What is Digg?105 Comments
- TechCoder, on 10/12/2007, -9/+33The new security "features" are a major hassle, I installed the beta and it made it almost impossible to do anything. From copying files to running programs. I ended up disabling the security features.
Whats the point in switching from xp to vista? A new GUI? New secutiy? Its not worth the trouble. - mfratt, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3320xx?
- IQ70, on 10/12/2007, -9/+30The user interaction will be much different in the real release. Its well established that beta users were being made to really beta test the warning messages as to judge which user interactions were going to be kept for the final release.
- kturner, on 10/12/2007, -23/+40OSX allows for graceful/easy user permissions... Hell, Ubuntu does as well. Why can't Vista figure it out?? Vista won't have so many of the features it said it would (I'm still ticked that WinFS was removed.) So I'll ask again... WHAT IS THE POINT OF SWITCHING?
Vista = Plus! XP on crack - saska, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14There's no making people happy. The sudo password system is exactly what commenters a few paragraphs up are complaining about. However, it only seems to warrant complaint when it's in Windows.
On the other hand, if you run your Vista machine as a member of the Administrators group, you're basically running your desktop as root. That's a foolish user practice. Hopefully the installation routine prevents you from doing so. - seventoes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11..."forget the meaning of the word "beta""...
That would be Web 2.0 + Google's fault. - Maasneotek, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15I would have to agree with the conclusion that this is a hassle. I am looking forward to getting vista, mainly for direct x 10.
However, the security is pretty ridiculous, I think Paul Thurrott (http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/) explained it best, but there are multiple instances where the OS asks for permission to do the most mundane of tasks like copying a file to another folder or simply running a program (again and again). Its the equivalent to the computer asking- "you want to do that eh? are you SURE you want to do that?". Trust me it gets pretty annoying, you can change this through a registry hack, but that's not really the point. Especially since this is about marketing the OS to the average user, not the more tech savvy like us.
Microsoft is really shooting themselves in the foot here; I hope they can sort this out, because right now- its a pain just to manage a couple of files let alone live with this OS. Keep in mind its not about how secure the OS is, we're talking about aesthetics of a new OS being COUNTER-INTUITIVE to the average Joe.
-maasneotek - alienfluid, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15run as a limited user, not in the administrators group, and you will be asked for credentials.
- lat47, on 10/12/2007, -10/+19Everyone complains about weak Windows security. MS tries to do something about it and everyone complains. Some people are never happy.
- hipsterelitist, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16has anyone noticed how the number of "experts" and "analysts" grows exponential with every OS release?
I can't help but to think that most of the time these things are just nay saying BS. If there were any merit to these forecasts, why wasn't there more flack before the release Windows ME? - eddyc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Isn't this the point of putting out a beta?, so that people can identify bugs and annoyances, report them back to the programmers and have them fixed.
Since when did vista come out..... - saska, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11You were in the Administrators group, then. It's not sudo; it isn't going to ask you for your password when you're already logged in.
- xed122333, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14It's amazing how everyone seems to treat the beta build of Vista as what Vista will eventually be released as. People these days tend to forget the meaning of the word "beta" and just treat the beta as a final release. When Microsoft releases Vista, it will not be in the state that it is in now.
- ArcusOfSV, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Aluminum doenst rust jackass.
-->xpehw - Patioswings, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I agree and MS is actually doing a great thing by putting out Betas, listening to feedback, and making changes Then they will hopefully ship a product that will make Windows users happy.
- letmereplynow, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16Hmm why can't the security/network Admins just turn off the alerts for themselves and leave them for the end users, who they are intended for? Sounds simple enough for me. If everyone today wouldn't run use Windows as Admins(the user account), they wouldn't be 90% of the viruses out there today. I don't blame Microsoft for trying to educate people on how to protect themselves.
I am not digging this... - Elsan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Read.
"While the researchers laud Microsoft's efforts to reduce account privileges to slow the spread of malware, lock down holes in its Internet Explorer browser, improve network access controls and integrate anti-spyware and anti-phishing applications into Vista, the report concludes that the execution of some of those plans may encourage companies to take a wait-and-see approach with the OS." - BigHungryJoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6This just in, article is on Windows Vista, not Apple Macs dumbass..
- r3zonance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I've used the latest Vista Beta, thru MSDN subscription at work.
The Security Dialogs are a pain in the backside. Everytime you delete a file it asks you to "Allow" or "Cancel", same goes for emptying the recycle bin, opening the "Keyboard" or "Mouse" settings in Control Panel. EVERY time you open a MMC snap-in it whines too.
It is just an absolute annoyance. I could understand if they had gone with the route of authenticate to actually CHANGE a setting, but not to view them, that's just ridiculous.
