I turned off UAC

Gordon

"Ian D" <taurus@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:etq0xn%23jJHA.1928@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>
> "tweakvista" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
> news:102607acebb660d25d736c9aff97ce06@nntp-gateway.com...[color=green]
>>
>> Disabling UAC is not dangerious at all tbh. It is rather annoying and
>> unless your a 'newb' i suggest disabling it.
>>
>> If you know what your doing on your computer the only thing you really
>> need is a firewall and not an anti-virus.
>>
>>
>> --
>> tweakvista[/color]
>
> I see something of a double standard here. Running Vista without
> UAC enabled is a big, "no-no," yet running XP, which has no such
> "protection" is perfectly acceptable, although Vista without UAC
> is probably still more secure than XP.
>[/color]


XP doesn't have UAC. And yes, XP users should run as a User on a daily basis
rather than an Admin but most people have been too lazy or ignorant to do
so.

--
Asking a question?
Please tell us the version of the application you are asking about,
your OS, Service Pack level
and the FULL contents of any error message(s)

Spirit

[url]http://www.tweak-uac.com/[/url]
Tweak UAC Utility - put UAC in Quiet Mode or On/OFF easily

[url]http://xenomorph.net/?page_id=336[/url]
Vista Tweaker - UAC too

[url]http://www.petri.co.il/disable_uac_in_windows_vista.htm[/url]
Disable UAC

[url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa905108.aspx[/url]
User Account Control

[url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa906022.aspx[/url]
TechNet Getting Started with UAC

[url]http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVista/en/library/0d75f774-8514-4c9e-ac08-4c21f5c6c2d91033.mspx?mfr=true[/url]
Windows Vista User Account Control Step by Step Guide

[url]http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/windows/en-us/help/f941cb45-b2cd-4b39-ab87-cb9ea959f44e1033.mspx[/url]
Understanding UAC

"Justin" <Justin@nobecauseihatespam> wrote in message
news:uQgoQMzjJHA.4028@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> For various reasons I turned off UAC.
> Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from warning
> me constantly?[/color]

DanS

Justin <Justin@nobecauseihatespam> wrote in
news:upSuRh9jJHA.4760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

(Top-posted for brevity.....)

Don't you just love it how some people, when they hear you don't like
something, it's because you don't understand it or how to use it or too
stupid to understand it.

How come, I know what it does, I know how it works, I don't like it is
never good enough for some people. (rhetorical)






[color=blue]
> Jack the Ripper wrote:[color=green]
>> Justin wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Kayman wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 01:03:01 -0500, Justin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> For various reasons I turned off UAC.
>>>>> Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from
>>>>> warning me constantly?
>>>>
>>>> Five Misunderstood Features in Windows Vista
>>>> ¡E User Account Control
>>>> ¡E Image management
>>>> ¡E Display Driver Model
>>>> ¡E Search
>>>> ¡E 64 bit architecture
>>>> [url]http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=34f40386-96[/url]
>>>> 61-49b1-87ce-6d4a39e83747&DisplayLang=en
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The User Access Control (UAC) can detect rootkits before they
>>>> install. AV-Test.org carried on a test of common AV applications to
>>>> find out how good they detected rootkits. The examiner had to turn
>>>> off UAC because it detected every rootkit used in the test.
>>>>
>>>> Avoiding Rootkit Infection.
>>>> "The rules to avoid rootkit infection are for the most part the
>>>> same as avoiding any malware infection however there are some
>>>> special considerations:
>>>> Because rootkits meddle with the operating system itself they
>>>> *require* full Administrator rights to install. Hence infection can
>>>> be avoided by running Windows from an account with *lesser*
>>>> privileges" (LUA in XP and UAC in Vista).
>>>>
>>>> You should understand the reason why UAC is there. You should read
>>>> about the two access tokens for user/admin on Vista, and yes, if
>>>> UAC is disabled,
>>>> then Run As Administrator is disabled too.
>>>>
>>>> [url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc709691.aspx[/url]
>>>> [url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc160882.aspx[/url]
>>>> [url]http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc138019.aspx[/url]
>>>>
>>>> Now, listen to the experts and be guided accordingly!
>>>>
>>>> Good luck :)
>>>
>>>
>>> I understand why UAC is there.
>>> I also understand that it interferes with Firefox/Thunderbird's
>>> update and the Java updater as well.[/color]
>>
>> Interferes as far as what? I have Thunderbird and Java in use, and I
>> see no interference with UAC enabled, other than you have to approve
>> the update.[/color]
>
> As in when it tried to update, the UAC prompt comes up; I allow it and
> it still doesn't update.
>
>[color=green]
>>
>> Do you really know what UAC is about? It's about not allowing a
>> user-admin to run on the Internet or do anything else as a
>> full-rights admin like on XP.[/color]
>
> I know that.
>
>[color=green]
>>
>> The admin-user is only a user with Standard user rights, that must be
>> escalated to admin rights, the escalation to full-admin rights only
>> last for the moment of escalation to do the task, and then the admin
>> user is returned to being a Standard user again with Standard user
>> rights only, not admin rights.[/color]
>
> I know that too.
>[color=green]
>>
>> Unlike XP that has no UAC, Vista doesn't allow a virus or malware the
>> ability to have full rein on the computer once it has compromised the
>> machine like on XP with a full-rights admin user using the machine.
>>
>> Malware or a virus can only run under the context of the user account
>> that is using the computer. If admin user on Vista is only a Standard
>> user with Standard user rights in reality that must be escalated to
>> full admin rights, then that mitigates the damage that can occur
>> because the virus or malware is not running with full admin rights
>> with the user that's using an admin account on Vista.[/color]
>
> I know that too.
>[color=green]
>>
>> Nothing is bulletproof, but one doesn't see a lot of posts by Vista
>> users about virus or malware issues, not like you see on XP.
>>
>>[/color][/color]

