file can't remove registry entries and was quoting the exact post where you make no mention of backups.

Correct.

I don't think importing a registry file actually removes information (unless specified otherwise) - it merely can add or changes stuff (unless it is locked). I haven't noticed it removing information about installed entities - might be just me. :?

It sounds like you may have a problem conveying what you think you're conveying. The other problem here is that "changes stuff" isn't very descriptive either. Deleting existing data falls under the category of change, so what you're really saying is that importing a reg file can't remove information and can remove information. :/

[yxz]

disabled superfetch

reason

overhead

so what you're really saying is that importing a reg file can't remove information and can remove information. :/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer

Edited January 10, 2010 by yxz

[omganinja]

UAC: Default (I use built in Administrator account so it doesnt bother me anyway)

Firewall: Off

Libraries: Disables, Useless

Homegroups: Disabled, also useless

Windows Media Player: Removed, have VLC

Internet Explorer: Removed, have firefox

[iamwhoiam]

And why pray tell would you want to install XP on a 512 MB partition? Don't you realize that programs, by default, install to the C:/ (or whatever the install drive is) drive?

I won't speak about the 512MB partition, but it's always a good idea to separate the OS from the 3rd party apps, and of course personal documents. By default, any program on my system that installs to Program Files/Program Files (x86) goes to another partition automatically. My Users folder is also on a separate partition.

[LiquidSolstice]

disabled superfetch

reason

overhead

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer

AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH You have no idea what Superfetch is.

Overhead.

I lol'd pretty hard.

[Guest xiphi]

disabled superfetch

reason

overhead

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer

LOL!!! You disabled Superfetch for the very reason it prevents!!

[LiquidSolstice]

Yeah, yxz, I think you need to read about what Superfetch is and stop trusting "tweaking" sites, it's ridiculous. Here, a link for you:

SuperFetch

[yxz]

Finally, we need to think about the impact of these optimizations ? SuperFetch itself cause extra I/O and extra CPU usage, so how does one do the trade-off? The solution lies with prioritization ? SuperFetch uses low priority I/O and low priority threads, so the CPU and Disk I/O overhead is minimal and does not interfere with the actual jobs being performed. In fact, SuperFetch reads only a few pages per second at Very Low Priority. There is certainly a memory overhead which is caused by having to maintain information about what all is happening in the system, but that overhead is minimal and more than makes up with all the advantages provided.

http://www.vineetgupta.com/2007/02/key-io-...dows-vista.html

Additionally, machines with relatively slow spindle rotation speeds, low areal density and small disk buffer/cache will be impacted by the IO overhead of SuperFetch far more than a systems with a fast disk. Essentially, below a 4.9 rated disk on a system with 1GB of memory, SuperFetch?s benefits are (in my testing) usually outweighed by its overhead. Even on systems with 2GB of memory, but a very slow primary disk (4.7 or lower Primary Disk WinSat score), SuperFetch?s IO may negatively impact performance, rather than improve it. Conversely, a 1GB configuration on a system with a fast primary disk may still perform better with SuperFetch enabled. My general rule of thumb though is that if the system has 1GB or less, or if the system has a disk score below 4.8, I disable SuperFetch.

http://makfu.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/vist...-for-this-post/

[LiquidSolstice]

http://www.vineetgupta.com/2007/02/key-io-...dows-vista.html

"Feb 27, 2007" <-- Fail #1.

VineetGupta.com <-- Self-declared tech support site, cookie cutter status, material appears to be cut and paste. Our hard drives are much faster know, FYI.

http://makfu.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/vist...-for-this-post/

Again, that's Vista. Oh, and lol at this:

if you are running Vista with 2GB or more of memory (especially 4GB or larger 64bit configurations) with a fast disk subsystem (16MB of buffer/cache, 7200RPM, etc.) turning off SuperFetch is actually a bad idea and will lower system responsiveness.

AKA every single new computer sold since 2005. Your logic is fail. Plus you're apparently incapable of providing evidence, instead linking us to fairly poor and outdated so-called "tech advice" sites.

If you're running a system with a gig or less of RAM, you shouldn't be running 7 on it, it's got nothing to do with the OS and everything to do with your crappy hardware.

[Kirkburn]

http://www.vineetgupta.com/2007/02/key-io-...dows-vista.html

http://makfu.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/vist...-for-this-post/

Notably the first quote doesn't really support you at all.

Regarding the second - do you run such a machine?

[hdood]

I won't speak about the 512MB partition, but it's always a good idea to separate the OS from the 3rd party apps

I could see the point on a Unix or Unix-like system, but on Windows? What are you accomplishing? It's not like you'll be able to reuse all the installed programs if you reinstall the system partition. That is one of the reasons for doing it in the Unix world, but it's not applicable to Windows.

[iamwhoiam]

I could see the point on a Unix or Unix-like system, but on Windows? What are you accomplishing? It's not like you'll be able to reuse all the installed programs if you reinstall the system partition. That is one of the reasons for doing it in the Unix world, but it's not applicable to Windows.

I don't reinstall. I restore my image. I have it set up so that Program Files/Program Files (x86) are on a separate partition, as is the Users folder. These are set up that way from a customized install disc using the WAIK. Apps that are hard coded for certain locations can be made to play nice by simply making junctions that point to the moved locations.

That provides me the benefit that if my OS drives gets corrupted, or I replace it with a larger drive, I can simply restore that partition and still have everything in tact just the way it was before the corruption, and I won't lose anything except the few minutes it takes to restore.

It does take a bit of time to set it up that way, but it works for me.