So what's wrong with a new look?
-
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
Other than that, I suspect the bane of our lives is going to be User Account Control (UAC).
According to Microsoft that can be disabled, just go here Windows Vista User Account Control Step by Step Guide[^] and find the area "Disable Admin Approval Mode". The instructions are fairly straightforward. This will give you XP style administrator level ability for such things.
Mike Poz
Mike Poz wrote:
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote: Other than that, I suspect the bane of our lives is going to be User Account Control (UAC). According to Microsoft that can be disabled, just go here Windows Vista User Account Control Step by Step Guide[^] and find the area "Disable Admin Approval Mode". The instructions are fairly straightforward. This will give you XP style administrator level ability for such things.
And just as instead of making the code work as a limited user, the standard developer solution to security hassles in NT/2K/XP has been 'run as an administrator', the vista solution will be 'turn off UAC'. Actual development practice will remain unchanged, and wide open user permissions will result in plenty of room for malware writers to hide.
-
I've read that several people - including my colleagues at work - complained about Vista's new look, Aero. I'm using Windows XP at the moment and I find the new XP skin much less of an eyesore compared to the 'classic' look. I like Vista's glassy look and I'm pretty sure many home users would love it too (that is if their PCs can run it). What I hate is that XP and Vista rearranged the furnitures, or so to speak, by moving the buttons/shortcuts/items around, grouping and presenting them in "smarter" way (e.g. Control Panel, File Search) - or so they think. So, let me ask you guys, what's wrong with Vista on the basis of new look only?
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin Edbert Sydney, Australia
My showstopper are all the nag screens. I have never seen so many message dialogs per minute in my life! Almost whenever I do something I am told Windows need permission to continue. Can I turn this madness off somewhere?
-
Mike Poz wrote:
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote: Other than that, I suspect the bane of our lives is going to be User Account Control (UAC). According to Microsoft that can be disabled, just go here Windows Vista User Account Control Step by Step Guide[^] and find the area "Disable Admin Approval Mode". The instructions are fairly straightforward. This will give you XP style administrator level ability for such things.
And just as instead of making the code work as a limited user, the standard developer solution to security hassles in NT/2K/XP has been 'run as an administrator', the vista solution will be 'turn off UAC'. Actual development practice will remain unchanged, and wide open user permissions will result in plenty of room for malware writers to hide.
dan neely wrote:
And just as instead of making the code work as a limited user, the standard developer solution to security hassles in NT/2K/XP has been 'run as an administrator', the vista solution will be 'turn off UAC'. Actual development practice will remain unchanged, and wide open user permissions will result in plenty of room for malware writers to hide.
Okay perhaps I'm not clear on what you're saying but if I have it right you think that by disabling UAC you open up the computer for all user levels (administrator through user level)? If that's what you are concerned about then you're mistaken. By disabling UAC on the system, in an administrator level account you get XP style administrator level ability. This doesn't give limited users full administrator level ability, it just gives them XP style limited user level ability. So in addition to disabling on UAC, in a limited user account, you'll still have to do the "run as..." if you want to do any system level changes while logged in as limited user. UAC is sort of a "are you sure you want to do this" kind of thing for Administrators where they're installing something they believe to be harmless and, basically user level, but then what they're installing is trying to alter things at the system level. You know, altering, adding, and deleting HKLM values, overwriting system level files, etc. Because of the way bad guys have been attacking windows left and right and kind hearted but not educated enough developers do things with system level files and settings, due Windows XP and before's architecture, it's just a new system level way of trying to prevent the accidental install of something REALLY bad without direct administrator confirmation. If you need to register a DLL consistantly as a developer, then you keep an elevated CMD window open and do it there. Then use that DLL in the non-elevated arena to make sure it works properly there. As with all things, once you understand how it works, you figure out the angles and work around them. -- modified at 17:32 Wednesday 20th September, 2006 Just clarified some things...
Mike Poz
-
I generally like it, although I'm finding the new start menu to be a pain. Having said that, the "type a few characters and I'll find the command" thingy is useful. Other than that, I suspect the bane of our lives is going to be User Account Control (UAC). Unless Visual Studio is running with elevated privileges, registering an ATL DLL will result in E_ACCESSDENIED... X| I imagine that as more devs move over to Vista this is going to become one hot topic!
