backtop


Print 155 comment(s) - last by A Stoner.. on Feb 12 at 6:07 PM


  (Source: New York Times)

UAC for Windows 7 will no longer expose its users' systems to takeovers, thanks to a reversal in policy by Microsoft based on feedback.  (Source: Started Something)
Microsoft wins points with the tech community by reversing its decision to ignore a critical security flaw

DailyTech recently reported on how a critical security flaw found in the beta of Microsoft's upcoming Windows 7 OS could allow attackers to easily disable the integral User Account Control (UAC) security component and gain control of systems.  The flaw was first discovered by Windows blogger Long Zheng, and was also independently detailed by blogger Rafael Rivera.  The pair followed up with additional information yesterday on how the flaw could be used to give a malicious payload full execution rights.

Microsoft's reaction to the flaw initially was to totally deny that it was a problem, choosing to instead refer to it as "by design".  In a blog post, Jon DeVaan, the senior vice president responsible for Windows' architecture and core components defended the move saying it was necessary to prevent user annoyance.

Stated Mr. DeVaan, "If people see more than two prompts in a session they feel that the prompts are irritating and interfering with their use of the computer.  We are very happy with the positive feedback we have received about UAC."

His blog post was met with a firestorm of criticism from experienced Windows users in the community.  However, rather than casting a blind eye to the criticism, Microsoft has apparently listened to its community and customers, today announcing a swift and dramatic reversal on its UAC stance. 

Microsoft announced that it will implement the seemingly obvious solution to the problem.  It will warn users before any changes to the UAC.  Previously this was only done in safe mode.  The change preserves Microsoft's certification system, which provides less irritating warnings, while now safeguarding the UAC.

Jon DeVaan and Steven Sinofsky, two Microsoft executives responsible for Windows' development, released a joint statement today.  The pair writes, "Our dialog is at that point where many do not feel listened to and also many feel various viewpoints are not well-informed.  That's not the dialog we set out to have and we're going to do our best to improve."

They attempt to placate critics, stating, "We said we thought we were bound to make a mistake in the process of designing and blogging about Windows 7.   We want to continue the dialog and hopefully everyone recognizes that engineering, perhaps especially engineering Windows 7, is sometimes going to be a lively discussion with a broad spectrum of viewpoints."

Most importantly, they reveal, "We are going to deliver two changes to the Release Candidate that we'll all see.  First, the UAC control panel will run in a high integrity process, which requires elevation.  Second, changing the level of the UAC will also prompt for confirmation."

The upcoming Release Candidate of Windows 7, which features these changes, will mark almost the last step before Windows 7 goes on sale.  The pair’s remarks may be significant as they seem to indicate that the RC will be coming soon, which would be a sign that Windows 7 is well on-track for its target launch of the second half of 2009.

The move by Microsoft to accept and deal with the criticism constructively is already being praised by some in the security community, even if they feel it was more to avoid negative PR than to strengthen security.  Says Andrew Storms, director of security operations at nCircle Network Security Inc. in an interview with ComputerWorld, "This goes back to what beta programs are supposed to provide: feedback from a real audience.  This was an obvious design flaw, and for them to say they simply weren't going to fix it, that was the real problem.  I think they realized that they needed to do something, more over the concern about their reaction than to the vulnerability itself."

And Mr. Long, who discovered the flaw, reveals pleasant surprise at the response, stating, "This is definitely the result we've been looking for.  [But] I'm a little bit shocked at just how quickly Microsoft has turned around, considering they made a post not 12 hours earlier stating that they would not change their position."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Bravo
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 3:59:11 PM , Rating: 5
It's nice to see a big company with a lot of big egos step up to the plate and admit when they made a mistake and to get back on course, both in terms of the technical problem and in communicating with customers.




RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/6/2009 4:13:33 PM , Rating: 3
Agreed... Its also nice to see them admit Vista is bloated, and to offer a more streamlined faster OS... =)

I put 7 Beta on an old P4 with 512mb of ram and a 80gb hard drive and it ran pretty well... Almost as fast and responsive as XP.


RE: Bravo
By quiksilvr on 2/7/2009 2:51:08 PM , Rating: 2
I'm getting pretty excited about Windows 7. Lets just hope they don't price it badly.


RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/7/2009 3:16:04 PM , Rating: 2
Me too...

Its supposed to have a lot of file structure enhancements to improve the speed of sold state drives as well. That alone turns me on now that they are affordable. =)


RE: Bravo
By reader1 on 2/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/8/2009 10:12:59 AM , Rating: 2
"That's because Vista and Windows 7 aren't that different from XP. Micro$hit can't make any real changes to Windows because they know it means losing their monopoly."

Then by all means, I suggest you don't buy or use and MS OS. I hope you never need to get a job though. Because the world runs on it.

As far as "real" changes. XP doesnt need a whole hell of a lot. Its been running the world's computers for well over 6 years, and does a great job. Ever try to get any real work done on a Mac or Linux ? It doesnt happen.


RE: Bravo
By reader1 on 2/8/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By omnicronx on 2/8/2009 12:55:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's why I won't be paying for my copy of Windows 7.
And you think MS really cares? You are still going to be using an MS product, regardless if you pay for it or not. Pirating 7 will only help the windows monopoly grow, as you will not be using a competing product!!

I just find it funny you whine about MS, and yet you do not realize that you are still supporting them. Piracy does not hurt MS when they control 90% of the market, with 75% of those sales being OEM.


RE: Bravo
By paudoauldstock on 2/8/09, Rating: 0
RE: Bravo
By paudoauldstock on 2/8/2009 12:57:45 PM , Rating: 2
Ooops, meant to reply to retrospooty!


RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/8/2009 1:46:42 PM , Rating: 2

Could you be more wrong? Could you let us know exactly what kind of "real work" you have tried to do on Linux and OS X? Could you explain why exactly it was "impossible" to do it?


I am talking about business applications. 95%+ are not written for Mac or Linux. Sure there is MS office, and IE for mac and SOME web based apps work fine on a Mac and Linux, but most business apps dont work. Point, Datatrac, or just about any mortgage or banking based apps are incompatible, most other custom business based apps are incompatible, and dont even get me started on anything that runs on Citrix Metaframe client/server situation... If you dont think that is the case, you obviously either don't have a job that uses computers in an enterprise environment, or you are a lucky minority that happens to use apps that do work on the Mac.

Just to be clear, I am not saying that Mac's and Linux arent capable of running the software, they certainly are - my point is that most business apps arent written for them and don't work, or work, but are full of bugs.


RE: Bravo
By robinthakur on 2/9/2009 7:34:37 AM , Rating: 2
I work for a financial institution in the UK and there was a fad back when the Macbook air came out, when lots of people demanded one or a Macbook pro. In addition the communications department all use Macs, as do our creative teams for Photoshop/Quark etc and would point-blank refuse to use PC's because in their industry its really never going to happen. We simply use a secure remote access system to allow them access to a windows envuironment for email etc, and that works fine.

