The week I spent with my Vista PC

[donniedarko]

i really think that vista is the worst os ever

[Alessandro17]

XP 64 was worse, nForce drivers are still beta(never were updated) and hard drive performance is real bad with them.

 

Not sure about Nforce drivers (Intel mobo and CPU here), but I tried XP 64 again after about a year and I found overall hardware and applications compatibility greatly improved, most definitely a lot better than Vista.

[elviejo]

No, that would also be bad security -- you might as well have a prompt as soon as the PC starts and than if the person clicks Allow than that whole session will have no more prompts.

 

And no, the correct is wrong, the ad implies you get a prompt for the most simple things, like saying hello which is BS and you know it.

 

Here is a list of things which give you prompts, that's hardly 'everything' done on Windows, in fact, most things aren't covered.

I installed Visual Studio like that and I don't get prompted every time.

 

How about, one of you prove you get prompts for EVERYTHING till than, it's not me vs the world, it's me vs a bunch of randoms on a forum who can't prove anything or extremely little.

 

If you want to know if is you against the world, google for UAC Vista and you are going to see, and, don't worry, I'm going to prove you as soon I get home from work; by the way, you know what is bad security?, when a feature who suppose to protect your computer only ask "allow or not allow" without a password, anyone who is sitting in front of that computer can "allow" and that's also a hole who can be exploited remotely; what is going to happen with UAC?, one of two things, must of the people with some knowledge are going to turn it off, the average people are going to click "allow" by ignorance, both ways the purpose of it are going to be defeated. I almost forgot, what about networking?

[Panda200x]

i really think that vista is the worst os ever

Aren't you forgetting WindowsME? I just ask if you have used Vista yet.

[Potleg]

My PC is currently on Windows Vista Business Edition and i got it free from the acedemic alliance with my Uni. It is quite buggy but its in its early stages at the moment but all major annoyances of the OS was fixed when the ratil patch was released as i had probs with my surround sound b4 hand.

 

Ive recently dloaded OSX86 and taking the plunge to use it as my second OS so hopefully it should be ok running on my AMD AThlon 64 PC or itll off straight away.

 

as a designer i feel there is more variety of software to use thats created by apple so i'm mainly installing it for those.

[Veggfx]

Guess what? I can't wait for my macbook pro...

 

Well done!

 

~Veg

[elviejo]

If you want to know if is you against the world, google for UAC Vista and you are going to see, and, don't worry, I'm going to prove you as soon I get home from work; by the way, you know what is bad security?, when a feature who suppose to protect your computer only ask "allow or not allow" without a password, anyone who is sitting in front of that computer can "allow" and that's also a hole who can be exploited remotely; what is going to happen with UAC?, one of two things, must of the people with some knowledge are going to turn it off, the average people are going to click "allow" by ignorance, both ways the purpose of it are going to be defeated. I almost forgot, what about networking?

 

There is the proof with a program running as an administrator.

[sandmanfvrga]

Good screen shot, but these Vista Zealots will not listen.

[Panda200x]

How do we know if your running admin?

 

(FreeBSD Root ftw. )

[Baliw]

There is the proof with a program running as an administrator.

 

I am not defending Vista here, but i think what you got is simple case of a program that wants to run as an admin which Vista doesnt recognize. Just a bad software design , imho. Not Vista's fault.

[elviejo]

I am not defending Vista here, but i think what you got is simple case of a program that wants to run as an admin which Vista doesnt recognize. Just a bad software design , imho. Not Vista's fault.

 

That's not the problem, is not the program who "want" to run as administrator, is ME, the owner of the machine, who told vista to run that program as administrator, if you look at the picture, ( yeah, is a picture because that stupid UAC don't let you do nothing else, not even take an snapshot of your system) the image at your right are the properties of that program, you can see, I admit with some difficult, that it must run in compatibility mode with windows xp sp2 and as administrator, and there is the problem, why in the hell vista need to ask me every time I run the program if I want to allow it?, because the stupid kid don't remember what I told him in the first place!.

 

Let's be clear on something, I don't care who is the best OS, I use what I need of every one,but, and that's what a lot of people think, if you spend five years developing an OS to come with this annoyances, that tell me the first four years you where going in one direction and something happen and you need to improvise in the last year. You people know what?, I think, if Apple got crazy and open Mac OS X to everybody, Microsoft is going to cry.

[Panda200x]

I'm not patronizing or whaterver but UAC doesn't come up all the time for me unless I am using WinRAR (the most annoying UAC thing yet). I would suggest that microsoft puts *remember this session* or *never warn me again* for running applications like that. Microsoft won't cry, there are already many OS's who have many features (included/not included ) who have began to eat their marketshare. Why do you think Linux is a popular os?

