Yep , but I doubt that "plain" filesystem journaling represents an effective "safety measure" (when such a number of programs and services run in the background).
Having a transactional filesystem may possibly help (due to the "atomic" nature of the transaction log) and not-so-casually transactional NTFS was introduced with Vista
But (just for the record), at application level, the thingy was rather poorly implemented, or documented, or both , to the point that it is now "deprecated" :
TxF was introduced with Windows Vista as a means to introduce atomic file transactions to Windows. It allows for Windows developers to have transactional atomicity for file operations in transactions with a single file, in transactions involving multiple files, and in transactions spanning multiple sources – such as the Registry (through TxR), and databases (such as SQL). While TxF is a powerful set of APIs, there has been extremely limited developer interest in this API platform since Windows Vista primarily due to its complexity and various nuances which developers need to consider as part of application development. As a result, Microsoft is considering deprecating TxF APIs in a future version of Windows to focus development and maintenance efforts on other features and APIs which have more value to a larger majority of customers.
The good MS guys, however seemingly "invented" a transactional exFAT for Windows Ce/Phone, TexFAT (of which exist seemingly also a 2.x version, completely UNdocumented) see:
That filesystem may be (if ever it will be available/usable on "real" Windows PC's) a good "no permission/no unneeded fluff" kind of solution.
But of course this - even if it will ever happen - won't change in any way the situation of the Registry which is in itself a filesystem (and actually very similar to NTFS) if you look at it from the right angle :
A nice experiment (if anyone has time/will) would be to try making a Windows 7 "standard" install (the one with the 100 Mb stupid "boot" partition - which the good MS guys call "system" - and a second "system" partition - the one which the good MS guys call "boot").
Then replace the second partition with a "copy of it" but formatted with a UDF (or exFAT or TexFAT) filesystem.
Will it work? (i.e. has the BOOTMGR the capability to access UDF (or exFAT or TexFAT) filesystems?)
P.S:: IN the mentioned thread on reboot.pro:
another member posted his experience with manifest files that can be removed from the WinSXS directory safely, so even 7 is possible.
If you want to do do the test, remember that the 7 installation footprint on disk will grow to 9 Gb or more, almost 10 Gb if I recall correctly.
Edited by jaclaz, 04 April 2014 - 04:25 AM.