I'm not demonstrating superiority either way, I'm just saying that it can be done. You've also got the dual booth option which simply boots straight to vista or VMware Fusion. The same apps do not exist for both platforms (far from it) but the situation now is much better than its ever been before as Mac's are making up a larger percentage of PC users and software companies are noticing. Btw NOBODY uses IE for the Mac, its awful and stopped developing at version 5. Besides whicch that for versions previous to 7, the notion of IE 'compatibility' was a joke in and of itself.


RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/9/2009 8:42:04 AM , Rating: 3
Ya, that works, but using remote access to run windows, is... running windows, so is having a dual boot system. When you boot up into Windows, its windows. its not MAc or Linux OS anymore.


RE: Bravo
By djc208 on 2/9/2009 2:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
That "feature" made me laugh. A big Apple fanboy friend of mine was talking about how his mac could run Windows if he wanted it too.

My response was that all that means is now Windows can run on just about ANYTHING. It stopped his gloating cold and gave me a good laugh.


RE: Bravo
By DFranch on 2/8/2009 2:45:36 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but you will still be using it won't you! That keeps the monopoly going even it you plan to pirate it.


RE: Bravo
By 67STANG on 2/8/2009 11:02:09 PM , Rating: 2
As a software developer who works very hard at all hours of the day for hopelessly ignorant end users like yourself, I hope Anand turns your IP over to MS so you can become a prison whore.


RE: Bravo
By adiposity on 2/9/2009 5:33:13 PM , Rating: 2
> Ever try to get any real work done on a Mac or Linux ? It
> doesnt happen.

This is an asinine statement. I use windows as my primary OS, because I need it for certain things. But there are people at my company who only use Macs. They seem to get lots of "real work" done. I know several colleagues who use Linux distros as their primary OS. They seem to get plenty of "real work" done. So, what are you talking about?

Most of the "necessary" apps that require Windows are old, legacy apps that interface with ERP systems, and the like. If you don't have those at your company you can often get away with just using Linux. There are some notable exceptions such as Photoshop, which is one of the reasons I still use Windows. But even though the GIMP is inferior (IMO) you can still get plenty of "real work" done with it.

-Dan


RE: Bravo
By Hare on 2/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: Bravo
By inighthawki on 2/6/2009 4:44:46 PM , Rating: 5
No, if it were Apple, they would say that they know what's best for us and never implement the change/fix.


RE: Bravo
By Hoser McMoose on 2/6/2009 6:46:44 PM , Rating: 5
... and the Mac zealots would praise the move and strike down any heathens that dared to disagree with The Prophet Steve Jobs.

Apple makes some good software but far too many people are not nearly critical enough the many stupid things they do. They get away with things that Microsoft would (and has been) crucified for. No one gripes about Apple's Authenticate feature even though it's virtually identical to UAC.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By chick0n on 2/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/8/2009 10:19:36 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, the guy is is a douche - but you have to admit he has a point. Based on your comment, I dont think you have actually used Vista much at all. User icons dont require UAC approval to delete. And for those things that do, any novice user can, in 20 seconds, go to the control panel, security settings and turn UAC off. If your skill level is not good enough on a PC to turn off UAC, its really best that you leave it on.

I never got the whole uproar over UAC. Yes, it's a pain, so turn it off. Its not there for power users that are constantly changing settings, and adding/removing apps. Its there for the novice to help keep him safe. If you cant figure that out, you have no business making changes to your PC, better call a pro.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/9/2009 3:05:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
User icons dont require UAC approval to delete
They do if the app was installed with an icon on AllUsers desktop, not on your own desktop, which is almost always the case with Vista. You're just too blind to notice that.
quote:
I never got the whole uproar over UAC
It's because you never realized that UAC could have been implemented in a MUCH more user friendly way while not compromising security.


RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/9/2009 10:58:05 PM , Rating: 2
So... you think one user novice enough to not know how to turn off UAC should be deleting icons for other users?

and you couldnt turn UAC off yourself because?


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/10/2009 2:52:37 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
one user novice enough to not know how to turn off UAC should be deleting icons for other users?
Well, what is he/she supposed to do if the application's installer put an icon on an AllUsers desktop, as it's usually the case?
quote:
you couldnt turn UAC off yourself because?
Because I don't understand why MS put something in the system that users should turn off. What's the point in developing a feature that people won't use?


RE: Bravo
By retrospooty on 2/10/2009 11:52:53 PM , Rating: 2
I guess your right... You dont understand.


RE: Bravo
By Vile2600 on 2/7/2009 3:11:19 AM , Rating: 4
Actually, yes it is.
First off, UAC does not prompt you for the continue/cancel when you remove desktop icons, so you are wrong about this, and second, the Mac security system is worse in comparison - With UAC you hit one button, either continue, or cancel. With Mac, if you have a password on your system, you need to first enter your password, then continue which is even more annoying. Yes, this can be enabled/disabled on either system but the point is, it's easier to simply click one button and proceed as opposed to typing in your password each time like you need to do on a Mac.


RE: Bravo
By slashbinslashbash on 2/7/2009 5:44:44 AM , Rating: 3
I'm not a Vista user, nor a Windows 7 beta user, so I can't comment on that, but I can say that I don't really mind the password procedure on OSX. It is practically straight from Unix. You are the admin user, you are root. Program asks to do something potentially dangerous, you type in the root password to acknowledge your responsibility for something risky, and it makes you think twice if it's something you got from an untrustworthy source.

Anyway, it's just a one-time deal (except in the case of certain Apple-automated updates) per program, so it's never gotten to the point where it annoys me. Maybe when I'm setting up a new machine from scratch, yes, but in day-to-day life and work, no, and it's very rare that I start from scratch, given how dead simple it is to transfer users, settings, programs, and files from one Mac to another when you get a new machine (easy for a Mac because it has no Registry, which is the Achilles' Heel of Windows and probably the number one reason why I stopped using Windows except for gaming).

From what I have heard about Vista, the security prompts come up pretty darn often, although maybe again this is just a new-user gripe from somebody who is setting up a machine and/or using Vista for the first time.


RE: Bravo
By bodar on 2/7/2009 6:29:23 AM , Rating: 2
I've noticed a decline in my UAC prompts, now that I've set up my PC. I mostly just get them when accessing management/device consoles or installing hardware/software. There are some apps though that just don't work unless you Run As Admin, but you can check a box to configure the shortcut to do so all the time.

Things that trigger UAC --
http://www.edbott.com/weblog/?p=1602


RE: Bravo
By omnicronx on 2/8/2009 1:07:55 PM , Rating: 2
I think the point is here that OSX/nix does have something very similar to UAC and nobody complains about it. Also UAC does not ask you over and over again for the same app, after you use it for a few weeks you only get prompts when doing something like installing hardware. All this aside, I like the UAC implementation of Windows 7. I turned it off immediately in Vista, but I have left it on in 7 and it has yet to annoy me.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/9/2009 9:53:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
UAC does not ask you over and over again for the same app
it's a blatant and obvious lie. Try to use any system tweaking or monitoring utility like CPU-Z or RivaTuner. Vista will NEVER stop asking if you really want to run this app. Idiotic Redmond "designers", shame on you!