[elviejo]

I'm not patronizing or whaterver but UAC doesn't come up all the time for me unless I am using WinRAR (the most annoying UAC thing yet). I would suggest that microsoft puts *remember this session* or *never warn me again* for running applications like that. Microsoft won't cry, there are already many OS's who have many features (included/not included ) who have began to eat their marketshare. Why do you think Linux is a popular os?

 

Agree with the UAC part, the problem with Linux is there are too many distros, is difficult to the people to choose, and you need some knowledge to manage them; on the other part, Mac OS X is a lot more friendly and you can be sure if it wasn't so restricted to the Apple hardware, lot of people who now use Windows could make the jump. My

[srnoth]

Hmm. I'm new here but it isn't the first MAC vs PC argument I've heard. I feel I must give my . First of all, let me start off by saying that in my opinion, there is no clearly better OS. Windows wins in some areas, OSX in others. So when someone tells me they find OSX is the better OS, I have no problem with that. To each his own. However, what I can't stand is Mac users who feel that their precious OSX is far superior to Windows in every way, and try to convince people of that by exaggerating and just plain lying. So:

 

 

The biggest lie thus far in the Vista vs OSX debate is the UAC, and the add Apple made mocking it. Now when I saw the add, I saw it as a somewhat funny exaggeration of Vista, that was in no way based on fact and was just another one of Apple's ridiculously exaggerated (but funny) adds. However it seems many Mac users have taken it to heart, as seen in the original article this thread is based on. The fact is UAC asks for your permission for any system wide changes, or for changes in folders that it sees as special (root, program files, windows etc). Which is good. Microsoft has scored almost perfectly with it's UAC, and how some of you mac fanatics can't see that, I don't know.

 

Let me deal with the various situations brought up in this thread:

 

Dont forget copying files to C:, program files and installing apps you usually get two prompts. I tried deleting something from program files that I put there and it wouldn't let me. After switching off UAC it was fine, but you do get prompted alot in the control panel and would have been simple to prompt once for the entire control panel.

 

When changing anything in the root folder or one of the other 'protected' folders, it firsts warns you that doing that will require admin privaliges, and then the second promt requires you to either enter admin password if you're not in an admin account, or to click allow if you are in an admin account. I aggree they could have just asked you once, but come on, is clicking okay a second time THAT big a deal?

 

And yes in some ways it would have been nice if the whole control panel should have admin privaliges required, and then not have to give permission for each thing inside it, but there are actually quite a few things in the control panel that do not require admin privaliges, so MS chose the more secure option.

 

The Apple advert is correct as you get prompted for most of the stuff in control panel, prompted for each app you install even though it's just one(two apps contained in one i.e iTunes/quicktime).

 

The Apple advert is WRONG. It claims that you get asked for permission to do even the simplest of things, like chatting with a friend. The only time you get asked for permission is when you do something that requires admin privaliges - system wide settings changes, installing programs, drivers etc. Just like in Linux or OSX.

 

 

Well, it's just a case of clicking Allow, if you go by what you said UAC is useless, a password prompt would have been more more useful.

 

Actually I thought so too until I saw your post and decided to experiment. Since it it just me that uses my laptop, it only has one account on it, (mine), and I just left it as an administrator account. But does that really make sense? No. So I created a separate admin account with a nice tough password, and made my account a standard user. So now, if I do something that needs admin privalages, I get this nice promt:

Which looks pretty similar to what happens in OSX. I just enter my admin password and I'm good to go.

 

So basically, anybody who sets up a normal user in an admin account is being silly. Of course UAC is then useless because all they have to do is click 'allow'. That situation is the human's fault, not vista's. Only use an admin account for installing drivers and stuff, although you don't really need all that.

 

 

Also, if you install a program with elevated privileges, every time you try to use that program, you get the prompt to allow that program to run. Don't try to deny that UAC sucks the way it is implemented, is you against the world,and, sorry, but must be you who is wrong, not the rest of the world.

 

This situation only occurs in some old programs that were not designed to work with UAC. UAC does not suck, if you use it correctly, then it works almost perfectly. Sure there are some things that could be improved, but jees, it's only been out a few months. And YOU do not qualify as the rest of the world. It is him and me and a few others who recognize what an improvement vista is, against a few mac users who look for everything possible in windows that they can exaggerate and then criticize.

 

Another thing is networking, try to share a printer and you are going to see what a pain in the ass it is, even between different flavors of windows, forget it with other OS's. Oh, by the way, yesterday I was backing up a DVD from my granddaughter ( with some scratches ) and every time the backing up program got to the scratches I got a blue screen, that don't even happen with XP, isn't suppossed that the program hangs, not the OS?

