I turned off UAC

  • Thread starter Thread starter Justin
  • Start date Start date
Ian D said:
I see something of a double standard here. Running Vista without
UAC enabled is a big, "no-no," yet running XP, which has no such
"protection" is perfectly acceptable, although Vista without UAC
is probably still more secure than XP.
Click to expand...


XP doesn't have UAC. And yes, XP users should run as a User on a daily basis
rather than an Admin but most people have been too lazy or ignorant to do
so.
 
Gordon said:
XP doesn't have UAC. And yes, XP users should run as a User on a daily basis
rather than an Admin but most people have been too lazy or ignorant to do
so.
Click to expand...

And have suffered no ill consequences.
 
I understand how and why, I just don't like the constant nagging.
If I wanted a Nanny, I would have hired one, not had one snuck in the back
door with a new OS.
Turning it off completely mucks up some other things, so I shut down as many
of the nags as possible.
The problem is, with the constant nagging, you become accustomed to just
clicking through to get the retarded thing off the screen.
I don't really care what happens as long as I don't have to see that stupid
prompt ever again!
That is just one of many reasons Vista will never be on my LAN.
BTW: I enabled the hidden admin account in Vista and use it every day.
I haven't been infected yet.
But I've only used it since early Beta...
 
Mike said:
And have suffered no ill consequences.
Click to expand...

Or they don't know that the machine has been compromised as malware
silently installs and hides itself right in their face, because they run
as admin with full rights on the Internet with the machine, such as XP.

All of those MS botnet machines are not out there by accident, as the
user continually participates in the compromise of the machine, as they
point and click on everything under the Sun as user admin.
 
Not said:
I understand how and why, I just don't like the constant nagging.
If I wanted a Nanny, I would have hired one, not had one snuck in the back
door with a new OS.
Turning it off completely mucks up some other things, so I shut down as many
of the nags as possible.
The problem is, with the constant nagging, you become accustomed to just
clicking through to get the retarded thing off the screen.
I don't really care what happens as long as I don't have to see that stupid
prompt ever again!
That is just one of many reasons Vista will never be on my LAN.
BTW: I enabled the hidden admin account in Vista and use it every day.
I haven't been infected yet.
But I've only used it since early Beta...
Click to expand...

Or you don't know that you have been infected nor do you know how to go
look from time to time to see if the machine has been compromised as the
compromise sits there right in your face or it hides itself.

What? I don't get many UAC prompts to even be concerned about it. And if
I do get a unexpected prompt, then I will know that something dubious
might be happening.
 
Jack the Ripper said:
What? I don't get many UAC prompts to even be concerned about it. And if I
do get a unexpected prompt, then I will know that something dubious might
be happening.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I maybe get two or three a WEEK....and then it's me doing
something that needs elevated privileges...
 
Or they don't know that the machine has been compromised as malware
silently installs and hides itself right in their face, because they run
as admin with full rights on the Internet with the machine, such as XP.

All of those MS botnet machines are not out there by accident, as the user
continually participates in the compromise of the machine, as they point
and click on everything under the Sun as user admin.
Click to expand...


The bottom line is that there are millions of users out there and no one
including yourself can possibly know each and every one's knowledge and
skill level. There are many ignorant computer users, but even more with
more than adequate knowledge and skill sets.

Every safety device including UAC is designed with a good intension, but
when the user demands to return the control power, the basic design idea is
to return the full control power to the user, regardless of whether it's an
ignorant or skillful user.

UAC in Vista demonstrated a lack of basic understanding of providing a
meaningful and useful safety device which also is why for MS changed it with
Windows 7.

Whether you wish to accept it is your choice, but MS have accepted its won
design flaws.
 
xfile said:
The bottom line is that there are millions of users out there and no one
including yourself can possibly know each and every one's knowledge and
skill level. There are many ignorant computer users, but even more with
more than adequate knowledge and skill sets.
Click to expand...