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By Vile2600 on 2/7/2009 6:45:41 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
First, UAC does prompt you when you have that icon on AllUsers desktop, not on your own one, which is often the case after you install apps.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you have a poor way of phrasing your points, because this does not make much sense at all. If by the quote above, you are trying to say that UAC prompts when you are deleting an icon from the desktop for another user account (ie User Account Name, All Users, etc) then I see nothing wrong with this, as you are modifying another user account.

quote:
Second, since I run my family Vista systems under limited user accounts mostly, I have to enter passwords in UAC dialogs just like on a Mac.

If this situation fits your needs, then that's perfectly fine. The point I was making, is that personally, as a user, (with the default settings) I would much rather hit UACs 1 button/continue, as opposed to typing the password each time.

quote:
Two misses today, Vile. Not bad, not bad :-)

No, zero misses actually, and everything I posted above is certainly accurate.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/8/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By Vile2600 on 2/8/2009 3:45:49 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
You see nothing wrong when app installers under Vista create those undeletable icons on AllUsers desktop? Good for you man, I envy your patience, you're a saint or something, but I'm not

Clearly you have used Vista for a short time, or you are an inexperienced computer user, as you are once again wrong.

Let me see if I can explain this for you..In Windows, when an application is installed, unless you choose not to do it, by default the entry for the application goes into the Start Menu and a desktop shortcut is created on the desktop for each user on the computer. This has been standard practice for Windows for years, not just Vista and its' nothing new. These shortcuts that are created are just that - shortcuts , and when you choose to delete these shortcuts on the desktop, UAC does not prompt you to continue/cancel. However, when you attempt to delete the entry on the Start Menu, UAC does prompt you for the continue/cancel because doing this will affected all users on the PC, unlike deleting the shortcut on the desktop, which will affect just that user and not everyone .

quote:
I'm just a human and that's why I'd like my OS not to be so f..g dumb.

Fortunately there is nothing wrong with the Operating System, and once again, it comes down to user error.

quote:
Yeah, years of living as admin under XP haven't taught you anything. You'll run as admin when noone else is, you must be that kind of guy. Good luck with that, I'm not following this weird trend 'cause living under admin is stupid, any security expert will tell you that. So be careful there, Mr. Eternal Admin, ok? :-)

Actually, I have two user accounts, one which is a standard user, one which is Admin. I log in on the Admin account when something needs to be installed/modified, otherwise regularly use the Standard account.

I regularly use my MacBook Pro alongside my PC running XP/Vista. The day that you people realize that both, Mac and PC each have their advantages and disadvantages, and that both are actually good, the sooner we can put this argument behind us and move on.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/9/2009 3:59:44 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
unlike deleting the shortcut on the desktop, which will affect just that user and not everyone
Oh, so you have never seen what happens on Vista when you place the icon on the AllUsers dekstop? You never noticed that this icon immediately appears on all users' dektops on that system? Then we have nothing to discuss here, you obviously never used Vista. Someone who really uses Vista IMMEDIATELY notices such obvious things.
quote:
I log in on the Admin account when something needs to be installed/modified, otherwise regularly use the Standard account
Sounds sooo idiotic... Why not just enter your admin password when you're asked by the UAC dialog when you are in your limited account? Why all this mess with switching accounts and entering admin account password INSTEAD OF _JUST_ ENTERING YOUR ADMIN PASSWORD IN UAC DIALOG, without any account switch delays? Are you intentionally choosing the hardest route to follow? What kind of masochism is that? :-))


RE: Bravo
By Vile2600 on 2/10/2009 12:59:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh, so you have never seen what happens on Vista when you place the icon on the AllUsers dekstop? You never noticed that this icon immediately appears on all users' dektops on that system? Then we have nothing to discuss here, you obviously never used Vista. Someone who really uses Vista IMMEDIATELY notices such obvious things.


I've repeated myself about three times now regarding this topic, and it's obviously not getting to you, since you're still wrong , and your still not understanding, so I think I'm done trying to explain it to you.

quote:
Sounds sooo idiotic... Why not just enter your admin password when you're asked by the UAC dialog when you are in your limited account? Why all this mess with switching accounts and entering admin account password INSTEAD OF _JUST_ ENTERING YOUR ADMIN PASSWORD IN UAC DIALOG, without any account switch delays? Are you intentionally choosing the hardest route to follow? What kind of masochism is that? :-))

It sounds idiotic to you, because you are what I would call a novice when it comes to computers, and you lack basic knowledge in this area; which is fine, since everyone has their area of expertise. The tone and attitude in your posts makes it quite obvious that you just enjoy trolling this site.
Perhaps instead of spending time trolling, you should spend time actually using the OS that you are bashing so you can actually pretend like you know what you're talking about at the very least.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/10/2009 2:56:14 AM , Rating: 1
Well, too bad, no counterarguments this time. See ya in the next topic then, Vile :-)

BTW don't pay attention to harsh words or calling names, it's just the DT forum style. I have nothing against you personally.


RE: Bravo
By Vile2600 on 2/10/2009 2:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, too bad, no counterarguments this time. See ya in the next topic then, Vile :-) BTW don't pay attention to harsh words or calling names, it's just the DT forum style. I have nothing against you personally.


There is no "counter-argument" because you're not listening to anything that's being said as it is.

If you would like me to elaborate about my previous post, I suppose I can do it once more. In Vista, there is no "AllUsers" folder, that's how XP did it. In Vista, the folder called "Public" is the equivalent, so your constant reference to "AllUsers" folder in Vista is bad enough, and it would help if you at least got the terminology correct. Anyway, the purpose of this folder, for example the Desktop like you mentioned, is to modify the Desktop for all users on the PC, so yes, UAC does prompt for this folder since you are making a change to the Desktop for all users. If you are basing your entire argument on this and the tremendous amount of work that needs to be done to click that one button (Continue) then perhaps you should disable UAC all together.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/10/2009 11:52:51 PM , Rating: 1
The problem is that application installers put the icons on that public desktop and then there is no way for a limited user account holder to get rid of these icons. If the system were smart it'd never put the application icons on the public desktop.


RE: Bravo
By icanhascpu on 2/6/2009 7:47:09 PM , Rating: 5
Too bad thats not what history states.

If there is one thing that's just as annoying as the Apple Zealots, its the Apple haters.


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 12:48:25 PM , Rating: 5
If there is a 2nd thing that's even more annoying, it's those whining about the whiners. I'll take 3rd place whining about the whining about the whiners, who wants 4th place?


RE: Bravo
By Chocobollz on 2/7/2009 2:41:30 PM , Rating: 3
I do. 4th place seems not bad. How much money do I get? :D


RE: Bravo
By Belard on 2/8/2009 10:11:36 AM , Rating: 2
You will be warned just this onces.

Amiga will come back and bite Apple and Windows in the balls and rip them off!

JUST YOU WAIT AND SEE!!

Just wait and see, my pretty precious...