 

I too have gotten a few unexplained blue screens, however they have been few and far between, and some bugs are expected in a new OS. I am actually very pleased with the LACK of bugs in Vista, especially after experiencing the launch of XP . And please don't tell me that OSX doesn't have bugs when it is launched, because OSX only has to work on a very limited amount of hardware options, where as Vista/windows has to work with just about every hardware component out there. There just isn't any comparison.

 

 

I do not see where you can control the side bar in the Control Panel. You can set it to open on startup, move it, or view what gadgets are open but I do not see where to hide it and open it in the CP. If the choices are hidden and not located inside the Windows Sidebar Properties icon, then that would really be ignorant of Microsoft. Clicking the show desktop button will hide my other programs also, so that is no answer to the problem of being able to easily hide it and have it reappear when you want.

 

I know you can turn off UAC but that makes the computer as vulnerable as XP.

 

I don't know about the whole sidebar issue - I turned off the side bar within my first day with Vista. But you are right about the second part, turning of UAC doesn't make sense.

 

 

Read about Vista like an intelligent person, and you'll understand it's not Xp with a new coat. But heaven forbid zealots realize this. I'm glad to see your article on .mac is so unbiased, and well written (sarcasm). If you used Vista primarilly, you'd realize UAC only occurs durring installations.

 

Thank you. Glad someone else out there has looked at vista through unbiased eyes.

 

 

I think that microsoft should let there be a button on the mouse to enable flip3d, just like the squeeze button on the apple's mouse.

Very true. Although I'm sure someone will come up with a way to do this.

 

 

I went to Mac and came back...

 

I think Microsoft has improved dramatically on Vista. The UAC can be annoying but once disabled it was 10x easier. Its true that DVD Maker and WMM is in no league compared with iLife which is why several companys develop new programs to cope. The start menu is better than XPs which doesn't overload the screen with folders. I think Microsoft understands intergration well (IE, shell? ). I've used Vista for 14 days and no flaws, crashes or even virii have affected me.

Agreed but please turn back on UAC, it makes it much more secure. All other modern OSes have some form of it (linux, osx etc), and sure it is somewhat inconvenient but it is a whole lot more secure.

 

 

No, that would also be bad security -- you might as well have a prompt as soon as the PC starts and than if the person clicks Allow than that whole session will have no more prompts.

 

And no, the correct is wrong, the ad implies you get a prompt for the most simple things, like saying hello which is BS and you know it.

 

Here is a list of things which give you prompts, that's hardly 'everything' done on Windows, in fact, most things aren't covered.

I installed Visual Studio like that and I don't get prompted every time.

 

How about, one of you prove you get prompts for EVERYTHING till than, it's not me vs the world, it's me vs a bunch of randoms on a forum who can't prove anything or extremely little.

Keep up the good fight .

 

 

I have Visual Studio installed, it tells you that you should run it with admin privileges (requiring you to go through the UAC prompt every time you run it). I can't wait for the next release, it's starting to get quite annoying.

 

One major thing that I've noticed about UAC is if you try to open something from IE (word document I think will do this), you first get a prompt from IE asking you if you want to open the file, then you get a UAC prompt asking you if you want to allow IE to open the file. You shouldn't have to tell it twice.

 

The biggest problem with UAC is that it requires you to confirm a single action more than once. If you want to change the clock, you shouldn't have to confirm that you want to change the clock and then enter your credentials. Entering your credentials should be enough to verify.

 

I also love it when you get a security center notification telling you that you've turned off security center notifications.

Finally some good constructive criticism. I agree there are times when you have to answer two prompts when one would have done. But does that mean UAC sucks, doesn't do its job etc? No. (I'm not talking about you by way, its other posts I'm refering to).

 

 

 

...and that's it, right there. The only sentence really worth reading in the article, it's kind of biased. Okay, REALLY biased. But you know... it's hard not to be, I understand...

Unfortunately the law is trying to stop Microsoft from integrating. Look at all the lawsuits they have gotten because of windows media player and internet explorer and all the anti-competition {censored}.

 

 

 

Twisting words again I see, I said most of the stuff in control panel. UAC may not be annoying to you but dont defend it like it's not annoying to everyone else. Are you saying we dont use Vista and UAC really dont bother you so much?, how about when you do turn it off it bothers you again with a notification every friggin time.

 

I recently install Vista because I got sick to death of XP even for the small time I use it for a few games, so dont patronize me and others claiming UAC works perfect because it dont.

 

UAC doesn't work perfectly. But does OSX's user control work perfectly either? No. Quite frankly I got pissed having to enter my admin password everytime I wanted to change a system wide setting in OSX. I like how with vista when I am doing system wide configuration, I just log into my admin account (enter password once), and then just click 'allow' for the individual things. When done with major config, go back to user account. Plain and simple.

