backtop


Print 85 comment(s) - last by PrezWeezy.. on Mar 3 at 1:03 AM

Microsoft reassures its testers that it is carefully considering their feedback

Ever since Microsoft released the beta of its upcoming Windows 7 to the general public, hundreds of thousands of users have downloaded the OS.  Many took the time to carefully sweep the system, scanning for defects or bugs.  As a result, Microsoft has been receiving a steady stream of information from beta testers.  Many testers of late, though, have become disgruntled as Microsoft has offered little in the way of official communication about the problems its testers were reporting.

However, Microsoft's Steven Sinofsky, senior vice president for the Windows and Windows Live Engineering Group, has broken the silence at last, saying that Microsoft has indeed been listening and has fixes planned for over 2,000 bugs found by testers.

Mr. Sinofsky writes that at its peak, Microsoft was receiving one Send Feedback report every 15 seconds for an entire week.  It has received 500,000 feedback reports already -- approximately 500 per developer, part of why it has been too busy to say much.  Microsoft also thanks its Connect members (the MSDN/Technet enrolled beta customers) for sending in numerous technical reports.  Both the public and the Connect feedback has helped more bugs be found and fixed than in any previous Windows release, Mr. Sinofsky states.

Mr. Sinofsky shed light on Microsoft's definition of a bug as well, stating:

Let's talk a bit about "bugs". Up front it is worth making sure we're on the same page when we use the much overloaded term bug. For us a bug is any time the software does something that someone one wasn't expecting it to do. A bug can be a cosmetic issue, a consistency issue, a crash, a hang, a failure to succeed, a confusing user experience, a compatibility issue, a missing feature, or any one of dozens of different ways that the software can behave in a way that isn't expected. A bug for us is not an emotional term, but just shorthand for an entry in our database representing feedback on the product. Bugs can be reported by a human or by the various forms of telemetry built into Windows 7. This broad definition allows us to track and catalog everything experienced in the product and do so in a uniform manner.

Hardware support is also doing quite well for the new operating system.  Microsoft has recorded 10 million device installations, and the use of around 2.8M unique plug-and-play device identifiers.  Of the hardware used, over 75 percent of it worked with the system's prepackaged drivers, writes Mr. Sinofsky.  He says that virtually all of the remaining hardware was easily support via driver downloads from Windows Update or by direct links to the manufacturer's web site.

Even some critics who were incensed at Microsoft's lack of communications have been warmed up by Mr. Sinofsky.  Chris Holmes of the blog GeekSmack recently had written, "I know I drifted off into a bit of a rant ... and hopefully this feedback is taken seriously by the Windows team (hey, there's a chance, it's not like we're dealing with the Windows Live team, those people don't know the meaning of the word feedback)."

However, after a personal email from Mr. Sinofsky, his feelings softened.  He states, "I honestly was not expecting a reply as I understand that Steven is undoubtedly a very busy man. But when I checked my in-box a few hours later, not only did he respond, but he did a very good job explaining his position and why the interim builds were not a good option for this release cycle."

While Mr. Sinofsky's metrics and comments surely won't placate all the disgruntled testers out there, it certainly seems a positive direction from Microsoft. 

Microsoft has recently become less stubborn and has become more receptive to feedback, after having long gone its own way.  For example, when a major security flaw was found in the UAC, a critical Windows 7 and Windows Vista component, Microsoft initially refused to change it.  However, it then quickly turned around, swallowing its pride and admitting to its mistake.  The UAC fix is among the many flaws and bugs the team will have fixed for the release of Windows later this year.



Comments     Threshold


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

75% isn't very good
By walk2k on 2/26/2009 12:37:41 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Of the hardware used, over 75 percent of it worked with the system's prepackaged drivers, writes Mr. Sinofsky
They will have to improve that percentage quite a lot before release. In my case it didn't detect my Nvidia card, onboard sound, and most importantly my LAN. So even though Windows update did have Nvidia and sound drivers, no LAN obviously made it impossible to connect to Windows update and download them...

Fortunately the Vista drivers worked and I had them on the installation CD that came with my computer, but I fear many people won't be so lucky to have install discs, or won't have the computer savvy to know to reach for them, and as such will be stuck with a completely useless Windows install (at least until they can borrow use of another computer and download drivers from the web).




