I really do hate Vista

Who else is tired of the headaches that vista causes?

Who else is tired of the headaches that vista causes?

cloud8900

been using vista since it came out. never really had any prollems wid it

u sure vista is causing u problems? it's prolly ur computer that can't handle vista very well

i've had no bigger problems with Vista either.

only one, wich still bothers me; i can't get full access in the registry editor. there's certain entries i need to delete in order to make one software work with Logitech drivers, but Vista is not allowing me to do it. i have all the permissions with my user account, but then there's this "USER OWNER" account wich permissions i can't change.

another one is the UAC allways checking wich programs can run and wich can't. really annoying, but i got rid of it with UACTweak.

oh! one more; Vista ain't allowing WinRAR shell extensions for me anymore. they were working fine some time ago, but not anymore. SP1 maybe? i don't know, but it ain't workin anymore even after reinstalling.

other than those, Vista has been good to me :)

i've had no bigger problems with Vista either.

only one, wich still bothers me; i can't get full access in the registry editor. there's certain entries i need to delete in order to make one software work with Logitech drivers, but Vista is not allowing me to do it. i have all the permissions with my user account, but then there's this "USER OWNER" account wich permissions i can't change.

another one is the UAC allways checking wich programs can run and wich can't. really annoying, but i got rid of it with UACTweak.

oh! one more; Vista ain't allowing WinRAR shell extensions for me anymore. they were working fine some time ago, but not anymore. SP1 maybe? i don't know, but it ain't workin anymore even after reinstalling.

other than those, Vista has been good to me :)

prowler666

As for SP1, it locked down a number of privilege escalation issues that can cause a number of system maintenance programs to go nuts. Any program that does go nuts probably needs to be updated. Same goes for WinRAR--you need an updated version. I have WinRAR shell extensions working on my Vista x64 machine.

i downloaded the latest WinRAR version (3.71) but still no luck...

and the for the UAC matter, i never was able to mess up my XP, so i don't think i would mess up Vista either. 3rd party firewall/antivirus is the only security i need.

edit: just remembered something; i was able to get the shell extension to work after applying silent mode with UACTweak and running WinRAR as administrator and re-applying the shell integrations, but the shell extensions were gone after next reboot.

and the for the UAC matter, i never was able to mess up my XP, so i don't think i would mess up Vista either. 3rd party firewall/antivirus is the only security i need.

prowler666

The trick is guarding against stuff that looks innocuous but really isn't and is furthermore a zero-day vulnerability so your AV can't detect it and disguises itself as web traffic so your firewall lets it through. UAC is a safeguard to make sure the seemingly innocuous file really is innocuous, as the moment it tries to meddle in the registry or whatever, Vista catches it and gives you fair warning.HuusAsking

The problem is that alot of programs will pop up with a UAC message, and if the end-user doesn't turn off the prompts, they're likely to allow the program anyway, as they've become accustomed to the prompts, and hence they'll just believe that it's normal for the program to require admin rights. This (apart from the annoyance) is one of the main problems (in my opinion), of the regularity of UAC prompts; it makes users complacent.

Either assumptions that can be you,

1. You are computer illiterate and you don't know how to modify Vista.

2. You are a flaming troll that wants to flame Vista for no reason.

I have Vista, and I love it, I've been using it since the launch of Vista.

I hadn't looked back ever since I upgraded to Vista from XP.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]The trick is guarding against stuff that looks innocuous but really isn't and is furthermore a zero-day vulnerability so your AV can't detect it and disguises itself as web traffic so your firewall lets it through. UAC is a safeguard to make sure the seemingly innocuous file really is innocuous, as the moment it tries to meddle in the registry or whatever, Vista catches it and gives you fair warning.G013M

The problem is that alot of programs will pop up with a UAC message, and if the end-user doesn't turn off the prompts, they're likely to allow the program anyway, as they've become accustomed to the prompts, and hence they'll just believe that it's normal for the program to require admin rights. This (apart from the annoyance) is one of the main problems (in my opinion), of the regularity of UAC prompts; it makes users complacent.

Thing is, I haven't encountered a ton of programs that prompt a UAC prompt. Unless it's undeniably system-related (such as RegEdit or Everest Ultimate), a setup program, or you're really monkeying around with program directories, you usually shouldn't see the prompt under normal usage. If you are, then perhaps the programs are doing things they shouldn't. See what I'm saying?HuusAsking

I do understand what you're saying, but whenver something gets the the stage of annoying, users will normally do one of two things. Either turn it off, or just simply ignore it.

For many users, UAC will reach that stage at one point or another. There are still alot of programs that aren't designed in mind with a limited user, and will request admin powers (even if they don't need it), just simply becuase it was a pretty safe assumption under previous versions of Windows that the user running the program was going to be an administrator.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]Thing is, I haven't encountered a ton of programs that prompt a UAC prompt. Unless it's undeniably system-related (such as RegEdit or Everest Ultimate), a setup program, or you're really monkeying around with program directories, you usually shouldn't see the prompt under normal usage. If you are, then perhaps the programs are doing things they shouldn't. See what I'm saying?G013M

I do understand what you're saying, but whenver something gets the the stage of annoying, users will normally do one of two things. Either turn it off, or just simply ignore it.