 

 

If you want to know if is you against the world, google for UAC Vista and you are going to see, and, don't worry, I'm going to prove you as soon I get home from work; by the way, you know what is bad security?, when a feature who suppose to protect your computer only ask "allow or not allow" without a password, anyone who is sitting in front of that computer can "allow" and that's also a hole who can be exploited remotely; what is going to happen with UAC?, one of two things, must of the people with some knowledge are going to turn it off, the average people are going to click "allow" by ignorance, both ways the purpose of it are going to be defeated. I almost forgot, what about networking?

I dealt with this a bit further up. You are clearly ignorant as to how UAC works. Only a moron (or someone who doesn't know about admin and standard user account) would give his mother in law an administrator account. Infact just about everyone should use a standard account, and then just enter the admin password when a system change needs to be made. Exactly like OSX. So stop looking for (imagining) the bad in Vista, and see the good.

 

 

That's not the problem, is not the program who "want" to run as administrator, is ME, the owner of the machine, who told vista to run that program as administrator, if you look at the picture, ( yeah, is a picture because that stupid UAC don't let you do nothing else, not even take an snapshot of your system) the image at your right are the properties of that program, you can see, I admit with some difficult, that it must run in compatibility mode with windows xp sp2 and as administrator, and there is the problem, why in the hell vista need to ask me every time I run the program if I want to allow it?, because the stupid kid don't remember what I told him in the first place!.

I agree there should be a 'remember this' sort of setting one could choose. But this problem only occurs with old problems that weren't designed for an environment with UAC, so some problems are expected. All new software should run without a hitch. Remember this is a major environment change for windows. Most windows programs just expected to have admin rights from the get go. In XP some programs just wouldn't run in a limited account. So infact UAC is an improvement.

 

 

 

 

 

So that's about it for UAC. It is a great improvement to Windows XP, and definitely brings Windows on par with OSX and linux for that type of security. Sure there are some improvements that could be made, but for a first attempt it is excellent. It would be nice if Mac fanatics could simply see Vista from unbiased eyes and be glad of the competition, instead of bashing everything Microsoft does with exaggerations and lies.

 

 

Now please don't take this as a personal attack on anyone. I am not a Windows fanatic and I do not think Vista is the best OS out there. I just cannot stand people attacking an OS without having a true knowledge of how it works, and by using lies and exaggerations. Those apple adds are mean to draw people by humour, not to realistically portray PCs.

 

 

Stephen.

[tripleboot]

I've slammed on Vista and also have tested it and have it dual booted with XP. Yes a legit copy of Vista I received from MS for testing along with Office 2007. Today I installed Rainbow Six Vegas on Vista and patched it up. Applied some tweaks and then plugged in my flash memory stick for (readyboost) to add just under a gig for additional cache boost. Running better then it did on XP. Then again you can't take a flash memory stick and use it for additional memory for XP ! I've been the biggest critic of Vista, but honestly so far with Vista Business I haven't had any problems so far.

[elviejo]

Hmm. I'm new here but it isn't the first MAC vs PC argument I've heard. I feel I must give my . First of all, let me start off by saying that in my opinion, there is no clearly better OS. Windows wins in some areas, OSX in others. So when someone tells me they find OSX is the better OS, I have no problem with that. To each his own. However, what I can't stand is Mac users who feel that their precious OSX is far superior to Windows in every way, and try to convince people of that by exaggerating and just plain lying. So:

The biggest lie thus far in the Vista vs OSX debate is the UAC, and the add Apple made mocking it. Now when I saw the add, I saw it as a somewhat funny exaggeration of Vista, that was in no way based on fact and was just another one of Apple's ridiculously exaggerated (but funny) adds. However it seems many Mac users have taken it to heart, as seen in the original article this thread is based on. The fact is UAC asks for your permission for any system wide changes, or for changes in folders that it sees as special (root, program files, windows etc). Which is good. Microsoft has scored almost perfectly with it's UAC, and how some of you mac fanatics can't see that, I don't know.

 

Let me deal with the various situations brought up in this thread:

 

 

 

When changing anything in the root folder or one of the other 'protected' folders, it firsts warns you that doing that will require admin privaliges, and then the second promt requires you to either enter admin password if you're not in an admin account, or to click allow if you are in an admin account. I aggree they could have just asked you once, but come on, is clicking okay a second time THAT big a deal?

 

And yes in some ways it would have been nice if the whole control panel should have admin privaliges required, and then not have to give permission for each thing inside it, but there are actually quite a few things in the control panel that do not require admin privaliges, so MS chose the more secure option.

