Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Flame on: Windows Vista

1235731

Posts

  • XaboraXabora Registered User
    edited January 2008
    DrDizaster wrote: »
    more stabler options.

    Man i really don't get where this comes from. Vista is far and away the most stable operating system I have ever used (and I am typing this on a macbook). I don't believe it has ever frozen or crashed on me.
    *ahem*

    Vista 32bit at the office where I used to work was the most unstable POS ever.
    However... the guys there that had Vista 64bit well it ran pretty good.

    Altho I have XP32bit and Vista 64bit at home on my pc with dual boot. :D

    Xabora on
  • Radikal_DreamerRadikal_Dreamer Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Epyon9283 wrote: »
    Despite being an OS X user, though, I don't think that OS X is the perfect example of user friendliness, either. Installation on OS X is just freaking convoluted. I'm recommending my sister get a mac, and I'm pretty afraid she won't know how to install programs. I'd probably never recommend my parents get one mostly because of that, too. They just wouldn't get it. It threw me for a loop right away, anyway.

    Installation convoluted? You either drag the application to the applications folder, or you double click on the installer. Many apps distributed as a DMG file have a little picture as the background on the finder window that shows you what to do. Installers generally say they're installers.

    I had no problem installing applications on my Mac when first got it.

    It was pretty funny when I first installed something on my Mac. I double clicked and got some picture of one icon, and arrow, and another icon. I sat there staring at it for a few minutes not knowing what the fuck it meant. I closed it a few time and reopened, expecting it to automatically install for me. It was after a few times that I realized it wanted me to open applications, and then drag that icon into the applications folder. I mean to install in OS X you have to double click something and that turns it into a disc drive. Then, you double click that and get an icon or something. Then you have to open up your applications folder and drag it to that. Then, you eject that disc image and delete the installation. That, to me, is pretty convoluted for a new user. It really shouldn't have taken me that long to get it, and I'm sure my parents or sister would 'get it' after a bit, too, but it's just way more complicated than just putting something in and letting it do its thing in Windows. My parents would go crazy if they actually had to open up the file system and drag something where they want to put it. You know where most things would end up if that was their computer? The desktop. New people don't want to mess with opening the file system. If it's not on their start bar or something, they don't want to even care that it's there. And the disc image thing? I can't describe just how confused they would be if I had to tell my parents what was going on with that.

    Radikal_Dreamer on
    theincidentsig.jpg
  • jonxpjonxp [E] PC Security Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'm late to the party here, but I've yet to understand people who are griping about the new control panel.

    The fact that they changed "Add/Remove Programs" to "Uninstall a Program" is a step forward in UI. No one used it to add programs, and now it makes more sense. As far as not finding it, it's right there on the front page when you open the new control panel under "Programs".

    Can't find the setting you're looking for in the control panel? There's a search box in the top right. Try it out. In fact, there's a search box in most of the shell. It certainly gets the job done if you actually use it.

    It irks me when people equate "different" to "bad". No it does not work in exactly the same way that you're used to. That's not necessarily a bad thing. And to hear people moan and complain about Windows, it should be a good thing.

    jonxp on
    Every time you write parallel fifths, Bach kills a kitten.
    3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576
    PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
  • LoneIgadzraLoneIgadzra Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Epyon9283 wrote: »
    Despite being an OS X user, though, I don't think that OS X is the perfect example of user friendliness, either. Installation on OS X is just freaking convoluted. I'm recommending my sister get a mac, and I'm pretty afraid she won't know how to install programs. I'd probably never recommend my parents get one mostly because of that, too. They just wouldn't get it. It threw me for a loop right away, anyway.

    Installation convoluted? You either drag the application to the applications folder, or you double click on the installer. Many apps distributed as a DMG file have a little picture as the background on the finder window that shows you what to do. Installers generally say they're installers.

    I had no problem installing applications on my Mac when first got it.