RE: Bravo
By erple2 on 2/9/2009 1:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
OK, that's 5th place, I think. Though curiously, nobody really hates Amiga because not enough people care anymore ... :)


RE: Bravo
By probedb on 2/6/2009 4:47:14 PM , Rating: 5
Apple wouldn't even have responsed to the original post ;)


RE: Bravo
By xeutonmojukai on 2/6/2009 5:09:52 PM , Rating: 3
If this kind of thing continues, I will definitely be glad to get a Microsoft computer.

Seriously, this kind of necessary and timely action is what they should be advertising. Not their value for use by conglomerate corporations (Do they really think I want to buy from a company that assumes COO's know what the consumer really wants?)

Anyway, I hope this becomes a trademark of future Microsoft policy, because it's a benchmark that is downright impressive.

This Mac user says 'Bravo!'


RE: Bravo
By waffle911 on 2/6/2009 6:37:20 PM , Rating: 4
As a Mac user, I concur. Though it has to be said, given that Apple tends to have a closed-door policy with its beta products, we don't really have much basis to judge how Apple might have responded in such a situation. Jobs is stubborn as a mule, but he does know what the majority of his customers want, or think they want, anyway.
Know what I want? An updated Mac Pro that has halfway decent graphics options instead of 2-generation old leftover silicon.
Better yet would be a plain old Mac (not iMac) tower that had the expandability of Mac Pro without the pricey dual-CPU server motherboard. Guess I'm stuck building a Hackintosh as my secondary system (to a Mac Book Pro... despite what anyone says, you can't beat their notebooks, unless you go for something with a 30min. battery life).


RE: Bravo
By Chocobollz on 2/7/2009 2:54:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
you can't beat their notebooks

Yeah, you're right, I'm sure any company can beat Apple in term of product's quality but they absolutely can't beat Apple's infamous way too overpriced pricings! :p


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By 67STANG on 2/8/2009 11:04:10 PM , Rating: 2
They would have replied. It would have taken quite some time to reply however, as they'd be posting with the MacBook Wheel.


RE: Bravo
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 4:52:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And if this was Apple you would be blaming them for defective design and being stuborn for way too long
Maybe I would feel the same way about Microsoft, if Windows 7 wasn't IN BETA!


RE: Bravo
By mmatis on 2/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By StevoLincolnite on 2/6/2009 10:14:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Windows 7 will be IN BETA until SP2 comes out. That's just the way it is with ALL Micro$oft products...


Load of hogwash, it will be released when Microsoft deems it ready, service packs are just addons that fix up bugs, remove exploits, performance tweaks and adds new features, the Operating system will be perfectly usable without the service packs.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By V3ctorPT on 2/7/2009 3:19:39 AM , Rating: 1
My Vista x64 machine never lost network connection, with emule and utorrent for weeks... So, u must have some kind of (noob) problem on your pc...

Windows 7 is Windows XP under the hood... It has all the nice things from Vista, but it's responsive as a XP machine, I'm very pleased with it, and I'm surely going to buy it.

W7 may be the "revolution" like 98SE -> XP (never thought Windows Me was a SO)


RE: Bravo
By William Gaatjes on 2/7/2009 7:31:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Windows 7 is Windows XP under the hood


Under the hood windows 7 is nothing like windows xp.
Under the hood it is an improved version of the nt6 kernel found in vista and not the nt5.1 with ancient technlogies found in xp. Windows is since nt6 coming technologically up to par with other concurrent operating systems. Vista probably had still a lot of debug code in it and windows 7 will just be a lot leaner because lot's of useless code is removed or replaced by more efficiënt algorithms making the system more responsive.

Going back to xp nt5 would really be robbing the windows users. The xp kernel is not bad , but compared to what modern linux, bsd, vista and osx kernels do...
It would really be a step back.


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 12:57:45 PM , Rating: 2
NT6 is after all, just another revision change on NT5, one that adds feature some want but others don't.

It's like a fork in the road, the only wrong path to take is one someone else suggests instead of evaluating where you really want to go having full information about the destination.

If someone can get their work done on Win7, good for them. If someone can get their work done on XP, again good. No robbing involved, no step back.

It would be silly to think the entire world, each person does exactly the same things with a PC and they all need the same OS features. What would be a real step forward is disabling all features and letting users who know what they are and the consequences, choose to install them, otherwise leaving them disabled. Someone else should not decide what runs on your computer till you turn that thing *off*, but in fact that is exactly what happens, even if someone chooses not to run Windows they have it happen just by turning the PC on when it arrives (remembering most are OEM with windows preinstalled).


RE: Bravo
By William Gaatjes on 2/7/2009 1:59:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It would be silly to think the entire world, each person does exactly the same things with a PC and they all need the same OS features.


When it comes to for example thread scheduling i/o management and memory management everybody want's it. It is something nobody sees but is very important because the overall performance of the pc + os depends on it. I am purely talking about kernel improvements and that means driver improvements too. I agree that the programs that complete the package making the OS windows is a person to person issue.

I admit i have not dug into vista as i have done with xp or before xp w2000 or before those w98se but i know that the nt6 kernel is a needed improvement. I will wait for windows 7 or at the latest windows 7 SP1. That is, in a worst case scenario. When the basic kernel does not provide features that can be put to good use, nothing will ever change. The chicken or the egg problem. Some features in vista are useless in my opinion but there are far many that are usefull. Features that programmers will take advantage off and will lead to better programs. Vista may have been bloated but it sure seems windows 7 is lean and mean , yet has more to offer. Well, we will just have to wait and see. And if there is 1 thing i have learned, is that windows always needs tweaking before it becomes reliable and rock solid.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2007.0...

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2007.0...

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2007.0...


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 8:55:00 PM , Rating: 2
Not really, the average person neither thinks nor notices any improvement in thread scheduling and memory management.

In fact, the only way they don't notice Vista is slower is that it's prefetching more, easily overcome by merely loading an app once and letting the larger amount of free memory serve as a larger filecache.


RE: Bravo
By William Gaatjes on 2/8/2009 5:14:22 AM , Rating: 2
And why do they not notice it ? Because the performance gain created by the kernel enhancements is used for programs to make life easier. Now what taks a program should perform is highly subjective and is a person to person issue. Buying a faster processor is not the only way to get performance gains. Do you not realize that ? And that vista has a certain way of using the gained performance is a personal issue. Regardless, even with vista's appetite for resources, i hear only positive news when it comes to multitasking. And when talking about multitasking we come back to the kernel improvements i wrote about in my previous posts. So to make a long story short, you do notice the improvements. It's just that a balloontext does not show up mentioning that you have a easier life because of kernel improvements.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Bravo
By GreenEnvt on 2/7/2009 6:15:18 PM , Rating: 2
I had a similar issue for a bit, but is was Nod32 causing it, it's network scanning feature was causing it. Disabled that, and it network connections worked fine.
Eset fixed it after a little while, which is good because nod32 is great and I didn't want to have to remove it.


