Windows Vista I turned off UAC

G

Gordon

Thread starter #81
"John Galt" wrote in message
news:i752b59p2ifvvqbqtr4on81or67or4g90f@4ax.com...
> "Gordon" wrote:
>
>>
>>"KristleBawl" wrote in message
>>news:#Nz38MuNKHA.5108@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> lilgto64 wrote:
>>>> Gordon;1170618 Wrote:
>>>>> Then you obviously mess with it rather than do WORK with it. I get the
>>>>> UAC
>>>>> prompt probably twice a week if not less.
>>>>
>>>> In my case - I am the sys admin - so when I "mess with it" that is work
>>>> - installing updates - patches - new apps - routine maintenance - break
>>>> fix - etc. The posts that I made to this particular thread though are
>>>> related to a specific web app that simply does not work with UAC on -
>>>> the exported file becomes a ghost which cannot be seen. It does appear
>>>> to me that the app - or rather the browser plugin - that is doing the
>>>> file export - is likely very old code - written before Vista and UAC
>>>> and
>>>> 64bit etc - just occurred to me that so far I have only tried this with
>>>> IE8 - I might give it a try with Safari or other browser to see what
>>>> happens. I prefer Safari for most things that I do myself - but many of
>>>> my users and some of the sites that I need to use simply don't work as
>>>> well in other browsers as they do in IE.
>>>
>>> There really should be an easier way for SysAdmins to toggle the UAC off
>>> when they need to and back on for the user. Right now, you'd have to
>>> navigate through the Control Panel to the almost hidden checkbox.
>>>
>>> In this way, too, UAC is definitely *not* designed for knowledgeable
>>> power
>>> users and admins. The only people that really need UAC are the
>>> *average*
>>> home and office users, less experienced and more likely to click "ok" on
>>> the wrong popups.

>>
>>I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
>>experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations - very
>>little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.
>
> You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
> want to have it THEIR way.
>
> I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
> setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
> I was finished with the initial setup.
>
> That was 18 months ago.

OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the time" -
it just DOESN'T!
 
J

John Galt

Thread starter #82
"Gordon" wrote:

>
>"John Galt" wrote in message
>news:i752b59p2ifvvqbqtr4on81or67or4g90f@4ax.com...
>> "Gordon" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"KristleBawl" wrote in message
>>>news:#Nz38MuNKHA.5108@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> lilgto64 wrote:
>>>>> Gordon;1170618 Wrote:
>>>>>> Then you obviously mess with it rather than do WORK with it. I get the
>>>>>> UAC
>>>>>> prompt probably twice a week if not less.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my case - I am the sys admin - so when I "mess with it" that is work
>>>>> - installing updates - patches - new apps - routine maintenance - break
>>>>> fix - etc. The posts that I made to this particular thread though are
>>>>> related to a specific web app that simply does not work with UAC on -
>>>>> the exported file becomes a ghost which cannot be seen. It does appear
>>>>> to me that the app - or rather the browser plugin - that is doing the
>>>>> file export - is likely very old code - written before Vista and UAC
>>>>> and
>>>>> 64bit etc - just occurred to me that so far I have only tried this with
>>>>> IE8 - I might give it a try with Safari or other browser to see what
>>>>> happens. I prefer Safari for most things that I do myself - but many of
>>>>> my users and some of the sites that I need to use simply don't work as
>>>>> well in other browsers as they do in IE.
>>>>
>>>> There really should be an easier way for SysAdmins to toggle the UAC off
>>>> when they need to and back on for the user. Right now, you'd have to
>>>> navigate through the Control Panel to the almost hidden checkbox.
>>>>
>>>> In this way, too, UAC is definitely *not* designed for knowledgeable
>>>> power
>>>> users and admins. The only people that really need UAC are the
>>>> *average*
>>>> home and office users, less experienced and more likely to click "ok" on
>>>> the wrong popups.
>>>
>>>I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
>>>experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations - very
>>>little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.

>>
>> You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
>> want to have it THEIR way.
>>
>> I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
>> setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
>> I was finished with the initial setup.
>>
>> That was 18 months ago.
>
>OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the time" -
>it just DOESN'T!

Once is too many time for me.
 
G

Gordon

Thread starter #83
"John Galt" wrote in message
news:mua2b5p3mkefv3s017n35p0ch38hrhe0i2@4ax.com...
>
> Once is too many time for me.


