How is sudo in Unix a good security feature while UAC in Windows is a diaper? Its basically the same thing: a way to elevate priveledges for certain tasks.
What kind of text were you copying exactly? I'd like to try and recreate this when I get home. Are you sure it was Vista and not just an IE7 specific anti-phishing technique? I ask because I haven't had this problem at all in Firefox 2.0, and I can see them preventing the copying of URLs so that users aren't phished by an email that says something like "Copy and paste this url in a new browser window, and then enter your account information. And remember to never click on links in an email!"
Sorry, but linux and OSX only ask you for your password when doing potentially dangerous things. You are not prompted when moving files from one of your own folders to another of your own folders. You are not prompted when editing your own menus.
In theory UAC should behave like this as well. UAC is mostly a way of elevating priveledges, just like sudo, minus the password. Administrators on Windows actually run under lower priveledge accounts, and then elevate for specific tasks that require administrator priveledges.
See, the real problem is so many things in Windows requires Administrator by default. Even stuff that shouldn't. Thats the real problem here.
Of course, linux and OSX have fine-grained mechanisms to grant/revoke permissions for any file, folder, or program. If I wanted to install openoffice as my cousin vinnie, I could do so.
You can do this in Window's too. It has a "Run As" option, and ACLs that let you any arbitrary number of users or groups' access to the file.
Its mostly because Windows has been so piss-poor with their default settings in the past, so trying to get a more secure-by-default setup is like pulling teeth. I remember once reading in a security book that integrating security into your application after the fact is several times harder than designing it that way by default. Windows is in the unenviable position of having to integrate security after the fact.
Regardless, I think that a Windows version of sudo is a very good step. They just should have spent more time working on permissions so that it didn't trigger so much (assuming that what the posters' have said is accurate). The setup thing in TFA is kinda stupid, but installers almost always write to Program Files in Windows, and rarely have a per-user installation method like in Linux. A better solution would have been to try and encourage installers to have a per-user installation method.
Anyways, it may be that I'm just lucky that I haven't had a lot of problems with UAC. But I haven't had to go registry diving or modify any system directories in Vista yet, so theres that too.
It could be that as a matter of course I don't use Windows in the same way as these other people do, or they could be using beta versions. I'm not ready to chalk it up to zealotry just yet.
Er what? For me, it only gave the nag screen when accessing the control panel, installing software, running software with administrative priveledges, or running Visual Studio. The Visual Studio thing is annoying, but other than that, all of the other things are the exact same sort of things that I have to sudo for in Linux. Except I'm not having to enter a password, just click a box. I'm not sure where the big gripe comes from, and honestly I feel like people are blowing it way out of proportion. Unless I'm coding (opening and closing Visual Studio) or changing the configuration of my machine, I never see the UAC box. So I barely see it during normal usage.
Not including monitor. But then again, they often end up being fairly high end machines. Usually 2 gigs of RAM and a 7th or 8th generation GeForce card. It's possible to skimp it down lower, but then it wouldn't be at PS3 levels of graphical prowess.
Metroid Prime 2 was one of those games for me. It was when I got the invisibility goggles and realized I was going to have to crawl all around the entire map looking for some invisible platform that I couldn't see before.
Lately, I'm very quick to drop games. Its pretty rare for me to actually finish a game these days.
I did read it. And yes, I think its BS. Apple has always been about giving anti-DRM lip service then gleefully locking in their customers when it wasn't necessary. Mac OSX? Indie music on iTunes? Yeah, he says that licensing Fairplay is "too hard." I don't believe him, and if he really didn't feel that DRM was necessary, then he wouldn't lose too much sleep about it being cracked. Its not like the *AA have sued DRM makers when their DRM was cracked.
Perhaps this same conclusion contributed to Microsoft's recent decision to switch their emphasis from an "open" model of licensing their DRM to others to a "closed" model of offering a proprietary music store, proprietary jukebox software and proprietary players.