RE: Bravo
By theapparition on 2/7/2009 10:03:49 PM , Rating: 2
Same could be said about OSX where if a move command was interupted, you lost all files. I'll take annoyances over data corruption any day.

Bugs happen in all releases. OSX is no different. Get over it.


RE: Bravo
By chick0n on 2/7/2009 1:34:31 AM , Rating: 1
Macs OS are soo cool with their "updates" huh ?

You want an Update? what update? oh yes We just made an "Update" ... I mean we have a new OS called "Kitten!" Its 10.3.1.2.3.4.65.78 !!!! Oh yes we made so many updates to it! We changed the icons from here to there, throw another few useless crap to it, Safari can finally load pages 1/2 as fast as IE, and yes it has a "Bigger" and "brighter" Apple logo on it. Yes! and it will cost another 200 bux. Huh what? ITS WORTH IT TRUST ME! WE made so many "updates" to it that even Bill Gates will say its worth it.

ROFL. GTFO here loser.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Bravo
By Hare on 2/7/2009 4:16:09 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. My message was a joke, that's why the "you" was in italic and there was a wink at the end. It was aimed directly at you TomZ and had nothing to do with MS or Apple community in general.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 5:25:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
if this was Apple you would be blaming them for defective design and being stuborn for way too long
No, it's not Tom, it's me. Because Apple can't implement WPA or WPA2 for their internal Wi-Fi access point that's built into Macs.

When you share internet through your Mac it turns into the access point, and guess what? This access point supports only WEP. Go check for yourself if you don't believe me. It's in Leopard too, they didn't fix it there AFAIK.

So yes, MacOS X is defective by design, at least in this area. And yes Apple is too stubborn and dumb to leave it like that. I said this, not Tom.


RE: Bravo
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 5:31:21 PM , Rating: 2
I think the problem is that Steve hasn't been able to figure out how WPA works yet. Maybe they should hire a few Microsoft engineers to help them with that. :o)


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 5:41:49 PM , Rating: 2
Did you notice the fact that there is a Wi-Fi access point functionality in Mac OS X and there is no such functionality in Windows?

Looks like Microsoft engineers don't even know how to implement access point in their OS :P

Can't score a hit this time, Tom? ;-) Try again.


RE: Bravo
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 6:06:44 PM , Rating: 2
You've got me there... :o)


RE: Bravo
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/6/2009 7:48:17 PM , Rating: 3
You can turn a laptop into an access point in Windows. Just requires some advanced wireless settings.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 8:45:57 PM , Rating: 1
That's not Windows, that's a third party utility provided with the laptop's Wi-Fi card, so doesn't count.


RE: Bravo
By GaryJohnson on 2/6/2009 10:12:12 PM , Rating: 2
I think the Windows Server OSs have the built in functionality.


RE: Bravo
By amandahugnkiss on 2/6/2009 10:26:53 PM , Rating: 2
it is in Vista as well, but I'm not seeing it in XP SP2.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 11:05:47 PM , Rating: 2
Like I said above third party utilities supplied by the Wi-Fi chip/card manufacturers don't count. There's no default built in OS Wi-Fi access point functionality in Vista which makes it possible to turn your average PC into a Wi-Fi access point. But there is one in Mac OS X. It uses ancient and outdated WEP encryption that's easily hackable by anyone these days, true, but at least it exists in the system! That's my point.


RE: Bravo
By cmdrdredd on 2/6/2009 11:53:56 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Like I said above third party utilities supplied by the Wi-Fi chip/card manufacturers don't count. There's no default built in OS Wi-Fi access point functionality in Vista which makes it possible to turn your average PC into a Wi-Fi access point. But there is one in Mac OS X. It uses ancient and outdated WEP encryption that's easily hackable by anyone these days, true, but at least it exists in the system! That's my point.


If you're even remotely serious about building a wifi network you would NEVER do this. You'd have a normal wireless access point or router.


RE: Bravo
By GaryJohnson on 2/7/2009 1:28:36 AM , Rating: 3
Right. And if you just needed to temporarily connect some PCs wirelessly, why not just use Ad Hoc?


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 5:32:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
if you just needed to temporarily connect some PCs wirelessly, why not just use Ad Hoc?
Doesn't work with WPA2


RE: Bravo
By GaryJohnson on 2/8/2009 4:09:08 AM , Rating: 2
But neither does the OSX access point right, so what's the difference?


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/9/2009 9:46:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But neither does the OSX access point right, so what's the difference?
Difference is: Windows doesn't have built in system Wi-Fi AP, while OS X does have one.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 5:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you're even remotely serious about building a wifi network you would NEVER do this. You'd have a normal wireless access point or router
I have to buy a standalone access point just because you told me to? That's not enough :-) More real arguments please.


RE: Bravo
By chick0n on 2/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 1:11:43 PM , Rating: 2
While insulting, you are actually correct that it needs no 3rd party tools in XP, no special support from the network adapter. Funny how everyone went brain-dead (or never knew how to network) once a colorful cartoon layout came.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Bravo
By cmdrdredd on 2/7/2009 8:18:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Like I said above third party utilities supplied by the Wi-Fi chip/card manufacturers don't count. There's no default built in OS Wi-Fi access point functionality in Vista which makes it possible to turn your average PC into a Wi-Fi access point. But there is one in Mac OS X. It uses ancient and outdated WEP encryption that's easily hackable by anyone these days, true, but at least it exists in the system! That's my point.


Who cares if the OS doesn't have it built in? I would much rather use a 3rd party tool that worked the way I wanted to than a half-assed and unsecured method using the OS. Every WiFi card you buy for a PC has software anyway.


RE: Bravo
By noirsoft on 2/7/2009 9:41:12 AM , Rating: 2
Don't you have that backwards? It's the 3rd party tools that tend to be half-assed, poorly written, and insecure.


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 1:09:31 PM , Rating: 2
Sure, a few are, then there are quite a few that are better. I'd recommend the latter, but if you want to pick the former just to suit your argument then by all means...


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 5:36:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Every WiFi card you buy for a PC has software anyway
Only a few have access point functionality. Most don't.


RE: Bravo
By amandahugnkiss on 2/7/2009 9:02:41 AM , Rating: 2
I said Vista and referred to XP SP2, and there is absolutely a utility there to create a wireless access point, in the Network and Sharing Center under Control Panel. If you have a wireless card in you machine (laptop or tower, etc...) or are connected to a wireless network device you can configure it from the Network and Sharing Center. The only reason Macs shipped with this capability enabled by default and not every PC did was because macs shipped with a wireless card by default (the extreme card was just amazing!):). Windows as an OS supported this feature but without support from the hardware vendors it was useless. This is not a fault in the OS.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 5:13:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
there is absolutely a utility there to create a wireless access point, in the Network and Sharing Center under Control Panel
It's for external AP boxes, not for internal Wi-Fi cards. Scored a miss, sir :-)


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 1:05:33 PM , Rating: 2
Many of us want the opposite, none of this junk built into the OS, all the OS is supposed to be is a means to run 3rd party applications. While having them bundled in the OS is cheaper, they are usually less featured, and OS bundling reduces customer base for 3rd party apps so it artificially raises the price of 3rd party apps.

