Topic: Microsoft Exec: UAC Designed To 'Annoy Users'

[Nemesis]

Link to full article

In a Thursday presentation at RSA 2008 in San Francisco, David Cross, a product unit manager at Microsoft who was part of the team that developed UAC, admitted that Microsoft's strategy with UAC was to irritate users and ISVs in order to get them to change their behavior.

"The reason we put UAC into the platform was to annoy users. I'm serious," said Cross.

Microsoft not only wanted to get users to stop running as administrators, which exacerbates the effects of attacks, but also wanted to convince ISVs to stop building applications that require administrative privileges to install and run, Cross explained.

"We needed to change the ecosystem, and we needed a heavy hammer to do it," Cross said.

Thats one way to do it I suppose.  Getting vendors to stop writing programs that demand Adminstrator access is a good goal.

[Bonk]

They should put advertising in it then! That would be perfect!

I often envision ad producers telling their writers and actors, NO! It's not annoying enough! Make it more annoying! More ringing phones, more crying babies, more bad guitar riffs!

[Bonk]

Wait a minute.... this logic is bass ackwards:

"The reason we put UAC into the platform was to annoy users. I'm serious," said Cross.

Microsoft not only wanted to get users to stop running as administrators, which exacerbates the effects of attacks, but also wanted to convince ISVs to stop building applications that require administrative privileges to install and run, Cross explained.

I assume if I were to run as admin in vista, then UAC would not need to pop up. If I run as a normal user then UAC is going to be looking for permissions all the time. So like a typical exec, this guy has no idea what he is talking about. But I bet he has a shiny suit.

[Pestalence_XC]

UAC in windows Vista does its function.. it monitors software installation..

when running a program, it asks for permission to operate the software because the install directories are administrator protected from being over-written..

example.. I install SFC OP on here.. UAC monitors the install.. if a file corruts during install, UAC will notify you install was not correct and offers you a re-install using preferred settings.. doing this, the software goes in without corruption.

Now I install EZINI, does same process.

then I run EZINI from desktp.. I do not run it as administrator.. SFC OP is protected from file changes at an administrator level.. EZINI will access the SFC.INI file but is unable to alter it because the EZINI does not have a high enough security level.. UAC protected the program from being altered by outside software.

However when I right click and select "Run as Administrator" or change the shortcut properties to "run as administrator", then the program launches and asks if I am sure I want to run the program.. I say yes, the program has full system access, even into the Windows directory.. I say no, application closes down....

Disabling UAC removes the protection layer off your folders.. all system folders can be accessed without permissions, including the Windows directory, but programs launch just like normal for XPSP2.

However if you do an install with UAC turned off, and files corrupt, then there is no way to catch it until the app crashes on you because of a bad file..

UAC has its purpose ... I run it enabled more often than not.. but on graphic intensive applications like Crysis and Hellgate London, I disable UAC to free the game to access whatever it needs to give the best performance.

Running as Administrator in Vista still does not give you full access, it runs apps in a protective environment.. you have Administrator rights to tell UAC to run the app with full access.. just running an app without giving it Administrator level, then if the application has to alter a file located somewhere other than C:\Users directory, it will be unable to do so.

Turning off UAC gives the entire system Administrator level access, (depending on the account) and will run programs without any security layer however, it does leave the system open to attack by malicious software..

[Lepton]

Pesty, you are obviously a smart guy so let me just offer this to help you.

"It's" means it is.  "Its" is the possessive form of the neuter gender pronoun.

[Pestalence_XC]

Pesty, you are obviously a smart guy so let me just offer this to help you.

"It's" means it is. "Its" is the possessive form of the neuter gender pronoun.

Grammar was not my strong point in school or college... Math and Science were my strong points..

Thanks for the correction.. post above is corrected.

[Bonk]

Pesty, you are obviously a smart guy so let me just offer this to help you.

"It's" means it is.  "Its" is the possessive form of the neuter gender pronoun.

Somebody's been reading Slashdot too much.

[Nemesis]

Somebody's been reading Slashdot too much.

The one that annoys me there is payed instead of paid. 

[Bonk]

The one that always gets me (not on /.) is pleaded instead of pled. I think pleaded is the correct usage, but it just does not look or sound right to me. The way I see it the past tense of plead would be pled.

My other favourite grammar pet peeve is the over/misuse of "impact", it is like the words affect and effect do not exist anymore.

[Beeblebrox]

How about using "hung" instead of "hanged"?  The correct past tense of "to hang" is "hanged", not "hung".  Porn stars are hung; pirates and Iraqi dictators are hanged.

It sounds to me as if this UAC (whatever it is) was designed to either jump in and get in your way every few minutes or, if you switch it off, it will leave your computer open to outside attack. 

Why, oh why, did I ever upgrade from Windows 98SE?