I find this a very odd attitude.
Windows, which is insecure by design, now has some sort of security check so
that malignant software does not install by default.
Linux and Unix, which are both far more secure than Windows by design, have
to have credentials input when a system change is made and you can't turn
that off.
Windows users, who are battered by a huge assault of viruses, malware and
trojans, whinge like mad when an attempt is made to make the OS a little bit
more secure.
Linux (and Unix) users who have the far more secure systems, just accept it.

Do you not consider computer security AT ALL?
 
K

KristleBawl

Thread starter #84
Gordon wrote:
>
> "John Galt" wrote in message
> news:i752b59p2ifvvqbqtr4on81or67or4g90f@4ax.com...
>> "Gordon" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "KristleBawl" wrote in message
>>> news:#Nz38MuNKHA.5108@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> lilgto64 wrote:
>>>>> Gordon;1170618 Wrote:
>>>>>> Then you obviously mess with it rather than do WORK with it. I get
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> UAC
>>>>>> prompt probably twice a week if not less.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my case - I am the sys admin - so when I "mess with it" that is
>>>>> work
>>>>> - installing updates - patches - new apps - routine maintenance -
>>>>> break
>>>>> fix - etc. The posts that I made to this particular thread though are
>>>>> related to a specific web app that simply does not work with UAC on -
>>>>> the exported file becomes a ghost which cannot be seen. It does appear
>>>>> to me that the app - or rather the browser plugin - that is doing the
>>>>> file export - is likely very old code - written before Vista and
>>>>> UAC and
>>>>> 64bit etc - just occurred to me that so far I have only tried this
>>>>> with
>>>>> IE8 - I might give it a try with Safari or other browser to see what
>>>>> happens. I prefer Safari for most things that I do myself - but
>>>>> many of
>>>>> my users and some of the sites that I need to use simply don't work as
>>>>> well in other browsers as they do in IE.
>>>>
>>>> There really should be an easier way for SysAdmins to toggle the UAC
>>>> off
>>>> when they need to and back on for the user. Right now, you'd have to
>>>> navigate through the Control Panel to the almost hidden checkbox.
>>>>
>>>> In this way, too, UAC is definitely *not* designed for knowledgeable
>>>> power
>>>> users and admins. The only people that really need UAC are the
>>>> *average*
>>>> home and office users, less experienced and more likely to click
>>>> "ok" on
>>>> the wrong popups.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
>>> experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations - very
>>> little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.

>>
>> You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
>> want to have it THEIR way.
>>
>> I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
>> setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
>> I was finished with the initial setup.
>>
>> That was 18 months ago.
>
> OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the
> time" - it just DOESN'T!

That's true! I only experience the UAC when I install something,
including some, but not all, program plug-ins or add-ons, and some, but
not all, manual updates for other software.

However, in a large office network environment, their are often a few
users that keep playing with the settings, changing the wallpaper, using
the recycle bin as a folder, etc. These people are innocently clicking
yes to *install* a wallpaper image because they won't listen to anyone.

They frequently add third-party toolbars for the fun of it, stick big
magnetic adverts on the sides of their computers, and forward every
email to everyone in their address book, but only after they click the
link and watch some specialty videos that only run after you *install*
the update for the player, conveniently located on the site, of course.

When I was in charge of a small network of only 8 computers, a server
and three printers, I spent more time fixing user meddling than actually
updating or patching anything.

Computers don't need admins, but users sure do! :)
 