Further, many of us have bought a fair amount of software over the years, the cost to incrementally add utilities like this shouldn't be any higher than the cost to bundle all the things we don't need into each successive version of an OS. Obviously someone starting out with nothing has a different perspective, should probably buy a Dell with all that SW bundled.


RE: Bravo
By walk2k on 2/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 4:56:48 PM , Rating: 2
I'm surprised you feel that way. With the default UAC setting, you only get UAC prompts when you install new software. Changing settings, deleting protected files, etc. all don't prompt any more.

And if you ask me, installing software is the one time where you do want to be sure you approve the change!


RE: Bravo
By walk2k on 2/6/2009 5:47:28 PM , Rating: 1
On the default setting I get 2 popups from Rivatuner every time I boot up/log in. Then another popup every time I ran most games.

What they need is "don't ask me again for this program" check mark (like every other security software, firewall, etc).

Bothering the user over and over again for running the SAME program is stupid and annoying. Plus as we have seen it just does not improve security that much. Best thing is just to disable it.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 11:12:16 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, I've been complaining about this moronic UAC's lack of tunability for like 2 years now, but why would MS care?

They need their market share to get down to 50% before they start to implement REALLY user friendly interfaces, not the joke they do now with that constant UAC prompting every time you run same old app like CPU-Z or Rivatuner or what not.

Dumb idiotic MS "designers", shame on you!


RE: Bravo
By Smilin on 2/6/2009 11:40:12 PM , Rating: 2
You're a tard too. See below.


RE: Bravo
By Smilin on 2/6/2009 11:38:42 PM , Rating: 4
You need to understand what's going on and who to blame.

First, Rivatuner is accessing your hardware. To do so requires system/admin privledges.

Second, Rivatuner is doing it wrong and was written by a bunch of monkeys with the spare hand that wasn't picking at fleas. Your antivirus requires system/admin privledges to execute a filesystem filter driver every time it starts yet you don't get a UAC prompt . Why? Because it was written with PROPER security practices..a user-mode tray icon separate from yet bound to a kernel mode driver. It's not that hard.

Third, Because Rivatuner is written with no real security in mind it is putting your system at risk every time you see the UAC prompt ( the prompt is WARNING you, not just bugging you )

Finally, you should NOT be seeing a UAC prompt every time you run a game. (If you do it's probably because your shiz got jacked by some malware while you were blindly clicking OK to rivatuner instead of asking yourself "why?". hehe :p)

Since you clearly have no clue about UAC how about you avoid giving anyone advice about it?


RE: Bravo
By lycium on 2/7/2009 6:13:17 AM , Rating: 2
it is quite sad that ms get the blame for software written under overly strong (lack of os security) assumptions.

then again, i do get uac-asked way too often... am i really not allowed to write to a root drive in explorer without explicitly saying i can? what's to stop a piece of malware sending windows messages to click on the ok button?


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By walk2k on 2/7/2009 6:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody cares who is to "blame" for it.

UAC is one of the top issues that people had with Vista and one of the reasons they still stick with XP.

Windows 7 is MS's second chance to fix issues like UAC.

I TRIED to give UAC a 2nd chance. I was prepared to leave it on the default setting, but it became blatently clear to me after only a few days that I was going to have to turn it off completely.

I don't know about other people but there's no way I will give UAC a 3rd chance. If Windows7 ships with this version of UAC I will turn it off immediately after installing and never look back. I know millions of other users will do the same, you can bank on that.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bravo
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 5:25:21 PM , Rating: 3
Only a "true Apple believer" would find a way to give credit for this to Jobs. :o)

Seriously, though - competition is good. I like to see Microsoft a bit humbled and bit scared and motivated to do a great job instead of "just delivering another version."


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 5:35:22 PM , Rating: 2
You must admit Mac vs PC ads from Apple did their job ;-) Didn't they?


RE: Bravo
By walk2k on 2/6/2009 7:31:41 PM , Rating: 2
Not really, like most of Apple's marketing over the years those ads were more about preaching to the choir than actually converting people. Vista might have been a flop, but it's not like all those people ran out and bought Macs - most of them just stayed with XP. That's hardly a "win" for Apple.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 8:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's hardly a win for Apple
Haha, you wish. Decline of Windows market share and growth of Mac market share, constant growth of Mac sales, plus very decent profit for Apple last quarter combined with layoffs at MS at the same time - all these facts paint pretty different picture, don't you think? ;-)


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 1:26:30 PM , Rating: 2
The picture painted is that iPod became a hit during the lifecycle of someone's PC, then eventually when it came time to replace their PC, that popularity made a few people think more highly of Apple products.

Like parachute pants, other trends come and go. For Apple to really take off they need the momentum they won't be able to gain during a recession, if they would've otherwise which is still arguable because of the price-premium to do typical tasks.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 6:15:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For Apple to really take off they need the momentum
Why they need it if they already have it?
quote:
price-premium to do typical tasks
Like it hurt iPod domination or prevented iPhone from selling more than all WinMo devices together :-) You must be really behind these days. Read some recent market share news, that should help.


RE: Bravo
By mondo1234 on 2/6/2009 9:15:35 PM , Rating: 2
I would have to agree, especially with the MS $300 million dollar ad campaign. The sight of BG shaking his A** with Jerry Seinfeld was a turning point.


RE: Bravo
By TomZ on 2/7/2009 11:06:45 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You must admit Mac vs PC ads from Apple did their job ;-) Didn't they?
The only thing those ads did for me is to ensure that I will never buy anything from Apple. I don't want to support that kind of arrogance and FUD.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 4:39:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only thing those ads did for me is to ensure that I will never buy anything from Apple. I don't want to support that kind of arrogance and FUD
It's because you're a techie, Tom. Apple's PR is targeted at the average Joe, not at you. For one or two techie Toms who became wary of Apple products there are dozens and dozens of those tech illiterate Joes who bought Apple products, usually after Windows has died because of some malware piece which was rinning with admin rights as it's the usual case in Win XP, after that thay saw the Mac vs PC ad and thought "hey wait a minute, this is about my goddamn Windows PC, ahaaaa, so THIS is what I have to buy instead!". Bingo, new Apple user, one less Windows sold, MS is in recession and layoffs while Apple continues to grow.

So who care about you, Tom? Definitely not Apple, but some other techie oriented comapnies like Cisco and such. You're a techie and hence a minority, Apple doesn't pay attention to YOU techies when they do their ads. You noticed that they never advertised Mac Pro in those ads, didn't ya? Now think about it. This fact means a lot, if you understand what I'm talking about.


RE: Bravo
By reader1 on 2/7/2009 6:11:29 PM , Rating: 1
You couldn't support Apple if you wanted to. You have to use Windows because Microsoft has an OS monopoly.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 6:20:48 PM , Rating: 2
Good point, reader1. Couldn't be said better.

