J
Jim Wray
Other than the GUI, what exactly is the difference between these two
registry editors. I've used regedit to do whatever I needed to do with the
registry for years while running Win98. Now that I have switched to Win2000
I remember reading somewhere that you shouldn't use regedit but rather
regedt32. Every time I needed to to do anything with the registry I have
started off using regedt32 but generally gave up in frustration because it
is just too tedious to use for my tastes. Is there really any problem if I
just use regedit or is there some possibility of corrupting the registry
(other than human error). I know the Win2000 registry structure is different
than the previous registry structure but so far, every time I have used
regedit it did what I wanted it to do with no discernable problems.
thanks for any enlightenment...
registry editors. I've used regedit to do whatever I needed to do with the
registry for years while running Win98. Now that I have switched to Win2000
I remember reading somewhere that you shouldn't use regedit but rather
regedt32. Every time I needed to to do anything with the registry I have
started off using regedt32 but generally gave up in frustration because it
is just too tedious to use for my tastes. Is there really any problem if I
just use regedit or is there some possibility of corrupting the registry
(other than human error). I know the Win2000 registry structure is different
than the previous registry structure but so far, every time I have used
regedit it did what I wanted it to do with no discernable problems.
thanks for any enlightenment...