Anna :rose: Currently working mostly on: Visual Lint :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
the bane of our lives is going to be User Account Control (UAC)
I can imagine home users and network admins at some companies giving users full privilege already...
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin Edbert Sydney, Australia
-
My showstopper are all the nag screens. I have never seen so many message dialogs per minute in my life! Almost whenever I do something I am told Windows need permission to continue. Can I turn this madness off somewhere?
I think Anna-Jayne and Mike has the answer[^] for that already.
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin Edbert Sydney, Australia
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I also hate the way they move stuff around, I still use the classic start menu in XP.
You'll hate the control panel in vista so! I must say, the new start menu is one of my favourite things about vista. In particular, the run/search box at the end of the start menu is simply amazing. I don't think I've click on the all programs link in months and I never open the classic run box any more. Regading the hardware, see my reply to below: http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1676889#xx1676889xx
Regards, Brian Dela :-)
I dont like the new start menu in Vista. The new program listing is awfull. Alot of stuff in the control panel and "panels" have been changed. Some thing were extracted from a panel and moved to the root of the control panel:doh:, lol.
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
-
It requires a new computer plain and simple. I like my trusty Athlon XP 1800+ :->
As of how to accomplish this, have you ever tried Google?
Failing that try :badger::badger::badger:I ran beta 2 on my Athlon XP 1800(overclocked to 2.1ghz) it seems to run fine. I do need more memory, a raid hard-drive setup would help alot too.
static int Sqrt(int x) { if (x<0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(); int temp, y=0, b=0x8000, bshft=15, v=x; do { if (v>=(temp=(y<<1)+b<>=1)>0); return y; :omg:
-
dan neely wrote:
And just as instead of making the code work as a limited user, the standard developer solution to security hassles in NT/2K/XP has been 'run as an administrator', the vista solution will be 'turn off UAC'. Actual development practice will remain unchanged, and wide open user permissions will result in plenty of room for malware writers to hide.
Okay perhaps I'm not clear on what you're saying but if I have it right you think that by disabling UAC you open up the computer for all user levels (administrator through user level)? If that's what you are concerned about then you're mistaken. By disabling UAC on the system, in an administrator level account you get XP style administrator level ability. This doesn't give limited users full administrator level ability, it just gives them XP style limited user level ability. So in addition to disabling on UAC, in a limited user account, you'll still have to do the "run as..." if you want to do any system level changes while logged in as limited user. UAC is sort of a "are you sure you want to do this" kind of thing for Administrators where they're installing something they believe to be harmless and, basically user level, but then what they're installing is trying to alter things at the system level. You know, altering, adding, and deleting HKLM values, overwriting system level files, etc. Because of the way bad guys have been attacking windows left and right and kind hearted but not educated enough developers do things with system level files and settings, due Windows XP and before's architecture, it's just a new system level way of trying to prevent the accidental install of something REALLY bad without direct administrator confirmation. If you need to register a DLL consistantly as a developer, then you keep an elevated CMD window open and do it there. Then use that DLL in the non-elevated arena to make sure it works properly there. As with all things, once you understand how it works, you figure out the angles and work around them. -- modified at 17:32 Wednesday 20th September, 2006 Just clarified some things...
Mike Poz
The problem with this approach, which the folks at Microsoft should be very well aware of, is that on too many similar looking dialogs we will start to automatically click OK without checking. That's what I did after the 3rd dialog, anyway. It also disappointed me that I was offered no options to turn off this feature. -- Thomas
-
Edbert P wrote:
So what's wrong with a new look?
Absolutely nothing. I like it :). I don't understand why people don't like it.
Ryan
"Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
Some people don't like change. Some people love to complain. Some people embrace change and prefer to be positive. :cool:
-
I've read that several people - including my colleagues at work - complained about Vista's new look, Aero. I'm using Windows XP at the moment and I find the new XP skin much less of an eyesore compared to the 'classic' look. I like Vista's glassy look and I'm pretty sure many home users would love it too (that is if their PCs can run it). What I hate is that XP and Vista rearranged the furnitures, or so to speak, by moving the buttons/shortcuts/items around, grouping and presenting them in "smarter" way (e.g. Control Panel, File Search) - or so they think. So, let me ask you guys, what's wrong with Vista on the basis of new look only?
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin Edbert Sydney, Australia