TomZ has absolutely nothing to answer to THAT! :))


RE: Bravo
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 1:15:18 PM , Rating: 2
Apple doesn't scare MS, they simply realized that sooner or later this flaw should be corrected, and wisely told the right people to just concede it now rather than later (doing things the way they should). That's the kind of communication issues involved with such a large company.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 5:26:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple doesn't scare MS, they simply realized that sooner or later this flaw should be corrected, and wisely told the right people to just concede it now rather than later (doing things the way they should). That's the kind of communication issues involved with such a large company.
No, I didn't mean just that single screwup with UAC hole in Win 7, I spoke in general. Strange you didn't get it. Oh well


RE: Bravo
By walk2k on 2/7/2009 6:22:58 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is profitable because of the iPod, period.

If it were not for the iPod it's very likely we wouldn't even be talking about Apple, except in the past-tense. Like "hey remember when other companies used to make comptuers like Commodore, Atari and what was that other one... oh yeah, Apple."

Macs growing from 5% to 7% market-share or whatever is hardly a huge victory for Apple. Like I said, the legions of people who didn't buy Vista did NOT run out and buy Macs instead, most of the just stuck with XP.


RE: Bravo
By Pirks on 2/7/2009 6:53:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple is profitable because of the iPod
Urban legend. Try reading Apple financial reports to stop this delusion.
quote:
Macs growing from 5% to 7% market-share or whatever is hardly a huge victory for Apple
Who said about huge victory? Small but steady victory in market share year over year is not less important, even better actually, 'cause it does not bear the mark of your typical market fad.


RE: Bravo
By mondo1234 on 2/6/2009 9:05:14 PM , Rating: 2
There isn't much room for egos when your stock takes a 30% hit and you state that you are uncertain about future earnings. I don't think they have a choice at this point to do anything but respond. MS is a big company, but they cant afford another Vista. Many people didn't like it, nor did the press, or some resellers.
MS is changing, lets hope it is fast enough.


RE: Bravo
By cmdrdredd on 2/7/2009 12:00:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There isn't much room for egos when your stock takes a 30% hit and you state that you are uncertain about future earnings. I don't think they have a choice at this point to do anything but respond. MS is a big company, but they cant afford another Vista. Many people didn't like it, nor did the press, or some resellers. MS is changing, lets hope it is fast enough.


Not half as bad as even a rumor of Steve Jobs being in poor health causing stocks to plummet, what's more without Jobs marketing polished turds on a stick to people with deep pockets they won't be producing any "iPod phone nano imovie appletv wizbang macbook produo uber devices" that sell


RE: Bravo
By mondo1234 on 2/7/2009 2:13:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not half as bad as even a rumor of Steve Jobs being in poor health causing stocks to plummet


Why so defensive? What does Apple have to do with that statement? I think you are doing your math "half as bad"...$9 off an $87 stock is "half as bad" as $2 off a $19 stock?
This is a Five year chart, please show me "half as bad". MS's stock hasn't gone up in over 5 years.

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=AAPL#chart1:sym...

I am hoping MS does better, you on the other hand hopes Apple does worse. At least one of us believes competition is good for the market. Its not SJ's fault he has a disease, give him a break. MS released statistics on the company, SJ released personal health information. The two aren't the same.


RE: Bravo
By Suomynona on 2/8/2009 7:02:12 PM , Rating: 2
Is Microsoft truly lacking in confidence such that we feel the need to praise them for being forced into doing the right thing. It is obvious from their response that they would much rather have swept this glaring security hole under the rug rather than actually dealt with it. Thankfully the critical backlash was enough to reverse their decision.

It's one thing to drag your heels when releasing security patches, it's another to deny them to your customers outright and tell them it's for their own good. Microsoft and it's customers shouldn't have to rely on the internet community to make the right decisions for it. Not when it has countless 'security experts' on it's payroll.


RE: Bravo
By jhb116 on 2/8/2009 11:25:04 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed - but - in this case, soon after Win 7 releases - there will be thousands on here complaining about the extra notices from the UAC......


RE: Bravo
By Bravo16 on 2/9/2009 8:17:14 AM , Rating: 2
Did someone call for me...


Congradulation
By GoodBytes on 2/6/2009 4:51:45 PM , Rating: 2
Awesome move from Microsoft.
Now, there is only 1 last major UI issue to fix, which is when a window or program is maximized the boarders and super bar stays transparent. This is ultimately distracting if you have a bright background, or a changing one (as you think Windows wants your attention on something) or an animated one.

I know some people sees Vista behavior as a bug for some reason, so I vote for an option to change this behavior between Win7 and Vista.




RE: Congradulation
By TomZ on 2/6/2009 5:29:24 PM , Rating: 2
The way Vista made maximized windows' borders opaque confused me a little when I first started using Vista. I think the way Windows 7 keeps them semi-transparent makes more sense.


RE: Congradulation
By GaryJohnson on 2/6/2009 10:21:11 PM , Rating: 2
Why can't it be an option? Some people want it one way, some people want it the other.

Why isn't Windows skinnable (out of the box) yet?


RE: Congradulation
By noirsoft on 2/7/2009 9:48:06 AM , Rating: 2
Windows is skinable, they just make it so you can't install random 3rd-party skins. It's been this way since XP.

Every third party skin out there fails to do everything it needs to do, and will eventually fail to look right. Of course, MS would take the blame.


RE: Congradulation
By GaryJohnson on 2/8/2009 4:20:57 AM , Rating: 2
I think I'm arguing semantics, but: if you can't skin it, it isn't skinable.


RE: Congradulation
By crystal clear on 2/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Congradulation
By amandahugnkiss on 2/7/2009 8:12:23 AM , Rating: 2
However, there are still plenty of security experts who feel that UAC is a flawed concept that does little to enhance security, and who believe Microsoft needs to overhaul it or scrap it entirely.

Note- this means absolutely nothing and no actuaal 'experts' were even rtefferenced

Note- Crystal Clear is a dumb ass

Microsoft needs to overhaul it or scrap it entirely! - pretty stupid assumption made by a fairly unintellegent being


RE: Congradulation
By crystal clear on 2/8/2009 1:27:58 AM , Rating: 2
Calling people names doesnt make you appear any smarter,rather best describe yourself.

Note-
Do some reading on other sites to broaden your knowledge base.

Note-
If you dont agree with my views then just shut up & ignore my comments.

and heres the reference-

However, there are still plenty of security experts who feel that UAC is a flawed concept that does little to enhance security, and who believe Microsoft needs to overhaul it or scrap it entirely.

Bruce Schneier, British Telecom's chief security technology officer, sees the Windows 7 UAC episode as an example of many PC users' mistaken assumption that security is something that should operate invisibly in the background.

"Security means it's going to be hard to use. If you're annoyed by having to take a key out of your pocket to unlock your door, and you remove the lock, you lose the security," said Schneier.

"Is there a better technological alternative to UAC? Yes, but it's going to cost money, and it's also going to be inconvenient, just in a different way."

http://www.crn.com/software/213300664;jsessionid=F...

Not interested in discussing any further with you.

Go find somebody else to fight with & use your schoolboy terminology- it will not do any good to you.


