Windows Vista Question

[jediphx]

What are the reasons to upgrade to Vista and if there are none now when will there be a reason to upgrade to it?

 

[jediphx]

bump

 

[Maximilian]

Heres the reasons i upgraded, some may be relevant to you:

1. Support for more than 4GB of memory on the 64 bit version
2. Bored with XP
3. Its pretty
4. More secure than XP (consult the security thread here for some info on vista security)
5. Games manager, treats games differently from other programs
6. Direct X 10, although i think that by the time DX10 becomes mandatory many gamers will have switched because of the memory limitation anyways. DX9.0c should be supported for a long time.
7. Superfetch is great i have 4GB of ram and vista is plenty fast. Its not much of a resource hog as some would have you believe. I had 2GB up until today and gaming on vista was not affected in any noticeable way.

Heres some reasons not to upgrade:

1. Absolutely crazy price
2. Some programs may not work, *most* will, in fact everything has worked for me, except audacity which crashed when i stop a recording
3. Its not needed right now, i would only really recommend upgrading to vista with a new build, or with somthing with 1GB or more of ram.
4. It comes with a babysitter, his name is UAC, but no fear he can be sent packing by going to help & support, typing UAC and it will detail how to disable it 🙂

In fact just check out the stickied thread about vista in this part of the forum, its got lots of informative stuff in there.

 

[bsobel]

4. It comes with a babysitter, his name is UAC, but no fear he can be sent packing by going to help & support, typing UAC and it will detail how to disable it 🙂

Soviet, any chance you can not post that users should turn off UAC by default? Its there for a reason. However if a user doesn't like it and asks, it's perfectly appropriate to tell them how. However turning it off when their isn't an issue is likely to cause some of us more work (work we'd like to avoid).

Your posts remind me of a series of posts that happened when XP was released. A group of users complained over and over about system restore (apparently it was evil also and likely to cause the end of humanity). People kep saying 'buy XP and then turn off SR'. However, the people they told it to wound up coming back here with problems and we often told them 'system restore back to before it happened'. We got the 'I turned it off, so and so said to...' response and fixing their system was that much harder for us.

Since your basically helping malware writers infect boxes, I'd much prefer your 'victims' to have at least asked the question before you give them the loaded gun.

It's a serious request so I hope you'll at least consider it.

Bill

 

[Pabster]

I agree. Disabling UAC by routine or default is incredibly stupid. Like it or not, it is a major security advantage over previous Windows.

Disabling it for yourself may be acceptable, but I wouldn't do it on the average users' machine.

 

[stash]

Your posts remind me of a series of posts that happened when XP was released. A group of users complained over and over about system restore (apparently it was evil also and likely to cause the end of humanity). People kep saying 'buy XP and then turn off SR'. However, the people they told it to wound up coming back here with problems and we often told them 'system restore back to before it happened'. We got the 'I turned it off, so and so said to...' response and fixing their system was that much harder for us.

That, and the XP SP2 firewall. "It doesn't have outbound filtering and it's from M$, it must be worthless!!!eleventy"

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: bsobel

4. It comes with a babysitter, his name is UAC, but no fear he can be sent packing by going to help & support, typing UAC and it will detail how to disable it 🙂

Soviet, any chance you can not post that users should turn off UAC by default? Its there for a reason. However if a user doesn't like it and asks, it's perfectly appropriate to tell them how. However turning it off when their isn't an issue is likely to cause some of us more work (work we'd like to avoid).

Your posts remind me of a series of posts that happened when XP was released. A group of users complained over and over about system restore (apparently it was evil also and likely to cause the end of humanity). People kep saying 'buy XP and then turn off SR'. However, the people they told it to wound up coming back here with problems and we often told them 'system restore back to before it happened'. We got the 'I turned it off, so and so said to...' response and fixing their system was that much harder for us.

Since your basically helping malware writers infect boxes, I'd much prefer your 'victims' to have at least asked the question before you give them the loaded gun.

It's a serious request so I hope you'll at least consider it.

Bill

UAC reminds me more of messenger service than system restore. Jediphx do what you want with UAC.

