Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Err... that's because it has? SP2 was a unuallsy large upgrade for XP and that came out a long time after initial release.
Burnsy
Windows Mojave!
- Thread starter mr.sly
- Start date
Err... that's because it has? SP2 was a unuallsy large upgrade for XP and that came out a long time after initial release.
Burnsy
Hello Slogan, what do you mean exactly by "poorly implemented pop-up box"?
Ethics and caged answered for me in the posts after.
I can understand the purpose of the feature but don't like how it is implemented in the operating system. It's just a real nasty to use and the way around bettering that experience is to turn it off or disable it to an extent - which sort of defeats the purpose of it.
Also, given it's very nature and the interruption is does cause on even the smallest task (deleting an empty folder), the user is likely to hit 'allow' at the time when they should be hitting cancel anyway.
Which you'd surely expect, given that XP is seven years old now?
I think Vista is further ahead now than XP was 18 months after release.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
How is it nasty? It's intention is to focus the user to the dialog. I guess why it's so sudden and blanks everything else out is from a programming perspective; it must be disabling everything in the background, otherwise you would just have viruses/trojans simulating accepting it.
I disabled it anyway as I trust Symantec Endpoint, not had anything yet.
Vista is still a better OS than XP (and Mac OSX IMO). I have used it on a multitude of my systems, from a 2.33Ghz P-M to a Q6600 (dual cores inbetween on laptops/desktops) and it is a joy to use. Cannot say the same as Mac OSX or XP, XP seems to degrade massively after installs of software and the wireless support on Macbook is shoddy, it drops out constantly even if you're sitting next to the router. I also find the OS unproductive. As a result I used it for about 1 week then gave it to my mum, who likes it because "it looks pretty". It also reaches ridicilous temperatures because of its poor design (functional), it is as good as getting rid of heat as a vacuum sealed furnace. as a result, it has destroyed 3 hard drives.
Of course the Mac lovers will blame everything else apart from Leopard.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 3,871
Hello helmutcheese, to a very small degree. The main purpose of User Account Control is not to stop non computer literate users from messing up their system.
Hello Caged and Slogan, there is a reason why you are switched to the "Secure Desktop" when something requests administrator privileges. When the elevation dialogue appears on the Secure Desktop, it prevents other pieces of software, malicious or otherwise, from messing with that dialogue.
Hello Ethics, would you care to expand on the above please, I'm interested to find out more about the individual points that you have made.
I honestly don't find it a problem at all. If people wish to disable it, they really should think about putting it in "Silent Mode" using TweakUAC first which admittedly isn't as secure as running it on it's default setting but better than disabling it completely.
The prompts are only a small part of User Account Control. If a user wishes to do something, they will most likely do that particular action regardless if a prompt pops up or not. Though, they will be aware that their actions have triggered a prompt and to a degree, it can prevent accidental or purposely caused actions. However, as already been said, the prompts are not what User Account control is just about.
It interferes with the user experience in a way that isn't desirable. That's why it's nasty.
OS X wireless is a problem they haven't fixed in a while - I touched on it on the previous pages. It doesn't constitute the operating system being poor because of that fault though.
The problem was also there before Leopard - around 10.4.6 iirc.
I would say Vista now is better than XP, but not when it launched and that's when people were giving their reviews on it.
OS X, in my opinion, is better but that's hardly surprising given that I use a Mac and you use a Windows machine and obviously believe Vista to be better. It's not really what it is being debated.
OS X wireless is a problem they haven't fixed in a while - I touched on it on the previous pages. It doesn't constitute the operating system being poor because of that fault though.
The problem was also there before Leopard - around 10.4.6 iirc.
I would say Vista now is better than XP, but not when it launched and that's when people were giving their reviews on it.
OS X, in my opinion, is better but that's hardly surprising given that I use a Mac and you use a Windows machine and obviously believe Vista to be better. It's not really what it is being debated.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
Of course, it is all opinion
In my case, I wanted to give Mac OSX a chance when I got the Macbook with the view of perhaps making my main machine a Mac. However, I hated using it and still do. It feels so bare and I can only see it being of use as a basic machine as my mum does (ie web browsing) or real specialist software (video editing etc), it's not a general purpose OS nor an enterprise OS. If I tried to do anything else with it, it was just massively furstrating to use. The only reason that Macs are resurging in popularity is not because of the OS, it's because of the looks. This is why I prefer Vista as it is an all rounder of an OS, I have tried Linux etc and always go back.
The amount of people I know who bought Macs then ditched Mac OS (ie bootcamp) is quite a lot.
Mate I know exactly why it does it, I have no issues understanding why it does it, but it's the exact opposite of a smooth transition. The screen flickers, audio keeps playing but video is frozen, and sometimes it launches as a taskbar button instead of appearing at the front, so whatever you ran appears to have not responded.
I fully appreciate why it does it - and I'm glad Microsoft are trying to get away from everyone running as an Administrator, but it doesn't stop the implementation being poor.
Oh come off it, it's painfully obvious how UAC in its default configuration disrupts workflow and concentration, unless you aren't at all put off by a sharp change to the entire screen to accept or deny a task you just tried to perform. It's reasonable to assume that productivity suffers as a result.Fire Wizard said:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 3,871
Hiya Caged, sorry, I wasn’t implying that you didn't know what the "Secure Desktop" was for or that certainly wasn't my intention, so I do apologise if it came across that way. I don't particularly find it a problem though.
What I was trying to get at is, depending on the sort of work you do, you may not need to make any system configuration changes, you may just need to use for example, a word document like Microsoft Word. Though, I will admit that is entirely based on the kind of work you do.
Are you the kind of person who disables delete confirmation boxes purely because of the "inconvenience"?
Honestly though if it bothers you that much just turn it off.
It might not dim the screen but it still, and I quote, "sits between you and completing the task".
It sounds to me like you either have an axe to grind or just like to complain. Like I said; if it bothers you that much then you know how to turn it off, it bothers me too and I generally feel I'm a competent enough user that I don't really need it. What do I do? I turn it off, without moaning constantly.
I don't have an axe to grind, I'm merely presenting an alternative view to the people who think UAC is perfection when it's far from it. I know exactly what it does which is why it's still enabled. I'm sorry I don't view Vista as highly as you do.
Who said anything about viewing Vista highly? I just said I turn UAC off because it bugs me, didn't I?
I just gave you an alternate view of UAC too: Turn it off instead of moaning.
I'm just telling you to use your loaf instead of moaning, what's wrong with that?
Reading your posts I honestly thought; "Does this guy have Steve Ballmer pointing a gun at his head, commanding him to use UAC even though it inconveniences him enough to dislike it so much?" You'd think so with some anti-Vista folk.
But you seemingly ignored everything people like Fire Wizard said about why UAC behaves as it does.