Jack the Ripper

Justin wrote:[color=blue]
> Jack the Ripper wrote:[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> I understand why UAC is there.
>>> I also understand that it interferes with Firefox/Thunderbird's
>>> update and the Java updater as well.[/color]
>>
>> Interferes as far as what? I have Thunderbird and Java in use, and I
>> see no interference with UAC enabled, other than you have to approve
>> the update.[/color]
>
> As in when it tried to update, the UAC prompt comes up; I allow it and
> it still doesn't update.[/color]

And some how, you think this is a UAC problem? When on the same token, I
do it and I have no problem?

Jack the Ripper

DanS wrote:[color=blue]
> Justin <Justin@nobecauseihatespam> wrote in
> news:upSuRh9jJHA.4760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>
> (Top-posted for brevity.....)
>
> Don't you just love it how some people, when they hear you don't like
> something, it's because you don't understand it or how to use it or too
> stupid to understand it.[/color]

Which is usually the case.[color=blue]
>
> How come, I know what it does, I know how it works, I don't like it is
> never good enough for some people. (rhetorical)[/color]

This is your pov, which is not good enough.

paliometoxo

well for those who only read email and visit a few websites how much
skill do you really need to do that?:)


--
paliometoxo

Jack the Ripper

paliometoxo wrote:[color=blue]
> well for those who only read email and visit a few websites how much
> skill do you really need to do that?:)
>
>[/color]

Are you taking to yourself? How much trouble would it be for you to
learn how to reply post.

DanS

Jack the Ripper <Jack@Rripper.com> wrote in news:ejlXzxHkJHA.4028
@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
[color=blue]
> DanS wrote:[color=green]
>> Justin <Justin@nobecauseihatespam> wrote in
>> news:upSuRh9jJHA.4760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>>
>> (Top-posted for brevity.....)
>>
>> Don't you just love it how some people, when they hear you don't like
>> something, it's because you don't understand it or how to use it or too
>> stupid to understand it.[/color]
>
> Which is usually the case.[color=green]
>>
>> How come, I know what it does, I know how it works, I don't like it is
>> never good enough for some people. (rhetorical)[/color]
>
> This is your pov, which is not good enough.[/color]

Not good enough for ???????

Gene E. Bloch

On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 12:17:43 +0200, Thegrackfire wrote:
[color=blue]
> Not Even Me wrote:[color=green]
>> "Kayman" <kayhkay-nospam-@operamail.com> wrote in message
>> news:tkyvtjw916zj.1t5r5ei02wrl4.dlg@40tude.net...[color=darkred]
>>> Now, listen to the experts and be guided accordingly!
>>> Good luck :)[/color]
>>
>> Most users with a brain don't like the constant nagging of UAC.
>> As good as the idea may be, the implementation is so poor as to render it
>> useless.
>>
>>[/color]
>
> no one seems to have mentioned [url]www.tweakuac.com[/url]
>
> TweakUACâ„¢ is a free software tool that you can use to quickly turn UAC
> (User Account Control of Windows Vista) on or off, or to make UAC
> operate in the quiet mode. This software is FREE, no strings attached.[/color]

OK, then, I'll mention it :-)

However, in quiet mode, TweakUAC still makes Windows bring up the annoying
shield that the OP wanted to get rid of.

I decided not to follow your advice about turning that off, though, in case
some significant message would eventually be suppressed. Just paranoia, I
guess.

--
Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom

Jack the Ripper

DanS wrote:[color=blue]
> Jack the Ripper <Jack@Rripper.com> wrote in news:ejlXzxHkJHA.4028
> @TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>[color=green]
>> DanS wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Justin <Justin@nobecauseihatespam> wrote in
>>> news:upSuRh9jJHA.4760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>> (Top-posted for brevity.....)
>>>
>>> Don't you just love it how some people, when they hear you don't like
>>> something, it's because you don't understand it or how to use it or too
>>> stupid to understand it.[/color]
>> Which is usually the case.[color=darkred]
>>> How come, I know what it does, I know how it works, I don't like it is
>>> never good enough for some people. (rhetorical)[/color]
>> This is your pov, which is not good enough.[/color]
>
> Not good enough for ???????[/color]

You are boring.