Vista - things to know.

[Kitsune]

I may as well toss out the other side of the coin after railing on macintosh OS for a bit.  In the interests of full disclosure, my consulting company is a gold certified Microsoft partner, so if you want to believe I'm a MS fanboy, you may do so now.  However, the profit margin on Microsoft's crap is razor-thin, so honestly I have no real stake in people buying their stuff from me, it just looks impressive in the phone book ad to say I'm a gold MS partner.  My money comes from the labor, as I can't make squat off of the hardware or software.

Anyhow, words of advice.

1. Consider Home Basic over Home Premium.  You lose the flashy transparent graphics on the desktop, a DVD movie maker, an automated backup (you can still run manual backups), the Tivo-ish media center program, and some extra games.  Most people don't need any of those things, and it can save you forty bucks.

2. Upgrading is possible, but kind of a rip-off.  Buying Home Premium costs forty bucks more than Home Basic.  However, upgrading from Home Basic to Home Premium costs eighty bucks.  Cheaper than having to buy a new retail box like you did for XP, but more than you might expect.

3. DO NOT RUN AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNT  This part is important.  If you run an admin account in Vista, it will block you with a verification prompt whenever you do something that could be a security risk.  That's why people keep seeing the 'are you sure?  confirm/deny' window that everyone is complaining about.  Make a non-admin account and use that, instead.  As if by magic, those windows will vanish.  You'll only see the occasional request to enter the admin password when doing something that requires administrative privileges, like installing a new program or mucking around with control panel settings.

4. You don't have to update, spyware scan, or defrag.  All three of those are run automatically by the OS in the background now.  It will ask you for permission to install updates that it finds, and will prompt you if Defender finds spyware and wants to know what you want to do with it.  Other than that, the computer'll take care of itself for those things.  You still need to get and run an anti-virus program, or configure it to auto-scan, whichever you prefer.  AVG works fine on Vista.

5. Get start++.  It's an awesome little tool made by one of the Microsoft code monkeys, it lets you run a lot of commands from the search bar at the bottom of the start menu.  'w zork' does a wikipedia search for Zork.  'g coder jobs' runs a Google search for new job for this guy after MS discovers one of their own coders put a google search macro in his program.  'play Johnny Cash' searches your computer's music for Johnny Cash songs, compiles them into a playlist, and runs the playlist into Windows Media.  Very sweet, very useful.

6. Get at least a gig of RAM.  The minimum system specs are filthy lies.  Vista will work on 512 megs, but not very well, with lots of disk churning for pagefile access.  Get a gig.  If you want good gaming experiences, get two.

7. Be patient.  Vista still has plenty of kinks to work out, just like XP did back in the day, and it's going to take a few months to iron them out.  The system will improve, and I'm pretty confident that in time it'll be much better than XP was.

8. DO NOT RUN AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNT  I really, really mean it.

[Lantyssa]

6. Get at least a gig of RAM.  The minimum system specs are filthy lies.  Vista will work on 512 megs, but not very well, with lots of disk churning for pagefile access.  Get a gig.  If you want good gaming experiences, get two.

Always double Microsoft specs, at a minimum, to get a functional machine.

[Numtini]

If you run an admin account in Vista, it will block you with a verification prompt whenever you do something that could be a security risk.  That's why people keep seeing the 'are you sure?  confirm/deny' window that everyone is complaining about.  Make a non-admin account and use that, instead.  As if by magic, those windows will vanish.

So they made XP where even basic tasks like installing a printer couldn't be done without an admin account and then upgraded it with Vista where you can't do anything with an admin account without getting nagged to death?

/headdesk

[Samwise]

Letting you run in non-admin mode but get prompted for admin-only operations (rather than making you log out, log back in, and re-find the thing you were trying to do) is actually an improvement IMO.  I wasn't aware they'd done that.  1 point for Vista.

[Engels]

Of course, distros of Linux have been doing this for a while now. In fact, Ubuntu won't even let you log in as root, you have to use a different account type, even if you elevate that account to admin priv. Every once in a while you have to do stuff that requires elevated privs, and then it prompts you for the admin password. Just like Vista does. Hmm.

[Strazos]

So...it's bad that I run XP under the admin account instead of a limited account?

[Selby]

So...it's bad that I run XP under the admin account instead of a limited account?