    It was pretty funny when I first installed something on my Mac. I double clicked and got some picture of one icon, and arrow, and another icon. I sat there staring at it for a few minutes not knowing what the fuck it meant. I closed it a few time and reopened, expecting it to automatically install for me. It was after a few times that I realized it wanted me to open applications, and then drag that icon into the applications folder. I mean to install in OS X you have to double click something and that turns it into a disc drive. Then, you double click that and get an icon or something. Then you have to open up your applications folder and drag it to that. Then, you eject that disc image and delete the installation. That, to me, is pretty convoluted for a new user. It really shouldn't have taken me that long to get it, and I'm sure my parents or sister would 'get it' after a bit, too, but it's just way more complicated than just putting something in and letting it do its thing in Windows. My parents would go crazy if they actually had to open up the file system and drag something where they want to put it. You know where most things would end up if that was their computer? The desktop. New people don't want to mess with opening the file system. If it's not on their start bar or something, they don't want to even care that it's there. And the disc image thing? I can't describe just how confused they would be if I had to tell my parents what was going on with that.

    I agree. I like drag-and-drop install, but the whole disk image thing is just a pain in the ass. I'm sick of ejecting and trashing disk images. Everyone I know who uses a Mac - even the neophytes - is used to it, and it didn't take me too long to figure it out since I'd already played with images in the Pre-X days, but still.

    On the plus side, at least OS X has a sane GUI for managing virtual drives like that. Windows still relies on its fucking stupid "safely remove hardware" thing and various extra hacks, applications, and hard-to-find settings.

    LoneIgadzra on
  • Epyon9283Epyon9283 Registered User
    edited January 2008
    Epyon9283 wrote: »
    Despite being an OS X user, though, I don't think that OS X is the perfect example of user friendliness, either. Installation on OS X is just freaking convoluted. I'm recommending my sister get a mac, and I'm pretty afraid she won't know how to install programs. I'd probably never recommend my parents get one mostly because of that, too. They just wouldn't get it. It threw me for a loop right away, anyway.

    Installation convoluted? You either drag the application to the applications folder, or you double click on the installer. Many apps distributed as a DMG file have a little picture as the background on the finder window that shows you what to do. Installers generally say they're installers.

    I had no problem installing applications on my Mac when first got it.

    It was pretty funny when I first installed something on my Mac. I double clicked and got some picture of one icon, and arrow, and another icon. I sat there staring at it for a few minutes not knowing what the fuck it meant. I closed it a few time and reopened, expecting it to automatically install for me. It was after a few times that I realized it wanted me to open applications, and then drag that icon into the applications folder. I mean to install in OS X you have to double click something and that turns it into a disc drive. Then, you double click that and get an icon or something. Then you have to open up your applications folder and drag it to that. Then, you eject that disc image and delete the installation. That, to me, is pretty convoluted for a new user. It really shouldn't have taken me that long to get it, and I'm sure my parents or sister would 'get it' after a bit, too, but it's just way more complicated than just putting something in and letting it do its thing in Windows. My parents would go crazy if they actually had to open up the file system and drag something where they want to put it. You know where most things would end up if that was their computer? The desktop. New people don't want to mess with opening the file system. If it's not on their start bar or something, they don't want to even care that it's there. And the disc image thing? I can't describe just how confused they would be if I had to tell my parents what was going on with that.

    I don't know... I just, you know, didn't have a problem figuring it out. I come from the land of Linux where installtion procedures can vary wildly.
    rpm -i whatever.rpm
    yum install whatever
    apt-get install whatever
    emerge whatever
    dpkg -i whatever.deb
    tar -zxf whatever.tar.gz; cd whatever; ./configure; make; make install
    Then there are the multitude of GUI apps.

    Figuring out to drag the application into the applications folder just wasn't too difficult to me. Plus, OS X has a nice little help system.
    osxhelp.png

    Also, if people don't like going into the filesystem they're going to have a hell of a time launching apps in OS X. Since, you know, theres no little start menu.

