Make your Vista's admin account acts like in XP


Recommended Posts

God this is like saying you want to always run as ROOT in linux 24/7.

Something that about 100% of security experts will tell you to NEVER do.

Well, a little bit, but you're still not running as SYSTEM. That would be root. ;)

I think the reason people are doing this is because it would be like running as a normal user,

then a dialog [like kdesudo] pops up for small things, but if you want to make a symlink in a location

you don't own, then it would just tell you that it doesn't work, no sudo dialog at all.

Think about your analogies before you say them, or else you end up looking worse than if you did it yourself.

Yes, I've done this, but I don't use it all the time, I just login to it whenever I need to.

Clint

This is exactly what I thought...

Seems like some people always need to complain, XP was not save becouse you work as administrator, now they solved that issue and now they are complaining again!

Microsoft has build in this feature not to attack their users but to defend them, so those people who do work as administrator in Vista all day long shouldn't complain about Windows as soon they got malware and stuff on their computer.

I'm also not too happy with the UAC, its quite anoying when you want to cleanup your start/programs, but if this helps to keep the OS clean and stabil i'm happy.

I never asked for this. I never complained about the way XP handled/didnt handle this. The default way Vista handles this is the most annoying thing Ive ever experienced on a pc... yes, even more annoying than a trojan or virus, which I can count on 1 hand the number of those Ive gotten in 20 years. I hate it, so its gone. This is my own system, in my own house, with my own self. :rofl:

This is exactly what I thought...

Seems like some people always need to complain, XP was not save becouse you work as administrator, now they solved that issue and now they are complaining again!

Microsoft has build in this feature not to attack their users but to defend them, so those people who do work as administrator in Vista all day long shouldn't complain about Windows as soon they got malware and stuff on their computer.

I'm also not too happy with the UAC, its quite anoying when you want to cleanup your start/programs, but if this helps to keep the OS clean and stabil i'm happy.

I think that's really dependent on the user. For example, I never complained about XP's security or stability. I think it's pretty solid on both if your a smart user. Hell, I myself go to those "questionable" websites and I've never been infected. Because I can take care of my computer, hardware and software side. On the other hand, I have friends who need my help in fixing their computer often. For them Vista's UAC would be a boon. A huge boon. For me, it's a pain in the ass and I'm glad I dumped it.

Thanks all.

I've never complained about XP either, and a choice has to be made in Vista's way of controlling users and everyone is free to use whatever he/she likes and be responsible for any result.

I am using Home Premium and I decided to set ConsentPromptBehaviorAdmin=1 so that it actually asks for password instead of Ok/Cancel prompt. :)

I decided to go this way since I found myself clicking Allow sometimes without reading the prompt, when I was in middle of something.

I am using Home Premium and I decided to set ConsentPromptBehaviorAdmin=1 so that it actually asks for password instead of Ok/Cancel prompt. :)

I decided to go this way since I found myself clicking Allow sometimes without reading the prompt, when I was in middle of something.

Wow. So you made it even more annoying. What are all these prompts you're getting that you werent expecting? Are you in the KGB? CIA? Interpol? MOSSAD? Scotland yard?

  • 3 weeks later...

So I have followed the instructions, working great.

But I have one issue:

Is it possible to change the name of the "\Users\Administrator" folder to per example "\Users\SYSOP" ????

Why would I do that?

Because I have a lot of shortcuts, setups and settings that use the folder "\Users\SYSOP".

I have managed to just rename that folder from another account, but then after restarting Vista seems to not "find" my account "Administrator" and create a temporary account.

-

So I have followed the instructions, working great.

But I have one issue:

Is it possible to change the name of the "\Users\Administrator" folder to per example "\Users\SYSOP" ????

Why would I do that?

Because I have a lot of shortcuts, setups and settings that use the folder "\Users\SYSOP".

I have managed to just rename that folder from another account, but then after restarting Vista seems to not "find" my account "Administrator" and create a temporary account.

-

Oh, I managed to solve this myself :-)

After the

3- Set "Accounts: Administrator account status" to Enabled

I also opened

Set ?Accounts: Rename administrator account?

and changed the name to SYSOP

When restarting Vista the new Administrator account's folder name under C:\Users was SYSOP.

This approach MUST be done when you enable the built-in Administrator account for Vista for the FIRST time.

-

  • 2 weeks later...
Make your Vista's admin account acts like in XP, Always in full control

Funny that made me laugh.

