fear change

5/27/07 2:27:21 AM

In the version of English I speak...

...aka "English English", "Personalize" isn't even a word! So doubleplusungood!

Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]

Post #285,786

by jb4

5/30/07 9:24:11 AM

**chuckle**

Post #285,467

5/27/07 5:58:38 AM

5/27/07 9:28:02 AM

Remind me again... You're not an MS fanboy or shill, just...

...just like Andrea Dear, right?

It's just that, just like him(*), you just *happen* to only ever post positive (or at least alleviating) things about them, right?

Yeah, right.

(*): And just like Bill (both of them), when it comes to the Repugnicans.

[Edit: No trailing slash in HR tag, Chris.]

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]

Edited by CRConrad May 27, 2007, 09:28:02 AM EDT

Expand All History

Post #285,469

5/27/07 6:18:46 AM

No trailing slash in HR tag, Chris.

Post #285,479

by drewk

5/27/07 9:08:14 AM

Yes there is, but I think there should be a space before it

===

Kip Hawley is still an idiot.

===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]

Post #285,486

5/27/07 10:37:48 AM

Re: Yes there is, but I think there should be a space bef

Without slash:

With:
<hr />

Post #285,470

5/27/07 7:14:16 AM

Hey, don't be picking on Hubert J. Farnsworth now!

My recollection is that Chris almost always posts concise solutions to problems with Windows when he posts. He's not a fanboi.

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who notices it's RB click on the desktop, Properties, Settings tab on this Win2k NVidia box; or LB click on the NVidia "tray" icon, put the pointer on the "Screen Resolution ->" entry, and let the flyout menu indicate the currently selected setting (fewer clicks, but more accuracy required).)

Post #285,492

by hnick

5/27/07 10:56:17 AM

Seemed like a reasonable reply to me.

There are many reasons to bitch about M$ in general and Vista in specific. Bitching because it doesn't do something like you may be used to, makes the person squawking seem like a bit of a twit.

Changing the appearance of screens is acceptable. If one can't take a few minutes to figure out a new system, maybe they should go back to their etch-a-sketch. Changing interfaces and such is somewhat nastier.

Changing the security system is acceptable if it does some good. Releasing a security system that degrades user experience and provides less security is open to criticism. Take all those stupid pop ups that require the user to go back and re-run as administrator and then still ask for a note from the users mother and a chit from the chaplain. If a malware distributer can get the user to run an installer, it can launch a service which can change all those permissions and bypass the pop ups while looting your system.

They did change the control panel applets. Now they can be written as a .exe and registered as a control panel applet. There is a mechanism that lets the author make it accessible from multiple panels. That's kind of cool IMO.

Some things are strictly personal preference. In older versions you can hit control-tab and tab through all open programs. In Vista, if you hit <window button>-tab you get all the open programs in live windows that you can tab through. Personally, I think it is a waste of processor power, but I know others that like it.

In general, saying something positive about a M$ product is not being a shill or fanboi. It may be a little more fair to skip personal accusations until something REALLY warrants it.

Just my $0.02

Post #285,504

5/27/07 1:14:08 PM

You mean alt-tab; ctrl-tab is for docs within an MDI app.

Post #285,512

by hnick

5/27/07 2:22:04 PM

Ok. I don't have a windows machine at hand...

Since you mention it, I think you're right though...

Fallibility is just running rampant today.

Post #285,507

5/27/07 1:27:43 PM

On the surface of it, yes.

But note that it *does* tend to alleviate the problem the original poster pointed out; doesn't it?

All I'm saying is that it at least *seems* to me that Old Guy seldom misses a chance to post replies of *that* kind -- while, if an equally "reasonable" reply would tend to put MS in a bad light, it's not as much a given that he'll post it.

Sure, could be coincidence... Could even be a case of over-developed $hill-radar on my part... OR, it COULD be, the most insiduous -- and in the long run, most effective -- form of $hill-ing.

It's easy to prove me wrong, if you want to: Just go through all his posts and compile the stats.

Or, the easier way: Ask him about it.

Which is what I did.

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]

Post #285,513

by hnick

5/27/07 2:29:36 PM

Cool...

