I Think Windows 7 RC Looks Disappointing - Do You Too?

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: DasFox

Originally posted by: Andrmgic
I'm saying it is more secure to have the built-in admin account disabled, because in earlier versions of windows, you could always tell which account was the administrator account by the hexidecimal value of its entry in the SAM database. In my mind, it makes sense why they did that. I agree that would be better for the account created to be a standard user and have a password to elevate the account to the equivalent of a superuser in a OS X or Linux environment. I know that using an administrator-level account is far less secure, but I'm personally willing to give up a degree of security for the convenience of not having to type in a password whenever I want to do something that requires more rights than my account already has.

Well I guess remembering how the user accounts can be messed up it's good to create an admin account so that if you can't access it then you have the backup account.

Using the standard user account shouldn't just be about typing in the password all the time to do something, it should about having greater security which should be everyone's concern.

Being under a user account should also make it harder against hacks and exploits trying to gain access to the system, where UAC wouldn't being suspecting anything.

You honestly don't get it, do you? UAC has a couple purposes...

In a business environment it simplifies locking down a computer so users can't install software if they're not a local admin.

In a home environment it's a warning, "Hey fucktard, that icon you double clicked is about to make system wide changes... just so ya know."

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

Originally posted by: Fedaykin311
Re: UAC vs Sudo

The UAC alerts that pop up all the time are genuine security concerns, and there are a lot of them because Windows and it's vast library of apps by and large don't behave well from a security standpoint (everything from old dos apps that want direct access to hardware to the latest and greatest ANTI VIRUS program that simply refuses to run without admin privileges).

All major antivirus programs require UAC confirmation ONLY at first installation, for installing the service. Which reputable antivirus program requires UAC at every start-up?

I have Avira Antivir installed on my laptop and Eset NOD32 on my desktop, but they don't require any UAC confirmation EXCEPT for the initial installation. Heck, updating the signatures don't require any UAC. They just do it in the background without any user intervention.

 

[chrisf6969]

So my take on it, with about 24 hours of experience.

1. Feels like Vista 2.0

2. Acts like Vista 2.0

3. Looks like Vista 2.0

4. No email program by default is going to freak some newbs out.
- I downloaded Windows Live Mail, which is really a Vista program, but I'm trying to keep it as much MS software as possible for the full experience.

5. My webcam.... a MICROSOFT VX3000 camera doesn't work! How ironic, of all the webcams to be broken.... a MS one! I know its still Beta software.

6. I wish I had installed the 64-bit version, I downloaded & burned the 32-bit b/c I had planned on installing it on an older PC to test, then changed my mind & dual-booted it on my main PC. e8500, Asus P5K-E, 4Gb, GTX 260, etc.

Problems:
IE locked up once, when I was switching back & forth between a local image & an internet webpage.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: chrisf6969
So my take on it, with about 24 hours of experience.

1. Feels like Vista 2.0

2. Acts like Vista 2.0

3. Looks like Vista 2.0

4. No email program by default is going to freak some newbs out.
- I downloaded Windows Live Mail, which is really a Vista program, but I'm trying to keep it as much MS software as possible for the full experience.

5. My webcam.... a MICROSOFT VX3000 camera doesn't work! How ironic, of all the webcams to be broken.... a MS one! I know its still Beta software.

6. I wish I had installed the 64-bit version, I downloaded & burned the 32-bit b/c I had planned on installing it on an older PC to test, then changed my mind & dual-booted it on my main PC. e8500, Asus P5K-E, 4Gb, GTX 260, etc.

Problems:
IE locked up once, when I was switching back & forth between a local image & an internet webpage.

Let me tackle this real quick.

1-2-3: It is Vista 2.0. Microsoft has said it is basically Vista 2.0. (Vista is the base after all.) There is nothing wrong with Vista to begin with.

4. Thank the EU and companies like Google, Mozilla, Opera and Real Networks for this one.

5. Have you tried to download and install the Vista driver? Windows 7 is compatible with Vista drivers. If that doesn't work, you need to send feed back to Microsoft so they can get it working by RTM. Remember, this is still pre-release software.

6. Can't help you there but you have a chance to correct that with the RTM version.

IE 8 is really good and I have switched back to it because Mozilla refuses to use protected mode and their security is going to hell in a hand basket lately. Then you have disasters like the NoScript debacle which should have never happened to begin with because of poorly thought out add-on policies. What other things at Mozilla are they getting wrong when they can't get these simple and necessary things correct?

Flash is probaly the culprit to your crashes. I dare say 90% of browser crashes today are flash or Java based.

 

[Lepard]

Originally posted by: chrisf6969

5. My webcam.... a MICROSOFT VX3000 camera doesn't work! How ironic, of all the webcams to be broken.... a MS one! I know its still Beta software.

Go here:
http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/windows7/support.mspx

Download the Lifecam software... it will work.

 

[chrisf6969]

Tried the Vista software, it comes up with a warning that says the application is blocked due to incompatibility. I should have screencap its for lulz. (MS cam not working on MS OS)

I think I may delete my 32-bit install & reinstall the 64-bit. Like I said, orginally I had planned on installing Win7 on an older P4 system to play with, but then changed my mind. This will probably be the first version that the 64-bit version is as good or better than the 32-bit. XP & Vista 64-bits both had problems support-wise (drivers, apps, etc) compared to the 32-bit versions.