UAC: Don't be part of the problem
-
Ian Griffiths tells it like it is[^]. Excellent article.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Torah Answers to Christian Questions The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
If you are a developer who has turned off UAC in frustration, remember that UAC is only this way because of all those software developers who insist on running as admin. nope. UAC only exists because Windows is such a delicious target for malware.
image processing toolkits | batch image processing | blogging
-
If you are a developer who has turned off UAC in frustration, remember that UAC is only this way because of all those software developers who insist on running as admin. nope. UAC only exists because Windows is such a delicious target for malware.
image processing toolkits | batch image processing | blogging
That's true, but malware wouldn't be so successful if we didn't all run as admin.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Ian Griffiths tells it like it is[^]. Excellent article.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Torah Answers to Christian Questions The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
But on Windows we have an unfortunate history of ordinary applications that demand admin privileges for no good reason. If the Windows development culture hadn’t gone down this road we would never have needed UAC.
This is the basis for his entire argument, and it sounds convincing, except that it is entirely wrong. The blame rests squarely on Microsoft's shoulders for not making the default account a USER account instead of an ADMIN account in all prior versions of Windows. Developers only ever developed to the admin account, because - TADA! - that's all the users ever used unless they were working in a corporate environment where the IT staff actually bothered to apply a group policy. Microsoft should NEVER have made the home users have an Admin account by default.
Cheers, Patrick
-
But on Windows we have an unfortunate history of ordinary applications that demand admin privileges for no good reason. If the Windows development culture hadn’t gone down this road we would never have needed UAC.
This is the basis for his entire argument, and it sounds convincing, except that it is entirely wrong. The blame rests squarely on Microsoft's shoulders for not making the default account a USER account instead of an ADMIN account in all prior versions of Windows. Developers only ever developed to the admin account, because - TADA! - that's all the users ever used unless they were working in a corporate environment where the IT staff actually bothered to apply a group policy. Microsoft should NEVER have made the home users have an Admin account by default.
Cheers, Patrick
Patrick Sears wrote:
The blame rests squarely on Microsoft's shoulders for not making the default account a USER account instead of an ADMIN account in all prior versions of Windows.
Perhaps. But now that home users have non-admin accounts by default, let's not continue the problem by continuing our unfortunate tradition of writing software that requires admin privileges.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Ian Griffiths tells it like it is[^]. Excellent article.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Torah Answers to Christian Questions The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
The only reason we have UAC at all is because of a cultural problem: many developers run as administrators on Windows. Is Ian trying out for the one-eared rabbit award? I think so. What a stupid statement. Developers are, what, .01% of all the users of Windows? And yet he says that we developers and our culture of running as administrators is the reason we have UAC? What a load of myopic horse manure. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
The only reason we have UAC at all is because of a cultural problem: many developers run as administrators on Windows. Is Ian trying out for the one-eared rabbit award? I think so. What a stupid statement. Developers are, what, .01% of all the users of Windows? And yet he says that we developers and our culture of running as administrators is the reason we have UAC? What a load of myopic horse manure. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
Developers are, what, .01% of all the users of Windows?
You misunderstood. Developers are about 100% of the people that write the software that runs on Windows. Because devs themselves aren't running as regular users, they don't realize their software requires admin privileges. And because their software requires admin privileges, it forces end users to run as admins. If devs just write software that doesn't require admin priveleges -- honestly, it isn't that hard! -- this problem wouldn't exist. Patrick made the point that it's really Microsoft's fault for making users admins by default in the first place, which is true. However, now that users are non-admins by default, we shouldn't keep writing software that requires admin privileges.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
Developers are, what, .01% of all the users of Windows?
You misunderstood. Developers are about 100% of the people that write the software that runs on Windows. Because devs themselves aren't running as regular users, they don't realize their software requires admin privileges. And because their software requires admin privileges, it forces end users to run as admins. If devs just write software that doesn't require admin priveleges -- honestly, it isn't that hard! -- this problem wouldn't exist. Patrick made the point that it's really Microsoft's fault for making users admins by default in the first place, which is true. However, now that users are non-admins by default, we shouldn't keep writing software that requires admin privileges.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Ah, ok.