RE: 75% isn't very good
By TomZ on 2/26/2009 12:53:15 PM , Rating: 1
Huh? Didn't detect your nVIDIA card? What card are you using?

You must be using either very old, or very new, hardware.


RE: 75% isn't very good
By walk2k on 2/26/2009 1:06:16 PM , Rating: 2
8800GT


RE: 75% isn't very good
By omnicronx on 2/26/2009 1:42:03 PM , Rating: 1
Did you run windows update? Because I personally installed an Asus 8800GT on my friends computer last week and the driver was found immediately using windows update.

Either way, it could just be a bug, a 8800GT is a new enough card that windows should pick it up easily . In fact of the machines I have installed it on, none have forced me to get drivers from the manufacturer.


RE: 75% isn't very good
By JasonMick (blog) on 2/26/2009 3:45:36 PM , Rating: 4
Reread the op, he said he couldn't connect to the network, initially as his W7 install didn't have drivers for his LAN card.

I'm assuming after he installed the working Vista drivers, which he fortunately had, he was able to grab the 8800 GT drivers from Windows Update.

To the original OP:
What kind of network card were you using, out of curiosity? Your motherboard didn't come with onboard ethernet?


RE: 75% isn't very good
By walk2k on 2/26/2009 10:12:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, I used the Vista drivers from the install CD for the LAN, as I mentioned. Then I was able to connect to WU and get the rest of the drivers. Point is, you can't do that if LAN doesn't install first....

The LAN is onboard, "Atheros AR8121/AR8113 PCI-E Ethernet Controller". Win7 didn't have a driver for it, didn't install one anyway.

I installed Win7 x64 if that makes a difference...


RE: 75% isn't very good
By Screwballl on 2/27/2009 11:01:32 AM , Rating: 2
What motherboard do you have? There are only a few older systems that I have found that it either doesn't see all the hardware (some AthlonXP or older systems) or refuses to install (like on my older HP ze4540).

I use the 8800GTS and it found the proper pre-release nvidia driver with no problems during the install process. There was an updated nvidia driver recently available through Windows update as well.

As for your Atheros, that is strange as it is a pretty popular LAN chip... I suspect Atheros did not release any W7 drivers to Microsoft by the time you installed it.


RE: 75% isn't very good
By omnicronx on 2/27/2009 11:41:04 AM , Rating: 2
Yep, I definitely lacked reading comprehension yesterday. (Sad part is I read the entire post, I wasn't just skimming) Sorry walk2k ;)


RE: 75% isn't very good
By DeepBlue1975 on 2/27/2009 6:55:44 AM , Rating: 2
Wierd at least

I have the same card and it worked right away and even suggested an update to download from the MS servers.

My only gripe with win7 right now, is that after installing the utilities that came with my camera, the OS could never start again. Seems it allowed incompatible components to be installed.
As soon as I reinstall the OS, I'll report this to MS.

The utility package said it didn't support 64 bit OSs, but I hoped it would allow me to run it in compatibility mode or simply refuse to install.

It even allowed me to install directx 9c, and I guess it shouldn't. :D

Other than that, been using it almost 24x7 without any problems and coming back to my main Vista Ultimate installation is a big turn off to say the least.


RE: 75% isn't very good
By TomZ on 2/27/2009 7:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
My only gripe with win7 right now, is that after installing the utilities that came with my camera, the OS could never start again. Seems it allowed incompatible components to be installed. As soon as I reinstall the OS, I'll report this to MS.
So you're one of those types that believes that Microsoft should take responsibility for any and all software that misbehaves on Windows, even if it most likely has nothing to do with the OS itself? Interesting...


RE: 75% isn't very good
By crimson117 on 3/1/2009 2:57:32 PM , Rating: 2
DirectX 9c is MS software.

And yes, I'd hope that Microsoft would have at least minimal protection from software that can completely disable their operating system. Especially when it's not an intentionally malicious virus but just an older set of camera drivers.

I suspect booting into Safe Mode and uninstalling the incompatible utilities / drivers would avoid having to reinstall the entire OS, though...


RE: 75% isn't very good
By Bonesdad on 2/27/2009 1:36:23 AM , Rating: 2
Had the same problem. I have an Abit IP35E with a Marvell Gigabit ethernet...W7 didn't recognize it. I was able to use the Vista driver downloaded from another PC. Then all was good.


