UAC and other permission schemes delay progress

[Retired]

Sorry, but you are sadly misinformed about the "advantages" of UAC. I
predict, as have many knowledgeable experts (check Google for the many
articles on the subject), that Microsoft will be making major changes to UAC
before another year has past. Why? Because they already have realized what a
disaster UAC has brought to Vista.

Yes, my system is clean. Having a system that is empty of a virus or spyware
is possible, checking for the existence of one of these pests is possible,
and getting rid of them is also possible. All of these possibilities can be
easily achieved WITHOUT Vista or UAC. If you don't believe that, then again,
you are sadly misinformed.

You said "90% to 95% of computer users do not have much of a clue when it
comes to protecting a system. Anything that Vista does is a step in the
right
direction - for the average user.". I guess that means that Microsoft
regards the average user as too dumb to protect himself/herself. How
patronizing!

Yes, I have heard of "throw-away" email addresses. I use them, but they
will not stop a virus.

Just curious. Are you associated with Microsoft?

Have a nice weekend.

 

[Richard Urban]

I fully expect changes to UAC also. It will be made better and likely more
secure yet.

UAC is here to stay. Learn to live with it. The next iteration may not be
able to be turned off, much as in Unix, Linux etc. - where you have to sign
in as a *super user* to do certain things. There are if's, and's or but's
about this. If you don't log in as super user - you don't do it. End of
game. I can see UAC going there also.

Again, 90% of people just want to turn on their computer and use it. Many
never add a program in addition to what came with the computer. Many never
buy into their Antivirus subscription when it expires - and wonder why they
are infected.

I now install perpetually free editions of antivirus, anti spyware etc. so I
don't have to deal with this 6 months down the road.

I guess you have progressed past this point. I know personally of hundreds
who have not, never will - and don't give a rats ass about it. They just
want to use it, not maintain it. It is these people that Microsoft is
targeting and protecting - those who can't or refuse to do it for
themselves.



--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[john]

I liked the way, on old cars, you could just push a button on the dash to
start the engine. I don't need no friggen key.

Choices get removed all the time for various reasons, in countless
products. Learn to deal with it and stop whining!

I wasn't whining, merely marveling at how people like you line up and bend
over every time some entity, whether corporate or government, tells you to,
and then you expect everyone else to follow suit.
Individuality os OK, as long as all do it together, right?
This is exactly the reason why we have the Patriot Act.

Like I said before, Microsoft plays the role of shepherd, as long as we are
all willing sheep.
Me? no thanks, I prefer to think for myself, a foreign notion to you for
sure.

=======================================
"I know not a single less irrelevant reason for an update than bugfixes.
The reasons for updates are to present more new features."
- Bill Gates
=======================================

 

[Frank]

Actually, you might actually have a point.
After all Bill Gates himself said (and I quote):

- "Let's face it, the average computer user has the brain of a Spider
Monkey."

Just remember that folks, the next time you're tempted to lay down your hard
earned $$ for another Microsoft product.
What you get will be a direct result of this kind of thinking.

Why are you here?
Frank

 

[S Wayne]

UACis here to stay. Learn to live with it. The next iteration may not be
able to be turned off, much as in Unix, Linux etc. - where you have to sign
in as a *super user* to do certain things. There are if's, and's or but's
about this. If you don't log in as super user - you don't do it. End of
game. I can seeUACgoing there also.

Umm? Never used any form of *nix have you? Never heard of sudoers and
elevated
permissions in the other environments. I haven't logged into any of my
Linux
boxes as super-user in years, and I get all of my admin tasks done
when I need
to.

 

[john]

Why are you here?
Frank

just to piss -you- off
next stupid question...
ROFL

--
=======================================
"They say when you play that Microsoft CD backward you can hear satanic
messages ... but that's nothing. If you play it forward it will install
Windows.
=======================================

 

[Hugh Wyn Griffith]

I have no inherent objection to UAC even if I do tend to know what I'm
doing but I really can see no reason not to have a "Do not ask me again
for this application" checkbox.

I've seen it argued that this could be faked by an invader but surely
so can the "Yes I know this application" command.

I hope that this is one of the modifications you expect.

 

[Guest]

If you mean turn off UAC, I did. However I still get all kinds of intrusive
Vista messages telling me something about this or that. This is the "other
ridiculous permission junk" items I was referring to in my original post.
And just what would that be?

 

[Guest]

Sorry, but you are sadly misinformed about the "advantages" of UAC. I
predict, as have many knowledgeable experts (check Google for the many
articles on the subject), that Microsoft will be making major changes to UAC
before another year has past. Why? Because they already have realized what a
disaster UAC has brought to Vista.

Yes, my system is clean. Having a system that is empty of a virus or spyware
is possible, checking for the existence of one of these pests is possible,
and getting rid of them is also possible. All of these possibilities can be
easily achieved WITHOUT Vista or UAC. If you don't believe that, then again,
you are sadly misinformed.

You said "90% to 95% of computer users do not have much of a clue when it
comes to protecting a system. Anything that Vista does is a step in the
right
direction - for the average user.". I guess that means that Microsoft
regards the average user as too dumb to protect himself/herself. How
patronizing!

Patronizing but true!

Yes, I have heard of "throw-away" email addresses. I use them, but they
will not stop a virus.