It seems to me, though, that since our extended downtime, tempers have become more fragile, accusations come easier, and we, as a community, seem a lot more grouchy.

It could be for any number of reasons, not the most improbable, that I'm full of shit on this point. I'm pretty sure I'm more grouchy, but I also have a list of the top 75 reasons (Vista is in the single digit section of the list.)

Post #285,515

5/27/07 2:59:50 PM

+10. Inciteful.

Er, I mean, insightful.

;-)

Cheers,
Scott.

Post #285,516

by hnick

5/27/07 3:25:21 PM

Of course you did... :)

Post #285,521

5/27/07 7:08:56 PM

Speak for yourself...

...and the rest of the guys -- I, OTOH, have of course *always* been that way! :-)

(Heh; who'd'a'thunk that orneriness would ever come in handy as a defense against ~~accusations~~claims of -- orneriness?!)

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]

Post #285,522

5/27/07 7:25:20 PM

Ummm. Yeah.

--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ i_wethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0

Post #285,549

5/28/07 7:45:50 AM

It's not easy being....

whatever the heck you are, Chuckles

you're so busy attempting to emasculate the race traitors that you've lost sight of reality

if Vista truly was the disaster you want it to be, you wouldn't need this forum to find out about it. It would be front page news everywhere. It isn't, most likely because pre-installed Vista works reasonably well

as you could see from my original post, if you weren't blinded by gender confusion, I've had a .667 success rate for Vista installs. Not a high number, even considering the small sample, especially as MS recommends upgrading, not the clean install.

the driver-resolution issue that set off a few of you here is another example of what happens when the 'Windows sucks' mentality gets too much play. This encourages the industry to install replacements for Windows functions and gets consumers to spend money on generally useless alternate shells and software that does what Windows is already doing. of course, that is how you do it in the Linux world, but there it is all free and part of the fun of customizing your distro, desktop, etc

people criticize the UAC (the new security setup), strangely many of them previously criticized Windows for making the user an admin. now they want the user to be an admin
those popup messages from UAC are very similar to those from SpyBot which the critics used to claim was necessary to be installed in order to attempt to survive running Windows

in a mellow mood

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #285,550

5/28/07 8:09:07 AM

"Works reasonably well"

...is a pretty shitty outcome for 6 years and $5B of effort.

Pretty much every other operating system out there does better than "reasonably well", including Windows XP.

UAC is brain dead. You need to understand that, too. All that happens when you annoy the user is they either tune out or turn off the annoyance.

Vista's fuckedupness /is/ front page news; the fact that Dell defied Microsoft and continued to offer XP on selected models was on the front page of pretty much every news site.

Reality bites.

And so does Vista.

Post #285,554

by boxley

5/28/07 10:00:11 AM

every microsoft advance has never exceeded reasonably well

its the target they want to hit and that consumers in the past have been satisfied by. Agree with Andread on that point.
thanx,
bill

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]

Post #285,568

by crazy

5/28/07 10:53:40 AM

An interesting rating

"Reasonably well"

EVERYTHING works "Reasonably well" for someone with a vested interest in it succeeding. Means the same thing as rationalizably well. Moving target, yet the target is moving backward. Declare victory, rationalize the result.

Post #285,676

5/29/07 9:44:31 AM

Not up to your usual standard...

of slagging

The purpose of UAC is not to annoy the owner (admin) of the machine. It is to protect the machine from the other users in a home or business situation
As the speaker at the Vista launch I went to explained it: leave UAC on for the other users of the box even if you turn it off for yourself

Visit dell.com, many machines that were not even offering Vista a few months back are now on Vista although there is a link for those searching out XP
hardly earth-shattering that not everyone embraces change
HP and SONY took their time with Vista too but it is being sold

Whenever MS launches a new OS, there are certain comments that can be counted on:

it doesn't work as good as ______
it's not an improvement over the last MS OS
it may mark the end of MS dominance
it's not what it's cracked up to be
users are having massive problems everywhere

Even granting that the boy who cried wolf was indeed eaten by a wolf eventually, I think the anti-MS crowd needs to rein in their exaggerations if they expect to be taken seriously by the world at large

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #285,681

5/29/07 10:22:56 AM

Re: Not up to your usual standard...