RE: 75% isn't very good
By retrospooty on 2/27/2009 8:03:53 AM , Rating: 2
odd... I have a DFI with Marvel gbit ethernet and it did detect and install fine, 32 and later 64 bit both.


RE: 75% isn't very good
By ExarKun333 on 2/27/2009 8:17:03 AM , Rating: 2
Your point is moot. If someone isn't computer savvy enough to know how to install a driver, then I doubt they would be testing a beta OS. If they are, then they need to either learn quickly or find something else to do. Did you realize this is a beta OS and not a retail copy?


RE: 75% isn't very good
By Yawgm0th on 2/28/2009 12:04:25 AM , Rating: 2
His point was only that it would need to be better for release. Few are seriously complaining about the beta.

Regardless, few who are savvy enough to install a fresh OS can't also go get drivers. That's not the point. It's an inconvenience. Even most Linux distributions have >95% compatibility these days.

Besides, it can be a really big inconvenience, depending on the situation. If I put a fresh Vista or 7 install on a Dell laptop at work and a NIC or VGA adapter doesn't install, I might end up downloading 100 of MBs of drivers (Dell's fault, partially). That's not fun on a T1 shared amongst dozens of users.

When released, 7 will need to have at least 98% compatibility with recent hardware (let's say anything LGA775 or newer) or it might get the same early reception Vista got..


In the mean time
By crystal clear on 2/26/2009 12:27:53 PM , Rating: 2


Microsoft released a comprehensive update for Windows 7 Beta Tuesday aimed at plugging numerous compatibility and reliability holes in Internet Explorer 8.
The comprehensive update patches an array of stability problems that include crashes, hangs and memory issues on Windows 7 Beta caused by IE as well as third-party components such as Adobe Flash, Adobe Acrobat and others. The patch also fixes glitches in PDF file printing and includes a change that improves cookie management.

"We found that approximately 10 percent of customers who had downloaded the Windows 7 Beta had experienced some type of reliability problem in IE," said Herman Ng, Microsoft program manager, in an IE blog post. "We also found that a small number of users were experiencing crashes on a more regular basis and that about 1.5 percent of all Internet Explorer sessions had encountered a crash."



http://www.crn.com/security/214600097;jsessionid=Y...




RE: In the mean time
By walk2k on 2/26/2009 12:53:02 PM , Rating: 2
I found a lot more problems with IE8 than anything else in Win7 actually. Most web pages - like 99% need to run in "compatibility mode" to display properly. Even then it has a bug where it squashes 1-2 lines of text per page. Crashes are more frequent, though the good news is it can often recover automatically.

At one point IE8 just completely stopped working. I had to dig around in the internet options and disable automatic configuration to get it working again.

I will say though the 64 bit version is VERY fast. It's just too bad that vendors are lagging behind with 64bit plugin support. Though actually browsing without Flash is nice sometimes since it removes a lot of those annoying animated ads.


RE: In the mean time
By TomZ on 2/26/2009 12:56:15 PM , Rating: 2
For me, IE8 works fine for 99% of web sites. I've only had to kick into compatibily mode a few times so far.

I've also had a lot of times where IE8 hoses up. But I believe that is related to the current version of the Adobe Flash player, because (a) I was seeing the same kinds of crashes in IE7 with the same version of Flash, and (b) if I disable Flash, I don't get any more crashes. Annoying.


RE: In the mean time
By 67STANG on 2/26/2009 11:59:25 PM , Rating: 2
Tried using on Google Maps? Horrible mess. Even Gmail has problems occassionally in IE8.


RE: In the mean time
By TomZ on 2/27/2009 8:47:52 AM , Rating: 2
That strange - I use Google Maps all the time in IE8 - no problems here.


RE: In the mean time
By crystal clear on 2/27/2009 7:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
Windows Internet Explorer 8 Release Candidate 1 Fact Sheet

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/window...


RE: In the mean time
By crystal clear on 2/27/2009 7:15:58 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft Corp. today revealed some of the changes-36 of them, it has made to Windows 7 since it issued a public beta more than a month ago.

Some Changes Since Beta for the RC

http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/26/some-c...


Vista vs 7
By Screwballl on 2/26/2009 10:34:53 AM , Rating: 1
As a staunch Vista hater, I have also beta tested W7 and found it to fix most of the problems that I found to be wrong with Vista, even after SP1. There are still some software issues that need to be ironed out but many programs that had major issues in Vista, do not have them or it is minimized in W7 beta.
I still do software testing under Vista and it is just as bad now as it was when it was in beta... yet the beta of W7 handles everything so much better.




