dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) (10/01/90)
Did anyone ever think about creating an editor for the various INI files? Really, they are the worst thing about Windows right now and they are the main reason people complain about it being hard to set up. If someone were to build a front-end for editing WIN.INI, SYSTEM.INI, and so on that recognized all the different parameters, knew the common defaults, and could explain them to the user a LOT of people who be made happy. It would have to be a "control panel" type display like the pif editor. Menus would be too confusing (too many).
spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) (10/07/90)
In article <N8DDq1w163w@zooid.UUCP> dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) writes: >Did anyone ever think about creating an editor for the various INI files? Have you ever seen the program SYSEDIT.EXE? It may be fairly undocumented but it comes with Windows and sits in your \win\system directory... I really like it, use it all the time. >It would have to be a "control panel" type display like the pif editor. Oh, that would be cool. It would have to know a LOT though. Joel Spolsky spolsky@cs.yale.edu Silence = Death
CC65MGTW@MIAMIU.BITNET (10/08/90)
It would be virtually impossible. Every Windows app you install has its own unique parameters it puts into WIN.INI. These parameters are found by a simple search of the file, and the parameters are read in. Since there are hundreds of applications, and each application can have any number of parameters, there is virtually no way to have ae editor any more efficient than the undocumented SYSEDIT.EXE. Even then, there are very few WIN.INI parameters you would ever have to adjust, and then only once. I think the Windows manual does an adequate job. -Chris
dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) (10/08/90)
spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) writes: > >It would have to be a "control panel" type display like the pif editor. > > Oh, that would be cool. It would have to know a LOT though. It's true that a WIN.INI control panel editor would have to know a lot, but really it is the most non-intuitive part of the whole system. The rest of it is point and click, but it is jarring to have to go into an editor to edit WIN.INI whenever you want to change anything, and you even have to know what you are doing. I think it would dramatically improve people's view of Windos if this were available. I can't imagine a first-time computer user, who liked the Windows interface and bought a machine because of it, and then to have to go in and edit WIN.INI and SYSTEM.INI and so on...
strobl@gmdzi.gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) (10/09/90)
CC65MGTW@MIAMIU.BITNET writes: >It would be virtually impossible. >Every Windows app you install has its own unique parameters it puts into >WIN.INI. These parameters are found by a simple search of the file, and >the parameters are read in. Does anybody know whether the Windows control panel is extensible, like the MacIntosh control panel is? It's interface suggests that it should be quite easy (at least for Microsoft) to add new icons and new handlers. Some icons/handlers are in fact shown/hidden depending on how your Windows configuration looks like, i.e. whether you run in enhanced mode or not, or whether you have a network driver installed or not. It would be nice to do the same (i.e. add the installation/configuration part to the control panel) for arbitrary applications. Any ideas? Wolfgang Strobl #include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) (10/09/90)
In a recent article spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) writes: >In article <N8DDq1w163w@zooid.UUCP> dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) writes: >>Did anyone ever think about creating an editor for the various INI files? > >Have you ever seen the program SYSEDIT.EXE? It may be fairly >undocumented but it comes with Windows and sits in your \win\system >directory... I really like it, use it all the time. Well...SYSEDIT is effectively a NOTEPAD app which automatically opens the four primary configuration files SYSTEM.INI, WIN.INI, AUTOEXEC.BAT, and CONFIG.SYS. It doesn't "know" anything about the contents of the files; it's just a convenient text editor. Anyone doing complex work with Windows, though, should be aware that SYSEDIT will fail to start cleanly if you have sufficiently large files. In my case I suddenly started getting error messages from it ("UNABLE TO LOAD WIN.INI") which I finally found to be caused by a sudden increase in the size of some of the four files. There seems to be a hardwired buffer size which isn't capable of being expanded to meet the need of the system. (In my case I have both PCL and PostScript printers, and between them they made the WIN.INI file over 800 lines long. This caused SYSEDIT to refuse to load either WIN.INI *or* SYSTEM.INI. Removing *three* lines of comments in WIN.INI now lets it load SYSTEM.INI but not WIN.INI. Strange.) Joe Morris
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (10/09/90)
In article <32FPq2w163w@zooid.UUCP> dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) writes: >spolsky-joel@cs.yale.edu (Joel Spolsky) writes: > >> >It would have to be a "control panel" type display like the pif editor. >> >> Oh, that would be cool. It would have to know a LOT though. > >It's true that a WIN.INI control panel editor would have to know a lot, but >really it is the most non-intuitive part of the whole system. The rest of it >is point and click, but it is jarring to have to go into an editor to edit >WIN.INI whenever you want to change anything, and you even have to know what >you are doing. I think it would dramatically improve people's view of Windos >if this were available. I can't imagine a first-time computer user, who >liked the Windows interface and bought a machine because of it, and then to >have to go in and edit WIN.INI and SYSTEM.INI and so on... What about third party software that uses win.ini for its settings. This makes the editor very difficult to handle the general case. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) (10/10/90)