Just curious. Are you associated with Microsoft?

If you've turned off UAC what are you bitching about?
Are you a virus writer?

 

[Guest]

you're missing the point... It's all about choices, and Microsoft is
removing them.

HOW!
YOU CAN TURN IT OFF, IT'S A CHOICE!

he//, I'll even go so far as to agree with you that UAC might actually be a
good idea for the masses...
-IF- it worked, which clearly it doesn't.

Just because it isn't perfect in your eyes doesn't mean it doesn't work.
Show me some numbers that prove that.

How about this? Why not just suggest to Microsoft that they incorporate some
Patriot Act bits into their next Service Pack? Every keystroke would be
forwarded through Dept. of Homeland Security for microscopic scrutiny.
Only we wouldn't call it "spyware" we'll call it "added security" instead.
That oughta fool 'em

Yet another dumb analogy.

After all, us poor dumb consumers need all the protection from ourselves as
Microsoft can shove down our throats.

TURN IT OFF !!!
YOU ARE ALLOWED TO.
How on earth can you claim MS is taking away your choice in this is beyond me.

[ Microsoft is becoming what Geo. Orwell warned us about ]

=======================================
"Since when has the world of computer software design been about what
people want?" - Bill Gates
=======================================

 

[Guest]

Actually, you might actually have a point.
After all Bill Gates himself said (and I quote):

- "Let's face it, the average computer user has the brain of a Spider
Monkey."

Just remember that folks, the next time you're tempted to lay down your hard
earned $$ for another Microsoft product.
What you get will be a direct result of this kind of thinking.

So John

What OS do you use and are you going to tell me it does everything perfectly
the way you want it and everything in it has a option to let you configure
it exactly the way you want it? I'm guess no.

Face it you're just a MS basher
I know I know you think your a rebel saving the world from the big bad
cooperations.

 

[Guest]

just to piss -you- off
next stupid question...
ROFL

There you are folks an admitted troll.

 

[Bob Eyster]

Just my opinion;

The UAC is nothing more than a means to divert the blame from MS to the end
user for security.

If ever a class action law suite over security, MS can say we developed the
UAC and the user allowed the virus or whatever program to run.

If the UAC is MS" answer to security? No wonder they and their software are
always being breached/hacked.

 

[Retired]

Good point. UAC does appear to have been designed by a committee of
corporate lawyers, just like the "I accept" statement every user has to
click on before installing major software. Does anyone actually read all of
that junk?

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Really?
I see more "whining" from you than from most anyone.
It seems the critics do most of the "whining" in the Microsoft
newsgroups.
In most newsgroups I watch, the critics do most of the "whining".
Very typical of you to attempt to project your own issues on others.

 

[Andre C]

Is Vista a step backwards?

LIstening to the inevitable disintergration of this thread I am
reminded of the Usenet urban myth that all threads, if allowed to
continue too long end up with someone making some nazi/Hitler jibe.
Which I believe is Goodwin's law
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law)

Anyway why don't you all agree to disagree. UAC (if you sum it up)
appears to be a good idea (already practiced in Unix) which has been
initially poorly implimented by a corporate body designed to off set
user blame but which will improve and be compulsory in time and which
has a positive benefit for the 90% of the computer user population who
have very minimal skills re computers and ,thankfully, have no idea
what usernet is and so will not see this insult.

Personally I have switched it off as it caused problems with a number
of software despite compatibility mode and I am too lazy to keep
clickign amouse button.

I await the Nazi comment with interest.

ACC

 

[Don Guillett]

My Infinity M45 has just such a button and the key remains in my pocket.

--
Don Guillett
SalesAid Software
(e-mail address removed)

I liked the way, on old cars, you could just push a button on the dash to
start the engine. I don't need no friggen key.

Choices get removed all the time for various reasons, in countless
products. Learn to deal with it and stop whining!

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

Many cars will not allow you to even start them unless the drivers seat
belt is buckled - a safety feature. So, the auto manufacturers force an
action upon the consumer. Some cars turn on the headlights whenever the
engine is running, without any input from the operator. A safety feature
for sure.

Heating pads have an over temperature device that shuts down the current
in case the pad gets too hot. You want more heat/ Tough buddy!

Bathroom electrical outlets have ground fault detectors built in, by
code. You don't want them? Tough, you don't get a C.O.

Even the better computer power supplies have over current protection.
You want to add another hardware device? Tough luck buddy. You are past
the maximum allowed. John says, "But I want to add another hard drive"!
Too bad John.

Need I go on.

you're missing the point... It's all about choices, and Microsoft is
removing them.
he//, I'll even go so far as to agree with you that UAC might actually be
a good idea for the masses...
-IF- it worked, which clearly it doesn't.

How about this? Why not just suggest to Microsoft that they incorporate
some Patriot Act bits into their next Service Pack? Every keystroke
would be forwarded through Dept. of Homeland Security for microscopic
scrutiny.
Only we wouldn't call it "spyware" we'll call it "added security"
instead. That oughta fool 'em

After all, us poor dumb consumers need all the protection from ourselves
as Microsoft can shove down our throats.

[ Microsoft is becoming what Geo. Orwell warned us about ]

=======================================
"Since when has the world of computer software design been about what
people want?" - Bill Gates
=======================================