G

Gordon

Thread starter #85
"KristleBawl" wrote in message
news:#o6Ys1vNKHA.1280@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Gordon wrote:
>>
>> "John Galt" wrote in message
>> news:i752b59p2ifvvqbqtr4on81or67or4g90f@4ax.com...
>>> "Gordon" wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "KristleBawl" wrote in message
>>>> news:#Nz38MuNKHA.5108@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> lilgto64 wrote:
>>>>>> Gordon;1170618 Wrote:
>>>>>>> Then you obviously mess with it rather than do WORK with it. I get
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> UAC
>>>>>>> prompt probably twice a week if not less.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my case - I am the sys admin - so when I "mess with it" that is
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> - installing updates - patches - new apps - routine maintenance -
>>>>>> break
>>>>>> fix - etc. The posts that I made to this particular thread though are
>>>>>> related to a specific web app that simply does not work with UAC on -
>>>>>> the exported file becomes a ghost which cannot be seen. It does
>>>>>> appear
>>>>>> to me that the app - or rather the browser plugin - that is doing the
>>>>>> file export - is likely very old code - written before Vista and UAC
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> 64bit etc - just occurred to me that so far I have only tried this
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> IE8 - I might give it a try with Safari or other browser to see what
>>>>>> happens. I prefer Safari for most things that I do myself - but many
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> my users and some of the sites that I need to use simply don't work
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> well in other browsers as they do in IE.
>>>>>
>>>>> There really should be an easier way for SysAdmins to toggle the UAC
>>>>> off
>>>>> when they need to and back on for the user. Right now, you'd have to
>>>>> navigate through the Control Panel to the almost hidden checkbox.
>>>>>
>>>>> In this way, too, UAC is definitely *not* designed for knowledgeable
>>>>> power
>>>>> users and admins. The only people that really need UAC are the
>>>>> *average*
>>>>> home and office users, less experienced and more likely to click "ok"
>>>>> on
>>>>> the wrong popups.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
>>>> experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations - very
>>>> little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.
>>>
>>> You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
>>> want to have it THEIR way.
>>>
>>> I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
>>> setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
>>> I was finished with the initial setup.
>>>
>>> That was 18 months ago.

>>
>> OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the
>> time" - it just DOESN'T!
>
> That's true! I only experience the UAC when I install something,
> including some, but not all, program plug-ins or add-ons, and some, but
> not all, manual updates for other software.
>
> However, in a large office network environment, their are often a few
> users that keep playing with the settings, changing the wallpaper, using
> the recycle bin as a folder, etc. These people are innocently clicking
> yes to *install* a wallpaper image because they won't listen to anyone.
>
> They frequently add third-party toolbars for the fun of it, stick big
> magnetic adverts on the sides of their computers, and forward every email
> to everyone in their address book, but only after they click the link and
> watch some specialty videos that only run after you *install* the update
> for the player, conveniently located on the site, of course.
>
> When I was in charge of a small network of only 8 computers, a server and
> three printers, I spent more time fixing user meddling than actually
> updating or patching anything.
>
> Computers don't need admins, but users sure do! :)

Then the machines need to be locked down so the users CAN'T "fiddle" with
them....
 
K

KristleBawl

Thread starter #86
Gordon wrote:
> "KristleBawl" wrote in message
> news:#o6Ys1vNKHA.1280@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Gordon wrote:
>>> "John Galt" wrote in message
>>> news:i752b59p2ifvvqbqtr4on81or67or4g90f@4ax.com...
>>>> "Gordon" wrote:
>>>>> I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
>>>>> experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations -
>>>>> very
>>>>> little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.
>>>>
>>>> You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
>>>> want to have it THEIR way.
>>>>
>>>> I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
>>>> setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
>>>> I was finished with the initial setup.
>>>>
>>>> That was 18 months ago.
>>>
>>> OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the
>>> time" - it just DOESN'T!

>>
>> That's true! I only experience the UAC when I install something,
>> including some, but not all, program plug-ins or add-ons, and some,
>> but not all, manual updates for other software.
>>
>> However, in a large office network environment, their are often a few
>> users that keep playing with the settings, changing the wallpaper,
>> using the recycle bin as a folder, etc. These people are innocently
>> clicking yes to *install* a wallpaper image because they won't listen
>> to anyone.
>>
>> They frequently add third-party toolbars for the fun of it, stick big
>> magnetic adverts on the sides of their computers, and forward every
>> email to everyone in their address book, but only after they click the
>> link and watch some specialty videos that only run after you *install*
>> the update for the player, conveniently located on the site, of course.
>>
>> When I was in charge of a small network of only 8 computers, a server
>> and three printers, I spent more time fixing user meddling than
>> actually updating or patching anything.
>>
>> Computers don't need admins, but users sure do! :)
>
> Then the machines need to be locked down so the users CAN'T "fiddle"
> with them....

That was over a decade ago, when Win 3.11 was still in use and until
Win98SE was new. ;-)

General computer security has improved since then, and I left them with
a then-current general computing manual, customized to the proprietary
business software they used. It reduced a lot of the idiocy and was
well worth my time to create!
 
J

John Galt

Thread starter #87
"Gordon" wrote:

>
>"John Galt" wrote in message
>news:mua2b5p3mkefv3s017n35p0ch38hrhe0i2@4ax.com...
>>
>> Once is too many time for me.