    Epyon9283 on
  • Radikal_DreamerRadikal_Dreamer Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Epyon9283 wrote: »
    Also, if people don't like going into the filesystem they're going to have a hell of a time launching apps in OS X. Since, you know, theres no little start menu.

    Which is exactly why I wouldn't call OS X the most user friendly, and why I would probably never ever recommend a mac to my parents.

    Radikal_Dreamer on
    theincidentsig.jpg
  • wunderbarwunderbar What Have I Done? Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    jonxp wrote: »
    The fact that they changed "Add/Remove Programs" to "Uninstall a Program" is a step forward in UI.

    Maybe you're using some Russian version of Windows or something, but in my version of Windows Vista, they changed "add/remove programs" to "Programs and features"

    I dont' call that a step forward.

    wunderbar on
    XBL: thewunderbar PSN: thewunderbar NNID: thewunderbar Steam: wunderbar87 Twitter: wunderbar
  • LoneIgadzraLoneIgadzra Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Epyon9283 wrote: »
    Also, if people don't like going into the filesystem they're going to have a hell of a time launching apps in OS X. Since, you know, theres no little start menu.

    Which is exactly why I wouldn't call OS X the most user friendly, and why I would probably never ever recommend a mac to my parents.

    I don't find that to be a big deal with my mom. I just set her up with all the icons on the dock she needs, and she's good to go. Mail and Safari are not very hard to use. Also, I hate fixing ignorant people's PC's, because they've always got a bunch of stupid shit installed that is making it really slow but that they actually use sometimes, or will just plan freak if it goes away because things "changed". My life would be easier if no one knew how to install software.

    Granted, a new computer user, upon first staring at a Mac screen, will have no idea what the fuck to do, but I've been helping people with computers so long I have some pretty effective up and running an hour lesson plans. Windows' whole approach to UI design is to give you something obvious to click that a neophyte might want right then, but it's really just a shitty half-assed solution that is annoying waste of screen real-estate for a more experienced user, and a roadblock for the new user accomplishing anything of quality.

    LoneIgadzra on
  • victor_c26victor_c26 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    bash wrote: »
    bash wrote: »
    I think it's clear from adoption rates, media criticism, end user criticism, and even OEM criticism that Vista is not a widely liked OS.
    No, it's clear from adoption rates et al that it's a poorly marketed OS, which has fuck-all bearing on whether or not the software is actually good.

    Wait, the general bad reception of Vista in multiple venues is a marketing problem? Microsoft pushed their Vista marketing pretty hard: their Wow campaign, the "Speechless" campaign, "Certified for Windows Vista" badging, "Games for Windows" badging, lots of print ads, their ill-conceived laptops for bloggers campaign, as well as institutional pushes for businesses and schools. Despite these marketing schemes dislike for Vista is all over the web. Vista's got strong marketing but many users also have just as strong a dislike for it. No sooner does Vista start getting widely panned by the press than Microsoft starts talking up the still vaporware Windows 7. It's kind of sad that people dislike your current product so much they can only hope that your next product isn't quite as bad.

    It was a horrible marketing campaign. Just because it was massive and a lot of money was spent on it doesn't mean it was a good or successful campaign.

    All the campaign showed was the Aero interface, that's it. Marketing could have at least showed some of the changes that were made under the hood.

    Microsoft showed flash, and Apple took advantage of their mistake, without shame, and went right for the jugular.

    victor_c26 on
    steam_sig.png
    MK: DS Code: 528.341.706.032 - Import from Play-Asia PSN: VictorX10
  • ImpersonatorImpersonator Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    wunderbar wrote: »
    jonxp wrote: »
    The fact that they changed "Add/Remove Programs" to "Uninstall a Program" is a step forward in UI.

    Maybe you're using some Russian version of Windows or something, but in my version of Windows Vista, they changed "add/remove programs" to "Programs and features"

    I dont' call that a step forward.