Judah Himango wrote:
If devs just write software that doesn't require admin priveleges -- honestly, it isn't that hard! -- this problem wouldn't exist.
Well, then please ask Ian: WHY DOES VS2005 UNDER VISTA TELL ME I SHOULD RUN WITH ADMINISTRATIVE PRIVILEGES BECAUSE SOME PARTS OF VS2005 WILL NOT WORK UNDER A NORMAL USER ACCOUNT??? Eh Ian? What say you to that? The very friggin' tool tells you to run as Admin!!! [edit]Oh, but I suppose one could argue that running VS2005 as admin is still different from running the app your developing with VS2005. While technically true, I feel that he is still making up excuses.[/edit] Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
But on Windows we have an unfortunate history of ordinary applications that demand admin privileges for no good reason. If the Windows development culture hadn’t gone down this road we would never have needed UAC.
This is the basis for his entire argument, and it sounds convincing, except that it is entirely wrong. The blame rests squarely on Microsoft's shoulders for not making the default account a USER account instead of an ADMIN account in all prior versions of Windows. Developers only ever developed to the admin account, because - TADA! - that's all the users ever used unless they were working in a corporate environment where the IT staff actually bothered to apply a group policy. Microsoft should NEVER have made the home users have an Admin account by default.
Cheers, Patrick
Irregardless of whether or not the default account is an admin account, if a developer doesn't take into account standard users it is the developers fault.
Matt Newman
-
Ah, ok.
Judah Himango wrote:
If devs just write software that doesn't require admin priveleges -- honestly, it isn't that hard! -- this problem wouldn't exist.
Well, then please ask Ian: WHY DOES VS2005 UNDER VISTA TELL ME I SHOULD RUN WITH ADMINISTRATIVE PRIVILEGES BECAUSE SOME PARTS OF VS2005 WILL NOT WORK UNDER A NORMAL USER ACCOUNT??? Eh Ian? What say you to that? The very friggin' tool tells you to run as Admin!!! [edit]Oh, but I suppose one could argue that running VS2005 as admin is still different from running the app your developing with VS2005. While technically true, I feel that he is still making up excuses.[/edit] Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
Well, then please ask Ian: WHY DOES VS2005 UNDER VISTA TELL ME I SHOULD RUN WITH ADMINISTRATIVE PRIVILEGES BECAUSE SOME PARTS OF VS2005 WILL NOT WORK UNDER A NORMAL USER ACCOUNT???
Did you read the F'ing article? Obviously you DID NOT!!
Matt Newman
-
Ah, ok.
Judah Himango wrote:
If devs just write software that doesn't require admin priveleges -- honestly, it isn't that hard! -- this problem wouldn't exist.
Well, then please ask Ian: WHY DOES VS2005 UNDER VISTA TELL ME I SHOULD RUN WITH ADMINISTRATIVE PRIVILEGES BECAUSE SOME PARTS OF VS2005 WILL NOT WORK UNDER A NORMAL USER ACCOUNT??? Eh Ian? What say you to that? The very friggin' tool tells you to run as Admin!!! [edit]Oh, but I suppose one could argue that running VS2005 as admin is still different from running the app your developing with VS2005. While technically true, I feel that he is still making up excuses.[/edit] Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithI can't speak for Vista; I'm still on XP. I've been developing under XP using a limited user account for 3 years straight. Ian actually addressed your question in the blog post:
(It's true that Microsoft recently added to the confusion by recommending that developers run Visual Studio 2005 elevated. This doesn't in fact seem to be necessary for an awful lot of scenarios. I regard this recommendation as being just one more contribution to the problem...)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
The only reason we have UAC at all is because of a cultural problem: many developers run as administrators on Windows. Is Ian trying out for the one-eared rabbit award? I think so. What a stupid statement. Developers are, what, .01% of all the users of Windows? And yet he says that we developers and our culture of running as administrators is the reason we have UAC? What a load of myopic horse manure. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
What a stupid statement. Developers are, what, .01% of all the users of Windows? And yet he says that we developers and our culture of running as administrators is the reason we have UAC?
Could be, but I would be willing to bet that the number of people developing software is more than .01% developers.
