Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Gold - Windows Vista

Microsoft finishes work on Windows Vista has word that Microsoft's new operating system has been deemed ready for prime time, and is due in stores on January 30:

SEATTLE - Microsoft Corp. finished work Wednesday on its long-delayed Windows Vista operating system, and said the software would be broadly available Jan. 30.

The announcement means Microsoft will meet just barely its revised goal of putting Vista in consumers' hands in the first month of 2007.

Windows Vista's code was released midmorning Wednesday to manufacturing a step that allows the company to begin making the copies that will be distributed with PCs and sold at stores, said Jim Allchin, co-president of the Microsoft division that includes Windows, in a conference.

"This is a good day," Allchin said.

Microsoft had previously said it would release Vista to big business clients at an event at the Nasdaq Stock Market on Nov. 30, and Allchin reiterated Wednesday that corporations who buy Windows licenses in bulk will get the new system this month. That's also in keeping with the company's revised release schedule.

The release will be the first major upgrade in more than five years to the operating system that powers most of the world's personal computers. Vista boasts improved graphics, more effective tools for finding documents, pictures and other items on personal computers, and a new Internet browser, among other changes.

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

63. Re: No subject Nov 10, 2006, 04:47 Tim
 
Well, yes and no. It's true that everyone always running in admin mode is a security issue. However, the reason most people do that is because a user in Windows CAN'T FUCKING DO ANYTHING.

Why do I need to be a local admin to install software? Why can't a user do that? Isn't that in the very definition of a user? That they USE things? Like...I dunno, software?

You should only be an admin when you're changing system specific settings, like your swap file, messing with the registry, that sort of thing. A user should be able to install software into a user defined area, ditto for any .dlls that need to go into Windows\System32 (which should have been subdivided into System32\SystemCritical and System32\UserCritical ) and ditto for any registry keys that SHOULD go into HKey_Local_User.

But because MS made a user completely useless, what else are you supposed to do? Switch around constantly? Come on, who the fuck wants to deal with that shit.

A marginal amount of thinking about this would have saved a lot of security leaks.

Creston

Anger management issues aside Yeah I get where you're coming from but if you allow a user to do _everything_ then the same goes for any virus, trojan or malware Mr. Stupid User (tm) executes. You don't run as root in linux do you? Yikes..

I agree MS stuffed it up, dropped the ball, kicked themselves in the gonads by creating an environment where users were left with no choice but to run as admin to 'FUCKING DO ANYTHING' - my point was, they're trying to change that ethos and that isn't a bad thing. You ask why you have to be an admin to install stuff - well, in general, you shouldn't - but apps on Windows are built around the lack of a good security model and so they expect you to be admin. I'm hoping that'll change - of course, they'll still be occasions when an app needs to make potentially dangerous changes to the system and that's where UAC comes in - to allow the user to elevate an app for a short time to admin status (which means a lower window of opportunity for malware). You shouldn't be installing software all the time and so this shouldn't be so much of a bind.

Yes, it's MS' fault that we're where we are - but it'll take user buy-in to the new security model to change things to the way they SHOULD be. I don't hold out much hope as most people will see security as an obstruction based on what they're used to with XP. Security requires compromise and Windows users don't do that IMHO.


 
Avatar 15972
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Subject
Comment
     
 
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 
          Email me when this topic is updated.
 

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


footer

Blue's News logo