>
>I find this a very odd attitude.

Perhaps you're a very odd person. Evidence seems to weigh in that
direction.


>Windows, which is insecure by design, now has some sort of security check so
>that malignant software does not install by default.
>Linux and Unix, which are both far more secure than Windows by design, have
>to have credentials input when a system change is made and you can't turn
>that off.
>Windows users, who are battered by a huge assault of viruses, malware and
>trojans, whinge like mad when an attempt is made to make the OS a little bit
>more secure.
>Linux (and Unix) users who have the far more secure systems, just accept it.
>
>Do you not consider computer security AT ALL?


I've been online for nearly 20 years. For close to half of those 20
years (on and off, not contiguous periods) I surfed without benefit of
anti-virus software or malware protection.

For the past 3 years I've been retired and have spent in excess of 6-8
hours a day surfing the 'net, and doing email. At the present I have
only anti-virus protection (Avira, registered version). I have no
real-time malware protection. None of my antivirus programs have ever
detected a virus, and I have never been hit by any malware.

PLUS, I backup my entire system on a daily basis to another internal
disk and periodically copy the two most recent full backups (not the
incremental backups) to an external disk.

All the security I require is my own behavior and good common sense.
 
G

Gordon

Thread starter #88
"John Galt" wrote in message
news:qgg2b5lkjuktolhm585qfisd7gec0hc0n1@4ax.com...
>
> I've been online for nearly 20 years. For close to half of those 20
> years (on and off, not contiguous periods) I surfed without benefit of
> anti-virus software or malware protection.



Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the effects
of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?

Sheeeesh!


>
> For the past 3 years I've been retired and have spent in excess of 6-8
> hours a day surfing the 'net, and doing email. At the present I have
> only anti-virus protection (Avira, registered version). I have no
> real-time malware protection. None of my antivirus programs have ever
> detected a virus, and I have never been hit by any malware.
>


So YOU say. How do you know your computer is not a bot?



> PLUS, I backup my entire system on a daily basis to another internal
> disk and periodically copy the two most recent full backups (not the
> incremental backups) to an external disk.
>
> All the security I require is my own behavior and good common sense.
>


Err NO it's NOT
That is one of the selfish attitudes that ensures that the internet is awash
with windows viruses.

JEEEZE!
 
J

John Galt

Thread starter #89
"Gordon" wrote:

>
>"John Galt" wrote in message
>news:qgg2b5lkjuktolhm585qfisd7gec0hc0n1@4ax.com...
>>
>> I've been online for nearly 20 years. For close to half of those 20
>> years (on and off, not contiguous periods) I surfed without benefit of
>> anti-virus software or malware protection.

>
>
>Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
>awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the effects
>of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?
>
>Sheeeesh!

Careful, old bean... you're about to pop a vein.


>> For the past 3 years I've been retired and have spent in excess of 6-8
>> hours a day surfing the 'net, and doing email. At the present I have
>> only anti-virus protection (Avira, registered version). I have no
>> real-time malware protection. None of my antivirus programs have ever
>> detected a virus, and I have never been hit by any malware.
>>

>
>So YOU say. How do you know your computer is not a bot?

Avira has bot protection, you fool.

>> PLUS, I backup my entire system on a daily basis to another internal
>> disk and periodically copy the two most recent full backups (not the
>> incremental backups) to an external disk.
>>
>> All the security I require is my own behavior and good common sense.
>>

>
>Err NO it's NOT

Stick your "Err" up yer Limey arse.

>That is one of the selfish attitudes that ensures that the internet is awash
>with windows viruses.
>
>JEEEZE!





>
>
 
G

Gordon

Thread starter #90
"+Bob+" wrote in message
news:4jg4b5p155qgu5jssq37ck18uqmvbgdc8p@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:22:45 +0100, "Gordon"
> wrote:
>
>>Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
>>awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the
>>effects
>>of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?
>>
>>Sheeeesh!

>
> Really? I think you need to get a grip on reality.
>
> How do you account for the hundreds of millions of users with
> non-Vista OS's and nary a clue about viruses or security who are not
> infested with a 'bot?

err because bots aren't WRITTEN for non-Windows OSs......DUH!!!!!!!!!
 
P

Pasan Indeewara

Thread starter #91
UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.