 

 

 

The Apple advert is WRONG. It claims that you get asked for permission to do even the simplest of things, like chatting with a friend. The only time you get asked for permission is when you do something that requires admin privaliges - system wide settings changes, installing programs, drivers etc. Just like in Linux or OSX.

 

 

Actually I thought so too until I saw your post and decided to experiment. Since it it just me that uses my laptop, it only has one account on it, (mine), and I just left it as an administrator account. But does that really make sense? No. So I created a separate admin account with a nice tough password, and made my account a standard user. So now, if I do something that needs admin privalages, I get this nice promt:

Which looks pretty similar to what happens in OSX. I just enter my admin password and I'm good to go.

 

So basically, anybody who sets up a normal user in an admin account is being silly. Of course UAC is then useless because all they have to do is click 'allow'. That situation is the human's fault, not vista's. Only use an admin account for installing drivers and stuff, although you don't really need all that.

 

 

This situation only occurs in some old programs that were not designed to work with UAC. UAC does not suck, if you use it correctly, then it works almost perfectly. Sure there are some things that could be improved, but jees, it's only been out a few months. And YOU do not qualify as the rest of the world. It is him and me and a few others who recognize what an improvement vista is, against a few mac users who look for everything possible in windows that they can exaggerate and then criticize.

 

 

 

I too have gotten a few unexplained blue screens, however they have been few and far between, and some bugs are expected in a new OS. I am actually very pleased with the LACK of bugs in Vista, especially after experiencing the launch of XP . And please don't tell me that OSX doesn't have bugs when it is launched, because OSX only has to work on a very limited amount of hardware options, where as Vista/windows has to work with just about every hardware component out there. There just isn't any comparison.

 

 

I don't know about the whole sidebar issue - I turned off the side bar within my first day with Vista. But you are right about the second part, turning of UAC doesn't make sense.

 

 

Thank you. Glad someone else out there has looked at vista through unbiased eyes.

 

Very true. Although I'm sure someone will come up with a way to do this.

 

Agreed but please turn back on UAC, it makes it much more secure. All other modern OSes have some form of it (linux, osx etc), and sure it is somewhat inconvenient but it is a whole lot more secure.

 

Keep up the good fight .

 

Finally some good constructive criticism. I agree there are times when you have to answer two prompts when one would have done. But does that mean UAC sucks, doesn't do its job etc? No. (I'm not talking about you by way, its other posts I'm refering to).

Unfortunately the law is trying to stop Microsoft from integrating. Look at all the lawsuits they have gotten because of windows media player and internet explorer and all the anti-competition {censored}.

 

 

UAC doesn't work perfectly. But does OSX's user control work perfectly either? No. Quite frankly I got pissed having to enter my admin password everytime I wanted to change a system wide setting in OSX. I like how with vista when I am doing system wide configuration, I just log into my admin account (enter password once), and then just click 'allow' for the individual things. When done with major config, go back to user account. Plain and simple.

 

I dealt with this a bit further up. You are clearly ignorant as to how UAC works. Only a moron (or someone who doesn't know about admin and standard user account) would give his mother in law an administrator account. Infact just about everyone should use a standard account, and then just enter the admin password when a system change needs to be made. Exactly like OSX. So stop looking for (imagining) the bad in Vista, and see the good.

 

I agree there should be a 'remember this' sort of setting one could choose. But this problem only occurs with old problems that weren't designed for an environment with UAC, so some problems are expected. All new software should run without a hitch. Remember this is a major environment change for windows. Most windows programs just expected to have admin rights from the get go. In XP some programs just wouldn't run in a limited account. So infact UAC is an improvement.

So that's about it for UAC. It is a great improvement to Windows XP, and definitely brings Windows on par with OSX and linux for that type of security. Sure there are some improvements that could be made, but for a first attempt it is excellent. It would be nice if Mac fanatics could simply see Vista from unbiased eyes and be glad of the competition, instead of bashing everything Microsoft does with exaggerations and lies.

Now please don't take this as a personal attack on anyone. I am not a Windows fanatic and I do not think Vista is the best OS out there. I just cannot stand people attacking an OS without having a true knowledge of how it works, and by using lies and exaggerations. Those apple adds are mean to draw people by humour, not to realistically portray PCs.

Stephen.