The purpose of UAC is not to annoy the owner (admin) of the machine. It is to protect the machine from the other users in a home or business situation
As the speaker at the Vista launch I went to explained it: leave UAC on for the other users of the box even if you turn it off for yourself

I know what the purpose of UAC is. Every single review of Vista has agreed that UAC is annoying to the point where one blindly clicks on the "Leave Me The Fuck Alone" button, AKA the "Do It Now, You Stupid Machine" button, AKA the "Jesus, ANOTHER Of These Fucking Boxes?" button.

Windows is something people tolerate, put up with and work around. Has been since 3.0, will be until the end of time. Very, very few people enjoy using it.

Post #285,705

5/29/07 3:07:17 PM

Wrong

if you want to slag UAC at least understand it

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #285,706

5/29/07 3:12:50 PM

What are you gibbering about, you cretin? Re-read his posts!

Post #285,838

5/30/07 1:37:29 PM

Oh, Chuckles

and Pete too

rave on

and on

and on

the way UAC works for a non-admin user is that they have no option to turn it off
they are asked for a password
if they don't have it they can't do whatever they were trying

not what Pete said

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #285,846

5/30/07 2:23:48 PM

OK, so you're just not capable of reading with comprehension

Post #285,851

5/30/07 3:12:42 PM

Hah

Pete wrote:

Every single review of Vista has agreed that UAC is annoying to the point where one blindly clicks on the "Leave Me The Fuck Alone" button, AKA the "Do It Now, You Stupid Machine" button, AKA the "Jesus, ANOTHER Of These Fucking Boxes?" button.

It's still wrong as far as non-admin users are concerned

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #285,876

5/30/07 5:08:37 PM

So how is that any the less annoying?

And what is this "non admin user" you speak of?

Since when was the average home user non-admin?

Listen up, fanboi:

I KNOW WHAT UAC IS, DOES AND HOW IT OPERATES

IT IS BRAINDEAD IN DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

IT ANNOYS THE LIVING FUCK OUT OF EVERYONE WHO COMES INTO CONTACT WITH IT AND IS DISABLED OR BLINDLY IGNORED

THAT IS ALL

Post #285,936

5/31/07 10:49:55 AM

Wrong in caps is still wrong

home - a place where more than one person may live

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #285,940

5/31/07 11:57:28 AM

Which part is wrong?

Explain this to me. You've signally failed so to do.

Post #285,945

5/31/07 1:17:02 PM

Ok. Lets review

[link|http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa906021.aspx|http://technet.micro...sta/aa906021.aspx]

User Account Control: Delivering a More Secure Desktop
The main goal of User Account Control is to reduce the exposure and attack surface of the operating system by requiring that all users run in standard user mode. This limitation minimizes the ability for users to make changes that could destabilize their computers or inadvertently expose the network to viruses through undetected malware that has infected their computer.

With User Account Control, IT administrators can run most applications, components and processes with a limited privilege, but have "elevation potential" for specific administrative tasks and application functions.

Conversely, when users encountera system task that requires administrator privileges, such as attempting to install an application, Windows Vista will notify the user and require administrator authorization. This type of prompting helps ensure that users do not accidentally make modifications to their desktops. It also helps eliminate the ability for malware to invoke administrator privileges without a user's knowledge.

As a defense-in-depth measure, User Account Control also provides additional protection for administrators through its Administrator Approval Mode. With Administrator Approval Mode, Windows Vista will run most applications with standard user permissions even if the user is an administrator. If a user wishes to run a program that requires administrator permissions, they must give consent through a User Account Control prompt. This helps limit malware's ability to make system-wide changes without the administrator's knowledge. However, Administrator Approval Mode does not provide the same level of security or control as a true standard user account.

So what does this say really.

Its says, up to now the vast majority of windows users have operated as administrators. Our advanced new operating system doesn't let you do that anymore...and requires you to enter information whenever you decide to add or delete any software, access any site that is somewhere MS deems "unsafe" and so on and so on.

