Registry Entry vs. Silent Install?

[JoeMSFN]

I see all these discussions about how to silent install the GDI+ bad library detection tool, and the Malicious Software Removal tool. These files are BIG compared to the few bytes in a .reg file.

I can't understand why (other than not knowing now to do registry entries) someone would use up 100s of KBs of valuable space on an install disc to run an installer that checks for something that should already be patched!

To quote from MS' Malicious Software Removal tool page, this doesn't install anything! So why have it on the disc? Whenever a new update comes out, I manually run it and compare registry snap shots, and put whatever looks like Windows Update would want on my new disc (I'm 2 for 2 so far with this method)

GDI+ seems to want me to run windows updates eventhough nothing shows up on the list. (plus office isn't even installed).

Well there's my view. I'm currious of other peoples' views on this matter. (really I am)

Which method do you use? and more importantly why?

[Jeremy]

Well, if the registry entry saves filesize and is more efficient, despite not knowing exactly what you're talking about, I'll vote for the reg entry.

[EliasXP]

WPI

[angadsingh007]

Who's dumb enough to use the f****d up installer ?