RE: Vista vs 7
By hemmy on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: Vista vs 7
By Screwballl on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: Vista vs 7
By nycromes on 2/26/2009 12:33:58 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I still do software testing under Vista and it is just as bad now as it was when it was in beta... yet the beta of W7 handles everything so much better.


I think they took issue with the quote above, this is just plain false. Vista (though still not perfect) is head and shoulders above what it was during it's beta. Windows 7 is above that. Its funny to me that the people who criticize Vista always seem to say its as bad as it was during beta, and when someone disagrees with them they say something along the lines of your sheep comment. They didn't say Vista has nothing wrong, just that you are lying about the current state of Vista, its much improved, though still not perfect.


RE: Vista vs 7
By Gyres01 on 2/26/2009 1:01:19 PM , Rating: 4
I have been using Vista for 2 years now, and at first it was having issues...but now it works flawlessly....I say good for MS, they seem to be heading in the right direction...IMHO.


RE: Vista vs 7
By Pirks on 2/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: Vista vs 7
By MarcLeFou on 2/26/09, Rating: 0
RE: Vista vs 7
By Pirks on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: Vista vs 7
By themaster08 on 2/28/09, Rating: 0
RE: Vista vs 7
By themaster08 on 2/28/2009 5:20:54 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
idiotic and soo annoying UAC which can't be turned off permanently JUST FOR A FEW SPECIAL APPS like RivaTuner or CPU-Z

What have you been smoking, Apple boy? Of course you can permanently turn UAC off. Maybe you can't because you're too dumba$$ to know how. Any excuse to try and make Vista look such an inferior OS.
Like MarcLeFou says, you have absolutely no credability upon your judgement of Vista.

quote:
Vista is the same flop as it was two years ago

Just as Macs are the same flops they were 25 years ago.

I have a couple of pages for you to ponder upon:-

http://www.dailytech.com/Hacker+Unveils+Stealthy+M...

http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+ASUS+and+HTTPS+All+...

Stick with OSX, get hacked, be quiet!


RE: Vista vs 7
By Screwballl on 2/27/2009 11:17:02 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I think they took issue with the quote above, this is just plain false.


Exactly... you THINK it is false...

Just as my years in IT and dealing with crap from MS that I KNOW that Vista still needs a lot of work and this is where I derive my opinions that Vista is crap... I know some people do not have problems with it but for the rest of us power users, Vista is like a little spoiled brat should should not be let outside of the house, causes entirely too many problems or is prone to messing up constantly.
XP even at the beginning was nowhere close to as bad as Vista or ME, which is why I call Vista "WinME v2".

Even Microsoft admitted that Vista is crap:

quote:
"We broke a lot of things. We know that, and we know it caused you a lot of pain. It got customers thinking, hey, is Windows Vista a generation we want to get invested in?"
-- Brad Brooks, Microsoft's VP.


Which is why they are putting so much work into Windows 7, which is exactly what Vista should have been.


RE: Vista vs 7
By PrezWeezy on 3/3/2009 1:03:40 AM , Rating: 2
I spent a lot of time talking to some people at MS about Vista. The guy I was talking to was basicaly saying his biggest issue with Vista is performance. I have no issue with performance. In fact it runs great on my POS machine with less than 1GB of RAM. I also work in the IT industry and I LOVE Vista. It's not perfect, XP wasn't either, niether was 2000 or 98 or NT nor any other OS EVER released. And I hate to break it to you, Windows 7 won't be perfect either. There is always room for improvement, but that doesn't mean the product is bad. I like the fact that I have not had a single Vista machine compromised since it's first install. Not one person has had malware, or a virus. Not one. That is reason enough to switch to Vista alone. Add in the search, the better organization, the UI (techincal as well as artistic), the power tools, it all winds up to be a great package. And even the Black Hat convention couldn't hack into it. I'd throw everything else away to keep the security features.


RE: Vista vs 7
By ChronoReverse on 2/26/2009 12:35:07 PM , Rating: 2
Or perhaps you're the sheep that overblows the issues (that definitely exists) with Vista in an effort to make yourself seem so clever.

I don't know how many people I've met who try to ingratiate themselves to me with the starting line "So I hear Vista isn't very good..."