In addition, you can't run software that needs admin rights without specifically granting them at some prompt somewhere.

Sorry, at this point I have to agree with Peter that the vast majority of people will find the easiest way to delete or disable this as possible...rendering it useless and ineffectual.

You also seem to think it [link|http://www.petri.co.il/disable_uac_in_windows_vista.htm|can't be disabled], if I read you correctly. You are mistaken.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}

Post #285,947

5/31/07 1:33:27 PM

"Attack Surface"?!?! Sheesh.

Post #285,949

5/31/07 1:48:24 PM

At least I didn't write it :-)

Leave it to MS to come up with something like that.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}

Post #286,006

by Ashton

5/31/07 11:05:42 PM

(Isn't that pretty large - on a sponge? ;-)

Post #285,962

by crazy

5/31/07 6:14:20 PM

I LOVE the scenario where they say disabling is reasonable

During demos.

Hey, we want to sell some crap.
Hey, it runs horrible when UAC is enabled.
No problem, turn it off.

Post #286,008

by static

5/31/07 11:48:03 PM

That typifies the problem with UAC:

Marketing got a say. :-/

Their goals are noble. Unfortunately, their execution leaves something to be desired. Part of that problem is the sheer historical weight of programs and habits of defaulting to Administator privileges for everything. Reviewers are not helping by laying the problems almost entirely at Microsoft's feet. That's not to say the Microsoft have made mistake with it, of course.

Wade.

Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed

Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please

-- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne.

· my ·
· [link|http://staticsan.livejournal.com/|blog] ·
· [link|http://yceran.org/|website] ·

Post #285,974

5/31/07 7:15:43 PM

Well now.

That seems to be as close to a descriptions of what "sudo" does in as many words.

Except... "sudo" has more granularity.

Sorry. Innovation? no. Making headway? Absolutely not. Catching up? Not hardly.

Okay, let up be serious here. "sudo" has been around for a while, a long while. I've used it since *BEFORE* 1998.

At least Microsoft picked a good model to "embrace and extend". They did muck it up quite badly. They "re-thought" the interface ... badly. They made it complicated. They made it cumbersome.

Oh well, at least it is in the right direction. 10 steps forward, 9 steps and a few inches of a skid back again.

Post #285,977

by crazy

5/31/07 7:44:40 PM

5/31/07 7:46:27 PM

Huh?

You means I can use it to assign a group of people (based on group membership) the ability execute specific command (or a group using pattern matching wild cards) as a specific user (NOT ADMIN USER), ie: a production user that has very clearly defined rights against certain files and certain hardware.

I doubt it.

"Those who fail to understand UNIX are doomed to reimplement it. Poorly"

Edited by crazy May 31, 2007, 07:46:27 PM EDT

Expand All History

Post #285,983

by boxley

5/31/07 8:05:48 PM

that was my understanding

[link|http://www.vistaexplained.org|http://www.vistaexplained.org]
if one looks in the registry you will see a key that points to \\windows\\gnu\\bin\\sudo.tk
HTH
thanx,
bill

Post #285,984

5/31/07 8:14:08 PM

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt.

You are right. Most of (All) the "Milestones" Microsoft has made with Vista for security have been in UNIX, since... forever or at least since the "everything is a file" idea came about.

It is really a shame. I just hope they fix it.

Post #286,012

6/1/07 1:23:06 AM

*nod*

Example.

DACLs. Windows-only folk make a big deal out of these, saying that the UID/GID-based security of UNIX filesystems is inadequate, and that you need NTFS (which, for all that it's attached to a steaming pile of shit operating system, is actually a pretty good filesystem).

Tell me again when the proprietary UNIXes grew these? Was it 1992ish? When did VMS have these? 1982-ish?

Windows: failing to understand that writing a badly-designed wizard is not the same as innovation since 1995.

Post #286,026

6/1/07 10:11:09 AM

Thanks Bill

I think I said it much briefer earlier on but Pete and Chuckles are apparently not capable of reading anything I say because I set off their 'must attack' system

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #286,035

6/1/07 12:58:57 PM

Re: Thanks Bill

Which part of "I agree with Peter" didn't you get from Bill's post?

