Microsoft Australia has defended the company's User Account Control (UAC) system as being "misunderstood" and said it should be the type of technology that all operating systems aspire towards.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-07
Yes there is. I've placed files in the "All Users" desktop myself so that other members of my family can see it easily (without having to explicitly dig into the "Shared Documents" folder). Why should I make a copy for each desktop and then have to change each one whenever I update the file? And yes, for such files, I *do* want the user warned if he decides to delete it.
This can be solved in a much more elegant way with hardlinks.
Member since:2006-01-02
Not exactly. If you uninstall a program under the current model, you remove it from the "All Users" desktop. If you make a hardlink there, then you have to go hunting for all hardlinks in order to remove a program. This can fail in so many ways, depending on how your permissions are set (say, for instance, one user decides to use personal directory encryption on their desktop... you're screwed then).
There's obviously a design rationale for having an "All Users" desktop. Now, if you want to get rid of or rename an icon there, you do it once and face a UAC prompt. If you're renaming the file every few minutes, then you seriously need to find better things to do with your computer.
Member since:2007-02-27
Member since:
2006-07-04
Your complaint is how system-wide programs are installed, not with UAC.
"There's no reason why files on user desktops should be shared."
Yes there is. I've placed files in the "All Users" desktop myself so that other members of my family can see it easily (without having to explicitly dig into the "Shared Documents" folder). Why should I make a copy for each desktop and then have to change each one whenever I update the file? And yes, for such files, I *do* want the user warned if he decides to delete it.
And save the "See Linux for how the desktop should be" line. The "Linux is the epitome of OS design and anything that differs is therefore wrong by definition" line is so played out.