Installed Windows 8 to friends and family, everyone loves it.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

UAC isn't a layer of security, it's a way for the system to ask if you did actually intend to perform a certain operation (That's why it runs on a "secure desktop", so an app can't change a system level setting without user authorisation)

[techbeck]

UAC is not a security boundary.

UAC isn't a layer of security, it's a way for the system to ask if you did actually intend to perform a certain operation (That's why it runs on a "secure desktop", so an app can't change a system level setting without user authorisation)

Again, we have steps in place that will do a hell of a lot better job than UAC. We dont want a user to do something? Thats what group policy is for and other applications/utilities.

[MikeChipshop Member]

I try to stay out of this discussions because i'm more than certain half the time people are just making their replies up off the top of their heads any way.

However on this occasion i'll chip in.

I've installed Win 8 for several clients on their request and so far i've heard nothing but compliments from them.

I've of course sat them down and run through it with them just to put their minds at rest as to where some things might have moved etc.

The thing i notice the most is while they like it, their kids absolutely love it and can navigate and use it to its full potential within minuets.

This leads me to believe that MS knows exactly what they are doing, they're not staying in the past, they're moving forwarded and embracing their future customers. Which if any thing, makes me feel like an old, old, tortoise!

[+DonC Subscriber²]

We dont want a user to do something?

This demonstrates that you simply don't understand the purpose of UAC. UAC is just a fancy "Are you sure?" prompt that's harder for malicious software to override.

The software doing the asking has exactly the same rights before and after the UAC prompt.

[ingramator]

This demonstrates that you simply don't understand the purpose of UAC. UAC is just a fancy "Are you sure?" prompt that's harder for malicious software to override.

The software doing the asking has exactly the same rights before and after the UAC prompt.

Exactly. UAC does a lot more then just prompt you when making changes to sensitive disk contents. I would love to know these "internal" programs he uses.

[techbeck]

This demonstrates that you simply don't understand the purpose of UAC. UAC is just a fancy "Are you sure?" prompt that's harder for malicious software to override.

The software doing the asking has exactly the same rights before and after the UAC prompt.

Dont assume what I do an do not know. I know exactly what UAC is. I said UAC is annoying, hampers what we do at work, and we have out own security measures in place to prevent users from installing malicious software. Users do not get the "are you sure" prompt since they are not allowed to install software. They get a "you need admin rights to install this software" message. And we have other measures in place which I cannot divulge for confidentiality reasons.

So, users do not even get the chance to download/try to install anything that would make UAC "useful". They never see a UAC prompt even if it was enabled. And UAC also makes deploying software a pain.

I would love to know these "internal" programs he uses.

If I told you that, I would be fired from my job. We have government contracts and we cannot give out any info on our IT infrastructure. I dont think the DoD would appreciate that to much.

[ingramator]

If I told you that, I would be fired from my job. We have government contracts and we cannot give out any info on our IT infrastructure. I dont think the DoD would appreciate that to much.

I respect that but why can't UAC supplement your custom solutions? If users aren't modifying system components, running unsigned code or trying to do anything a normal user wouldn't do then they shouldn't be seeing UACs dialogue anyway.

[techbeck]

I respect that but why can't UAC supplement your custom solutions? If users aren't modifying system components, running unsigned code or trying to do anything a normal user wouldn't do then they shouldn't be seeing UACs dialogue anyway.

Because UAC interferes with app deployments.

[sc302 Veteran]

Dont assume what I do an do not know. I know exactly what UAC is. I said UAC is annoying, hampers what we do at work, and we have out own security measures in place to prevent users from installing malicious software. Users do not get the "are you sure" prompt since they are not allowed to install software. They get a "you need admin rights to install this software" message. And we have other measures in place which I cannot divulge for confidentiality reasons.

So, users do not even get the chance to download/try to install anything that would make UAC "useful". They never see a UAC prompt even if it was enabled. And UAC also makes deploying software a pain.

If I told you that, I would be fired from my job. We have government contracts and we cannot give out any info on our IT infrastructure. I dont think the DoD would appreciate that to much.

Working in enterprise class and government facilities, I can assure you that UAC does absolutely nothing to hamper my ability to troubleshoot, install, uninstall, remote in, or assist in any way shape or form. UAC is set at the default level, as a matter of fact the only thing that sometimes causes issue is the software firewalls that are left in place but after the gpo gets assigned properly that issue goes away.

I would like to know what software you use, this does not infringe on anything having to do with the government or their controls..it is just a software package. If you don't feel comfortable, take it to pm. There are services out there that allow you to put in your admin credentials prior to logon to be able to take full control and see all uac prompts and be able to put in passwords as needed. You can't see uac prompts with many remote tools because it gets installed or applied without admin user creds. Software that does allows you to see uac prompts is logmein rescue (this is not the normal logmein service, this is a technician service that has a annual cost behind it), dameware mini remote control, pc anywhere (need to preinstall as a admin), logmein (need to preinstall as a admin), teamviewer (need to preinstall as a admin), labtech (site management package), altiris (site management package), sccm (site management package)....I am sure that I am missing some that I have used in previous experiences.

[MorganX]

Truth!

hahahah, while I do believe he wrote the bullet points through his own filter, a bit too technically accurate for "normal" people, I do believe him. For normal people whose PCs usually sit around collecting dust and viruses I absolutely believe they love Windows 8. The Start Page makes all the basics much more accessible and easy to use for them.