For many users, UAC will reach that stage at one point or another. There are still alot of programs that aren't designed in mind with a limited user, and will request admin powers (even if they don't need it), just simply becuase it was a pretty safe assumption under previous versions of Windows that the user running the program was going to be an administrator.

I have XP on desktop and Vista on laptop and it doesnt deserve any of the slagging off its been getting, theres nothing wrong with Vistavitriolboy

Agreed

[QUOTE="vitriolboy"]I have XP on desktop and Vista on laptop and it doesnt deserve any of the slagging off its been getting, theres nothing wrong with Vistadazza_avo

Agreed

I'll admit when vista was first released it had alot of problems, but most of them where due to the fact that everything else needed time to adapt to it. once all the new drivers ect. where released then vista became a great OS, Too many people couldn't except this and have been crying ever since. Also XP was a great OS and everyone became accustomed to it and when they installed vista and things didn't work exactly like XP they just saw that as a bad thing (without even taking the time to learn how to use Vista).

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]Thing is, I haven't encountered a ton of programs that prompt a UAC prompt. Unless it's undeniably system-related (such as RegEdit or Everest Ultimate), a setup program, or you're really monkeying around with program directories, you usually shouldn't see the prompt under normal usage. If you are, then perhaps the programs are doing things they shouldn't. See what I'm saying?G013M

I do understand what you're saying, but whenver something gets the the stage of annoying, users will normally do one of two things. Either turn it off, or just simply ignore it.

For many users, UAC will reach that stage at one point or another. There are still alot of programs that aren't designed in mind with a limited user, and will request admin powers (even if they don't need it), just simply becuase it was a pretty safe assumption under previous versions of Windows that the user running the program was going to be an administrator.

UAC was a good idea but a joke at the same time, They really needed to make the program smarter and able to learn from previous events (ie. Only appear when something unusual happens) But for me it would ask for permission everytime i tried to copy a file from one drive to another and just got to the stage where i just turned it off completely.

[QUOTE="G013M"]

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]Thing is, I haven't encountered a ton of programs that prompt a UAC prompt. Unless it's undeniably system-related (such as RegEdit or Everest Ultimate), a setup program, or you're really monkeying around with program directories, you usually shouldn't see the prompt under normal usage. If you are, then perhaps the programs are doing things they shouldn't. See what I'm saying?mattisgod01

I do understand what you're saying, but whenver something gets the the stage of annoying, users will normally do one of two things. Either turn it off, or just simply ignore it.

For many users, UAC will reach that stage at one point or another. There are still alot of programs that aren't designed in mind with a limited user, and will request admin powers (even if they don't need it), just simply becuase it was a pretty safe assumption under previous versions of Windows that the user running the program was going to be an administrator.

UAC was a good idea but a joke at the same time, They really needed to make the program smarter and able to learn from previous events (ie. Only appear when something unusual happens) But for me it would ask for permission everytime i tried to copy a file from one drive to another and just got to the stage where i just turned it off completely.

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"][QUOTE="G013M"]

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]Thing is, I haven't encountered a ton of programs that prompt a UAC prompt. Unless it's undeniably system-related (such as RegEdit or Everest Ultimate), a setup program, or you're really monkeying around with program directories, you usually shouldn't see the prompt under normal usage. If you are, then perhaps the programs are doing things they shouldn't. See what I'm saying?HuusAsking

I do understand what you're saying, but whenver something gets the the stage of annoying, users will normally do one of two things. Either turn it off, or just simply ignore it.

For many users, UAC will reach that stage at one point or another. There are still alot of programs that aren't designed in mind with a limited user, and will request admin powers (even if they don't need it), just simply becuase it was a pretty safe assumption under previous versions of Windows that the user running the program was going to be an administrator.

UAC was a good idea but a joke at the same time, They really needed to make the program smarter and able to learn from previous events (ie. Only appear when something unusual happens) But for me it would ask for permission everytime i tried to copy a file from one drive to another and just got to the stage where i just turned it off completely.

But then it justs gets back to the point that G013M made about people getting to the stage of either ignoring it or just turning it off completely.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

Thing is, Windows can't tell whether all those warning occasions were of your devising. In fact, it intentionally plays dumb so as to make sure it minimizes the possibilities of exploit writers learning of these gaps in the armor and exploiting them (reminds me of an old-time computer game whose plot ran on a similar premise of a exploited "intentional security hole"). Suppose the UAC message were to come up while you were doing something completely outside the area of interest? Wouldn't you be glad for the UAC at that point?mattisgod01

But then it justs gets back to the point that G013M made about people getting to the stage of either ignoring it or just turning it off completely.