Windows 7: Putting limits on users' privileges... Windows UAC

Well myself since testing Vista early on in its development, learned to run a good security system and virus protection and always enable the hidden Admin account and use it instead of the regular user account with Admin privileges and have never had to deal with the UAC as far as i am concerned. I get confused when I go to a friends house and have to fix there system, with UAC pop-ups and have to keep clicking on yes ok.

I am not going to flame you but you are doing your friends, family, neighbors, customers, and clients a huge disfavor if you do not thoroughly explain to them that you have completely disabled all their Windows Security and that just browsing the internet is extremely dangerous.

Maybe you don’t realize it; but Microsoft added all this security because of the Home User. Microsoft spent millions researching problems with Home User computers and gathered tons of data and complaints from Home Users on what they wished Microsoft would to protect their computer, keep it from crashing, and protect the system from inexperienced User mistakes. These changes are to protect the Home User from the evils of the world and the Home User from themselves. JMHO.

Respectfully, that is because “Documents and Settings” do not exist in Windows 7, not knowing that is exposing your lack of knowledge of Windows. I have installed many Windows 7 machines for Home Users and have NEVER had to take ownership of anything, turn off UAC, enable the Administrator account, or disable any of the security on the machine. They never complain and everything works perfectly. It all comes down to learning how Windows 7 works and using it, not spending all your time trying to force it to do something unprotected, like the Windows 98 days. JMHO.

Too each his own, I say. It kinda reminds me of the ongoing argument between people over which is better: standard transmission (where the driver has to do a bit more work) or automatic transmission. The easiest solution and answer to the debate is, "Whatever works best for the individual involved."

I think a better comparison would be “Airbag” or “No Airbag”. I don’t like the Airbag because it makes my steering wheel big and bulky, and I have to have the horn in a different spot. Let’s disable the Airbag and replace the steering wheel so I can have a clean easy to use steering wheel. Great when there were fewer cars on the road. (Disable Security; Great when there were fewer Windows Machines on the Internet).

You are right it is completely up to the end user; however I would much prefer to deal with the bulky steering wheel and have the safety then not. - WS

Removing the Airbag makes the vehicle less safe. Not telling the end user is irresponsible.

Removing security in Windows makes it less safe. Not telling the end user is irresponsible.

WIndows Star, what an excellent series of posts.

You are absolutely right of course. Whilst I can see people's point about UAC, it bugged the hell out of me in Vista too. I barely even notice it any more. I like the way it has been toned down for windows 7. In Vista, if you wanted to move something into a "restricted" zone (like for instance "Program Files") you used to get 3 UAC prompts. One telling you that you needed to be Admin to do it. A UAC popup, and then ANOTHER "You need to be Admin" for this, once you had given it UAC Clearance. With Win 7 its just one "yes I am the Admin, carry on" click.

I am not going to sit here and tell people who know what their doing to leave UAC on. You understand the risks, and your choosing to take them anyway, thats your choice.

What I do take exception to however, is advising Home Users to switch it off. Its just irresponsible IMO. I will now conclude this post, with my reponses to some of the funnier posts in this thread.

I am a Home computer user who started out with their first computer on Windows 95. I like UAC. I'd rather that than have a drive by download install itself without even a chance of me finding out about it until it's too late

Why do you need to contact an IT specialist? Is it really that hard to click Yes?

So you want to give someone who doesn't know what their doing, complete unfettered access to their system? I can only assume you work in Malware removal and are trying to drum up business.....

Until you get a virus disguising itself as one of these trusted apps.... Admittedly though, if by "non networked" you mean "not on the internet" then your probably fairly safe, as long as you never plug any external devices like USB sticks in

I started computing over 30 years ago, when Gates & Allen were still playing PacMan and dreaming big. UAC has never been a nightmare to me, in fact I am quite thankful it's there. Mostly, it's just a mouse click every now and then.

I've helped a lot of people to migrate to Vista and later to Seven. When I have explained UAC and showed some examples, the reaction has normally been quite positive. "That's nice. So I don't have to be afraid something is installed without my knowledge, and I get like a warning if I'm trying to delete some important stuff".

A very subjective, personal opinion: I find that an irresponsible way to work with a customer's / friend's computer.

My way is totally opposite. I don't touch UAC, leaving it as it is set by default. I most definitely do not take ownership of the stuff the makers of windows have gone an extra mile to protect.

I then show and explain the UAC to the owner / user of that computer, letting him / her to decide.

I would like to know in which kind of scenarios the UAC don't let the owner of the computer do something without contacting an IT specialist?

A happy UAC user Kari

Thank you all for a very stimulating conversation, but I'm going to UN-Subscribe from this thread now. It's been great, but not that great!
Old quote, "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still".

Cheers Mates!
Doc

In other words,, Ignorance is Bliss.

XP ideology does not work in a 7 world. Time for some people to learn some new tricks. like using a PC as it is meant to be used, not how they want it to be used. Or don't use Windows.

Some people are providing a disservice, and wish to remain ignorant of new ideas, tools and procedures.

As Mike Holmes always says, "Old procedures with New Products don't mix".

EDIT: I have to say,,, Your signature quote is quite contradictory to your post, don't you think?

Picture this scenario: You're browsing the web and a virus somehow gets into your computer. Depending on whether or not the UAC is on, you may either see a little warning that something is trying to install itself on your computer or you may see nothing and then wake up the next day to see that your computer has been destroyed by a virus.

The UAC and its Mac/Linux equivalents are there for a reason. In Windows XP, the default user had complete control over his/her computer. It was like an administrator account on steroids. Also, there was no UAC, meaning there was no warning if a virus invaded. Since you have an administrator account, that virus will now be able to completely take over your computer and lodge itself deep within the system. Now, with Windows Vista and Windows 7, you can avoid that. You may be just browsing the web and all of a sudden, you see a UAC alert pop up despite the fact that you never told the computer to install anything. This is your first clue that a virus has made it into your computer, but thanks to the UAC, that virus cannot activate to destroy your computer. This gives you time to scan your computer, hunt down that virus, and kill it. In Windows XP, by the time the antivirus catches the program, it will have already activated itself and will have begun to destroy your computer.

The UAC is looking pretty good now, isn't it?