    Mine, wich is in Portuguese, is also called Uninstall a Program

    Impersonator on
    Bioptic wrote: »
    Lemmings was pro-Communist propeganda. All are created equal, sorted into specific jobs and roles that they will hold for the rest of their lives by a higher authority, and must sacrifice continuously for the good of the group. Success is measured by meeting quotas and nothing else. Also, nuclear holocaust.
  • victor_c26victor_c26 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    So I guess the English version got the short end of the stick this time around.

    victor_c26 on
    steam_sig.png
    MK: DS Code: 528.341.706.032 - Import from Play-Asia PSN: VictorX10
  • ImpersonatorImpersonator Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Finally.

    Impersonator on
    Bioptic wrote: »
    Lemmings was pro-Communist propeganda. All are created equal, sorted into specific jobs and roles that they will hold for the rest of their lives by a higher authority, and must sacrifice continuously for the good of the group. Success is measured by meeting quotas and nothing else. Also, nuclear holocaust.
  • RonenRonen Registered User
    edited January 2008
    Epyon9283 wrote: »
    Also, if people don't like going into the filesystem they're going to have a hell of a time launching apps in OS X. Since, you know, theres no little start menu.

    Which is exactly why I wouldn't call OS X the most user friendly, and why I would probably never ever recommend a mac to my parents.

    I don't exactly consider double clicking on the hard drive (the only icon on the desktop for a new Mac) and clicking on Applications in the Sidebar of the Finder (there by default) "digging into the filesystem." In fact, I've sold lots of Macs to people who aren't tech savvy on account that that's easier than its Windows counterpart.

    The disk image thing can be confusing for a novice user though. Nothing a quick explanation doesn't fix. I usually just tell people that the dmg format is like a virtual CD (since, you know, it is), so you have to eject it like you would a real CD, and then you can throw the dmg away. That tends to get the point across.

    Ronen on
    Go play MOTHER3

    or Brawl. 4854.6102.3895 Name: NU..
  • IcarusIcarus Registered User
    edited January 2008
    If nothing else, this thread is a huge success for introducing me to Launchy.

    Icarus on
  • jonxpjonxp [E] PC Security Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    wunderbar wrote: »
    jonxp wrote: »
    The fact that they changed "Add/Remove Programs" to "Uninstall a Program" is a step forward in UI.

    Maybe you're using some Russian version of Windows or something, but in my version of Windows Vista, they changed "add/remove programs" to "Programs and features"

    I dont' call that a step forward.

    Are you using "Classic" or the new Control Panel?

    jonxp on
    Every time you write parallel fifths, Bach kills a kitten.
    3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576
    PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
  • SushisourceSushisource Registered User
    edited January 2008
    Or, you could just hit WIN+E and click "Uninstall or change a program" in the little blue bar dealy.

    Sushisource on
    Some drugee on Kavinsky's 1986
    kavinskysig.gif
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    wunderbar wrote: »
    jonxp wrote: »
    The fact that they changed "Add/Remove Programs" to "Uninstall a Program" is a step forward in UI.

    Maybe you're using some Russian version of Windows or something, but in my version of Windows Vista, they changed "add/remove programs" to "Programs and features"

    I dont' call that a step forward.
    The control panel is an unmitigated disaster, but if you use the new "Control Panel Home" view instead of Classic, it's a lot easier to find the setting you're looking for. Just follow the links, in this case "Uninstall a program" under the "Programs" heading.

    Azio on
  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    So I had Vista installed for a few hours and got rid of it. I installed good old XP SP2 again.

    Vista is probably the most unfriendly OS I've used. It didn't work with my monitor (which is a new LG LCD), so it was giving me headaches and constant eye strain. Boxes were popping up whenever I wanted to open a god damn program. The general UI of Vista is just messy.
    I installed Vista on my Dad's laptop (which is designed for Vista), and he said he had no idea where to go and how to use it -- I had to reinstall XP for him. It may be a subjective way of showing it, but Vista is definitely not friendly for someone that isn't that great with computers. My Dad was literally lost in the shitty UI.