RE: Vista vs 7
By kyleb2112 on 2/26/2009 5:34:55 PM , Rating: 1
"We broke a lot of things. We know that, and we know it caused you a lot of pain. It got customers thinking, hey, is Windows Vista a generation we want to get invested in?"
-- Brad Brooks, Microsoft's VP.

Apparently, Microsoft's VP is also just trying to make himself seem "clever".

A lot of defensiveness and denial in the air now, as Vista fans realize their baby will go down as another ME. Marking me down won't change that, but go ahead if it makes you feel better.


RE: Vista vs 7
By t1e on 2/26/09, Rating: 0
They are taking advise from Blizzard?
By dgingeri on 2/26/2009 11:31:24 AM , Rating: 3
I believe they might be taking advise from Blizzard. Blizzard certainly knows how to run things. They give feedback to their users, thank them for bug reports personally, give progress reports, take advise from users, and yet still maintain their own vision of where they are going with their software.

They also produce software that stands on its own without putting tendrils all over the OS, causing instability and crashes. Installation and removal is easy and fast. It's also released when they are satisfied that it is stable. (That doesn't mean it is bug free, but it is far closer than most software I deal with.) I just wish they made apps as well as games.

Simply put, Blizzard is run like a software company should be run. Perhaps MS is taking notes and learning from them. I can hope.




By Chocobollz on 2/27/2009 12:29:01 PM , Rating: 2
Blizzard? Are you serious? You mean that company who like to milk their customers? Really?

quote:
They also produce software that stands on its own without putting tendrils all over the OS

Is that your definition of a good software? If it's then there's a lot more software who's better than that. For example, you know SpeedFan? It's a good and useful software and it uninstall like a charm too. You know KeePass? You know Opera Software? *ding* Do I ring any bells? :p

Well, I say that because I think you say it like Blizzard is a mighty company, which isn't. There's absolutely a lot of software houses better than Blizzard out there.


can't believe I am going to say this..
By LiquidIce1337 on 2/26/2009 10:20:05 AM , Rating: 4
but I think I am actually going to (gasp) purchase Windows 7 when it releases. I mean this doesn't say much but at least they are on the ball this time.




RE: can't believe I am going to say this..
By legoman666 on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
By Murst on 2/26/2009 12:28:15 PM , Rating: 2
I might get an OEM version if I can find the business edition for ~100$ or less ( needs to support a clean install ).

Otherwise, I'll prob just wait until they drop down in price or until a MS event comes to the area where they give out licenses...


Eat Meat
By bobcpg on 2/26/2009 1:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
Contrary to Apple owners, Steve needs to eat meat to stay healthy.

Think about it...




RE: Eat Meat
By bobcpg on 2/26/2009 1:20:45 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong article, sorry.


By imaheadcase on 2/26/2009 1:55:36 PM , Rating: 3
I don't know how that bug has been in the OS this long, its the most annoying thing with XP and now vista. the 2+ million google pages devoted to the topic are all temporary fixes, each time you reset computer have to re due the fix.




If this is true...
By 1078feba on 2/26/2009 10:22:05 AM , Rating: 2
If MS is really as open to constructive criticism and critique as the appear to be, W7 should shape up to be the best MS OS launch in a very long time, possibly even the best ever.

Here's to hoping...




Not going to fix bug 2,001
By Kougar on 2/26/2009 11:25:56 AM , Rating: 2
In the time the W7 beta has been active I have submitted a few bug and feedback via the feedback tool, and submitted three bugs directly to Microsoft Connect. The W7 team was very prompt and efficient in outright fixing or showing the work-around for the first two bugs.

Today I checked for feedback on the third bug, and was surprised to see their feedback stated the bug would NOT be addressed in Windows 7. Instead it "may" be fixed in future editions of Windows.

The bug in question regards the Jumplist feature. If users configure the taskbar back to using text (as in Vista/XP) and open more than one instance of a program (or have multiple folders open), right-click one to open a Jumplist. Select close, and watch the jumplist remain open and partially nonfunctional even though the program or folder was closed. I'm surprised they wouldn't at least recode the jumplist to automatically close when the associated window was closed.




By ChronoReverse on 2/26/2009 12:33:16 PM , Rating: 5
They usually do.

For instance, the universal outrage against UAC is ridiculous since you can just turn it right off and then tell Windows now to bug you about it.