Bah.  I run admin accounts all the time.  No problems here.  I experimented with setting up the Power User account before, that was easy enough.  Not a whole lot there that can't do that you would need an admin account on a regular basis.  But I gimped my IE so badly that it barely runs HTML with no Flash, no Shockwave, no jscript, and no pop-ups (WebWasher plus lots of fun with settings and the hosts file).  This means that there's virtually no web-based virii that can get in (now that I said that, I'll probably get one next week and need to format for the first time in over 2 years).  If I want to view a video or something funny, I just switch over to another computer here and view it that way (I've got 4 machines on one KVM switch).

I've always felt that keeping a Windows computer alive was quite simple if there were certain things you did and certain things you didn't do.  I used to be in charge of lab computers where virii and reformats were a weekly basis, not so much when the guy I started with and I got done.  Looks like MS has decided to do even more thinking for you and annoy you to death for it.  At least Unix says "st00pid idea" on certain things but lets you do it anyway and deal with the consequences of your own screw ups. 

[Yoru]

So...it's bad that I run XP under the admin account instead of a limited account?

For security, yes. However, lots of applications just don't work right without administrative rights on XP for a variety of reasons. Most of them lead back to lazy or time-crunched programmers.

Vista has a whole asston of stuff built into it that tries to make these older apps work right while shops transition over to the newer (as of, like.. 3-5 years ago?) model that Microsoft wants programmers to use for storing data and such - filesystem and registry virtualization, mostly. Hence, running Vista in LUA mode is far less painful than 2k/XP.

[Strazos]

Was just wondering. I haven't really had a problem with running as the admin in the 4+ years I've had this PC. A good firewall is a plus.

[Kitsune]

Yes, Vista allows you to elevate to admin privileges as necessary without running an administrative account.  It's a good thing, which Microsoft stole from Apple, who stole it from Linux.

The reason that running in an admin account is a bad thing is that if a naughty program takes over your computer while logged in, it can do anything you can do.  And if you're an admin, you can destroy the OS, format all the drives, install tons of spyware, etc.  But if the same program takes over while you're in a normal user account, it can't do much mischief.

In theory in a perfect security world, XP users should be using non-admin accounts.  However, in practice that sucks balls.  (That's a technical term.)  A non-admin account in XP can barely operate the computer; the OS will disallow things like installing programs, changing settings, certain file operations, running programs that require admin access, it's just a pain.  I tried it for a week, then gave up.  So Vista is trying to make it easier on users to run in a non-admin account.

EXCEPT THE STUPID FUCKERS GIVE THE DEFAULT USER ACCOUNT ON A NEW INSTALL ADMIN PRIVILEGES.  This annoys the hell out of me.  They went to all the trouble of setting things up to run as a normal user account, and then completely fail to implement it.  The user has to know to create a second, non-admin account, or else they're constantly buffeted by those permission warning windows.  Most users have no such clue, and just get frustrated and turn off the security prompts, leaving the system just as wide open to problems as they would be running an admin account in XP.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.  I hope they fix that with the first service pack.

[Engels]

So the answer is to create a non-admin account that then prompts you for an admin password every time you would otherwide, if you were using an admin account, have to click 'allow or deny'? Talk about tripping over yourself to solve a problem.

[Samwise]

The picture I'm getting is that you get warning prompts constantly if you run as an admin, even when doing things that you wouldn't have to be an admin to do (perhaps because doing those things as an admin is a potential security risk), but if you run as a non-admin you only get the "admin prompt" when it actually makes sense, like when installing a new program.

[Kitsune]

Samwise be correct in the understanding of this matter.  Running in non-admin only rarely receives a password prompt, while running in admin gets a popup window every ten minutes or so of normal activity.

[Engels]

I guess my question is then, if you disable the admin-level 'allow deny' feature, does it still warn you when you do tasks that, in a non-admin account, would require an admin password. Because if it doesn't, then you're back at the ole WinXP level of security.

[Kitsune]

If you disable it, you disable the security as a whole.  Poof, gone.  Back to XP land.  Which is why it's much, much better to run a non-admin account than disable the security if you want to avoid the popup security warnings.  I cringe inside whenever I see a, 'hay guyz, I found out how to fix the pop-up windows!  I just turned off the security!' post.  And it's really Microsoft's fault for just tossing users admin accounts by default like in XP.  All they had to do is have one extra step in the install process, "Please made an administrative account.  You use this password when installing programs, so don't forget it." and then have all other user accounts default to non-admin levels.