Most don't have the skill-set to protect the machine and the O/S, not
really, is the bottom line and they will never have it.
Every safety device including UAC is designed with a good intension, but
when the user demands to return the control power, the basic design idea is
to return the full control power to the user, regardless of whether it's an
ignorant or skillful user.
Click to expand...

You can just turn UAC off.
UAC in Vista demonstrated a lack of basic understanding of providing a
meaningful and useful safety device which also is why for MS changed it with
Windows 7.
Click to expand...
It was made configuable. And it still provides the same protection under
the hood.
Whether you wish to accept it is your choice, but MS have accepted its won
design flaws.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, one can turn UAC up to its highest level and
make it verbose, which will be the setting I'll use when I get to
Windows 7.

I must say that you have missed the point altogether about UAC, and the
protection it provides to the machine and the O/S, not the user.
 
You can just turn UAC off.

The current UAC will have a silent-effect to several applications if it is
being turned off. Admittedly, I didn't test for post SP1 and won't have any
interest for testing it.
I must say that you have missed the point altogether about UAC, and the
protection it provides to the machine and the O/S, not the user.
Click to expand...

I must say that you have missed the whole point about using computers and
OSes; they are just like any other tools, and the only purpose for their
existence is to help and serve the users to accomplish their tasks, not the
other way around, or it's just garbage.
 
xfile said:
The current UAC will have a silent-effect to several applications if it is
being turned off. Admittedly, I didn't test for post SP1 and won't have any
interest for testing it.


I must say that you have missed the whole point about using computers and
OSes; they are just like any other tools, and the only purpose for their
existence is to help and serve the users to accomplish their tasks, not the
other way around, or it's just garbage.
Click to expand...

I have no problems using Vista is the bottom line and so do others that
I know that use the O/S, which are happy with the current set-up of Vista.

If books and other such information was produced about the inner
workings of Vista instead of the cookie and cake features coverage
books, people would have a lot better understanding of Vista, which was
what I told such an Vista book author as I encountered him in a Linux
NG and the issues were discussed.
 
 
(Top-posted for brevity.....)

Don't you just love it how some people, when they hear you don't like
something, it's because you don't understand it or how to use it or too
stupid to understand it.

How come, I know what it does, I know how it works, I don't like it is
never good enough for some people. (rhetorical)
 
The bottom line is that there are millions of users out there and no
one including yourself can possibly know each and every one's
knowledge and skill level. There are many ignorant computer users,
but even more with more than adequate knowledge and skill sets.
Click to expand...

Are you friggin' kidding me ?!?!?!

More with adequate knowledge and skill sets than unskilled, computer-
illiterate ?

That is completely backwards. Of the typical home PC user, 80% are
dangerously computer illiterate, 15% are adequate, and 5% are fairly highly
skilled and knowledgable.
 
Justin said:
As in when it tried to update, the UAC prompt comes up; I allow it and
it still doesn't update.
Click to expand...

And some how, you think this is a UAC problem? When on the same token, I
do it and I have no problem?
 
DanS said:
(Top-posted for brevity.....)

Don't you just love it how some people, when they hear you don't like
something, it's because you don't understand it or how to use it or too
stupid to understand it.
Click to expand...

Which is usually the case.
How come, I know what it does, I know how it works, I don't like it is
never good enough for some people. (rhetorical)
Click to expand...

This is your pov, which is not good enough.
 
paliometoxo said:
well for those who only read email and visit a few websites how much
skill do you really need to do that?:)
Click to expand...

Are you taking to yourself? How much trouble would it be for you to
learn how to reply post.
 
no one seems to have mentioned www.tweakuac.com

TweakUACâ„¢ is a free software tool that you can use to quickly turn UAC
(User Account Control of Windows Vista) on or off, or to make UAC
operate in the quiet mode. This software is FREE, no strings attached.
Click to expand...

OK, then, I'll mention it :-)

However, in quiet mode, TweakUAC still makes Windows bring up the annoying
shield that the OP wanted to get rid of.

I decided not to follow your advice about turning that off, though, in case
some significant message would eventually be suppressed. Just paranoia, I
guess.
 
Back
Top