By TomZ on 2/26/2009 12:50:48 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, UAC is a red herring. Even when it's turned on, it comes up so infrequently that it is not really a problem.


By walk2k on 2/26/2009 1:00:25 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe for you it does, for me it was throwing up TWO popups every time I booted up, and again every time I ran a couple of my favorite games.

Now you can place the blame on software vendors if you want, but to the end user it doesn't matter. All MS has to do is add the common "don't ask me again for this program" that every other security/firewall and even their own IE does, but for some reason they can't, or won't.

UAC is actually MORE dangerous when left on, since it trains users to ignore warnings and popups and just click OK as fast as they can.


By rdeegvainl on 2/26/2009 1:33:27 PM , Rating: 3
users were already "trained" to just click next next ok yes, since the days of win 95


By omnicronx on 2/26/2009 1:33:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All MS has to do is add the common "don't ask me again for this program" that every other security/firewall and even their own IE does, but for some reason they can't, or won't.
Obviously you havn't used Windows 7, as this is one of the 4 UAC settings, and is part of the default setting.


By walk2k on 2/26/2009 10:18:31 PM , Rating: 2
What? No it isn't. I'm using Windows 7 right now. There is no such setting.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/26/2009 4:46:06 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Agreed, UAC is a red herring. Even when it's turned on, it comes up so infrequently that it is not really a problem.


I rather click a UAC dialog box once in a while then deal with Linux bugging me for my freaking admin password all the time.


By atlmann10 on 2/26/2009 12:45:02 PM , Rating: 5
To start with I think MS is learning a few things. With the beta released and being used as it is I believe is very positive. Take a point from Mozilla, which has steadily been gaining support and users for years now. When you run something and allow feedback "and user customization" the platform will grow in many cases immensely. I am not criticizing MS here I think they did the right thing with this pre-release of 7.

For one thing it looks like waiting for SP1 and SP2 will most likely be done before it ever is officially released. Meaning it should be stable and well performing from the start. Believe me I have beta'd every op sys from MS since 98SE, and used widows actively since 3.1. The way they are handling this one is much better than anything I have seen to date.

Another thing I am a true multi purpose user. I use my computers (3 right now) for educational, communications, banking, shopping, photo manipulation, sound playing and manipulation, Gaming, Research, Minor professional writing and just about everything else they can be used for.

I imagine there are many users like me on here, so them listening to there customers this way is very productive. Oh and by the way I on 3 pc's I use XP and Vista 32 & 64 bit with 7 as a secondary op sys. So the interaction between the 4 is great, but the networking is above all windows versions as for ease of use and functionality so far. There are many other things that also eases co-communication between all the version I use.


By StevoLincolnite on 2/26/2009 12:33:57 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't noticed any "Decisions" that Windows 7 made for me during normal operating procedures, Then again I disabled UAC as well.

I have been using Windows 7 for the last several months, it's stable, it's more efficient than Vista, the GUI is pleasing to the eye, driver and software compatibility is great even though it's in a Beta stage, once the OS is released I'll be one of the first buyers in-line, much like Halo Wars when it was released here today in Australia.

When Windows XP was released most people were using a Win9x based operating system, which at that time allot of software had issues with the NT based operating systems.

This isn't going to be another repeat of that debacle, nor will it be a repeat of the Vista debacle, it will be more like the upgrade that we did years ago when we moved from Windows 95 to Windows 98.


By The0ne on 2/26/2009 1:19:22 PM , Rating: 2
After running and testing Win7 myself I'm on the boat to grab it when it comes out. I like it. It's lean, efficient at handling files, less annoying, and on and on. Although not a major leap really, it's enough to warrant the move from XP.


I got a feedback for you
By AnnihilatorX on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: I got a feedback for you
By kilkennycat on 2/26/2009 11:55:55 AM , Rating: 5
Fired up your copy of the Windows 7 beta and clicked on "Send Feedback" ? A much better way if getting your message to the developers.


RE: I got a feedback for you
By AnnihilatorX on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
By DuctTapeAvenger on 2/26/2009 3:27:52 PM , Rating: 2
Have you even tried the beta yet? UAC seems to be a step up from the version in Vista.


By The0ne on 2/27/2009 11:08:16 AM , Rating: 2
UAC is a step up. It's easier to locate and change :)


By CrazyBernie on 2/26/2009 7:47:02 PM , Rating: 2
Or, replace the whole posting with "I didn't have my coffee/cigarette/miscellaneous fix this morning."


UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By reader1 on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By bobsmith1492 on 2/26/2009 10:47:55 AM , Rating: 5
Um... no.


RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By reader1 on 2/26/09, Rating: -1
RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By GoodBytes on 2/26/2009 11:22:29 AM , Rating: 3
Wtf are you talking about. You don't even know what UAC is.
Linux even has it.

PLEASE, stop saying what you were told by other, and read up on it. This is a 'life' saving feature. I already put a friends USB stick on my computer which has a virus or malware which executes as autorun. I knew this because when I plug-it in, windows goes "auotrun.exe wants Admin rights?", I was like "No" and THEN my anti-virus goes alert me of a virus on the USB stick which is autorun.exe. You can image other scenarios like you want to select a file that you know is dangerous and your double click by accident.

Also, it fixes the problem that if you are under a limited account you can easily install applications with the admin password. Under Win2000/XP its doable, but what it does actually is not give permission, it actually loads the Administrator account and installs it inside. This causes many complications for many applications (hens one of the reason why everyone stay as Admin under XP).

The interesting thing with Vista is that UAC can be disabled by a simple check box. Check the OS help doc for more information. Under Win7 ou can fine tune it or disable it.

I hope this help understanding this feature better, and that you stop listen to other ignorants or close minded buffoons. And start taking a real opinion like a real smart person, based on your best of knowledge. Such attitude will be very beneficial in life.


By DarkElfa on 2/26/2009 12:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
I've been using the beta on both our main home PC's and other than the occasional bug or glitch, its more stable than Vista and faster. I only wish they could simply sell an upgrade to the beta so I don't have to do a major reinstall in August.


RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By kstatefan40 on 2/27/2009 4:15:44 AM , Rating: 2
The "UAC" you speak of in Linux is the NSA-developed "Security-Enhanced Linux" or SElinux. And it actually works much better because it asks for a password and not "Click okay to run as Administrator". Makes the typical lazy American like myself think twice about elevating my privileges to Root because I'll have to enter a damn password every time instead of just clicking "Okay, whatever the hell this is..."

Food for thought.


By The0ne on 2/27/2009 11:10:22 AM , Rating: 2
You're spot on with the password laziness. Hella funnie response as well! You've made my morning :)


By stmok on 2/27/2009 2:34:52 PM , Rating: 2
Eh, no. SELinux is NOT the same as UAC.

SELinux is a mandatory access control solution that allows one to set security profiles.

These profiles can be used:
=> to restrict what an application can/cannot do. (very useful to contain an application should it be compromised);
=> lock out users (including the almighty Root user);
And even...
=> restrict the network resources to a particular application. (Control the flow of information).

Effectively, you can completely confine an application to only what its supposed to do and nothing more. The only disadvantage is the learning curve and the tediousness of creating a profile for an application. (Its quite high, and takes time to get really familiar with what you're doing).

The closest thing Windows has, that is somewhat equivalent to SELinux, is Mandatory Integrity Control (MIC) and User Interface Privilege Isolation (UIPI). This was introduced in Vista and Windows Server 2008. (Obviously, it will be there in Windows 7)...Where do you think IE's "Protected Mode" came from?

Unlike SELinux, users of Windows don't have direct access (at least its not obvious) to tweak MIC and UIPI to their needs. Users rely on third-party software developers and MS to do that job for them. MIC/UIPI is also vulnerable to certain shatter attacks. This allows one to break out of IE's Protected Mode. (This was proven by security researchers last year.)

UAC in Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Server 2008 is a privilege escalation solution to bump a user from standard user privileges to admin user privileges when needed.

The Linux equivalent to UAC is:
=> gksudo (Gnome desktop)
=> kdesu (KDE desktop)
=> su (Command line, gives Root privileges to user)
=> sudo (Command line, gives Root privileges for applications/commands only)

For example: In Ubuntu (which uses Gnome desktop environment by default), only gksudo and sudo are used. There is no root/admin account at all.

If you're a Windows XP user, you can have similar ability as well! Set up a Limited User Account, download and install SuRUN in Admin Account. Before you do that though, make sure you run regedit and go to a very important entry: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE => System => CurrentControlSet => Control => LSA => nodefaultadminuser . Change the value from 1 to 0 (Zero).