[Strazos]

For some of the processes that elicit a prompt, is there a way for tell Vista to remember your response to that particular prompt? For instance, whenever I run a new or changed program, my firewall throws up a prompt before giving the program access to whatever it's asking for. I usually only have to do this once after each install/change as I have it remember my response. Does Vista have a similar functionality?

[shiznitz]

Letting you run in non-admin mode but get prompted for admin-only operations (rather than making you log out, log back in, and re-find the thing you were trying to do) is actually an improvement IMO.  I wasn't aware they'd done that.  1 point for Vista.

Good to hear. Glad MS told me. My Dad got a new PC and, of course, when I set it up I made the default log-in an admin account and then proceeded to turn off all the user protection to stop the "are you sure?" insanity.  Next time I visit, I will change it.

[Morat20]

Letting you run in non-admin mode but get prompted for admin-only operations (rather than making you log out, log back in, and re-find the thing you were trying to do) is actually an improvement IMO.  I wasn't aware they'd done that.  1 point for Vista.

Good to hear. Glad MS told me. My Dad got a new PC and, of course, when I set it up I made the default log-in an admin account and then proceeded to turn off all the user protection to stop the "are you sure?" insanity.  Next time I visit, I will change it.

Thanks for sharing it, actually. One of my coworkers is doing evaluation on Vista for our group (we're not rolling over until after the first service pack at the earliest) and he didn't know. It made him a happy camper.

[Yegolev]

I expect we will roll out Vista in the final hours of XP support.

[Ironwood]

Ain't that the fucking truth.

By then, though, I hope they have a new OS with some actual business improvements in there.

[Kitsune]

For some of the processes that elicit a prompt, is there a way for tell Vista to remember your response to that particular prompt? For instance, whenever I run a new or changed program, my firewall throws up a prompt before giving the program access to whatever it's asking for. I usually only have to do this once after each install/change as I have it remember my response. Does Vista have a similar functionality?

I haven't experimented as much as I'd like in that particular area, but I think that you can get an individual program to stop bugging you by going into properties>compatibility>run as administrator.

[squirrel]

For some of the processes that elicit a prompt, is there a way for tell Vista to remember your response to that particular prompt? For instance, whenever I run a new or changed program, my firewall throws up a prompt before giving the program access to whatever it's asking for. I usually only have to do this once after each install/change as I have it remember my response. Does Vista have a similar functionality?

I haven't experimented as much as I'd like in that particular area, but I think that you can get an individual program to stop bugging you by going into properties>compatibility>run as administrator.

What Vista really needs is 'sudo'. I want to be able to explicitly tell the OS that all operations in a certain context are admin level without either having to approve every fucking little step or completely give the app/command admin control all the time. Personally as an OSX/Linux user I *hate* Vista's approach - seems like the worst of both worlds to me.

[squirrel]

Of course, distros of Linux have been doing this for a while now. In fact, Ubuntu won't even let you log in as root, you have to use a different account type, even if you elevate that account to admin priv. Every once in a while you have to do stuff that requires elevated privs, and then it prompts you for the admin password. Just like Vista does. Hmm.

Um no. This is not how Vista works. You will get a UAC prompt changing the fucking time in Vista. But you never actually have to supply a password. You just have to click 'Ok'. (Provided you have top level privileges, which everyone will given the default install). And there is no ability to 'sudo' in Vista and avoid the whole issue.

So no. It's not like Ubuntu at all.

EDIT: Clarity on the issue, the default use account is not like Ubuntu at all. And that's the problem.

[Engels]

I think you misread what Kitsune posted. If you create a non-admin account, it prompts you for a password when doing things such as installing, as sudo does. If you use the default admin account in Vista, it doe sthe 'allow/deny' thing, which you rightly state is not like Linux.

[Kitsune]

There is a sudo (of sorts).  You can work it through the UI by right-clicking on the icon of the desired program (this includes the command window, if you want to pull up a DOS prompt with admin power) and selecting the 'Run As' option.  Alternately, the start++ program I linked to in the top post has a sudo macro.  You just type 'sudo <programname>' in the search box on the start menu and it will search for the program with that name and execute it with admin privileges.