 

I'm not going to quote everything you say, only pointing some facts, first of all, you know how must of the people got Vista?, pre-installed in a system build buy a computer maker, when they turn on the computer the account is just an standard account, without a password, and more than 80% never use a password, that's the real problem; the "old problems" you mention are programs people still use and are going to use for long, Vista UAC could had been made a little bit more intelligent to avoid the repetition. And as "clearly ignorant", you pardon me, but in this case you are clearly the ignorant, look the first fact, and you know why?, because that's my job, the IT manager in a company who build computers and have to deal with all the maladies who affect Windows. But, yeah, you have reason in something, there is no better OS, to some people Windows is the best, to others is Mac and to a lot is Linux, because of preferences, programs they use, etc. all said there is something everyone must agree, the must compromised of all OS is Windows, and, please, don't tell us is because the dominance of the market, what I said is, in five years of development and coming with this is really a disappointment , but if you think five years is only a "first attempt" so be it.

[Tech607]

Windows has its good points, even if it is few, but Vista is an attempt to COPY what Apple has been doing for years now. From Gadgets, to the useless Flip 3D, to Search, to Icon previews, to UAC, to Windows Mail, to Windows DVD Creator, to Windows Calender, to Windows Photo Gallery, must i keep going on (Thank GOD for Patents). I will admit Windows good spots if you Windows defenders with your spyware, adware, and viruses admit that Vista is an attempt to COPY what Apple is doing. I hate when Windows users act like MS is not in copy mode. WILL ONE OF YOU COME ON AND ADMIT IT PLEASE!

 

By the way I mostly wanted to see if Vista could compete with Apples end to end experience when it came to pictures , video and music and it failed badly. Integration was elementary at best. I am serious, if you want to play games with your computer instead of on your PS3 then buy windows but if you want a completely seamless user experience from end to end buy a Mac.

[srnoth]

I'm not going to quote everything you say, only pointing some facts, first of all, you know how must of the people got Vista?, pre-installed in a system build buy a computer maker, when they turn on the computer the account is just an standard account, without a password, and more than 80% never use a password, that's the real problem; the "old problems" you mention are programs people still use and are going to use for long, Vista UAC could had been made a little bit more intelligent to avoid the repetition. And as "clearly ignorant", you pardon me, but in this case you are clearly the ignorant, look the first fact, and you know why?, because that's my job, the IT manager in a company who build computers and have to deal with all the maladies who affect Windows. But, yeah, you have reason in something, there is no better OS, to some people Windows is the best, to others is Mac and to a lot is Linux, because of preferences, programs they use, etc. all said there is something everyone must agree, the must compromised of all OS is Windows, and, please, don't tell us is because the dominance of the market, what I said is, in five years of development and coming with this is really a disappointment , but if you think five years is only a "first attempt" so be it.

 

Yeah man, I know it was a lot of quotes. I didn't realize I attacked so many of your posts either - it's nothing personal.

 

Lets see now.

 

As you said, most people will get vista pre-installed on their machine, and may never bother to use a password. However, this is a fault of the user, not the OS. And in this situation, UAC does about all it can - it warns the user if a program is about to make changes, or asks the user if he/she is sure they are want to change something major. I'm not sure what else MS could really have done. They cannot truely protect their OS from a user who doesn't know what they're doing. By the way, the original account is an Administrator account, not a standard account.

 

 

By 'old programs' I meant programs that were developed for a non-UAC environment. The fact is there are quite a few useful programs that do not work in Vista, so there are going to have to be updates or patches for some programs. But supprisingly, most software does work. But I accept your point - a 'remember this setting' option should be available. But the lack of this setting does not mean that Vista should be discarded as a failure or as something far inferior to OSX.

 

 

I am sorry if you were offended by the 'clearly ignorant' comment, but if you did know how UAC works, how could you argue that someone could just click 'allow' without entering a password. If someone sets up there computer correctly, then one does have to enter a password. So from your comment, it appeared that you did not know this.

 

 

I'm glad you agree that there is no perfect OS. By 'first attempt', I mean that this is Microsoft's first OS with UAC. I too expected something a bit more amazing after 5 years, but while I was not 'amazed', I do think they did a pretty good job. It is certainly not terrible as described by many people who posted in this thread.

[Tech607]

I am on a rant. I am able to disable my Ethernet or Airport on my Mac without a problem or any verification, in Vista I cannot disconnect from a wireless disable my wirless connection without UAC popping up. Or disable and enable my Ethernet without UAC popping up. This keeps me safer how?

 

Not letting me disable my internet connection without UAC keeps me safe from what or is this a Windows fear I am missing because I use a Mac.

[srnoth]

Windows has its good points, even if it is few, but Vista is an attempt to COPY what Apple has been doing for years now. From Gadgets, to the useless Flip 3D, to Search, to Icon previews, to UAC, to Windows Mail, to Windows DVD Creator, to Windows Calender, to Windows Photo Gallery, must i keep going on (Thank GOD for Patents). I will admit Windows good spots if you Windows defenders with your spyware, adware, and viruses admit that Vista is an attempt to COPY what Apple is doing. I hate when Windows users act like MS is not in copy mode. WILL ONE OF YOU COME ON AND ADMIT IT PLEASE!

