arstechnica.com — The changes Microsoft has made to Windows 7's UAC render it little more than a pesky annoyance. If this is the path the company wishes to go down, it should stop doing things by halves and kill it off altogether.
Mar 5, 2009 View in Crawl 4
stealthspcMar 6, 2009
I agree you do have to play around to learn.The thing I hate is when people break their computer and then blame the OS for being crappy. Those people who wont accept that they broke the computer.
mabsarkMar 6, 2009
@klcoAnother technician@rstrube and CyberwolfYou didn't upset me, I just tend to swear a lot. If you want intelligent conversation, then don't talk crap.@"consultants"You're technicians or engineers, calling yourselves "consultants", so you will sound more impressive and be paid more than someone calling themselves a technician. Not everyone is stupid enough to buy that bulls**t.
Closed AccountMar 6, 2009
"It's actually more of a pain in Linux because you have to enter your password every time."Wrong. KDE and other desktop managers have included keyrings that save root passwords for each session. You enter the root password once, tell it to keep it saved for the duration of the session with one click, and you never see it again until you reboot. Pretty sure KDE has had this function for years. Gnome..no clue, I rarely use it.
waspbrMar 6, 2009
A little security? UAC just ends up delaying whatever you want to do, whether you know that you are doing or not. it does not stop stupidity it just annoys the crap out of me, since I actually do know what I am doing. Long story short my UAC has been disabled, now vista is slightly more bearable, still I stick to linux, I will just use vista when I absolutely need to.
magamiakoMar 7, 2009
heh. And I'm saying that all someone has to do is make a popup window that looks exactly like it and they'll type their password anyway.Need proof that people are stupid? Just see the SSLStrip demonstration video. That guys rips out SSL and replaces Favicon with a padlock and people just go about their business typing their account details.
shadywasabiMar 8, 2009
Dugg for the recommendation at the end that folks use a non-privileged account by default. Having the Windows installer create personal accounts as non-admin would solve a lot of problems.
ryan1249Mar 9, 2009
Put it out of it's misery, please!
endusMar 9, 2009
Yes but that is not acceptable in all deployment scenarios. I am dealing with extremely non technical users here, working in a life and death environment.
Closed AccountMar 19, 2009
How do they know they're safe? They don't. That's why they have to prompt any process that requires admin privaleges. It's how OS X and linux work. It's just programmers who were assuming the user would have admin privaleges, when they shouldn't need to. Writing files to the same location as the app is not how you should be storing your app settings.
storhaug3Jun 19, 2009
@mabsarkJesus Christ, these guys are only trying to be objective and rational. I'm glad that rstube and kico mentioned that the work in the software industry, because it establishes their credibility. Its called rhetoric (establishing ethos), look it up. I for one will trust what kico and rstube claim over you, because you just seem like a clueless dumb ass. Oh and by the way, I am a Computer Science major, though I suppose you somehow spite me because of that.Kudos to you for being a Linux user though.