Re: Vista 64 bit or 32 bit on New Computer?

Tech-Archive recommends: Speed Up your PC by fixing your registry

nak wrote:
I'm sure it will be better, they do listen and have taken allot of the critisism. Remember XP when it was released? It was a pile of sh1t, and blue screened for me continually until I got a few updates. All software has bugs, yup, that includes Linux and Mac software.

Some day I should tell you about the time I tried to cut a data DVD
on Linux and got my entire file system hosed. You are correct, they
all have bugs. The ones with peer review have far less, but when
then do go off, the results can be spectacular.

I know it's not good being the guinee pig at times with these things, but sometimes that's the only way, real world users can find problems that professional testers never touch ;)

Go on, grab yourself an account, you know you want to! lol!

Nick.

Hi Nick,

Only a year or so ago, a technical conversation like
our would have degraded into a lot of third parties
slinging insults and worse. I thoroughly enjoyed
your comments. I do hope this kind of civility
continues. Maybe it has to do with the rise of
virtual machine: you get to see each OS's strengths
and weaknesses.

Virus removal is one of my specialties (I actually
get a blast out of defeating someone who is trying
to hurt and innocent victim.) I am no seeing Vista
as any less immune to the bad guys as XP ever was.
I do know there are a few out there that XP is
specifically open to, but the majority are
equal opportunity infectors. Lately, the big
issue has been those targeted at IE. And,
Vista or W7 can not do a lot to help that as
long as Microsoft insists that Windows Explorer
and Internet Explorer be so closely linked.
The biggest security improvement I would have
liked to see Microsoft make would to have been separating
the two. Make IE just a browser, like Firefox.
Much better than the UAC. Compromise IE and
you have compromised the file system. ActiveX
being a bad guys playground does not help either.

Bearing in mind, I only get called when things go wrong,
I am just not seeing a security improvement from
the UAC. It just comes off as annoying. (I don't
turn it off, just in case I may be wrong.) I would
love it if Microsoft took a page from both Linux
and Apple on their installers: they just pop up
with a request for the root (administrator's) password.
Gets the user's attention, instead of annoying him
to the point where he "ignores" all the UAC messages.
(My customers do not even read them -- they just
blast past them. A real bad idea.)

-T
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Search for word or phrase in .pas & .dfm files
    ... windows explorer in vista? ... Click Show All Locations (elevate if UAC is enabled) ... Find and select DFM files ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: I turned off UAC
    ... Running Vista without ... UAC enabled is a big, "no-no," yet running XP, which has no such ... 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. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: turn off user account control
    ... If you didn't have problems with malware before UAC, ... all those prompts would be called "false ... >>> Real time scanning by third party programs provides (in ... >> "But rather with UAC enabled, the compromise runs under the context ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.security)
  • Re: turn off user account control
    ... If you didn't have problems with malware before UAC, ... all those prompts would be called "false ... >>> Real time scanning by third party programs provides (in ... >> "But rather with UAC enabled, the compromise runs under the context ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.security)