Funny, I distinctly remember everyone attributing that in to typical Microsoft lock-in. I can't disagree with them on that point.
Apple has concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies.
Again, its been managed in the past. I'm sure that they could come up with something. Barring that, the music industry didn't seem too broken up about current methods to remove or circumvent the DRM. Sounds like BS to me.
Nope, still don't buy it. Why doesn't Microsoft have the same problems? After all, lets face it, their security record is a whole lot worse than Apple's. I don't recall there ever being a case where the manufacturer of a DRM method was held liable when their protection was cracked. Otherwise, a lot of companies that provide DRM for PC games would be out of business right now.
And thats setting aside the fact that there are ways to manage such issues.
Believe Jobs all you want, but he's not some saintly good guy, and Apple aren't some doo-gooder company. You can look at their litigious history to confirm that.
Say what you will of Steve Jobs, he whole-heartedly believes in Apple's products, and in their ability to compete on a level playing-field.
Complete and utter bullshit. If he truly did so, then Apple wouldn't be using that DRM that they were "forced into using" to lock you into their hardware and software. They're getting sued over this in Europe for a reason.
I'll believe that line of reasoning when I'm able to use music bought and downloaded from their music store on anything other than iTunes and my iPod. And no, jumping through hoops and degrading music quality to remove the DRM doesn't count.
I don't believe it for a second. If he was really pressured into it by the record companies, then why does Apple refuse to license their DRM? Why do they have to be sued by European countries to open up access to iTunes bought music?
No, Apple LOVES the lock-in. This is all about playing the blame game, and trying to pass the buck to save Apple's reputation.
Every time there's a DRM article and Apple is mentioned, fanboys pop out of the woodwork and loudly proclaim that Job's is a saint and the evil RIAA twisted his arm into it. And yet they have no problem using it to try and lock iTunes users into the iPod. I'm sure their PR department is estatic that people actually believe that crap.
Much of the team who made Xenogears left for Namco. Xenosaga is the end result of that, and it's pretty much the successor to Xenogears. Whether its better than Xenogears is pretty iffy.
Some of us out there have a really hard time making friends. You are able to just make friends because you've passively learned the social protocols for doing so. They've become second nature to you. But there are a lot of people out there who, for one reason or another, never really learned the proper protocols, or haven't learned them to the degree that they are able to make friends easily. Woe be to you if you're one of these people and an adult. It effects every area of your life, and you are given almost no opportunity to learn by doing. People tend to not want to put up with socially awkward people in their inner circle. There's some very real value in being able to study behavior to make up for lost time, and apply those lessons to our own behavior, so we have some hope of fitting in.
I've been running Vista for a couple of months now. Sometime in December, my iPod got bricked. I could operate the menus and everything, but all my music was erased, iTunes refused to synch with the iPod, and trying to restore it to factory settings failed with a generic error. Apple had to replace my iPod.
Hasn't happened again since then. Based on forum posts, it seemed like the culprit was a specific version of iTunes, so I don't know if it was fixed by Apple's side or if I just got lucky.
iTunes seems rather picky about synching up with the iPod in Vista though. I usually have to fiddle around with it for a while before iTunes picks it up.
Still, I wouldn't call that a very good excuse for lacking support for a mainstream board chipset, if that is actually what happened, instead of some fringe driver conflict situation. After all, Vista happily installed default drivers for my nForce 4 board. I'd say nForce 2 is young enough that it should be supported.
So, what problems are people having? I read the articles, but the class action site is slashdotted.
All I know is, I have a 7800 GT, and have been running Vista since it was put up on MSDN two months ago. I've had zero problems with my video card, using the drivers nVidia provided. That includes gaming too.
Maybe I'm the exception to the rule, but I've only ever had one PS2. And this is one of the older models, long before the slimlines even came out. I think I bought it in 2002 or 2003.
Slashdot Mirror
How is sudo in Unix a good security feature while UAC in Windows is a diaper? Its basically the same thing: a way to elevate priveledges for certain tasks.
