Microsoft promises a reduction in unnecessary prompts, as well as more obvious control over UAC
Would you enable UAC if it let you have control over which prompts you received and gave you more information, or would you rather just disable it completely? Let us know your thoughts.
im no computer expert but less popups from the UAC would be a bad thing would it not ?? since the only way to diminish the popups would be a memory feature. you let that program run once then windows lets it run everytime under ur UA unless u tell it otherwise. basically working how most firewalls do .. u install the firewall get annoyed by all the requests but give it a few days and its not too bad after that. so what happens when someone designs a virus . calls it the same name as a popular small program ? .. ok even MS aint stupid enough to base permissions on filenames alone but im sure those with the know-how could make windows think the files signature was legit and make the SHA1 or whatever checksum method they decide to use match ? im no computer expert by all means though. i only know what ive learned from personal experience (which compared to a lot of the poeple on here probably isnt a lot). just thought id voice my thoughts .. feel free to bash :)
once again a microsoft OS is l8, i just dont see the point of publishing something and then despatching it couple of years down the line. 2b honest windows 9 sounds kool. but then again how many SPs will u need 2 download for 7? i mean u wud think they wud have learnt from vista wen they did Mohave. i guess they dont learn from their mistakes. :(
Seeing as Microsoft only added UAC because MAC and Ubuntu already have it I don't see why it gets so much abuse. Of course they could have done it better but imagine how many trojans it's actually stopped in their paths.
I have looked all through the Debian menus, and I am unable to find any of the UAC stuff. Guess that is one of the reasons I am happy with Linux and opensource........
. . to users feedback. Let's hope they keep on listening. You never know, Windows 7 might actually be ok after all. Maybe? Hopefully? In the meantime I'll stick with XP thanks.
Microsoft used to aim at a 3 year life span of OS and move on. Due to XP not being the finished article even after 3 years, it went on to last 7. People forget that. If you have a problem with MS making money then go join the Linux camp of freeloaders and open source garbage. Believe or not but Vista was polished a lot quicker than XP ever was, so a late 2009/ early 2010 release for W7 is fine.
The same reason we needed Vista when XP worked fine..... MS need to make money.
Can someone explain to me why we need Windows7? My Vista works fine since turning off the Granny-friendly-UAC feature and all the other annoying bits.
.... is "Will it still be annoying"? I've only used Vista once on a friends laptop. UAC kept on popping up for really trivial every day things. If MS stop these annoying pop ups for every day things, then I may well leave UAC on when I buy Windows 7, however the moment it starts to bug me for routine tasks, it'll be getting switched off.
At a cost of another (after Vista) £70-80 we will now have UAC more user friendly ... that is awesome! I love throwing my money at MS.
first thing i did with vista was to turn off UAC. however, if they are providing tweakability as to which prompts are shown, ill probably have it on for a few low-level options
Make a Comment
Fastest, cheapest 3G mobile broadband dongles from 3, Vodafone, T-Mobile and Orange
from just £10/month