    I've also heard that if you change your video card, it requires that you enter a new activation code from Microsoft? Can anyone confirm this?

    I don't think I'll be moving from XP any time soon, especially with SP3 around the corner.

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • halkunhalkun Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Suprise! XP SP3 will have UAC (that conferm/deny thing) included with it. You turn it off in the control panel by the way.

    halkun on
    wVo0Rgr.png
  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I had a feeling they would put that bullshit in.

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    halkun wrote: »
    Suprise! XP SP3 will have UAC (that conferm/deny thing) included with it. You turn it off in the control panel by the way.

    Wait what? It already has that in SP2.

    FyreWulff on
  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Are you sure?

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen in SP2, and I just did a clean install a few weeks ago.

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    Ever since SP2 I've always had to confirm/deny the running of a new program that I've downloaded.

    FyreWulff on
  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    That's really strange.

    Maybe that's an Internet Explorer thing?

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    Nope, it's in Windows. It even does it for MS-DOS programs.


    nocert.png

    It asks even on 'verified publishers' on my Windows box, when it was working.

    FyreWulff on
  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Turn off that Windows Security crap.

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • GoatmonGoatmon Property of Amara_P Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    The following occurred when I still had Vista. I was trying to delete a 2gig file I had left over from a beta client installer.

    (Spoilered for giant angry text)
    "Are you sure you want to move this file to the recycle bin?"

    Yes.

    "You need to confirm this operation; Continue, Skip, Cancel"

    Continue.

    "Windows needs your permission to continue; Continue, Cancel"

    Continue.

    "You need permission to perform this action; Try again, Cancel"

    Try again.

    "You need permission to perform this action; Try again, Cancel"

    Try again.

    "You need permission to perform this action; Try again, Cancel"



    I JUST GAVE YOU PERMISSION 5 GOD DAMN TIMES! JUST DELETE THE FUCKING FILE, YOU FORSAKEN PIECE OF USELESS GARBAGE! YOU WILL DO AS I SAY OR, SO HELP ME, I WILL RIP OUT YOUR PROCESSOR AND USE IT AS A FUCKING COASTER YOU ASININE MEANINGLESS SADISTIC ASSHOLISTIC PUZZLE OF A FUCKING OPERATING SYSTEM!

    In the end, I just put the file in an empty folder and I could delete the folder no problem. The security on Vista is so shitty and completely overbearing.

    Goatmon on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6680-6709-4204


  • Dublo7Dublo7 Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Hahahahaa

    Dublo7 on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • ZoolanderZoolander Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    UAC is undeniably broken in so many ways. What amazes me is that they had plenty of time to get it right, and plenty of existing examples to copy from to do so.

    Zoolander on
  • CyvrosCyvros London 1965Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    The funny thing is that Microsoft actually says that they want to see UAC implemented on all operating systems. From a Builder AU interview with Peter Watson, Microsoft Australia's chief security advisor:
    There has been a lot of misunderstanding in the market around User Account Control (UAC). If you look at it from an architectural direction User Account Control is a great idea and strategically a direction that all operating systems and all technologies should be heading down.

    Also, oddly enough, Microsoft got a patent in 2005 for UAC when that kind of security system has been around since the 80s, if not earlier.

    The problem with UAC is that it can be so easily triggered. If only they fixed it so that it would only be activated when something actually affecting security were to happen... But everyone else has said that already, anyway.

    Cyvros on
    Cy turned out to be much better in person.
  • MorskittarMorskittar Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Cyvros wrote: »
    The funny thing is that Microsoft actually says that they want to see UAC implemented on all operating systems. From a Builder AU interview with Peter Watson, Microsoft Australia's chief security advisor:
    There has been a lot of misunderstanding in the market around User Account Control (UAC). If you look at it from an architectural direction User Account Control is a great idea and strategically a direction that all operating systems and all technologies should be heading down.