Matt Newman
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
Well, then please ask Ian: WHY DOES VS2005 UNDER VISTA TELL ME I SHOULD RUN WITH ADMINISTRATIVE PRIVILEGES BECAUSE SOME PARTS OF VS2005 WILL NOT WORK UNDER A NORMAL USER ACCOUNT???
Did you read the F'ing article? Obviously you DID NOT!!
Matt Newman
Matt Newman wrote:
Obviously you DID NOT!!
I read it. I forgot he tried to brush off the "elevated" issue. Look. Ian is the master of spin. The real reason we have UAC and other OS's don't is because Microsoft makes an OS that is more vulnerable. It's that simple. It isn't because more people target it, or more people use it. It's that the code is crappier. The sooner he admits that, the better off we'll all be. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
I can't speak for Vista; I'm still on XP. I've been developing under XP using a limited user account for 3 years straight. Ian actually addressed your question in the blog post:
(It's true that Microsoft recently added to the confusion by recommending that developers run Visual Studio 2005 elevated. This doesn't in fact seem to be necessary for an awful lot of scenarios. I regard this recommendation as being just one more contribution to the problem...)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
Ian actually addressed your question in the blog post:
Yes. The "brush off" spin doctoring. Oh well. It's late, I'm tired and cranky, and obviously not in the mood to hear that the reason we have UAC is my g.d.f'ing fault. BS, I say. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
Judah Himango wrote:
Ian actually addressed your question in the blog post:
Yes. The "brush off" spin doctoring. Oh well. It's late, I'm tired and cranky, and obviously not in the mood to hear that the reason we have UAC is my g.d.f'ing fault. BS, I say. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
Oh well. It's late, I'm tired and cranky, and obviously not in the mood to hear that the reason we have UAC is my g.d.f'ing fault. BS, I say.
:) Ok Marc. Here's to a better day tomorrow :cheers: :beer:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Matt Newman wrote:
Obviously you DID NOT!!
I read it. I forgot he tried to brush off the "elevated" issue. Look. Ian is the master of spin. The real reason we have UAC and other OS's don't is because Microsoft makes an OS that is more vulnerable. It's that simple. It isn't because more people target it, or more people use it. It's that the code is crappier. The sooner he admits that, the better off we'll all be. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
Look. Ian is the master of spin. The real reason we have UAC and other OS's don't is because Microsoft makes an OS that is more vulnerable. It's that simple. It isn't because more people target it, or more people use it. It's that the code is crappier. The sooner he admits that, the better off we'll all be.
Late nite with Marc Clifton. I love it! :)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
Look. Ian is the master of spin. The real reason we have UAC and other OS's don't is because Microsoft makes an OS that is more vulnerable. It's that simple. It isn't because more people target it, or more people use it. It's that the code is crappier. The sooner he admits that, the better off we'll all be.
Late nite with Marc Clifton. I love it! :)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
Late nite with Marc Clifton. I love it!
It's not too different from regular daytime hours, you know. :) Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
Matt Newman wrote:
Obviously you DID NOT!!
I read it. I forgot he tried to brush off the "elevated" issue. Look. Ian is the master of spin. The real reason we have UAC and other OS's don't is because Microsoft makes an OS that is more vulnerable. It's that simple. It isn't because more people target it, or more people use it. It's that the code is crappier. The sooner he admits that, the better off we'll all be. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
It's that the code is crappier.
Pretty tall charge... Oh right, I forgot you were perfect now.
Matt Newman
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
It's that the code is crappier.
Pretty tall charge... Oh right, I forgot you were perfect now.
Matt Newman
Matt Newman wrote:
Oh right, I forgot you were perfect now.
For the next 10 minutes. Then I turn into a pumpkin. ;P Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
Ian Griffiths tells it like it is[^]. Excellent article.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Torah Answers to Christian Questions The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Of course, my ISP won't let me connect with UAC active, I wonder how many other vendors will do that rather than work out their UAC problems ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Of course, my ISP won't let me connect with UAC active, I wonder how many other vendors will do that rather than work out their UAC problems ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
Of course, my ISP won't let me connect with UAC active
:omg::wtf: That's one of the biggest WTFs I've ever heard. Have you submitted it to thedailywtf yet? ;) Actually, there may be a reasonable explanation: do you have to run some ISP software to connect?
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: The Virginia Tech Shootings, Guns, and Politics The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