What kind of text were you copying exactly? I'd like to try and recreate this when I get home. Are you sure it was Vista and not just an IE7 specific anti-phishing technique? I ask because I haven't had this problem at all in Firefox 2.0, and I can see them preventing the copying of URLs so that users aren't phished by an email that says something like "Copy and paste this url in a new browser window, and then enter your account information. And remember to never click on links in an email!"
In theory UAC should behave like this as well. UAC is mostly a way of elevating priveledges, just like sudo, minus the password. Administrators on Windows actually run under lower priveledge accounts, and then elevate for specific tasks that require administrator priveledges.
See, the real problem is so many things in Windows requires Administrator by default. Even stuff that shouldn't. Thats the real problem here.
Of course, linux and OSX have fine-grained mechanisms to grant/revoke permissions for any file, folder, or program. If I wanted to install openoffice as my cousin vinnie, I could do so.
You can do this in Window's too. It has a "Run As" option, and ACLs that let you any arbitrary number of users or groups' access to the file.
Its mostly because Windows has been so piss-poor with their default settings in the past, so trying to get a more secure-by-default setup is like pulling teeth. I remember once reading in a security book that integrating security into your application after the fact is several times harder than designing it that way by default. Windows is in the unenviable position of having to integrate security after the fact.
Regardless, I think that a Windows version of sudo is a very good step. They just should have spent more time working on permissions so that it didn't trigger so much (assuming that what the posters' have said is accurate). The setup thing in TFA is kinda stupid, but installers almost always write to Program Files in Windows, and rarely have a per-user installation method like in Linux. A better solution would have been to try and encourage installers to have a per-user installation method.
Anyways, it may be that I'm just lucky that I haven't had a lot of problems with UAC. But I haven't had to go registry diving or modify any system directories in Vista yet, so theres that too.
In my experience its more like the Windows version of sudo. Maybe my usage patterns match Microsoft's closer than the parents.
It could be that as a matter of course I don't use Windows in the same way as these other people do, or they could be using beta versions. I'm not ready to chalk it up to zealotry just yet.
Er what? For me, it only gave the nag screen when accessing the control panel, installing software, running software with administrative priveledges, or running Visual Studio. The Visual Studio thing is annoying, but other than that, all of the other things are the exact same sort of things that I have to sudo for in Linux. Except I'm not having to enter a password, just click a box. I'm not sure where the big gripe comes from, and honestly I feel like people are blowing it way out of proportion. Unless I'm coding (opening and closing Visual Studio) or changing the configuration of my machine, I never see the UAC box. So I barely see it during normal usage.
Not including monitor. But then again, they often end up being fairly high end machines. Usually 2 gigs of RAM and a 7th or 8th generation GeForce card. It's possible to skimp it down lower, but then it wouldn't be at PS3 levels of graphical prowess.
I'd like to know how you make a $500 PC with a GTS8800 and a C2D. Don't 8800's cost $500 in and of themselves?
Most C2D machines I price out end up being between $1000-1500.
Metroid Prime 2 was one of those games for me. It was when I got the invisibility goggles and realized I was going to have to crawl all around the entire map looking for some invisible platform that I couldn't see before.
Lately, I'm very quick to drop games. Its pretty rare for me to actually finish a game these days.
I did read it. And yes, I think its BS. Apple has always been about giving anti-DRM lip service then gleefully locking in their customers when it wasn't necessary. Mac OSX? Indie music on iTunes? Yeah, he says that licensing Fairplay is "too hard." I don't believe him, and if he really didn't feel that DRM was necessary, then he wouldn't lose too much sleep about it being cracked. Its not like the *AA have sued DRM makers when their DRM was cracked.
Funny, I distinctly remember everyone attributing that in to typical Microsoft lock-in. I can't disagree with them on that point.
Apple has concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies.