That's who it's for. Advanced users should not deny this, just keep asking for options, but it's silly to deny that for its target market, these things work.

Because UAC interferes with app deployments.

How so?

[techbeck]

I would like to know what software you use, this does not infringe on anything having to do with the government or their controls..it is just a software package. If you don't feel comfortable, take it to pm.

No, I am not going to risk my job for arguments sake. Wont happen. We have strict policies in place and I had to sign an agreement to keep out IT infrastructure secrete. We get sales calls all the time asking for info on our systems and each time we tell them we are not allowed to give out that info. It doesnt matter how little or insignificant it is.

[count0nz]

My Wife Loves windows 8 also.. She Loves the Start screen.. She can find all her stuff in 1 Place.

She hadly ever used the Start menu Anyway to Find things. She has 2 Folders on her Desktop

Games and Misc.

She Loves the Fast boot times.. the Anti-Virus..

And the Speed of the System .. She use to Love XP over 7... then Hated me running 8 ... But when I asked her if she wanted me to install 8.. She Jumped at the Chance. becose she saw 1st hand how much better it was..

[syobon999]

If I told you that, I would be fired from my job. We have government contracts and we cannot give out any info on our IT infrastructure. I dont think the DoD would appreciate that to much.

wow, the military and gov are using WINDOWS? you should be fired for not using a *nix :rofl:

[Lprd2007]

If I told you that, I would be fired from my job. We have government contracts and we cannot give out any info on our IT infrastructure. I dont think the DoD would appreciate that to much.

You know what? Absolutely no one cares. Why don't you just create your own operating system too? Seriously. That way you can have your amazing security infrastructure built in and you won't have so much time to waste trashing an excellent OS that is still being used by most people and corporations in the world.

.I.

[techbeck]

wow, the military and gov are using WINDOWS? you should be fired for not using a *nix :rofl:

I dont work for the military. I work for a company that has a contract with the Navy.

You know what? Absolutely no one cares. Why don't you just create your own operating system too? Seriously. That way you can have your amazing security infrastructure built in and you won't have so much time to waste trashing an excellent OS that is still being used by most people and corporations in the world.

.I.

I am not trashing the OS. I am trashing UAC and there are many others that do not like UAC either. I am not alone, just trying to have a convo with people here. All I ever said about Windows 8really is that I didnt like it. But then again, that is not trashing hte OS.

Get it straight next time to try to stick it to someone.

[georgevella]

Hey techbeck, you mentioned earlier that one of your problems with UAC was related to app deployments. Dunno what you guys are using but I'm suspecting the problem is with the way the apps you're trying to deploy are packaged. But then again you guys probably have all this deployment stuff proprietary or internally developed - should really complain about it. Disabling an OS feature to have something deployed automatically shouldn't be necessary IMHO (heck, the user shouldn't even realise: admins are the kings).

Damn, this went of topic. On topic: it's great that whenever someone gets win8, they are properly introduced to the OS, it can be a slight shock for those used to the older versions of Windows.

[The Rev]

I like Win 8 for the speed... Charms bar isn't terrible, but the start screen is atrocious if you don't have a touch screen... Really unnecessary, and the fact that they didn't allow a native way to disable it shows that they really couldn't care less whether or not their users appreciated the usability of their product... What's scarier still is that Microsoft plans to continue this style of operating system into "Windows 9" despite the disappointing sales of Win8... It's like their committing to the bad idea for better or (more likely) worse... They should have stuck with XP's style of a desktop OS and a tablet OS.. They wouldn't even need to change much but the start screen and metro apps... Considering how easy they are to disable now, it wouldn't have taken a huge code shift at all to crank out both versions... They just did this because they like the idea of unity... Which wouldn't be a bad thing, had Windows 8 been a more balanced approach to creating a touchscreen friendly OS that wasn't a gaudy monstrosity on a desktop PC...

[syobon999]

I like Win 8 for the speed... Charms bar isn't terrible, but the start screen is atrocious if you don't have a touch screen... Really unnecessary, and the fact that they didn't allow a native way to disable it shows that they really couldn't care less whether or not their users appreciated the usability of their product... What's scarier still is that Microsoft plans to continue this style of operating system into "Windows 9" despite the disappointing sales of Win8... It's like their committing to the bad idea for better or (more likely) worse... They should have stuck with XP's style of a desktop OS and a tablet OS.. They wouldn't even need to change much but the start screen and metro apps... Considering how easy they are to disable now, it wouldn't have taken a huge code shift at all to crank out both versions... They just did this because they like the idea of unity... Which wouldn't be a bad thing, had Windows 8 been a more balanced approach to creating a touchscreen friendly OS that wasn't a gaudy monstrosity on a desktop PC...

agree 100%

:shiftyninja:

nailed it

[OilersFan]

Only reason Microsoft makes it so you can't disable the start screen is Metro Apps, they want everyone to buy stupid apps from their store and forget everything else.

[DrakeN2k]

I quite like Win 8 , it was odd at first now its just second nature.

[+Warwagon MVC]

Call me old fashion, but my favorite version of Windows is still Windows 2000. I still LOVED the Win2k login screen compared to the full screen of Vista and newer OS'es.

To me Windows 8 is the COMPLETE opposite of Windows 200 and not in a good way.