Also if you haven't got AeroGlass running (i.e. you are using Areo or Windows Classic themes) the screen updates are really dog slow (like XP without a specific driver). But as soon as you turn AeroGlass back on it refreshes the screen really fast. So they have some real issues there too. I definitely won't be using it (Vista that is). - teamparadox, on 10/12/2007, -17/+22The default security in Vista is good, it works and its simple to use, if anyone is complaing about that then they have a grudge.
No digg - ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5THat sounds like the attitude Microsoft has - it is also how it treats its customers.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The problem is that you don't need to be asked what Vista is asking in the first place. If they would make a truly secure OS, you could install user apps without fear of them installing hidden malware or trashing your install. Why are Vista user apps that have no reason to mess with your base config allowed to do it AT ALL?
Don't tell me we're still going to have apps placing crap all over /windows/ and /documents & settings/ AND /program files/, with complete unfettered access to rape the Registry like in XP? That's not a security improvement! - drizek, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Because it sucks!
you only need sudo to modify a system file or install programs. With vista you need it to change the ***** wallpaper. - cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9No HobbesDoo, you are wrong. The normal user does not have admin priveleges all through the system, they have priveleges over their own files and applications, and are isolated from the rest of the system. Even the Administrator account is limited now in what it can do without confirmation.
Its a capability that Window NT based OSes have had for a long time, they are just now trying to
make use of it in an effective way. - kysle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7That video is hilariously bad.
- k0rtina, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The Shims are NOT the same as sudo, or Run as...
Run as: This allows the application to run in the context of a DIFFERENT user.
This is completly different to allowing the application to run as the same user, but with Admin rights.
sudo: This is something that the user needs to learn. Shims can be deployed with the application to allow the work to happen without user interaction. They just launch the appliction like they normally do. - k0rtina, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I think that Microsoft are heading in the right direction. For years Microsoft have been abused for having their "standard" user access as Administrator. For years experts have been saying that applications should run without administrative privileges.
Microsoft have finally implemented this!. They have also allowed you to change this functionality to suit yourself.
Checkout the Local Security Policy, there are 6 different options to change this behavior.
Many vendors are responsible for the problems that users are experiencing, why do some applications need local administrator rights to run? The biggest problem is LAZY vendors.
Vista has the ability to deal with this too!, they created this thing called "Shims" where you can have the users access elevated to administrator just for ONE application, This allows corporate environments to run a tight security infrastructure, but still allow that crappy application to function correctly without opening the whole desktop.
People complain about getting infected by spyware, If 90% of the user base were not administrators this problem would simply not exist. - ISVDamocles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Seems the MS fanboys are on the loose... (Referring to the guys booing you)
- mistshadow2k4, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10I don't understand why MS is having so much trouble with this. Just use the sudo password system that has been in use with *nix since the dawn of time. This is part of why *nix is so much more secure than Windows in the first place. Yeah, a lot of it is a problem of user ignorance, but just having them click "OK" isn't going to educate them, and that's what they desperately need, like it or not. If they had to input their password to carry out admin-level actions it might make them wonder why something simple needs and admin privileges at all, especially as they'll be hearing about the danger of doing that when they shouldn't need to.
And, as for DirectX 10, I think it's going to be pointless. No gaming company or developer in their right mind is going to make games that work only with DirectX 10 when the vast majority of Windows users are going to still be running older versions of Windows, so I seriously doubt that you will see any difference whatsoever. On the other hand, I'm sort of glad that Microsoft is doing this -- they're foolish for doing it, as it won't help them a bit, but if they insist on keeping a stranglehold on DirectX it will force others to innovate something to take it's place. Perhaps OpenGL will finally be further developed. In short, you try to control it too much, you kill it. - Hydroxyl, on 10/12/2007, -13/+16You have to if you're a gamer.
DirectX 10.
:| - tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Because before WinME pepople were content to think "Maybe this time they'll get it right."
- MrKite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I remember when all the "experts" asked why the switch from Windows 98/M/NT was necessary. I questioned it too. Then I switched, and I've found that the general stabilty in XP is 100x better than it was in the previous versions. Over the years I've found that every new version of Windows is much better than its predecessor. I very much doubt that MS would spill all that money into the development of a new OS only to make it equally as good or not as good as xp.
And I remember tinkering with XP beta and that was NOT the same experience as the released version at all. - nato64, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12If Microsoft actually did something useful or innovative about it, less people would complain. But what they seemed to have done was just make people click "Yes" on a dialogue box when wanting to do something. I could be very wrong. But that's what the public perception is going to be. And sometimes, that's what matters.
- spjmm0, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Linux and Unix users know their computers on average better, why they support each other, they have to know what their hardware is because some manufacturers do not have the best (if any) drivers and they have to figure out more as there are not as many books.
That being said...