    Also, oddly enough, Microsoft got a patent in 2005 for UAC when that kind of security system has been around since the 80s, if not earlier.

    The problem with UAC is that it can be so easily triggered. If only they fixed it so that it would only be activated when something actually affecting security were to happen... But everyone else has said that already, anyway.

    Why it doesn't have user-defined triggers, I don't know. Consumers get their hand-holding defaults, everyone else can leave the useful parts implemented without the hassle.

    Morskittar on
    snm_sig.jpg
  • ZoolanderZoolander Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Morskittar wrote: »
    Cyvros wrote: »
    The funny thing is that Microsoft actually says that they want to see UAC implemented on all operating systems. From a Builder AU interview with Peter Watson, Microsoft Australia's chief security advisor:
    There has been a lot of misunderstanding in the market around User Account Control (UAC). If you look at it from an architectural direction User Account Control is a great idea and strategically a direction that all operating systems and all technologies should be heading down.

    Also, oddly enough, Microsoft got a patent in 2005 for UAC when that kind of security system has been around since the 80s, if not earlier.

    The problem with UAC is that it can be so easily triggered. If only they fixed it so that it would only be activated when something actually affecting security were to happen... But everyone else has said that already, anyway.

    Why it doesn't have user-defined triggers, I don't know. Consumers get their hand-holding defaults, everyone else can leave the useful parts implemented without the hassle.
    I think user-defined triggers is a bad idea. A lot of users who think they know what they are doing probably don't. They should just get rid of the dumb things that trigger it (how many UAC notifications pop up when you try to remove something from the Start menu?). UAC on a fundamental level is a good idea, but MS's implementation is terribad.

    Zoolander on
  • DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Dublo7 wrote: »
    So I had Vista installed for a few hours and got rid of it. I installed good old XP SP2 again.

    Vista is probably the most unfriendly OS I've used. It didn't work with my monitor (which is a new LG LCD), so it was giving me headaches and constant eye strain. Boxes were popping up whenever I wanted to open a god damn program. The general UI of Vista is just messy.
    I installed Vista on my Dad's laptop (which is designed for Vista), and he said he had no idea where to go and how to use it -- I had to reinstall XP for him. It may be a subjective way of showing it, but Vista is definitely not friendly for someone that isn't that great with computers. My Dad was literally lost in the shitty UI.

    I've also heard that if you change your video card, it requires that you enter a new activation code from Microsoft? Can anyone confirm this?

    I don't think I'll be moving from XP any time soon, especially with SP3 around the corner.

    I swapped from a 8800GTS to an 8800GT, no reactivation required.

    I have, however, had to make a phone call to tech support for reactivation on my old XP box when I did a clean install of the video drivers.

    Dehumanized on
  • wunderbarwunderbar What Have I Done? Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Dublo7 wrote: »
    So I had Vista installed for a few hours and got rid of it. I installed good old XP SP2 again.

    Vista is probably the most unfriendly OS I've used. It didn't work with my monitor (which is a new LG LCD), so it was giving me headaches and constant eye strain. Boxes were popping up whenever I wanted to open a god damn program. The general UI of Vista is just messy.
    I installed Vista on my Dad's laptop (which is designed for Vista), and he said he had no idea where to go and how to use it -- I had to reinstall XP for him. It may be a subjective way of showing it, but Vista is definitely not friendly for someone that isn't that great with computers. My Dad was literally lost in the shitty UI.

    I've also heard that if you change your video card, it requires that you enter a new activation code from Microsoft? Can anyone confirm this?

    I don't think I'll be moving from XP any time soon, especially with SP3 around the corner.

    I swapped from a 8800GTS to an 8800GT, no reactivation required.

    I have, however, had to make a phone call to tech support for reactivation on my old XP box when I did a clean install of the video drivers.

    Ya, MS is kinda fucked when it comes to activation, always has been. I've never had a hassle with it though when I do have to call in.

    wunderbar on
    XBL: thewunderbar PSN: thewunderbar NNID: thewunderbar Steam: wunderbar87 Twitter: wunderbar
  • DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Yeah, it's a minor inconvenience at most.