 

By the way I mostly wanted to see if Vista could compete with Apples end to end experience when it came to pictures , video and music and it failed badly. Integration was elementary at best. I am serious, if you want to play games with your computer instead of on your PS3 then buy windows but if you want a completely seamless user experience from end to end buy a Mac.

 

 

I agree with you somewhat. Vista is not an attempt to copy Apple, that flatters apple way too much. Some aspects of vista, such as the Flip 3d thing, feels like a direct copy of apple. But a lot of the other things that are similar to apple are just natural improvements to the user experience. The thing with windows is that it has never been about integration, as OSX always has. If you, as a windows user, wanted those aditional functions, you bought/downloaded a 3rd part app to do it. Microsofts attempts at integration with Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player, have been met with lawsuits and claims of anti competition measures. So they are being prevented from doing this seemlessly as Apple has been able to.

 

UAC is not a copy of apple, as linux has long had UAC. It just makes sense. Thank goodness apple wasn't able to patent that.

 

Windows is not in COPY mode, it is in CATCHUP mode. Apple is not the only OS that has had improvements over XP, linux has also been competing. And vista feels like it has caught up pretty well.

 

 

But remember, end user experience is not the main focus of Microsoft's developement. MS also has to think a lot more about security than Apple has ever had to, because they are a much larger target. They also have to make sure their OS can run on a whole heap of hardware, which apple doesn't have to either.

 

 

I agree that in term's of Vista's end to end experience when it came to pictures , video and music, it doesn not compete with OSX. I wasn't really aware it was trying - infact I never even opened Windows Photo Gallery until I read your post . But is an OS really supposed to be focused on end user functionality, or is it supposed to provide a stable base for applications to run on? Because Vista excells in that area.

 

 

I realise from reading y'alls posts that when looking at Vista vs OSX, you are looking at the functionality that the OSes come with stock. But that's why I prefer Vista, because I can choose what I do with it:

*I don't have to use any of the apps it comes with, I use primarliy 3rd party apps - Firefox, winamp, VLC, Nero etc.

*I can run windows on ANY computer I choose, with specs I can customize - not just the computers Apple sells to me.

 

 

Basically, I like windows because I have choice.

 

 

So, I am sorry but I am a Windows defender (don't have spyware, adware, and viruses though!), and all I will admit is that Vista is an attempt to 'catchup' with other OSes (not just OSX) in some areas. And it did very well.

 

 

Stephen.

 

I am on a rant. I am able to disable my Ethernet or Airport on my Mac without a problem or any verification, in Vista I cannot disconnect from a wireless disable my wirless connection without UAC popping up. Or disable and enable my Ethernet without UAC popping up. This keeps me safer how?

 

Not letting me disable my internet connection without UAC keeps me safe from what or is this a Windows fear I am missing because I use a Mac.

 

 

Well let me see. To disable wireless... turn of wireless switch... darn that was easy . To disconnect from wireless network... right click from network icon in tray... click 'disconnect from'... click on the network you're connected to... tada!

 

Now I know you can't disable your internet connection without the UAC popping up, but this is to protect you from a program that might decide to disable your internet connection for spite. You see, windows has to expect the worst because it is such a big target for attacks. Can you imagine people calling in to complain their internet connection isn't working, all because some script kiddie decided to send round a virus disabling people's network card?

 

The point of UAC is really so that a program cannot make changes in the background without a user noticing. It's like this... let's say a user downloads a game off the net... why should a game be making system changes? So the user can then click 'cancel' and no damage is done. So basically nothing bad can be done to the system without the user giving permission.

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

By the way, you have these few quirks about Vista you don't like. Well what about this.

 

*In OSX, I have to enter my long admin password everytime I want to make a change - if I'm already in an admin account, why do I have to keep entering the password? Thats very annoying.

 

*Why is it so difficult to install OSX on a normal PC? All this bittorent, patches etc. If Apple was serious about getting people to 'convert', they should make it easy. Because I'm certainly not buying a whole new computer that I don't really like just to try a new OS. That just doesn't make sense.

[elviejo]

Yeah man, I know it was a lot of quotes. I didn't realize I attacked so many of your posts either - it's nothing personal.

 

Lets see now.

 

As you said, most people will get vista pre-installed on their machine, and may never bother to use a password. However, this is a fault of the user, not the OS. And in this situation, UAC does about all it can - it warns the user if a program is about to make changes, or asks the user if he/she is sure they are want to change something major. I'm not sure what else MS could really have done. They cannot truely protect their OS from a user who doesn't know what they're doing. By the way, the original account is an Administrator account, not a standard account.