Beta versions are beta versions, treat them as such. I liken most MS users to people driving cars, do they have any clue of the things that they do to their cars as they drive? No, as long as it starts they are happy, just as MS users are happy as long as their PC starts. So MS panders to them, bad or not, this is why the Internet and computers are the way they are. Market share drives innovation, Beta vs VHS taught us that. - GhostFreeman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I'm a gamer, and I am not going to upgrade for DX10 until I know the ramifications of its TPM integration.
Enough said. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This software is supposedly feature complete - it is supposed to ship in a few months. If they are still adding features they then are in deeper crap then I thought. Vistae today is a good represntation of what the final product is going to be. Quit hiding MS's crap software behind the word "beta" - google's beta stuff is pretty functional / stable as is most open source software (Alpha = danger danger)
- compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -13/+16Or maybe they're just reviewing it the way the majority of people would feel about it. If any tech expert things the security features are a hassle, how do you think a novice will feel? They'll probably end up disabling them just to stop all the popup balloons and warnings that Windows has. So now they're left with Windows XP w/ a new GUI. Money well spent.
- thatsiebguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Start with whats most restrictive and work your way back to something thats usable but still secure. As opposed to just giving users full admin permissions to a system.
Vistas implementation is no different than giving a user account limited access as opposed to admin access in XP except you dont have to do everything via RunAs. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6This whole page is full of MS fanboys trying to sing praises for MS for re-making something that was already made in like 1980 - and remaking it badly.
Bill Gates will *never* give you any of his money, so quit kissing his ass you *****.
... I think I may have had too many beers this evening ... - cazabam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Run as: This allows the application to run in the context of a DIFFERENT user. This is completly different to allowing the application to run as the same user, but with Admin rights."
No, it's not like sudo. It's like su, the precursor to sudo.
"sudo: This is something that the user needs to learn. Shims can be deployed with the application to allow the work to happen without user interaction. They just launch the appliction like they normally do."
The /etc/sudoers file can be used quite effectively to say 'user X has elevated privileges for commands Y and Z, and does/does not need a password for the privilege shift'. Use gtk-sudo to wrap the call and you're away. How is this different to shims? - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3[quote]What a transformative experience.[/quote]
You're not getting paid to say things like that, are you? - alienfluid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Because it sucks!
you only need sudo to modify a system file or install programs. With vista you need it to change the ***** wallpaper."
- care to share an example? changing display settings such as wallpaper and themes doesn't seem to ask me for credentials. maybe a more positive analysis from you would help - "it sucks" doesn't go very far. - ISVDamocles, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8You're something of an idiot, aren't you? Microsoft didn't "create" anything with this so-called "Shims." It's just sudo (sudo = SuperUser DO).
Like many above have said, Microsoft is just now fixing issues in their operating system that were fixed by Big Iron and Academia 20 years ago in POSIX-land.
The complaints are that Microsoft is still too arrogant to just use the standard as it is and they feel they need to "improve" it just like they "improved" Office with Clippy. - pt4117, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@mistshadow2k4
You really don't think that developers will make killer games because not enough people haven't "upgraded"?
When has that ever stopped them before? How many times have they released games that would make your 2 week old video card cry? - anagami, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2"Jaquith said that Microsoft is headed in the right direction with its security work in Vista, but said he believes that it will take the company at least a year before it is able to make the features it has already added more digestible for administrators and end users."
how... sick - Toggle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3After having done my share of years in DOS and Windows administration and IT in general (I'm a librarian now), I went out last October and bought an iBook. What a transformative experience. I feel a lot safer with a Mac from an OS stability perspective, for security, and for intuitive use. This machine locks down tight on command.
Corporate environments are going to run on MS forever - but I won't. There are a few Mac incompatibility issues - I'll find a PC to accomplish those, just the way I do with a "real" land line if I need to call 911 instead of worrying about Vonage's 911 on my main number.
I'm not saying that Vista is going to be crap, or that there won't be continuous product improvement on MS's side over the long term. I'm just not going to bother with it any more. And no, I don't have an iPod. - uownedge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Somewhat in respones to what scmiles had said earlier...
As an administrator, I feel it's a step in the right direction, but it's just not quite enough. They're setting up for the same disaster that has been Internet explorer. You have to tell the system it's "okay" to install something, or move a file, but most users will simply click "continue" without paying attention to what's going on, and then there you are...wtih another infected system.
Sure, we're adding annother step in the process to become infected, but that'll only help out so much, and in many cases, not at all. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5they could always stop and do a total rewrite
- boycy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4OSX is horrible.
- Recluse, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"The User Account Control feature is like Chatty Kathy, it's always in your face and the danger is that users are going to start treating it like the snooze button on their alarm clock and hitting 'yes' without looking to see why they've been prompted"
That's pretty much what I've been saying about it all along. And its what will happen.
I won't even consider getting vista until after the first service pack is released. -
Show 51 - 100 of 106 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is