And as Engles mentioned, yes, you only see the flurry of obnoxious, password-less security prompts if you're running as an admin.  If you are non-admin, you will see far less frequent security prompts asking you to enter an admin password.  If you're used to OS X's prompts for an admin password, this is pretty much exactly the behavior you'll see in Vista with a non-admin account.  Which isn't much of a coincidence, as Microsoft pretty blatantly swiped that particular good idea.

[Wasted]

I'm running Vista in the default admin account and, without having turned off any of the security features dont find the pop-ups that intrusive at all.  The claim they come every 10 minutes is a gross exaggeration,  I can go days without seeing the pop-up.  I'm not constantly installing new stuff or fiddling with settings all the time but I dont think I am a completely atypical user.

[Tebonas]

"Run as" is available in XP as well, I share printers all the time using that feature.

We evaluated Vista and despite support for XP running out there will be no reason whatsoever upgrading for our company. I suspect the only reason upgrading will be if somebody is bribed by Microsoft to do so. Or getting it with your computer and not having a company XP license. It eats resources like mad, breaks some of the old programs still in use and doesn't add additional usability to a well groomed corporate XP environment.

[Yegolev]

Running without support is not an option for larger shops, such as ours.  Desktop support is hard enough around here, apparently, even with actual MS support.

[Tebonas]

Depends on the outfit. We support over 1200 PCs and in the ten years I worked there we never had any actual MS support for our clients (the server people hogged our free support calls for their emergencies and they never trickled down to our client department). So I wouldn't know the difference.

Taking away administration rights from the users and having automated OS installation and software management admittingly helps there, though. We are quite lenient and helpful in our area, but other regional IT departments give each problem 15 minutes until they nuke the PC and let it reinstall.

[Miasma]

Dell has decided to once again offer good old Windows XP on new computers.

SEATTLE - Back by popular demand:
Windows XP. PC maker Dell Inc. said on its Web site Thursday it will once again let home PC buyers choose between Microsoft Corp.'s older operating system and Windows Vista when they purchase certain new machines.

Dell, like many computer makers, stopped offering XP on most home desktops and laptops soon after Vista launched at the end of January. By late March, the company said only two models aimed at home users could be configured with XP (the option still existed on many models for business users).

But on Dell's IdeaStorm Web site, where visitors can post suggestions for the company and vote on the ones they think are important, a plea titled "Don't eliminate XP just yet" racked up more than 10,700 votes.

"We heard you loud and clear on bringing the Windows XP option back to our Dell consumer PC offerings," Dell responded in a Web posting Thursday.

The company said it will immediately offer XP again an option for four models of its Inspiron notebooks and two models of its Dimension desktop PCs.

This comes just weeks after Dell said it is also planning to offer PCs with
Linux, a free operating system that competes with Windows.

"This is really odd," said Michael Silver, research vice president at Gartner. "On new PCs, consumers usually do want the latest and greatest."

Microsoft countered that Dell's move was in response to a "small minority of customers" with a "specific request." Michael Burk, a product manager for Microsoft's Windows Client group, said in an e-mailed statement, "The vast majority of consumers want the latest and greatest technology, and that includes Windows Vista."

Michael Gartenberg, vice president and research director of JupiterResearch, said many consumers continue to buy XP because it's familiar, it works with their existing hardware and programs, and is overall "good enough," even though Vista boasts a prettier user interface and stronger security.

"Microsoft is going to have to work hard to make sure that even if companies like Dell are offering XP, their customers don't want it," Gartenberg said. Now is time for the company to crank up Vista marketing, but that may be harder than it sounds.

"Operating systems inherently by nature are kind of boring," he said.

[Sky]

I want the latest and greatest! And by that I mean shitty drivers and buggy games.

[Rishathra]

Consumers generally do want the latest and greatest.  Vista only covers half of that.

[Yegolev]

When did Linux start competing with Windows?

[Murgos]

When did Linux start competing with Windows?

It's been creeping up.  Still a few years away from real competition in the home market but it has long been a contender in the server world.

All my work, except for documentation, is done on Linux machines.

[hal]

Aye, the above has been becoming more and more true. The big gap is drivers for the flavor of the month video cards. If we get the ability to run more than one operating system (this is apparently close) it will just be even a step closer. As it is to stay on the hardware edge you gotta compile your own kernel. Thats enough to keep the majority away but the gap is closing and the product is a good one.