CC65MGTW@MIAMIU.BITNET writes: > It would be virtually impossible. > Every Windows app you install has its own unique parameters it puts into > WIN.INI. These parameters are found by a simple search of the file, and > the parameters are read in. > Since there are hundreds of applications, and each application can have any > number of parameters, there is virtually no way to have ae editor any more > efficient than the undocumented SYSEDIT.EXE. > Even then, there are very few WIN.INI parameters you would ever have to adjus > and then only once. I think the Windows manual does an adequate job. > -Chris I don't agree. Perhaps Microsoft could design an editor for WIN.INI that could have parameters by a new program. Admittedly it would be complex, but it would be better than the current solution. You can take a Mac out of the box, plug it in, install a couple programs, and it works fine. To fine tune a Mac you just use a few control-panel type programs. Of course Windows is inherently more complex because it runs over DOS, but I am in touch with users of Windows who've barely touched a computer before and the last thing they want to do is wade through a text file, trying to figure out all the lines to change, add, or delete, after reading all the .TXT files it is necessary to read to fine-tune Windows. Microsoft could at least provide a control-panel type interface for the basic WIN.INI commands, such as the COM parameters. As it is I consider Windows only to be really useable in an organization that has a support person available, and that's from experience because during the first couple weeks of our new Windows department I spent a fair amount of time in WIN.INI fine-tuning. And that was just on 286s, on 386s it becomes more complex.
jmann@angmar.sw.stratus.com (Jim Mann) (10/10/90)
In article <kF5sq3w163w@zooid.UUCP>, dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) writes: |>You can take a Mac out of the box, plug it in, install a couple programs, |>and it works fine. To fine tune a Mac you just use a few control-panel type |>programs. Of course Windows is inherently more complex because it runs over |>DOS, but I am in touch with users of Windows who've barely touched a |>computer before and the last thing they want to do is wade through a text |>file, trying to figure out all the lines to change, add, or delete, after |>reading all the .TXT files it is necessary to read to fine-tune Windows. |>Microsoft could at least provide a control-panel type interface for the |>basic WIN.INI commands, such as the COM parameters. As it is I consider |>Windows only to be really useable in an organization that has a support |>person available, and that's from experience because during the first couple |>weeks of our new Windows department I spent a fair amount of time in WIN.INI |>fine-tuning. And that was just on 286s, on 386s it becomes more complex. But you cannot fine tune all Mac applications from the control panel or whatever. If you want to change settings for an application, you generally have to open that application to do so. From this point of view, what the end user can do by pointing and clicking is not much different for Windows apps than for Mac apps (and Windows, unlike the Mac, does let you change application configurations by editing a file). Jim Mann Stratus Computer jmann@es.stratus.com
jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) (10/11/90)
In article <kF5sq3w163w@zooid.UUCP> dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) writes: >CC65MGTW@MIAMIU.BITNET writes: >> It would be virtually impossible. >> Every Windows app you install has its own unique parameters it puts into >> WIN.INI. These parameters are found by a simple search of the file, and >> the parameters are read in. >> Since there are hundreds of applications, and each application can have any >> number of parameters, there is virtually no way to have ae editor any more >> efficient than the undocumented SYSEDIT.EXE. >I don't agree. Perhaps Microsoft could design an editor for WIN.INI that >could have parameters by a new program. Admittedly it would be complex, but >it would be better than the current solution. I think I've posted this comment before, but a major design flaw (IMHO) in the WIN.INI concept as currently implemented is that there is no protection against typos in the file except where file names are incorrectly entered. For example, our old favorite which has been tossed around in several threads over the past few months is: VirtualHDRIQ=false which must be spelled correctly or the system will simply ignore it, causing all sorts of interesting problems with DMA and SCSI interfaces. OK, how many of you readers noticed the transposition in the parameter? It's virtualhdIRq, not virtualhdRIq as I typed it. You can put your hand down now; you've proved yourself better than Windows at finding an error. It's not just the name of the parameter that isn't checked; you can also type: VirtualHDIRQ=flase and the system doesn't complain. I have no idea what value Windows is actually assigning to the parameter. It shouldn't be too difficult to write a semi-intelligent editor which just presented the parameter name, the choices, and maybe a few lines of comments. The syntax could even be compatible with the current system: ; %% VirtualHDIRQ=<boolean> ; %d On ; %h Allows Windows in 386 enhanced mode to terminate... ... VirtualHDIRQ=on where 'boolean' is recognized as meaning the set {1,0,true,false,on,off...} The program doesn't *have* to be able to handle the entire file, although that would be nice. If Microsoft provided the necessary parameter lines for its part of the file then the program could revert to dumbo mode for the rest if a vendor didn't provide matching parameters. The main problem is that without any validation procedure the user can change the WIN.INI or SYSTEM.INI file and be unaware that the intended behavior change may not have occurred. Some kind of checking is mandatory for a reliable system for any file which is subject to arbitrary editing. However frustrating they may be at times this is a distinct advantage to using binary configuration files: the users keep their fingers out and modify them only through (supposedly) bullet-proof application interfaces. Joe Morris
pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) (10/11/90)
But ! but ! but ! .... First time novice users are NOT supposed to
edit the .INI files. All they should do is to make changes via the
control panel etc.