Another Bug
By masteryoda34 on 2/6/2009 7:54:49 PM , Rating: 3
I've got another bug they can fix. Allow us to make folders named "con" for once. Go ahead and try it if you don't believe me. Windows won't let you.




RE: Another Bug
By Nekrik on 2/6/2009 8:13:04 PM , Rating: 3
Not a bug at all, it's a hold over from DOS. I would have guessed that anyone with 'Yoda' in their name should be old enough to know this :) (just a joke, not a hack). I can understand arguments for altering this behavior but many prefer it this way if for no other reason than to preserve history and remind us how much fun PCs used to be. It'll also be a while before it ever changes as it will never make it very high on the priority bar when compared to other features and bugs: hmmm, fix the highly visible so called security flaw everyone is screaming about or that obscure DOS reference?


RE: Another Bug
By Pirks on 2/6/2009 9:21:31 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
how much fun PCs used to be
I have to disagree with you here. PC becomes more and more fun with time, you just don't get it. The amount of stuff and customization you can do on your PC now, compared to 1980s? That's a different order of magnitude. PC has become megapowerful universal uberdevice, growing up from a hacker's toy of 1980s. PC is a universe now, instead of a toy. You must be too old to get this.


RE: Another Bug
By Nekrik on 2/6/2009 9:53:23 PM , Rating: 1
What a fucking ass. It was sarcasm.

Fortunately, I will never need you to help me 'get it'.


RE: Another Bug
By Smilin on 2/6/2009 11:45:47 PM , Rating: 2
Oh Noes! You mean they won't let you name something with a reserved token like CONsole!

Next thing you know they won't let us name folders using "prn", * ,and ?


sigh
By tehbiz on 2/6/2009 4:18:23 PM , Rating: 5
damned if you do, damned if you don't.




RE: sigh
By Fenixgoon on 2/7/2009 10:37:54 PM , Rating: 2
too bad you can't get a 6, because that's exactly the case. People whined with Vista's UAC, so MS changed it. And now they whine again because it's not as tight as Vista's UAC.


RE: sigh
By Pirks on 2/9/2009 10:00:12 PM , Rating: 2
MS does everything right only the third time, and Windows 7 is only their second attempt, so...


What idiot...
By sleepeeg3 on 2/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: What idiot...
By piroroadkill on 2/6/2009 10:40:26 PM , Rating: 2
You're kidding me, right? UAC is essentially process elevation, which occurs in all modern operating systems to some degree. I think it's a fantastic way of working around the problem of legacy software and process elevation on Windows


RE: What idiot...
By Smilin on 2/6/2009 11:56:34 PM , Rating: 3
The #1 security bug in Windows is the user (folks like you usually).

The "user bug" is very easy to fix actually and MS did it some time ago: You run as a user instead of an admin and the security bug disappears.

Oh, but nobody like's that answer do they? Nobody wants to here that THEY are the problem?


RE: What idiot...
By bodar on 2/7/2009 6:47:29 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously, Google "runas" or "sudo". Microsoft is just recognizing that people are going to use a privileged account on their home PC anyway (and apparently at work too), so it's an attempt to say, "Are you really sure you want to do this?", since an admin can do pretty much anything.

Also, if you have a general idea as to what should cause a UAC prompt and one comes up out of nowhere, you may want to go to Defcon 4.


UAC Warning...
By nixoofta on 2/7/2009 6:03:56 PM , Rating: 2

You are about to read an
"Apple VS Microsoft" comment section
of a Dailytech article...

are you sure you wish to continue?
________________ _______________
____Continue____ ____Cancel_____




RE: UAC Warning...
By HostileEffect on 2/8/2009 12:31:03 PM , Rating: 2
I actually hit continue, what does that mean?


RE: UAC Warning...
By Icelight on 2/11/2009 1:27:53 PM , Rating: 2
Cancel. CANCEL!


Welcome to the new Microsoft
By psypher on 2/6/2009 4:03:21 PM , Rating: 5
As an ardent supporter of Microsoft, the Windows 7 development cycle feels almost like a reward for being a faithful customer. If this is a sign of how Microsoft is going to operate going forward, then we are all in for a treat.

Go Microsoft!




By AnnihilatorX on 2/6/2009 8:29:49 PM , Rating: 2
Some background on the vulnerability from the blog:

quote:
The Achilles’ heel of this system is that changing UAC is also considered a “change to Windows settings”, coupled with the new default UAC security level, would not prompt you if changed. Even to disable UAC entirely.


quote:
The solution was trivial, you could complete the whole process with just keyboard shortcuts so why not make an application that emulates a sequence of keyboard inputs.


Surely, since the OS has access to the hardware layer, why not enable the prompt only when Windows detect virtual keyboard hook which is not signals from a real keyboard? Isn't this an obvious way to distinguish between malicious script and user interaction?




By Smilin on 2/6/2009 11:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
It's actually far more complicated than that. As an example, think about say terminal services in which keyboard input doesn't involve hardware at all.


Interaction is a great thing
By afkrotch on 2/6/2009 4:04:39 PM , Rating: 3
I like where Microsoft is going with their Windows development by including it's audience.

I don't know how much they listen to the feedback from their other beta products, but the stuff I provided feedback on seems to be getting changed. Guess many others feel the same way I do on certain aspects.

I haven't played with Windows 7 yet, but it'll get installed this weekend. I mainly just deal with the home products, as I don't have a whole lot of say in what goes in our work networks.




only problem
By MadMan007 on 2/6/2009 9:55:17 PM , Rating: 2
The only thing I truly dislike about UAC is getting multiple sequential prompts when I, or a program I've started, have only taken one action. If that were fixed UAC would be great.




By King of Heroes on 2/10/2009 11:27:27 AM , Rating: 2
This appears to be the consensus from butt hurt whiners complaining about people not using their favorite operating system.

It is not necessary for OS X and Linux (mostly Linux, OS X is fairly competitive already in its own way) to actually be competitive in their own right. It is the responsibility for the consumers to take pity on them and use their product regardless if it actually does what they need or if they're even comfortable using it. The creators of these operating systems should not have to consider why their product is not competitive. They should not have to consider ways to make their product more desktop oriented or user friendly. They should not have to consider ways of matching the vastly superior hardware and software support held by the dominant market leader. They should not have to face that fact that the "The evil M$ is using their godlike psychic powers and unlimited amounts of money to brainwash and pay off every living thing on Earth to prevent them from using our operating system! It has absolutely nothing to do with us or our product at all! Really!" excuse is tired, childish, horribly outdated, and just not applicable anymore.

No, none of this matters. The creators should not be expected to consider anything. It is the consumers DUTY to use their time and money to prop up these market failures.




By A Stoner on 2/12/2009 6:07:53 PM , Rating: 2
Well, there, I feel better now.




"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

Related Articles
Windows 7 UAC Leaves Door Open for Attacks
February 2, 2009, 8:37 AM
Quick Thoughts on the Windows 7 Beta
January 12, 2009, 1:12 AM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki