Dear Microsoft: Please get UAC right this time

  • Thread starter Thread starter Clear Windows
  • Start date Start date
On Sat, 31 May 2008 03:41:56 -0700, "xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> wrote:

>>>Doesn't annoy me - I just click and forget.
>>
>> Doesn't annoy me either - I clicked it OFF and forgot about it.
>
>I think whoever designed UAC will cry out loud if he/she read the above
>testimony. Actually, that defeated the purpose of UAC. The purpose is to
>let user to pause/read/think/take action.

Meet the two guys that did design UAC:

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=288259

From the look on their faces, they must have picked the short straws.
If anyone thinks they caught a lot of heat from users, listen to the
whole interview and learn how much INTERNAL resistance they ran into.

If you like White Board presentations, this includes a classic. Jon
Schwartz, the principle UAC Architect can't seem to even manage
drawing decent looking rectangles. Maybe that explains why UAC is
mostly fluff... which Jon admits once he finally gets to explain at
roughly the 41 minute mark in the interview how UAC is suppose to work
and why it really is just different warnings boxes each with their own
color scheme denoting the seriousness of the "threat".

Hint: the only one that really matters, according to Jon, are UAC
warning boxes with the red color scheme in the Title Bar. He also
admits those are hard wired to stop execution automatically. So guess
what, all the rest of those annoying UAC warnings are nothing but
click through "idiot boxes".

In other words Jon, the designer of UAC confirms what I've been saying
about it for over a year. Little more than Microsoft's version of cry
wolf.
 
Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>> John Waller wrote:
>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>>
>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>>> otherwise.
>>>
>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run
>>> on the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that
>>> the applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>>> compatible with Windows 7."
>>>
>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>
>>
>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
>> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
>> required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think
>> Win 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> Spreading FUD again?
>

Spewing unfounded insults again?

Alias
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 09:20:22 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
<mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:

>"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
>news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>> John Waller wrote:
>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>>
>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>>> otherwise.
>>>
>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be compatible
>>> with Windows 7."
>>>
>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>
>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
>> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows required
>> higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think Win 7 will be
>> any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>
>> Alias
>
>
>Spreading FUD again?

Mike typifies what being a MVP is all about. Always ready to bend down
a plant a big wet one on Microsoft's corporate ass... no matter what.
This ensures Mike gets a never ending supply of FREE Microsoft crap
which is the reason the majority wish to become MVPs in the first
place.

The MVP program instead of being a resource to help end users get
through the minefield of bloated and broken Microsoft software is
instead the first line defense to excuse away Microsoft's blunders.

The only question is how long does it take the typical user to figure
this out?
 
"John Waller" <johnw@REMOVETHISpinnacleweb.com.au> wrote in message
news:OA0LArxwIHA.5096@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even more
>> hardware to run properly.
>
> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
> otherwise.
>
> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on the
> recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be compatible
> with Windows 7."
>
> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx

That does not say much. Or in at least isn't comforting.

What is Microsoft going to do with disgruntled Vista users to get them back?

For me, they would have to send me Windows 7 free, and I will evaluate it in
detail. But fortunately the hardware vendors are not waiting, I hear Dell
is going to offer competition to Eee PC and offer it in XP or Linux.

Microsoft can continue to write fat, annoying, slow operating systems all it
wants. Will keep my XP and Linux, both of which operate with all my
devices.
 
"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message
news:uKKVUEywIHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>> John Waller wrote:
>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>>
>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>>> otherwise.
>>>
>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be compatible
>>> with Windows 7."
>>>
>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>
>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
>> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
>> required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think Win
>> 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> Spreading FUD again?

Send him a free copy of Windows 7 Super-Ulimate...retail $699.

Will not take long to see how it fairs against Vista.
 
Alias wrote:

> John Waller wrote:
>
>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>
>>
>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>> otherwise.
>>
>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>> compatible with Windows 7."
>>
>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>
>>
>
> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
> required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think
> Win 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>
> Alias

Certainly, no one believe you or capin' crunch or any of the other lying
linux trolls.
Frank
 
"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:b8m2445ufa6t7kd4hca79vtg4e1eh23cjk@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 09:20:22 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
> <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:
>
>>"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>>> John Waller wrote:
>>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>>>
>>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>>>> otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>>>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>>>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>>>> compatible
>>>> with Windows 7."
>>>>
>>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>
>>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
>>> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
>>> required
>>> higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think Win 7 will
>>> be
>>> any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>>Spreading FUD again?
>
> Mike typifies what being a MVP is all about. Always ready to bend down
> a plant a big wet one on Microsoft's corporate ass... no matter what.
> This ensures Mike gets a never ending supply of FREE Microsoft crap
> which is the reason the majority wish to become MVPs in the first
> place.
>
> The MVP program instead of being a resource to help end users get
> through the minefield of bloated and broken Microsoft software is
> instead the first line defense to excuse away Microsoft's blunders.
>
> The only question is how long does it take the typical user to figure
> this out?

I suspect not long at all:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/pc/

Today it says Amazon can't keep the Eee PC Linux version in stock, 1-2 month
wait. XP version, in stock. Tells me quite a few people are forgetting
about XP, forget Vista and moving on to Linux. The word is out, Linux will
not give you herpes, and operates securely and nicely on all hardware.

I get the same results from our local small PC shop, Linux versions, they
can't get them fast enough and they are long sold before they arrive. But
have XP versions on the shelf.

Now that means one of two things. MS pundits can take their pick.

1) Linux is outselling XP on Eee PC, in at least much more popular that ASUS
ever thought. And much to Microsoft's displeasure, users are choosing
Linux.

2) Somehow Microsoft has ASUS back in line and ASUS is not making enough of
the Linux ones trying to force feed XPee.

Dell is about to launch one just like it too, with Linux and XP as a choice.
Refreshing, after all these years of "bundling" consumers are going to get a
choice one more.

Either way, times are a changing. The market is revolting on over priced
Microsoft software products.
 
"Gordon" <gbplinux@gmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:g1qume$iu0$1@news.mixmin.net...
> "Not Me" <cargod01@bresnan.net> wrote in message
> news:ek%23sl7uwIHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> MS said they made UAC irritating on purpose.
>> They obviously don't know what real users do when they are annoyed by a
>> 'feature' of their software...
>>
>
> Doesn't annoy me - I just click and forget.

UAC should act like firewalls do and give the option to accept the action
and don't bother me again about this particular action.
--
Ron P

If we are what we eat then: I'm fast,
cheap and easy and past my best before date
 
thanks for providing faces of these total morons.

I can now print their ugly faces and make a target for my dart practice

morons

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:11k24414cvkl62k9pi2sssq93nrp5nctpc@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 03:41:56 -0700, "xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Doesn't annoy me - I just click and forget.
>>>
>>> Doesn't annoy me either - I clicked it OFF and forgot about it.
>>
>>I think whoever designed UAC will cry out loud if he/she read the above
>>testimony. Actually, that defeated the purpose of UAC. The purpose is to
>>let user to pause/read/think/take action.
>
> Meet the two guys that did design UAC:
>
> http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=288259
>
> From the look on their faces, they must have picked the short straws.
> If anyone thinks they caught a lot of heat from users, listen to the
> whole interview and learn how much INTERNAL resistance they ran into.
>
> If you like White Board presentations, this includes a classic. Jon
> Schwartz, the principle UAC Architect can't seem to even manage
> drawing decent looking rectangles. Maybe that explains why UAC is
> mostly fluff... which Jon admits once he finally gets to explain at
> roughly the 41 minute mark in the interview how UAC is suppose to work
> and why it really is just different warnings boxes each with their own
> color scheme denoting the seriousness of the "threat".
>
> Hint: the only one that really matters, according to Jon, are UAC
> warning boxes with the red color scheme in the Title Bar. He also
> admits those are hard wired to stop execution automatically. So guess
> what, all the rest of those annoying UAC warnings are nothing but
> click through "idiot boxes".
>
> In other words Jon, the designer of UAC confirms what I've been saying
> about it for over a year. Little more than Microsoft's version of cry
> wolf.
>
 
Alias wrote:

> John Waller wrote:
>
>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>
>>
>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>> otherwise.
>>
>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>> compatible with Windows 7."
>>
>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>
>>
>
> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
> required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think
> Win 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>
> Alias

