Just to stick my 2p worth in, first off, Windows has always been very multi-user, and it was exposed in XP with the ability to switch user on the login screen thus having multiple people logged in on the same machine at the same time. Plus the registry is per-user, with no shared rights to the individual files, as well as the machine shared registry.

The registry is a good solution to a lot of problems. First off it is structured, so not just a single level INI file or flat database. You can set rights to different parts, which means that I can read the settings from Microsoft Office or any other application without knowing anything about how they store their options this version. I can also add to another applications registry (like registering modues with Delphi) without having to use some custom DLL to access their options. It also separates the options from the application, which is important for shared use, and it also then allows the user to roam to other computers and keep *all* of their settings and not have a few left behind because the application stored them in a custom file somewhere.

Is it perfect? No, but it is a lot better than it was.


--

Matthew Jones

Roy Lambert wrote:

> MBAM

Presumably you found that an update blew MalwareBytes out of the water, but a new update is out to fix it.

--

Matthew Jones

Raul


Right - got it working - thanks

Now to try and figure out why the Linux VM can't see my shared folder - still its giving me something to do now I'm retired

Roy Lambert

Matthew

>Presumably you found that an update blew MalwareBytes out of the water, but a new update is out to fix it.

Actually I have no idea. Only one of four PCs went this way, two others just decided to turn web protection off for a short while (about 15 minutes) and the last went on fine.

I was bought the box set of Bewitched and I'm watching it so I'm putting it down to witchcraft.

Roy

Matthew

>Just to stick my 2p worth in, first off, Windows has always been very multi-user, and it was exposed in XP with the ability to switch user on the login screen thus having multiple people logged in on the same machine at the same time.

I think we are not sharing the same definition of multi-user.

Say I go on a trip and share a car with three other people. Every motorway service station we change drivers. Does that make the car multi-driver? A driving school car has two set of pedals which means its getting near to multi-driver.

>Plus the registry is per-user, with no shared rights to the individual files, as well as the machine shared registry.

True

>The registry is a good solution to a lot of problems.

You may have guessed that I don't agree with that. However, I would be interested to hear what the "lot of problems" are

>First off it is structured, so not just a single level INI file or flat database.

OK there are 5 main structural elements (HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT, HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, HKEY_USERS,HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG) which I have never tried to do anything with and I don't think you can. Under those its a bit of a free for all though

>You can set rights to different parts, which means that I can read the settings from Microsoft Office or any other application without knowing anything about how they store their options this version.

You've lost me here. Firstly I'm unsure what being able to set rights has to do with being able to read settings without knowing how they're stored and secondly, even if you know they're in the registry if the key has changed you still need to know that.

>I can also add to another applications registry (like registering modues with Delphi) without having to use some custom DLL to access their options. It also separates the options from the application, which is important for shared use,

Is this really a good thing?

>and it also then allows the user to roam to other computers and keep *all* of their settings and not have a few left behind because the application stored them in a custom file somewhere.

Only if they take their registry with them or can load a remote registry. Both operations beyond c99% of conmputer users.
>
>Is it perfect? No, but it is a lot better than it was.

True but in the immortal words of Bugs Bunny - I knew we should have turned left at Albuquerque.

Roy

Raul


Thank you again. Between you and a lot of googling I now have a VM with Lazarus icon on the desktop and can access my shared folders. Doing this really does make me appreciate Windows

Roy Lambert

Roy Lambert wrote:

> Matthew
>
> > Just to stick my 2p worth in, first off, Windows has always been very multi-user, and it was exposed in XP with the ability to switch user on the login screen thus having multiple people logged in on the same machine at the same time.
>
> I think we are not sharing the same definition of multi-user.
>
> Say I go on a trip and share a car with three other people. Every motorway service station we change drivers. Does that make the car multi-driver? A driving school car has two set of pedals which means its getting near to multi-driver.

In the case of Windows, you can indeed still have the other user active. If I were to start an application that processed a million database items, and then we switch users and you watch a Youtube video, and then we switch back, the database operation carried on in the meantime. I didn't get logged out. The likes of Citrix and Terminal Services takes this to the limit and allows the screens to be shared to.




> > First off it is structured, so not just a single level INI file or flat database.
>
> OK there are 5 main structural elements (HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT, HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, HKEY_USERS,HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG) which I have never tried to do anything with and I don't think you can. Under those its a bit of a free for all though

The structure is that you can put what you want under a hierarchy. So I can have HKCU\Software\Company\AppName\RecentlyUsed to have a list of recent files, and HKCU\Software\Company\AppName\DataStores for a set of keys with more keys with more keys in a nested hierarchy as I see fit. Can't do that with INI files, and INI files were getting very creaky.


