PC Review


Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread

Program virtualization vs. installer virtualization

 
 
Roof Fiddler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      20th Sep 2006
Since programs which insist on writing user data to the programs'
directories in C:\Program Files can be run on Vista using directory
virtualization, so that a program P run as user U sees a virtual C:\Program
Files\P which is actually a union of the real C:\Program Files\P and
C:\Users\U\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files\P, and the program's
writes are stored to the latter, why can't the program's installer also be
virtualized in the same way, so that non-admin users can install their own
private programs and the installers will think that they're running as
administrator even though they're really not?
Of course system-level utility programs, drivers, etc couldn't be
virtualized using this simple mechanism, but installers which must currently
run as administrator for no other reason than to be able to write to
C:\Program Files (and corresponding registry locations, and the start menu,
etc) could be virtualized using the current filesystem and registry
virtualization mechanisms.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Chris Moore
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      21st Sep 2006
This virtual stuff.....when saving Office document writer print jobs I have
been saving them to DESKTOP but Vista is saving them to a virtualised store
under Temporary internet files which is then not accessible even though I am
an administrator. I have from the command prompt tried to copy/move these
files but cannot.

Why is Vista behaving this way and Desktop is not Desktop for my user
account. I guess I am missing something fundamental here can you shed any
light for me?

Thanks

Chris

<DIV>&quot;Roof Fiddler&quot; &lt;(E-Mail Removed)&gt; wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...</DIV>> Since programs which
insist on writing user data to the programs'
> directories in C:\Program Files can be run on Vista using directory
> virtualization, so that a program P run as user U sees a virtual
> C:\Program Files\P which is actually a union of the real C:\Program
> Files\P and C:\Users\U\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files\P, and the
> program's writes are stored to the latter, why can't the program's
> installer also be virtualized in the same way, so that non-admin users can
> install their own private programs and the installers will think that
> they're running as administrator even though they're really not?
> Of course system-level utility programs, drivers, etc couldn't be
> virtualized using this simple mechanism, but installers which must
> currently run as administrator for no other reason than to be able to
> write to C:\Program Files (and corresponding registry locations, and the
> start menu, etc) could be virtualized using the current filesystem and
> registry virtualization mechanisms.
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Virtualization questions rusli AMD 64 Bit 0 7th Aug 2006 10:55 PM
Blue Pill: a rootkit using virtualization technology YKhan Processors 0 30th Jun 2006 07:01 PM
Virtualization in the future for AMD? ***** charles AMD 64 Bit 2 23rd Jan 2006 08:50 PM
AMD Pacifica virtualization technology specs released YKhan Processors 1 26th May 2005 01:03 PM
possible divergence in x86 virtualization technologies? YKhan Processors 18 9th Mar 2005 06:23 PM


Features
 

Advertising
 

Newsgroups
 


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:55 PM.