EDIT: In fact i just noticed, the stickied thread about vista recommends UAC should be disabled unless you want maximum security. So if people dont hear turn off UAC from me, they will from the sticky or a good chunk of the vista guides/reviews. Its a PITA.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Plus UAC is linked to many security flaws itself. A app can use UAC to basically get you to allow access to your entire system and infect it with whatever virus or trojan it wants. How? Many users will become accustomed to just pressing allow every time the window pops up without even thinking about it.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: bsobel

4. It comes with a babysitter, his name is UAC, but no fear he can be sent packing by going to help & support, typing UAC and it will detail how to disable it 🙂

Soviet, any chance you can not post that users should turn off UAC by default? Its there for a reason. However if a user doesn't like it and asks, it's perfectly appropriate to tell them how. However turning it off when their isn't an issue is likely to cause some of us more work (work we'd like to avoid).

Your posts remind me of a series of posts that happened when XP was released. A group of users complained over and over about system restore (apparently it was evil also and likely to cause the end of humanity). People kep saying 'buy XP and then turn off SR'. However, the people they told it to wound up coming back here with problems and we often told them 'system restore back to before it happened'. We got the 'I turned it off, so and so said to...' response and fixing their system was that much harder for us.

Since your basically helping malware writers infect boxes, I'd much prefer your 'victims' to have at least asked the question before you give them the loaded gun.

It's a serious request so I hope you'll at least consider it.

Bill

UAC reminds me more of messenger service than system restore. Jediphx do what you want with UAC.

EDIT: In fact i just noticed, the stickied thread about vista recommends UAC should be disabled unless you want maximum security. So if people dont hear turn off UAC from me, they will from the sticky or a good chunk of the vista guides/reviews. Its a PITA.

UAC should be left enabled. In today's security landscape, you are increasingly likely to need that proactive layer of protection, and once you get your system set up and stable, you're not going to have to deal with UAC prompts every instant of the day.

If you look at posts 20-39 in the sticky thread, you can see that the foolhardiness of disabling UAC has been brought up. I doubt BD2003 has studied the ramifications of his suggestion, and I doubt you have either. Understanding and Configuring User Account Control in Windows Vista

Turning UAC off opens your computer to system-wide malware installs.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: bsobel

4. It comes with a babysitter, his name is UAC, but no fear he can be sent packing by going to help & support, typing UAC and it will detail how to disable it 🙂

Soviet, any chance you can not post that users should turn off UAC by default? Its there for a reason. However if a user doesn't like it and asks, it's perfectly appropriate to tell them how. However turning it off when their isn't an issue is likely to cause some of us more work (work we'd like to avoid).

Your posts remind me of a series of posts that happened when XP was released. A group of users complained over and over about system restore (apparently it was evil also and likely to cause the end of humanity). People kep saying 'buy XP and then turn off SR'. However, the people they told it to wound up coming back here with problems and we often told them 'system restore back to before it happened'. We got the 'I turned it off, so and so said to...' response and fixing their system was that much harder for us.

Since your basically helping malware writers infect boxes, I'd much prefer your 'victims' to have at least asked the question before you give them the loaded gun.

It's a serious request so I hope you'll at least consider it.

Bill

UAC reminds me more of messenger service than system restore. Jediphx do what you want with UAC.

EDIT: In fact i just noticed, the stickied thread about vista recommends UAC should be disabled unless you want maximum security. So if people dont hear turn off UAC from me, they will from the sticky or a good chunk of the vista guides/reviews. Its a PITA.

UAC should be left enabled. In today's security landscape, you are increasingly likely to need that proactive layer of protection, and once you get your system set up and stable, you're not going to have to deal with UAC prompts every instant of the day.

If you look at posts 20-39 in the sticky thread, you can see that the foolhardiness of disabling UAC has been brought up. I doubt BD2003 has studied the ramifications of his suggestion, and I doubt you have either. Understanding and Configuring User Account Control in Windows Vista

Turning UAC off opens your computer to system-wide malware installs.

Like I said previously, many average users will just press allow to everything regardless.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus UAC is linked to many security flaws itself. A app can use UAC to basically get you to allow access to your entire system and infect it with whatever virus or trojan it wants. How? Many users will become accustomed to just pressing allow every time the window pops up without even thinking about it.