Also, no matter what MS does or does not do to W7, idiot moron loses
with their head-up-their asses like you, mr drunken pig and capin'
crunch will always hate MS because of their own incompetence and
inability to properly install, configure and run an OS.
Frank
 
no sir, if MS makes a good product I will support them..
just like I support them with XP

"Frank" <fb@tpi.olm> wrote in message
news:4841703d$0$4244$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Alias wrote:
>
>> John Waller wrote:
>>
>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>>
>>>
>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>>> otherwise.
>>>
>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be compatible
>>> with Windows 7."
>>>
>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>
>>
>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
>> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
>> required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think Win
>> 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>
>> Alias
>
> Also, no matter what MS does or does not do to W7, idiot moron loses with
> their head-up-their asses like you, mr drunken pig and capin' crunch will
> always hate MS because of their own incompetence and inability to properly
> install, configure and run an OS.
> Frank
 
Alias wrote:

> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>
>> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>>
>>> John Waller wrote:
>>>
>>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require
>>>>> even more hardware to run properly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft
>>>> say otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run
>>>> on the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that
>>>> the applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>>>> compatible with Windows 7."
>>>>
>>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves
>>> wiggle room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of
>>> Windows required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do
>>> you think Win 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>>
>> Spreading FUD again?
>>
>
> Spewing unfounded insults again?
>
> Alias

Get lost you lying linux loser!
Frank
 
Clear Windows wrote:
> no sir, if MS makes a good product I will support them..
> just like I support them with XP

So will I. That said, XP is the only OS that MS has ever made that's
worth anything.

Alias
> "Frank" <fb@tpi.olm> wrote in message
> news:4841703d$0$4244$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> John Waller wrote:
>>>
>>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require
>>>>> even more hardware to run properly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft
>>>> say otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run
>>>> on the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that
>>>> the applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>>>> compatible with Windows 7."
>>>>
>>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves
>>> wiggle room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of
>>> Windows required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do
>>> you think Win 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> Also, no matter what MS does or does not do to W7, idiot moron loses
>> with their head-up-their asses like you, mr drunken pig and capin'
>> crunch will always hate MS because of their own incompetence and
>> inability to properly install, configure and run an OS.
>> Frank
>
 
"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in
news:Byd0k.179011$Cj7.102474@pd7urf2no:

>
> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
> news:b8m2445ufa6t7kd4hca79vtg4e1eh23cjk@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 31 May 2008 09:20:22 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
>> <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>>>> John Waller wrote:
>>>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require
>>>>>> even more hardware to run properly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft
>>>>> say otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will
>>>>> run on the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and
>>>>> that the applications and devices that work with Windows Vista
>>>>> will be compatible
>>>>> with Windows 7."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/c
>>>>> ommunicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>>
>>>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves
>>>> wiggle room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of
>>>> Windows required
>>>> higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think Win 7
>>>> will be
>>>> any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>>Spreading FUD again?
>>
>> Mike typifies what being a MVP is all about. Always ready to bend
>> down a plant a big wet one on Microsoft's corporate ass... no matter
>> what. This ensures Mike gets a never ending supply of FREE Microsoft
>> crap which is the reason the majority wish to become MVPs in the
>> first place.
>>
>> The MVP program instead of being a resource to help end users get
>> through the minefield of bloated and broken Microsoft software is
>> instead the first line defense to excuse away Microsoft's blunders.
>>
>> The only question is how long does it take the typical user to figure
>> this out?
>
> I suspect not long at all:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/pc/
>
> Today it says Amazon can't keep the Eee PC Linux version in stock, 1-2
> month wait. XP version, in stock. Tells me quite a few people are
> forgetting about XP, forget Vista and moving on to Linux. The word is
> out, Linux will not give you herpes, and operates securely and nicely
> on all hardware.
>
> I get the same results from our local small PC shop, Linux versions,
> they can't get them fast enough and they are long sold before they
> arrive. But have XP versions on the shelf.
>
> Now that means one of two things. MS pundits can take their pick.
>
> 1) Linux is outselling XP on Eee PC, in at least much more popular
> that ASUS ever thought. And much to Microsoft's displeasure, users
> are choosing Linux.
>
> 2) Somehow Microsoft has ASUS back in line and ASUS is not making
> enough of the Linux ones trying to force feed XPee.
>
> Dell is about to launch one just like it too, with Linux and XP as a
> choice. Refreshing, after all these years of "bundling" consumers are
> going to get a choice one more.
>
> Either way, times are a changing. The market is revolting on over
> priced Microsoft software products.