Is this any different from the Mac approach ? Is the Mac interface
more customizable to novice users than Windows interface is ? I doubt
it though, but then I haven't used a Mac for almost 3 years now. So ...
Regards, ## Life is fast enough as it is ........
Peter Lim. ## .... DON'T PUSH IT !! >>>-------,
########################################### :
E-mail: plim@hpsgwg.HP.COM Snail-mail: Hewlett Packard Singapore, :
Tel: (065)-279-2289 (ICDS, ICS) |
Telnet: 520-2289 1150 Depot Road, __\@/__
... also at: pnl@hpfipnl.HP.COM Singapore 0410. SPLAT !
#include <standard_disclaimer.hpp>mikew@proton.LCS.MIT.EDU (Michael B. Williams) (10/11/90)
I think that lapses like this (the lack of a GUI-based .INI editor) are what keeps Windows from being a great environment instead of merely a good one. A GUI-based .INI editor would be a very useful tool, even if it were tailored only for Windows' own settings. To date, the best attempt I've seen is the INI File Mangler distributed by Bogus Software (a freeware outfit?). It's a program that edits any .INI file that is organized in the standard format. The nice thing about it is that on the left child window are the sections such as [fonts] and [windows], and when you click on a section, all the `=' entries under it are displayed on the right child window. What Windows really needs is something like the Sun defaults editor, which lets you specify defaults for all of the SunTools programs, such as Mailtool. It lists textual descriptions of all the defaults (not just a code word) and provides help with each default you can set. The nice thing about it is that it's extensible; vendors can create their own defaults file so that the user can use the defaults editor to customize the program. This is similar to Window's help system, in which vendors supply a .HLP file for use with the Windows Help program. It's all quite possible and feasible--if Microsoft would only take the lead and do it. Is anyone at Microsoft listening? ________________________________________________________________________ Michael B. Williams \ 1-2-3-4, KICK THE LAWSUITS OUT THE DOOR MIT NE43-532 \ 5-6-7-8, INNOVATE DON'T LITIGATE Laboratory for Computer Science \ 9-A-B-C, INTERFACES SHOULD BE FREE 545 Technology Square \ D-E-F-0, LOOK AND FEEL HAS GOT TO GO! Cambridge, MA 02139 -------------------------------------- (617) 876-7429 Internet: mikew@athena.mit.edu CompuServe: 73667,3264
dve@zooid.UUCP (David Mason) (10/13/90)
pnl@hpfinote.HP.COM (Peter Lim) writes: > But ! but ! but ! .... First time novice users are NOT supposed to > edit the .INI files. All they should do is to make changes via the > control panel etc. > > Is this any different from the Mac approach ? Is the Mac interface > more customizable to novice users than Windows interface is ? I doubt > it though, but then I haven't used a Mac for almost 3 years now. So ... Yes, in some cases you HAVE to edit WIN.INI. The Mac is of course much better in this regards, but there are times you have to do a bit of hacking to get it up to full speed. But there is no WIN.INI editing.. just moving things around.
kensy@microsoft.UUCP (Ken SYKES) (10/18/90)
This is all personal opinion so take it with a grain of salt... For the most part, users should never have to edit an INI file. Most of the INI file contents are specific to individual applications. It is up to the app to make sure its section of an INI file is maintained properly. Now, this just leaves the Windows system sections. For these, there should be a system icon or something in the control panel that allows these settings to be edited in an intuitive mannar. This is a different statement than saying windows should have an intelligent ini editor: Windows should only have to understand the sections of ini files that it uses. There is a problem with the above solution though: Most of these functions require the user to restart windows. Control Panel isn't the type of app that makes the user restart windows - the setup program is. So, this would be a more appropriate place for editing system INI sections. If users REALLY want to edit INI files manually, then any of the existing tools are adequate for this purpose. Ken Sykes Disclaimer: The above opinions are solely my own.