Again, its been managed in the past. I'm sure that they could come up with something. Barring that, the music industry didn't seem too broken up about current methods to remove or circumvent the DRM. Sounds like BS to me.
Nope, still don't buy it. Why doesn't Microsoft have the same problems? After all, lets face it, their security record is a whole lot worse than Apple's. I don't recall there ever being a case where the manufacturer of a DRM method was held liable when their protection was cracked. Otherwise, a lot of companies that provide DRM for PC games would be out of business right now.
And thats setting aside the fact that there are ways to manage such issues.
Believe Jobs all you want, but he's not some saintly good guy, and Apple aren't some doo-gooder company. You can look at their litigious history to confirm that.
Yeah I've already been modded troll for saying this exact same thing. Good luck to you.
Say what you will of Steve Jobs, he whole-heartedly believes in Apple's products, and in their ability to compete on a level playing-field.
Complete and utter bullshit. If he truly did so, then Apple wouldn't be using that DRM that they were "forced into using" to lock you into their hardware and software. They're getting sued over this in Europe for a reason.
I'll believe that line of reasoning when I'm able to use music bought and downloaded from their music store on anything other than iTunes and my iPod. And no, jumping through hoops and degrading music quality to remove the DRM doesn't count.
I don't believe it for a second. If he was really pressured into it by the record companies, then why does Apple refuse to license their DRM? Why do they have to be sued by European countries to open up access to iTunes bought music?
No, Apple LOVES the lock-in. This is all about playing the blame game, and trying to pass the buck to save Apple's reputation.
Every time there's a DRM article and Apple is mentioned, fanboys pop out of the woodwork and loudly proclaim that Job's is a saint and the evil RIAA twisted his arm into it. And yet they have no problem using it to try and lock iTunes users into the iPod. I'm sure their PR department is estatic that people actually believe that crap.
This second image is of a Windows Server running IIS.
You are wrong.
Much of the team who made Xenogears left for Namco. Xenosaga is the end result of that, and it's pretty much the successor to Xenogears. Whether its better than Xenogears is pretty iffy.
Some of us out there have a really hard time making friends. You are able to just make friends because you've passively learned the social protocols for doing so. They've become second nature to you. But there are a lot of people out there who, for one reason or another, never really learned the proper protocols, or haven't learned them to the degree that they are able to make friends easily. Woe be to you if you're one of these people and an adult. It effects every area of your life, and you are given almost no opportunity to learn by doing. People tend to not want to put up with socially awkward people in their inner circle. There's some very real value in being able to study behavior to make up for lost time, and apply those lessons to our own behavior, so we have some hope of fitting in.
I've been running Vista for a couple of months now. Sometime in December, my iPod got bricked. I could operate the menus and everything, but all my music was erased, iTunes refused to synch with the iPod, and trying to restore it to factory settings failed with a generic error. Apple had to replace my iPod.
Hasn't happened again since then. Based on forum posts, it seemed like the culprit was a specific version of iTunes, so I don't know if it was fixed by Apple's side or if I just got lucky.
iTunes seems rather picky about synching up with the iPod in Vista though. I usually have to fiddle around with it for a while before iTunes picks it up.
Er, I am running the 64 bit version of Vista.
Still, I wouldn't call that a very good excuse for lacking support for a mainstream board chipset, if that is actually what happened, instead of some fringe driver conflict situation. After all, Vista happily installed default drivers for my nForce 4 board. I'd say nForce 2 is young enough that it should be supported.
So, what problems are people having? I read the articles, but the class action site is slashdotted.
All I know is, I have a 7800 GT, and have been running Vista since it was put up on MSDN two months ago. I've had zero problems with my video card, using the drivers nVidia provided. That includes gaming too.
Huh seriously? I have Vista 64 bit, and a NVidia board, and I just popped in a DVD an hour ago. Seems to work fine.
Maybe I'm the exception to the rule, but I've only ever had one PS2. And this is one of the older models, long before the slimlines even came out. I think I bought it in 2002 or 2003.