Where...
0 = Administrators Group
1 = Object Creator
(You want to be installing things with Administrators Group ownership! Otherwise, you'll be insecure!)

Anyway, the biggest difference between Windows and Linux is really the goals of the implementation...

Microsoft has to compromise some security for usability of the masses. ie: If its too hard, people will be turned off, and its less sales for MS. (They can't afford to do that). if its too easy, the bad guys will have a field day...This "see-saw" scenario is exactly what was seen with the initial implementation of UAC in Windows 7 Beta.

On the other side of the fence: most Linux developers don't really give two hoots about the mainstream masses as they only focus on the core bits of Linux. The responsibility to bring things to a wider audience is on the distro developers (Like Red Hat, Canonical, Novell, Mandriva, etc). Its the distro developer's job to compile all the various bits and pieces together into something usable.


RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By The0ne on 2/27/2009 11:14:55 AM , Rating: 2
In addition to UAC, there are other less intrusive programs to use to prevent viruses and spam from starting.

1. Spybot
2. Adware
3. Threatfire (XP only)
4. Virus scanner, I use the free Avast
5. UAC, which I disable for Vista but use in Win7 :)
6. Zone Alarm or similar program

I always have the top 4 installed. I got nephews and nieces that uses PCs around here, got to be careful :D


RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By stmok on 2/27/2009 2:52:29 PM , Rating: 2
You don't need all that...

In Win2k or XP
1. Set up a Limited User Account.
2. (a) Set Software Restriction Policy to Deny Default (XP Pro only)
OR
2. (b) Install Trust-No-Exe (Win2k and XP Home Only)
3. Set the nodefaultadminowner registry setting to Administrator's Group (as discussed above in my long post).
4. Install SuRUN.
5. Install a third-party firewall with Host-based Intrusion Protection System (HIPS)
Either:
(a) PC Tools Firewall Pro 5.x
OR
(b) Online Armor Free Edition
OR
(c) Comodo Security (install the firewall and Defense+ components, NOT AV part).

If I used Vista or Windows 7, it would be similar...
1. Set up a Standard User Account.
2. (a) Set Software Restriction Policy to Deny Default (Ultimate/Business/Enterprise only)
OR
2. (b) Set AppLocker to Deny Default (Windows 7)
3. Set the nodefaultadminowner registry setting to Administrator's Group (Not sure if this still applies in Vista/Windows 7).
4. Leave UAC on. Set to max notification.
5. Install a third-party firewall with Host-based Intrusion Protection System (HIPS)
Either:
(a) PC Tools Firewall Pro 5.x
OR
(b) Online Armor Free Edition
OR
(c) Comodo Security (install the firewall and Defense+ components, NOT AV part).

No anti-malware apps needed.
No signatures to download.
No performance gobbling security apps running in the background.

...Just need your brain to be trained for more security conscious practices!

Prevention NOT cures. That's what I learned from the Linux/Unix world.


RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By TomZ on 2/27/2009 7:12:56 PM , Rating: 2
You don't need ANY of that. Just don't let idiots use your machine and you won't have any problems at all!


By Chocobollz on 2/28/2009 8:09:55 AM , Rating: 2
LOL.. and what if that idiot is you yourself? xD


RE: UAC is stupid because Microsoft is stupid.
By walk2k on 2/26/2009 12:26:35 PM , Rating: 2
UAC is stupid but not for the reason you suggest (actually I didn't really see a reason there but...)

It's stupid because it annoys the users so badly that they will either turn it off (like I did after 2 days and like most sane people will) or it will just train them to ignore the warnings and click OKOKOKOK as fast as they can.


By rdeegvainl on 2/26/2009 4:34:56 PM , Rating: 2
like i stated above, users have been trained to just click ok ok ok as fast as they can for over a decade. Way before UAC came along. That is also why users don't realize the benefits of UAC. Cause they just want to run whatever, whenever, no matter the risk, then complain about MS when they explicitly told their computer to install malware.


By omnicronx on 2/26/2009 2:10:26 PM , Rating: 2
We know.. you have only posted the exact same comment every single time a DT article has anything to do with Microsoft. Give it a break, nobody cares about your FUD!


By rudolphna on 2/26/2009 10:56:18 PM , Rating: 1
Hello PLAYSTATIONTHREE/Facemaster.


"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference














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