Post #286,047

6/1/07 2:46:41 PM

I'm thinking...

...it was more about tone than topic

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}

Post #286,085

6/2/07 7:01:36 PM

6/5/07 2:52:37 AM

It's the other way around; the poor nitwit is incapable...

...of understanding what Peter writes. (Or rather, pretends to be.)

Peter complains that Vista's UAC works like shit -- i.e, fails to *do* what it sets out to do -- in large part because it's too annoying; Andrea Dear gibbers in reply about how Peter doesn't get what Vista's UAC *sets out* to do, i.e, its purpose. No, fuckwit, he's known *that* all the time -- what he's been saying all along in this thread is, it doesn't *succeed* at it. But Andrea just refuses to get that distinction.

Just re-read the thread slowly and you'll se that that's where the "problem" (as artificial and intentional as it is) lies.

And therefore fuck knows if the reason s/he/it doesn't jump down your throat is your more conciliatory (Why, BTW?) tone in that one post -- or just the fact that s/he/it is apparently not *intentionally refusing* to understand what s/he/it is reading when it is written by anyone else but Peter or me. (Could that have anything to do with the fact that most of the rest of you guys haven't yet publically declared your understanding of s/he/its $hillness?)

Personally, I think the latter seems quite a bit more likely.

[Edit: Aaargh, typo!]

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]

Edited by CRConrad June 5, 2007, 02:52:37 AM EDT

Expand All History

Post #286,187

6/4/07 4:22:20 PM

You're wrong again

as I stated originally, the purpose of UAC is to limit or control the behavior of users, not to annoy admins

Admins can turn it off
Users can't turn it off if an admin has set it up on their machine
without an admin password they won't be installing whatever it was that brought up the UAC prompt

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #286,188

by mmoffitt

6/4/07 4:26:59 PM

Point = Missed. Intentionally or otherwise.

bcnu,
Mikem

It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell

Post #286,195

6/4/07 5:29:47 PM

Thank you so much for AGAIN explaining the *purpose* of UAC.

You didn't happen to see the bit where I wrote, "doesn't get that Peter has known the *purpose* all along", did you...?

So, a big thank you also for demonstrating so brilliantly my point from the previous post -- namely, that you just plain *refuse* to understand anything Peter or I write.

Now, couldn't you do us all a favour and just not reply to stuff you don't (because you refuse to) understand? (Like, I'm sure, this post.)

Thank you.

[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)

Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]

Post #286,203

by drewk

6/4/07 8:01:32 PM

Question

Is UAC described in the official Microsoft literature as a way to "limit or control the behavior of users"? Or is it described as a way to improve the security of the system?

You could take the dodge that in order to secure the system you have to "limit or control the behavior of users", but that is an implementation detail. I believe[1] the advertised purpose of UAC is to increase security. And in that respect, it fails -- specifically because it instead implements a way to "limit or control the behavior of users".

[1] I lied. I actually know that's the [link|http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa906022.aspx|advertised purpose].

User Account Control (UAC) is a new security component of the Microsoft\ufffd Windows Vista operating system. UAC enables users to perform common tasks as non-administrators, called standard users in Windows Vista, and as administrators without having to switch users, log off, or use Run As. <snip> By separating user and administrator functions while enabling productivity, UAC is an important enhancement for Windows Vista.

===

Kip Hawley is still an idiot.

===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]

Post #286,225

6/5/07 8:57:46 AM

Re: Question

as I said before that is how the MS spokesman at the Vista launch I attended described it
He was debating an attendee who thought UAC needed to be turned off immediately on all Vista installs

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #286,242

by crazy

6/5/07 5:02:13 PM

ahh, cascading shills

There is never an authority, and no one can ever be held accountable for claiming something, because after all, it's not like they expected anyone to believe them anyway.

Post #286,313

6/6/07 11:38:01 AM

The speaker was Michael J Murphy

you can visit his blog at
[link|http://blogs.technet.com/mjmurphy|http://blogs.technet.com/mjmurphy]

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #286,331

by crazy

6/6/07 3:46:53 PM

And I'd want to do that because?