Maybe MS should try to release an OS......just an OS......nothing more,
nothing less.

If they didn't bundle all of the non-OS s/w in with an OS installation,
maybe 1) it would work better, 2) maybe it would cost less, and 3) maybe
it wouldn't be super-bloated.

I've mentioned before maybe having an installer, like XPlite, or vLite,
that gives you REAL install options, not just the few they offer now.
There would be an 'absolute minimum' install option, a full-on everything
option, and customizable to do anything in between.

Of course, that idea was shot down by several people because it would
make install 'too hard and confusing' for the typical Windows user.

I know the first thing I do after doing a Windows install is to remove
all the things I never use, if they can be removed.
 
this girl reminds me of you.. only that you are ugly as a hag.. lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtkX3OyPF4Q



"Frank" <fb@tpi.olm> wrote in message
news:4841724f$0$4244$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>
>>> "Alias" <iamalias@NOSPAMPLEASEgmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:g1rh6g$s22$1@aioe.org...
>>>
>>>> John Waller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> From what I've read, Windows 7 will be more bloated and require even
>>>>>> more hardware to run properly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Depends on what you read and who you choose to believe. Microsoft say
>>>>> otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> "In fact, one of our design goals for Windows 7 is that it will run on
>>>>> the recommended hardware we specified for Windows Vista and that the
>>>>> applications and devices that work with Windows Vista will be
>>>>> compatible with Windows 7."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And you believe them? Note, the quote says "goals" which leaves wiggle
>>>> room for something else. Considering that MS' versions of Windows
>>>> required higher end hardware for each and every one, why do you think
>>>> Win 7 will be any different? Would you bet the farm on it?
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Spreading FUD again?
>>>
>>
>> Spewing unfounded insults again?
>>
>> Alias
>
> Get lost you lying linux loser!
> Frank
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 10:53:51 -0400, "Bogey Man" <spam@kwic.com> wrote:

>
>
>"Gordon" <gbplinux@gmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
>news:g1qume$iu0$1@news.mixmin.net...
>> "Not Me" <cargod01@bresnan.net> wrote in message
>> news:ek%23sl7uwIHA.704@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> MS said they made UAC irritating on purpose.
>>> They obviously don't know what real users do when they are annoyed by a
>>> 'feature' of their software...
>>>
>>
>> Doesn't annoy me - I just click and forget.
>
>UAC should act like firewalls do and give the option to accept the action
>and don't bother me again about this particular action.

Yes, of course, but that would require intelligent programming,
something usually out of the reach of the Boys of Redmond. They
specialize in creating kludge... writing a OS that has tens of
millions of lines of code resulting in bloat. Totally ridiculous but
non the less the twenty year plus history of Windows.
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 18:34:19 +0300, "Clear Windows"
<carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote:

>thanks for providing faces of these total morons.
>
>I can now print their ugly faces and make a target for my dart practice

I bet Microsoft could make a few more million if they offered poster
sized photos of these two with a target painted over them. -)

Seriously, if you watch the entire video and pay attention to their
body language they seem really uptight. I'm guessing they didn't
volunteer for the assignment and in typical Microsoft fashion weren't
given enough time to tune it up or make it what that really wanted it
to be either.
 
No it shouldn't.

If you could give it blanket permission to screw with your system, so could
a malicious program.

MS set it up so the default, simple, no-nothing window user would be
protected by default.

If you are computer savy, you can install your apps as admin, and never see
a UAC prompt.
But you have to be aware that you just unlocked the doors to your machine.

Its no big deal if you are aware of it, and keep your machine clean.

Kurt


>
> UAC should act like firewalls do and give the option to accept the action
> and don't bother me again about this particular action.
> --
> Ron P
 
Clear Windows wrote:
> no sir, if MS makes a good product I will support them..
> just like I support them with XP

Bullshit! Vista is the very best OS available today, yet a few
incompetent users, like you, can't seem to get to run properly.
Do you ever ask yourself why that is?
Frank
 
Back
Top