[Pestalence_XC]

UAC (User Account Control) does not get in the way every few min.. it only confirms what you are doing to make sure that the software you are running is approved... when you launch an application, it just asks if you are sure you want this program to run.. if it is a program that alters files in the Program Files (x86) directory or the Program Files directory, then you have to run it as administrator or the files will not change..
Also installing a program, if the entries to the registry are not correct, or the files corrupt on install, UAC will prompt you to reinstall using recommended settings to ensure that there is no corruption of the files or the registry.

Trusted programs you just set compatibility tab to "Run as Administrator" and when launched just say Allow.. and program runs just fine.

Turning off UAC, the system operates just like XP SP 2 or SP 3 ... but just like in XP, Win 2K3, Win 2K, Win ME, Win 98SE, Win 98, Win 95.. if you don't have UAC enabled (which is Vista and Server 2K8 only) Programs will run just like in XP, however you will not get a prompt to confirm running the application.. Installed programs may have a corrupted file or invalid registry entry and you will not know until the program locks up on you.. Also if a program is trying to install malicious or unknown content, there is nothing to CRC installs and your system can get infected..

That is why they included UAC in Vista and Server 2K8 to prevent unknown or malicious content from running without your knowledge.

There is also Windows Defender which rechecks your files and registry for corruption as well as checking for malicious software and / or trojans.. However I still prefer using Spybot Search and Destroy and Ad-Aware..

Ad-Aware is not yet available for Vista 64 bit, but it is available for Vista 32 bit.. Ad-Aware 2008 will be out in Beta next week on the 13th for 64 bit XP and Vista and Server 2K8 systems.

Like I said.. UAC is not that big of a deal as far as annoyance goes... You get use to it after a week.. however I do like how it has corrected some of the installs of software on my system.. I have yet to get a BOSD on here when I use to get them about once a week on XP..

The only problem I have had is when I was playing Hellgate London the other night with Frey and Stoneyface and I CTD.. but then again it was during my regular nightly maintainence which I forgot to disable before playing..

I do turn off UAC before I play Hellgate or Crysis, or any process intensive and graphic intesive game so I won't have any permission problems.. however I never had any problem playing them with UAC on.. but I do seem to get better frame rates with UAC turned off..

SFC, I play it with UAC on or off.. I have noticed no change in framerates or connection to the Dynaverse.. and as such, I feel playing with UAC on for that game is just fine..

I also keep UAC on when I am installing to make sure the installs go correctly without corruption.. I also use UAC when working in different software or when browsing the web.. Between the AVG Anti-Virus and UAC (no firewall).. I have yet to get anything on my system for infection, except the occasional tracking cookie..

as for software.. all programs I have installed on here work perfectly with exception of the SFC Networking issue on the D2 (GSA, TCP/IP, and Single player works flawlessly), and Dominion Wars, which won't run on Win NT kernel (which is the predominant kernel in Vista)..

Other than that.. all other games work just fine that I have installed...

KOTOR and KOTOR II works just fine.. only with KOTOR II, you have to copy the MSS32.DLL from KOTOR 1 to KTOTR II folder.. and it works perfectly.

all my other games, all the way back to Win 98SE works just fine both online and single player..

Some games UAC had me reinstall to correct installation errors from CD, but doing that, the games work better than they did on XP or Win 98.

so UAC may have a small annoyance factor, but the benifits of UAC out weigh annoyance any time, especially when it forces software to install properly and work correctly when in XP, it may or may not install correctly.

[Rod ONeal]

XP crashed weekly?!?!? I swear I've never (and I do mean never) had XP crash. I also can't recall ever having a program install incorrectly and having to reinstall it. I've screwed up with OP and installed patches wrong, back when I used to install multiple patches, if that's what you mean? Had to do an uninstall/reinstall then, but that's it.

Does anyone know how to get earlier versions of Studio Max to run on Vista? Since most game modeling plugins are for Max 3 to 5 (not just SFC) that's a major issue for modelers.

[Pestalence_XC]

The problem is not MAX with Vista.. it is the CDILLA verification tool that is not compatible..

Max 8 runs just fine on here.. CDilla account manager is what is broken.. I am looking for a fix for that currently, however the makers of CDilla have no plans of making it Vista compliant since the code is outdated..

I am looking for a work around for it now.

[Rod ONeal]

I had a feeling that it was the license manager and not actually Max. I don't have Vista, but I wonder if Gmax will run on Vista since it doesn't require a license manager running in the background?

That would be great if you could, Pestalence. Not just for the SFC community, either. Many modelers will need this in the future. There's probably little or no chance that I/O pluggins will be recompiled for Max 8+.

[Pestalence_XC]

GMax does work fine in Vista..

I'm still looking for a CDilla work around for Vista.. I need it myself..

I don't know if the Taldren Plugins for 3D Studio Max 5 will work in the current GMax release or not.. I haven't tried.