Occupation: IT Evangelist

At least you can pretend that you are looking out for the best interest of your company, and that its best interest does not necessarily coincide with the advancement of a particular technology.

Of course, you ARE pretending, since your career DOES depend on it.

This guy can't even pretend. He is a shill, with no doubt.

Post #286,400

6/7/07 8:47:35 AM

Not a shill

he works for MS

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #286,440

by crazy

6/7/07 3:29:44 PM

Serious question: Are you brain damaged?

Have you been in a car accident?
Maybe a little light on oxygen for a while?

[link|http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=shill|http://www.m-w.com/c...a-search&va=shill]

Post #286,451

6/7/07 4:51:34 PM

Re: Serious question: Are you brain damaged?

No

at the risk of quibbling with the dictionary, I've always had a slightly different understanding of the term
at a 3 card monte game, the 'winner' with the handful of cash who is a partner of the dealer is a shill

from Wikipedia:

A shill is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to purchase said goods or services or support the political group's ideological claims. Shills are often employed by confidence artists and governments.

Certainly, I think that is what Chuckles means when he calls me a shill

A

Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]

Post #286,456

by crazy

6/7/07 5:47:43 PM

Ah, the wonders of Wikipedia

where if you don't like it, you get to change it.

And the wonders of focused limited definitions.

You/he promote the environment, purposefully ignoring flaws, because it benefits you.

You are both shills.

He is a directly paid one, you are indirectly since it benefits your career in general.The more people that adopt it, the more money he makes and the more likelyhood your skillset will keep you employed.

And the comment concerning brain damage was a kind one, because otherwise, you'd be displaying the ultimate skill of a shill, the ability to ignore the incredibly obvious.

Purposeful stupidity is such an endearing trait, wouldn't you say?

Post #286,464

6/7/07 7:14:26 PM

I had always understood the term by his definition.

Employees aren't shills UNLESS they are on the net pretending NOT to be employees.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}

Post #286,467

by jake123

6/7/07 7:21:26 PM

Indeed; if they self-identify properly, they're salespeople.

Post #286,488

by crazy

6/7/07 10:18:53 PM

I disagree (new thread)

Created as new thread #286487 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=286487|I disagree]

Post #286,524

by mmoffitt

6/8/07 10:34:53 AM

I'm ambivalent. However, in Mega$loth's case ...

they actually have a titled position of "Evangelist". I'd be pressed not to call an evangelist a shill.

Post #286,209

6/4/07 9:56:58 PM

The problem here is you are defining a very limited user set

those on controlled machines. That isn't the majority and it certainly isn't the user set that creates most significant security problems.

Again, UAC is a "security tool" that is annoying enough to the vast majority for them to rip it out..making it not only annoying but completely ineffective.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}

Post #286,217

6/5/07 2:44:39 AM

"he's known" - HTH </CRC>

Post #286,219

6/5/07 2:53:52 AM

Aaargh! Fixed, thanx. (I can has cheezburger now?)

Post #286,221

by crazy

6/5/07 7:08:32 AM

Can't or pretends is the same in this case

While he may not get income directly from MS sales, his career is so tightly bound to running an MS infrastructure his opinion is essentially worthless.

[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=278535|http://z.iwethey.org...?contentid=278535]

And since he really only pretends to be technical ie: he can follow a cookbook but does not really seem to understand what is going on under the covers, ie: the perfect Windows "tech"), you can't really expect him to have any coherent discussion on the matter.

[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=284165|http://z.iwethey.org...?contentid=284165]

I always wondered about "pure" IT guys. Those that are tied with supporting the entire company, doing infrastructure stuff, like file serving, authentication, email, printing, networking, backups, non-customer specific DBA, etc.

People in these positions often seem to lose focus on the company and what it needs to do to service its customers, since customer contact is so indirect to them.

They get to "tax" the organization, and incompetent people can last a lot longer than anywhere else since the group as a whole is often blamed for their mistakes, which means only a top level firing can start moving the group forward.

Seem like the perfect place for MS specific people to hang around.