> > You can set rights to different parts, which means that I can read the settings from Microsoft Office or any other application without knowing anything about how they store their options this version.
>
> You've lost me here. Firstly I'm unsure what being able to set rights has to do with being able to read settings without knowing how they're stored and secondly, even if you know they're in the registry if the key has changed you still need to know that.

You can set access rights on any registry key just the same as on any file or folder.


> > I can also add to another applications registry (like registering modues with Delphi) without having to use some custom DLL to access their options. It also separates the options from the application, which is important for shared use,
>
> Is this really a good thing?

It is better than assuming that WORD.INI is the right place to put things, given that affected all users, and that it meant they couldn't change it easily.


> > and it also then allows the user to roam to other computers and keep all of their settings and not have a few left behind because the application stored them in a custom file somewhere.
>
> Only if they take their registry with them or can load a remote registry. Both operations beyond c99% of conmputer users.

It is indeed, but if you are on a roaming system then someone else is sorting it for you. The IT depts at most universities, for example, have everything set to roam. So when you go to make a presentation in a lecture theater, you log in as you and all your data and settings are "just there". User's don't need to do anything. And it works because the registry is a common and managed thing.



--

Matthew Jones

On 1/29/2018 3:40 AM, Roy Lambert wrote:
>
> I know what you mean but whilst I wouldn't blame a home owner for not fitting titanium shields across windows and doors I would blame them for leaving the front door open. Agreed that devs shouldn't do it but it was made so easy for them, and in some cases they were encouraged.
>

I you ever read Old New thing blog
(https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/) - it has great stories
about weird stuff apps did (and even how Windows tried to work around it).

>
> Nope - I think you'll find that's Citrix that's multiuser. Never used Terminal Services but from a quick google

Back in the Windows NT days they licensed their code to be included in
Windows and had a Metaframe product but since around Server 2000 onward
you need nothing but Windows and RDP client.

In earlier days i you had XP Pro you had a remote desktop license even
so you needed to not license user on windows server.

> <<Remote Desktop Services, known as Terminal Services in Windows Server 2008 and earlier, is one of the components of Microsoft Windows that allows a user to take control of a remote computer or virtual machine over a network connection>>

Is that Wikipedia? This is what Microsoft MSDN says "Windows Server 2012
R2, Windows Server 2012, Windows Server 2008 R2, or Windows Server 2008
with Remote Desktop Services (formerly known as Terminal Services) allow
a server to host multiple, simultaneous client sessions"

> Doesn't sound multiuser but since I've never used it I can't really say.

I assure you it's very much multi-user and quite heavily used even today
for "fat" apps still - there are lot more related tech these days from
simple app publishing to full virtual desktop (VDI).

Even for delphi apps there are companies trying to mash these
technologies to "webify" your delphi app easily - they basically use
their hooks to do the web UI of the delphi app running on server in
multiple sessions (see https://www.cybelesoft.com/thinfinity/virtualui/
for example - it's quite cool actually).

>
> No it was how they decided to approach it. If by "other options" you mean ini files - I use them. Over the years the only thing I've stored in the registry (at least for s/w I've written) is which com port to use to dial a phone. Everything else is stored in a database table or ini file.
>

INI, custom database, any other custom format (xml, json) etc - however
with exception of INI and registry everything else is unique to your app
and something you need to support if customer ever wants to auto deploy
etc.

Using registry or INI at least is something most management and
deployment tools know about and can handle.

Raul

On 1/29/2018 8:15 AM, Roy Lambert wrote:
> Right - got it working - thanks
>
> Now to try and figure out why the Linux VM can't see my shared folder - still its giving me something to do now I'm retired
>

What virtualization are you using ?

Vmware needs the vmware tools installed in vm for shared folder
functionality

Raul

On 1/29/2018 9:10 AM, Roy Lambert wrote:
> I think we are not sharing the same definition of multi-user.
>
> Say I go on a trip and share a car with three other people. Every motorway service station we change drivers. Does that make the car multi-driver? A driving school car has two set of pedals which means its getting near to multi-driver.
>

You are talking about desktop remote control that's part of desktop OS
since around XP - one user can drive screen at a time.

In case of Windows Server OS remote destop services you can have 10
users logged in with their own full desktop (fully independent of each
other), run apps (independent of each other) and do it all at the same time.

The only "shared" resource is the CPU, disk etc

Raul