As a long time user, power user and admin, I disagree by pointing the following:

* In 1995, did you use the "home" OS, like W95, 98, ME? Or the pro versions (Windows NT)? Because 9x is and was a joke, minimal pricing and meant for a home learning experience. Couldn't stay upright left alone. It matters, since that would be like using Tiny Linux to point out problems with Suse Enterprise.

* Registry is basically a large, upgraded config file and by nature has the same issues all settting systems do. Write trash in it, it will die. Has traded plain text (manual recovery) to indexed, structured storage (automatic recovery). However, it's been doubled by Last Known Good, tripled by Restore Points sine at least NT and 2002, respectively.

* Registry is always cached in RAM. Thus, vulnerable to memory errors and, coupled with the user's incessant need to reboot manually, saved onto disk bypassing LKG.

Finally, we have 90 percent os users. That means rougly 90 percent of uninstructed people, also, same for idiots.

Imagine how Linux stability would look if 80 percent of users would run as root and copy-pasting stuff they see in banners from Google searches.

I know the chances to ever get this straightened out are slim to none, but surely you can relate to this:

When comparing OSs, compare well managed versions on both sides. I don't compare Linux to Windows based on what Linux does FOR ME because I suck at it. And as non pros, most of you do at Windows.

I ask how thing should work, why can't you?

Juise-, this isn't aimed at you, it's a generic rant.