Post #286,228

by boxley

6/5/07 9:56:11 AM

Oy you

we are customer service thank you very much, we are constantly trying to improve the customer experience doing it faster and cheaper than ever before.
thanx,
bill

Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]

Post #286,241

by crazy

6/5/07 5:00:07 PM

Oy back

Your customers (the real ones, not the internal ones) are the ones using your service. Your infrastructure is in direct support of your customer's active experience.

If they don't like what you have to offer, they can go to a competitor.

You don't fall into the category described above.

Post #286,265

6/5/07 7:30:20 PM

Another way to disable UAC - TweakUAC.

[link|http://www.downloadsquad.com/2007/06/03/temporarily-disable-uac-in-vista-without-rebooting/|Download Squad] has a pointer to [link|http://www.tweak-uac.com/what-is-tweak-uac/|TweakUAC]. (I found it via [link|http://blogs.zdnet.com/Orchant/?p=464|Office Evolution], via a search on [link|http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/|MJF's Blog]).

Caveat emptor, and so forth.

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who is happy he has no interest in running Vista.)

Post #285,710

by boxley

5/29/07 3:45:42 PM

the mac commercial explains it very well :-)

Post #285,711

5/29/07 3:48:29 PM

I've got a Mac running OS X

I know exactly how UAC should have been done, ta very much.

Post #285,753

by static

5/29/07 10:13:05 PM

Consider.

Windows has *always* needed upgrades and new versions. Most IT people know this. Most people here know this. Most of the ire is targetted at what Microsoft got wrong in the upgrade process. UAC is one example.

We all know what UAC is for - but the concept has been around for a very long time in the Unix/Linux world. It's called 'sudo' and it generally works very well. Microsoft had two problems to overcome with UAC: they can't resist trying to re-invent computer security methodology, and their Windows architecture doesn't lend itself well to doing it properly, anyway. And I guess the latter leads to the former, really, too. :-)

We know there are always the usual round of derisions about a new Windows release. However, the end-user response to Vista has been less than with XP and that was less than with Windows 95. Plus Microsoft has either gotten more aggressive in getting people to upgrade, or it's more visible. Sure, the industry has changed since XP and much more since Windows 95.

Wade.

Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed

Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please

-- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne.

· my ·
· [link|http://staticsan.livejournal.com/|blog] ·
· [link|http://yceran.org/|website] ·

Post #285,759

by Silverlock

5/29/07 11:13:39 PM

Vista popularity.

Witness the stores opening at midnight on opening day of sales for its release and not having any customers. This was supposed to be a big deal. No lines. Bad news.

It fills no lack.

-----------------------------------------
Atheism is a religion in the same sense that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Post #285,761

5/29/07 11:47:33 PM

There have been lines.

Lines to return the POS and bringing in the machines to re-install W2K/98/XP/etc that came on them originally.

Unfortunately they OPENED IT, no return and they also have to pay $300 for R&R.

Suxs

Post #285,762

by Andrew Grygus

5/30/07 12:17:57 AM

So, knowing that many are paying $250 . . .

. . for Vista Home Premium, plus $300 to put XP back on, that's $550 to get the XP registry cleaned up. There's got to be a better way.

[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]

Post #285,773

5/30/07 7:28:01 AM

There is.

There are two, possibly three, well vetted ways.

Post #285,775

by scoenye

5/30/07 7:39:25 AM

And that's only the surface...

The "improved security" pretty much makes non-M$ IPSec VPNs impossible.

Just take a look at the amount of "unknowns" and dates in the latter part of 2007 in here: [link|http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929490|http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929490].

And I know that the Nortel situation is not fixed as that document claims: the version listed was a cobbled together Vista-only XP-compatibility mode (now there's an oxymoron...) hack to at least get the drivers to install.

Even with the "real" 7.01 driver, Vista appears to associate the driver with a network interface of it's choice and can't be moved to associate it with the one you want. And with that we haven't even addressed the fundamental problem yet in that Vista makes NAT encapsulation mandatory even if there is no NAT involved on the network. (Haven't had the time yet to investigate the full effects there. So far we have only one remote connector who jumped in the Vista swamp and he still has a functional XP machine)

Post #285,591