    Dehumanized on
  • jonxpjonxp [E] PC Security Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Cyvros wrote: »
    The funny thing is that Microsoft actually says that they want to see UAC implemented on all operating systems. From a Builder AU interview with Peter Watson, Microsoft Australia's chief security advisor:
    There has been a lot of misunderstanding in the market around User Account Control (UAC). If you look at it from an architectural direction User Account Control is a great idea and strategically a direction that all operating systems and all technologies should be heading down.

    Also, oddly enough, Microsoft got a patent in 2005 for UAC when that kind of security system has been around since the 80s, if not earlier.

    The problem with UAC is that it can be so easily triggered. If only they fixed it so that it would only be activated when something actually affecting security were to happen... But everyone else has said that already, anyway.

    How YOU define something security related is different from what is ACTUALLY security related.

    The most common reason to see a UAC dialog is because a program is attempting to write into a protected folder limited to administrator access (most commonly "program files"). This happens when you want to install/update a program, or when an application does not correctly use the per user, or global shared directories for data storage. This same kind of permission is required in Linux/BSD to install programs, except you see it as a gksudo password entry dialog (I don't know how it works in OSX).

    Second most common is when a system setting is going to be changed, yet again something that requires an administrator password in Linux/BSD.

    These aren't random events here, they are actually security related things that you don't want an application to be able to perform automatically and without your knowledge. Saying UAC is crap because your favorite application is designed poorly, or because one has to confirm that "Yes, I actually launched that installer, and it wasn't launched without my knowledge" is silly.

    jonxp on
    Every time you write parallel fifths, Bach kills a kitten.
    3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576
    PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
  • MorskittarMorskittar Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Zoolander wrote: »
    I think user-defined triggers is a bad idea. A lot of users who think they know what they are doing probably don't. They should just get rid of the dumb things that trigger it (how many UAC notifications pop up when you try to remove something from the Start menu?). UAC on a fundamental level is a good idea, but MS's implementation is terribad.

    A "layer" of control to give people some benefits wouldn't hurt. Without it, pseudo-techies and IT types end up just turning it off, and losing a lot of the actual benefits, like shutting down scripts that try to run through IE protected mode. I want to think that UAC off kills IE virtualization in the first place, though I don't remember clearly.

    In any case, dropping the "all or nothing" approach and killing stupid triggers would be awesome.

    Morskittar on
    snm_sig.jpg
  • FaceballMcDougalFaceballMcDougal Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    lots of bitching about something you can just turn off

    if you are the annoyed user... and the 'administrator' of that machine... you reap what you sow... so turn UAC off for yourself

    on my machine it's off for me and ON for my wife's user account

    FaceballMcDougal on
    xbl/psn/steam: jabbertrack
  • BroloBrolo Broseidon Lord of the BroceanRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    lots of bitching about something you can just turn off

    if you are the annoyed user... and the 'administrator' of that machine... you reap what you sow... so turn UAC off for yourself

    on my machine it's off for me and ON for my wife's user account

    I know dude, why bitch about an uncomfortable seat belt when you can just drive without one, right?

    And really it's okay if condoms don't fit properly on my wang, I'll just take my risks with unprotected sex.

    Brolo on
  • FaceballMcDougalFaceballMcDougal Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Rolo wrote: »
    lots of bitching about something you can just turn off

    if you are the annoyed user... and the 'administrator' of that machine... you reap what you sow... so turn UAC off for yourself

    on my machine it's off for me and ON for my wife's user account

    I know dude, why bitch about an uncomfortable seat belt when you can just drive without one, right?

    And really it's okay if condoms don't fit properly on my wang, I'll just take my risks with unprotected sex.
    car and sex analogy in the same post

    thread done then i guess unless someone has a valid point

    FaceballMcDougal on
    xbl/psn/steam: jabbertrack
Sign In or Register to comment.