1) Are you aware of Windows Integrity Control on Vista? 2-page article to read from bsobel's crew 😎

When a user receives an email with a link to a malicious web site (the sort of email they have been told a thousand times to delete), and he clicks on it, the malicious web site may attempt to install some sort of nasty malware. The malware will typically copy itself to some location on the hard drive and modify Registry keys to ensure its continued existence. It may also try to modify or delete other files or execute processes to initiate other malicious activity.

In Windows XP or older systems, whether or not the malware succeeds is more or less a function of the rights and privileges of the logged in user and whether or not the system and Registry have been hardened or protected in any way to block such attempts. With Vista, because everything related to the Internet runs at a Low integrity level, the malware will be unable to modify, delete or interact with virtually anything else on the system.

2) if the user is going to throw the door wide open and deliberately run stuff that's a Trojan, then that's a massive PEBKAC.


edit: also read this post. Vista shrugged off about 95% of the ~2000 malware samples the Symantec researchers tried on it. Granted, the bad guys are bound to try new ways to get a foothold, but that's a hard benefit to ignore. That is UAC at work, along with other new security capabilities.

 

[jediphx]

damn i seemed to have opened a hornets nest here 🙂 Sorry

 

[slpaulson]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus UAC is linked to many security flaws itself. A app can use UAC to basically get you to allow access to your entire system and infect it with whatever virus or trojan it wants. How? Many users will become accustomed to just pressing allow every time the window pops up without even thinking about it.

Forgive me if I'm ignorant, but how does turning off UAC stop applications from having access to your system? I always thought that turning off UAC is essentially like running everything as root in linux.

 

[Shawn]

I got it for the new Media Center. Everything else is an added bonus, but I love it. I couldn't go back to XP now. Even Windows Explorer has been greatly improved.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: cRazYdood

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus UAC is linked to many security flaws itself. A app can use UAC to basically get you to allow access to your entire system and infect it with whatever virus or trojan it wants. How? Many users will become accustomed to just pressing allow every time the window pops up without even thinking about it.

Forgive me if I'm ignorant, but how does turning off UAC stop applications from having access to your system? I always thought that turning off UAC is essentially like running everything as root in linux.

He is wrong and just repeating FUD he's heard elsewhere.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus UAC is linked to many security flaws itself. A app can use UAC to basically get you to allow access to your entire system and infect it with whatever virus or trojan it wants. How? Many users will become accustomed to just pressing allow every time the window pops up without even thinking about it.

As compared to the alternative, already having full acces to your system right? Sorry, UAC is causing a good slow down in Vista infection rates. Data it's hard to argue with. Of course, I suspect this is your opinion and based on something you read elsewhere. If it's not, I'd love to hear your qualifications to be making security arguments on an OS (Like to know whom Im discussing this with since your view is contrary to so many security professionals in the space)....

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: bsobel

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus UAC is linked to many security flaws itself. A app can use UAC to basically get you to allow access to your entire system and infect it with whatever virus or trojan it wants. How? Many users will become accustomed to just pressing allow every time the window pops up without even thinking about it.

As compared to the alternative, already having full acces to your system right? Sorry, UAC is causing a good slow down in Vista infection rates. Data it's hard to argue with. Of course, I suspect this is your opinion and based on something you read elsewhere. If it's not, I'd love to hear your qualifications to be making security arguments on an OS (Like to know whom Im discussing this with since your view is contrary to so many security professionals in the space)....

Bsobel is right on target here. I'm far from totally pleased with Vista and UAC, but it WORKS, pita it might be from time to time. Improvement is always possible, however, and I think it will work better as time goes on (of course the malware/spyware programmers will probably adapt somewhat as well, inevitably).

Relating to Vista upgrade, I think Vista is a no-brainer as long as you're working with modern high-end hardware. You're going to get a much longer lifespan than with XP at this point, as XP is going to be forced obsolete by three things :

(1)- 4GB Ram limit
(2)- No DX10
(3)- Less/Weaker Drivers for future hardware

On my personal systems, I still use XP primarily, but even I can see the writing on the wall 🙂

 

[Mem]

I actually like UAC now yes it was a pain at first,especially for XP users going over to Vista,however after the very first few weeks or so I'm now use to it.

It's only one extra click for added security so nothing drastic.

 

[Brazen]

Turning off UAC makes baby Jesus cry.

edit: ok, I know the whole "baby Jesus cry" argument is lame, but I was in a hurry when I wrote this, and their are already good arguments for leaving UAC on.