To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"I see no reason at all why anyone who bought something to work on XP should expect it to work on Vista"
Well, that depends on how long ago the hardware was purchased actually. If the hardware is recent, then there is every right to expect the manufacturer to continue to support it. See my example in my other post. That camera has only been on the market less then 2 years, so it is not even as old as it's warranty yet. On the other hand, if I have hardware that is 3 or more years old, then no, I would not expect it to work with Vista.
UAC, itself, isn't the problem. Many Windows programs were written to ignore security. UAC is merely pointing out those problems. As for people clicking "yes" to bypass the security notifications, what would you propose as an alternative to what Microsoft did? The UAC prompts are essentially the same as root password prompts under 'nix, except slightly less annoying.
I agree. But don't forget that UAC is not just about the "annoying" popups which seems useless because they are only prompting for 'Continue' or 'Cancel'.
If you create a limited user account then UAC will prompt for the admin password - just like Mac OS X. They made a good work.
I think the only problem with Vista is the performance. But anyway... Mac OS X was a real pain in the ass until 10.3 and imho Tiger 10.4 is only a little faster than Vista. Well, in the end we all install SP1 for Vista and most of us will be happy.





Member since:
2006-03-26
Of course the hardware drivers will be updated in time.
What bothers me more is the user account protection window popping up constantly when doing (adminstrative) work.
I can imagine that a lot of people click "yes" to make sure it just works. And that defeats the basic concept of the whole system no matter how safe you "think" you are