By 'old programs' I meant programs that were developed for a non-UAC environment. The fact is there are quite a few useful programs that do not work in Vista, so there are going to have to be updates or patches for some programs. But supprisingly, most software does work. But I accept your point - a 'remember this setting' option should be available. But the lack of this setting does not mean that Vista should be discarded as a failure or as something far inferior to OSX.

I am sorry if you were offended by the 'clearly ignorant' comment, but if you did know how UAC works, how could you argue that someone could just click 'allow' without entering a password. If someone sets up there computer correctly, then one does have to enter a password. So from your comment, it appeared that you did not know this.

I'm glad you agree that there is no perfect OS. By 'first attempt', I mean that this is Microsoft's first OS with UAC. I too expected something a bit more amazing after 5 years, but while I was not 'amazed', I do think they did a pretty good job. It is certainly not terrible as described by many people who posted in this thread.

 

Well, now we are getting close, I never say the OS was a failure or something like that, but, some features where not well implemented; MS tried to close the security breach with UAC, but , in one case, got paranoid and in the other did to little, let explain, instead of the repetitive "allow or denied" they must ask for an administrator password and remember the answer in the future. About the administrator account, you are wrong on that, is a power user account and that is something totally different; you only get an administrator account in factory mode, ( by the way, when you log in Administrator account you don't get must of the UAC prompts) as soon you execute sysprep (you know what is sysprep, don't you?), the Administrator account is disabled by default. And, no, I wasn't offended, don't worry about that.

[srnoth]

Well, now we are getting close, I never say the OS was a failure or something like that, but, some features where not well implemented; MS tried to close the security breach with UAC, but , in one case, got paranoid and in the other did to little, let explain, instead of the repetitive "allow or denied" they must ask for an administrator password and remember the answer in the future. About the administrator account, you are wrong on that, is a power user account and that is something totally different; you only get an administrator account in factory mode, ( by the way, when you log in Administrator account you don't get must of the UAC prompts) as soon you execute sysprep (you know what is sysprep, don't you?), the Administrator account is disabled by default. And, no, I wasn't offended, don't worry about that.

 

I agree it was not implemented as well as it could have been. As I showed you you can set it up to behave like OSX or Linux and ask you for an admin password each time UAC is activated, but you have to know how to do that and set it up that way. The default way my HP laptop came was with a passwordless administrator (not THE administrator account, but it's not a power user account, its a full admin account). The default setting should allow you to enter an admin password, and then just use a normal user account, entering the admin password when necessary. But instead they leave it up to the user to do that.

 

I know what sysprep is, but I've only really used it with Xp, not vista. From what I've seen, vista doesn't even have an 'Administrator' account that you can log in to in the way XP did. Your first account is the Administrator account, with full administrator privileges.

 

Glad you don't see it as a total failure though. Nice to see some good productive discussion instead of 'vista is the worst ever' and the other {censored} people tend to throw out.

 

 

Stephen.

[elviejo]

I agree it was not implemented as well as it could have been. As I showed you you can set it up to behave like OSX or Linux and ask you for an admin password each time UAC is activated, but you have to know how to do that and set it up that way. The default way my HP laptop came was with a passwordless administrator (not THE administrator account, but it's not a power user account, its a full admin account). The default setting should allow you to enter an admin password, and then just use a normal user account, entering the admin password when necessary. But instead they leave it up to the user to do that.

 

I know what sysprep is, but I've only really used it with Xp, not vista. From what I've seen, vista doesn't even have an 'Administrator' account that you can log in to in the way XP did. Your first account is the Administrator account, with full administrator privileges.

 

Glad you don't see it as a total failure though. Nice to see some good productive discussion instead of 'vista is the worst ever' and the other {censored} people tend to throw out.

Stephen.

 

That's why you think your account is an Administrator account, but is not, on Vista you use an Unattend script to install it with the Administrator account active, then you perform all the tweaks you need- pre installing programs, etc.- when you have the system the way you want you sysprep it to oobe first experience and is ready to deliver it to the customer, you remember I told you before I work doing that precisely?, if you want to try it pm me.

[rollcage]

In OSX, I have to enter my long admin password everytime I want to make a change - if I'm already in an admin account, why do I have to keep entering the password? Thats very annoying.

I think this is more of an attempt from keeping people around your computer from making changes, if you so happen to walk away while logged in as an admin. It's a good defense against spiteful relatives and co-workers.

[KJY9]

... how about when you do turn it off it bothers you again with a notification every friggin time.

.....

 

And they say ignorance is bliss?!?!?

One right click and two left clicks and you NEVER get that notification that UAC is turned off ROFLOLOL