"Gordon" wrote in message
news:OytZ3N6NKHA.3412@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
> "+Bob+" wrote in message
> news:4jg4b5p155qgu5jssq37ck18uqmvbgdc8p@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:22:45 +0100, "Gordon"
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
>>>awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the
>>>effects
>>>of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?
>>>
>>>Sheeeesh!

>>
>> Really? I think you need to get a grip on reality.
>>
>> How do you account for the hundreds of millions of users with
>> non-Vista OS's and nary a clue about viruses or security who are not
>> infested with a 'bot?
>
> err because bots aren't WRITTEN for non-Windows OSs......DUH!!!!!!!!!
>

--
Regards,
Pasan Indeewara
 
G

Gordon

Thread starter #92
"Pasan Indeewara" wrote in message
news:1A6C1FE9-7D3A-4970-B22C-36D14786765C@microsoft.com...
> UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.
>


Considering all the SECURE Operating systems (UNIX, AIX, Linux and MAC) use
it, or something very similar, why would you consider it stupid, unless you
are?
 
D

Daddy Tadpole

Thread starter #93
"Gordon" a écrit dans le message de
news:ermerMsOKHA.1232@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> "Pasan Indeewara" wrote in message
> news:1A6C1FE9-7D3A-4970-B22C-36D14786765C@microsoft.com...
>> UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.
>>

>
> Considering all the SECURE Operating systems (UNIX, AIX, Linux and MAC)
> use it, or something very similar, why would you consider it stupid,
> unless you are?
The problem may be that Windows used to be very sloppy in this respect. Not
everyone can afford to buy new software for every new version of Windows,
and much 10-20 year old stuff (scientific and other apps) still meets
requirements.

M$ should have corrected their earlier mistake while providing a means of
continuing to use software that is compatible but does not meet current
security requirements.

BTW is it OK to get round the problem by installing an application elsewhere
than in Program Files?

Regards
 
K

KristleBawl

Thread starter #94
Daddy Tadpole wrote:
>
> "Gordon" a écrit dans le message de
> news:ermerMsOKHA.1232@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Pasan Indeewara" wrote in message
>> news:1A6C1FE9-7D3A-4970-B22C-36D14786765C@microsoft.com...
>>> UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.
>>>

>>
>> Considering all the SECURE Operating systems (UNIX, AIX, Linux and
>> MAC) use it, or something very similar, why would you consider it
>> stupid, unless you are?
> The problem may be that Windows used to be very sloppy in this respect.
> Not everyone can afford to buy new software for every new version of
> Windows, and much 10-20 year old stuff (scientific and other apps) still
> meets requirements.
>
> M$ should have corrected their earlier mistake while providing a means
> of continuing to use software that is compatible but does not meet
> current security requirements.
>
> BTW is it OK to get round the problem by installing an application
> elsewhere than in Program Files?
>
> Regards

Absolutely! I install all games and most other software in the personal
directory, under the User's name, in a subfolder I call Installed.
 
B

+Bob+

Thread starter #96
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:55:24 +0100, "Gordon"
wrote:

>
>"Pasan Indeewara" wrote in message
>news:1A6C1FE9-7D3A-4970-B22C-36D14786765C@microsoft.com...
>> UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.
>>

>
>Considering all the SECURE Operating systems (UNIX, AIX, Linux and MAC) use
>it, or something very similar, why would you consider it stupid, unless you
>are?

It's not the strategy, it's the tactics.
 
G

Gordon

Thread starter #97
"+Bob+" wrote in message
news:u5igb5lq62l201i7l4prsbmb891sm9ai14@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:55:24 +0100, "Gordon"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Pasan Indeewara" wrote in message
>>news:1A6C1FE9-7D3A-4970-B22C-36D14786765C@microsoft.com...
>>> UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.
>>>

>>
>>Considering all the SECURE Operating systems (UNIX, AIX, Linux and MAC)
>>use
>>it, or something very similar, why would you consider it stupid, unless
>>you
>>are?
>
> It's not the strategy, it's the tactics.
>

I don't see what you mean. If on Unix or Linux I do something that is a
SYSTEM change, I get an invitation to authenticate.
If on Windows (Vista or 7) I do something that is a SYSTEM change, I get an
invitation to authenticate. What's the difference?
If I do something within my User area, I do NOT get an invitation to
authenticate - on either Unix, Linux OR Windows.
Can't see the problem myself...
 
Top Bottom