If you think this is bad you should hear MY rants!

[Homer J. Simpson]

Personally, I can't wait to purchase this OS. One of the elementary

schools in my area is also looking forward to using the software with the
new UAP build into it. I can also see your point that it can be
annoying, but UAP can be turned off.

So you trust elementary school kids to read and understand the warnings and
make the proper decision as to allow something to run or not?

If people think having these messages constantly in your face is going to
somehow protect the OS, they're only deluding themselves. And then you're
suggesting to turn off the warnings if they get too annoying? How's that
going to make the OS any safer?

 

[Zack Whittaker]

I think it's a good idea to be honest. We already know from the Vista
website what we can expect... and I think it's a good idea that they'll
"turn everything on" as standard because then the public gets to see a full
and frank sight of Vista.

I do think UAP especially needs a good tweak - especially if you let
Administrators have UAP pretty much disabled, it still gives the red shield
in the Security Center, that's certainly annoying, but I think it's good
that they're being honest about what's to expect and what's to eventually
see )

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--

 

[Mike Williams]

I think it's a good idea to be honest. We already know from the Vista
website what we can expect... and I think it's a good idea that they'll
"turn everything on" as standard because then the public gets to see a full
and frank sight of Vista.

I do think UAP especially needs a good tweak - especially if you let
Administrators have UAP pretty much disabled, it still gives the red shield
in the Security Center, that's certainly annoying, but I think it's good
that they're being honest about what's to expect and what's to eventually
see )

Yes, because the 2 people who are going to buy Vista with UAP in this
condition will want a full and frank understanding of why they wasted
their money.

 

[michael e dziatkowicz]

I understand UAP will be implemented by default on the public beta. What a
joke.
I can already hear the outcry!
Frank

One of my friends got to test the beta and they hated it. He couldn't get
UAP to turn off. I haven't played with it yet but from what I heard it's a
pain. When is it going public by the way? This month or not til next or not
til June now?

 

[Jason]

I never said I trust the kids in the school. I would hope to have trust in
the teachers and administrators that put the restrictions on the PCs.

--
Jason

Applied but still waiting to be accepted for the Vista Beta Testing group.
Can't wait to be able to play and help make it even better.

http://www.orderpcs4free.com/?r=878

MS Windows XP Pro, IE 7.0.5335.5 Beta 2

 

[Mike Williams]

I never said I trust the kids in the school. I would hope to have trust in
the teachers and administrators that put the restrictions on the PCs.

ROFL

 

[Frank]

I think it's a good idea to be honest. We already know from the Vista
website what we can expect... and I think it's a good idea that they'll
"turn everything on" as standard because then the public gets to see a full
and frank sight of Vista.

I do think UAP especially needs a good tweak - especially if you let
Administrators have UAP pretty much disabled, it still gives the red shield
in the Security Center, that's certainly annoying, but I think it's good
that they're being honest about what's to expect and what's to eventually
see )

I amazed that the geeks are or will be able to blow this by the
marketing people.
Frank

 

[Homer J. Simpson]

I never said I trust the kids in the school. I would hope to have trust

ROFL

Bottom line is, security has to be transparent, otherwise your system's
already compromised.

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

Why UAP is a good thing is simple, anything that executes needs permission.
Which means both good code or bad code needs your permission. Microsoft is
expecting the end user to read the dialogue, think through what they are
doing before allowing something that might dangerous to the user.
--
--
Andre
Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

 

[Robert Rixx]

I'm running Windows Vista Ultimate build 5342 x86 on a P4 3Ghz system with 3
gigs of memory. I have not have a single crash with the OS. And I'm putting
it though it's paces having multiple windows up, and really hammering the
memory usage. the only issue I have is the aero flip during java used
programs. that's it. yes I did a lot of work a rounds. But so far I'm
enjoying the software. I even fix other people stuff via remote desktop
while I got other stuff going at the same time. Beta testing requires work
folks. is it was a prefect running system already, what does MS need you for
to test it?
Stiff upper lips, Lads! and keeps those feedback going to MS. The RTM's
quality depends on you.

 

[Tom Lake]

Why UAP is a good thing is simple, anything that executes needs
permission. Which means both good code or bad code needs your permission.
Microsoft is expecting the end user to read the dialogue, think through
what they are doing before allowing something that might dangerous to the
user.

Unfortunately, it's been well documented that, given too many dialog boxes
requiring
a response, users will start simply clicking the choice that will get them
through the
step without really understanding exactly what they're doing. The question
then
becomes, "How many is 'Too Many'?" Has Vista reached this threshold yet?

Tom Lake

 

[Frank]

Why UAP is a good thing is simple, anything that executes needs permission.
Which means both good code or bad code needs your permission. Microsoft is
expecting the end user to read the dialogue, think through what they are
doing before allowing something that might dangerous to the user.

Marketing 101 says this UAP will never fly. MS is trying to go from
basically no protection from outside attacks to constantly harassing the
user sitting at the desktop.
Stupid idea. It's an over reaction to security holes that have been
present basically in IE for years. UAP does not correctly address the
real problem of outside attacks.
Leave the person at the desktop alone! Protect them from outside
attacks. Don't think you can protect them from themselves.
Frank

 

[Zack Whittaker]

I do believe that the UX Guidelines will be properly addressed by the time
Beta 2 is rolled out, so hopefully we won't see as many dialogs with UAP.
But we'll have to wait and see )

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--

 

[Frank]

I do believe that the UX Guidelines will be properly addressed by the time
Beta 2 is rolled out, so hopefully we won't see as many dialogs with UAP.
But we'll have to wait and see )

I'm holding my breath!
Frank

 

[Ed Sproull [MSFT]]

By transparent do you mean that there should be no user interaction? Just
say NO to everything?

If I've misunderstood, what is your solution?

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

Yes, it needs to be transparent, I don't think things like Defender, UAP
should be so in your face. Could you have Defender placed under System
Utilities? Its not something you are gonna access a lot. Also, like I said
before, UAP needs to be strained out and thought out logically. Things like
opening Device Manager, Speech or certain Control Panel items need UAP. Has
Microsoft done studies to show that you can hack into your computer through
certain Control Panel items?
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

Tell your friend to Click Start > All Programs > Accessories > Run > type in
MSCONFIG > click OK > select Tools (tab) > scroll down to Disable UAP >
click Launch > Restart system. The Public BETA should be available in this
quarter.
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

In my Opinion: Microsoft definitely needs to give us MSDN Subscriber's
something Newer than Build 5308 CTP (considering the fact that it is now
over 2 month's old and out-dated code), and so that they can prove to us
MSDN Subscriber's that Windows Vista (RTM) will be a worth-wile Operating
System to Upgrade to (just as soon as it's no longer in Beta).

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

P.S. It (Build 5308 CTP) was compiled on Febuary 17, 2006 at 10:00 P.M.
Microsoft Time (according to the WINVER command), so it really would be nice
to have something newer then Build 5308 CTP.

 

[Jason]

Maybe you should stop complaining and wait like the rest of us. Be greatful
that you have the version you have or just stop using it all together.

--
Jason

Applied but still waiting to be accepted for the Vista Beta Testing group.
Can't wait to be able to play and help make it even better.

http://www.orderpcs4free.com/?r=878

MS Windows XP Pro, IE 7.0.5335.5 Beta 2