Make your Vista's admin account acts like in XP, You and Virus attacks are Always in full control.

In XP I used to run as Limited User. It was a pain to create batch files and various tools to get Limited User to perform some tasks as Admin. With UAC in Vista all this trouble is gone. Whenever Admin access is required it just pops up.

controluserpasswords2vigv6.jpg

I have also enabled Administrator account from Computer Management

administratorenablevistxp5.th.jpg

which is another way to enable Administrator account in Vista/XP.

how do you create batch files to give certain programs the admin power they need to execute?

and what type of "various tools" do you use?

thanks

Just reformatted and did a fresh install. Gotta say thanks for a great tutorial! No longer annoying to use Vista Home Premium.

I've used XP as administrator since the beginning. Had a virus one time in more than 5 years. In XP (and now in Vista Home Premium) I use AVG Anti Virus, Spyware Blaster, AdAware SE and regularly do a full scan with Windows Defender.

Damn, I dont understand why you people feel the urge to turn off security features..

Still everyone to thier own

Simply because anyone with experience is going to get quicky frustrated having to click yes to every change they make.

I understand the theory about protecting your pc but to be honest the amount of pop ups vista has is ridiculous and could even cause inexperienced users even more problems. I know my Mum would be ringing me every 10 minutes!

alright i just did this and i want to delete this account named "administrator" but I don't know how... can anyone help?

1- Click Start, and type "secpol.msc" in the search area and click Enter. (You may receive a prompt from UAC, approve/login and proceed)

2- In the left list, choose "Local Policies", then "Security Options"

3- Set "Accounts: Administrator account status" to Disabled.

Note that doing so will undo the new behavior, if that what you want to do.

  • 3 weeks later...

Hello.

Firstly thanks Tantawi for the useful guide, however:

From what I can see running Vista HP in this Administrator account is pretty much the same as the Admin account created during setup, with the exception it disables UAC.

* I still cannot rename notepad.exe to notepad2.exe as I could in XP under Admin, admittedly I cannot think of a reason I'd ever want to muck about with SYSTEM32 files but still.

* I still cannot gain access to folders such as "Documents and Settings" without taking Ownership of them which annoyingly doesn't propagate down to all subfolders even though I set it to, and even then on some folders that isn't working.

Is there a way of setting Vista "exactly" how Admin worked in XP? So you have cart blanch? I'm having to amend each folder I get access denied on and giving my own permissions back to me.

Cheers

Brad.

p.s - Keep up the good work :)

Edited by bradavon

Another reason to use the proper Admin account is you UAC is completely disabled but you can still enable it so as to keep Windows Security Center happy. If you just disable it via the "Users" GUI front end WSC starts complaining it's switched off.

I fail to see how UCA is any use for System Admins anyway (it's definitely useful for Standard Users) as an Admin will know what he's doing anyway and will just click Continue making the prompt pretty useless. AFAIK it has no effect on Hackers, Viruses or Spyware and is purely a User Access Control. For example: I know full well meddling with the options in the System window (in Control Panel) can do damage but I also know how to use it.

Like I said UAC from what I understand it is a User not Hacker prompt, unless I'm mistaken? . That said disabling UAC does disable Internet Explorer 7's Protected Mode, which doesn't interest me much as I don't use it anyway.

* I still cannot gain access to folders such as "Documents and Settings" without taking Ownership of them which annoyingly doesn't propagate down to all subfolders even though I set it to, and even then on some folders that isn't working.

There is no folder named Documents and Settings in Vista!

You're mistaken, like XP you need to enable "Hidden and System Files" from Options ;). Trust me it's definitely there. "ProgramData" seems to be both "All Users" and your current User mixed together. Then there is also "Users" I've not figured out how it and ProgramData differ yet.

I only bought my new Vista HP Laptop today and have spent the evening working out how to gain access to my folders :D

Hi bradavon,

Congratulations on your new laptop, and welcome to Neowin :)

You may be looking to this tweak:

Take Ownership Context Menu Item

TakeOwn.reg adds a Take Ownership Context Menu Item to all files and folders. It opens an Elevated Command Prompt which recovers full access to the selected file / directory, sub directories and their content.

You can access the Context Menu Item by holding down Shift + right-click on a file or folder.

TakeOwn.png

If you want to access the Take Ownership Context Menu Item on an exe file, you must merge "RunAsAdmin_Exe-.reg"; this reg file removes the "Run as Administrator" Context Menu Item from all exe files (they both use the runas key). Merge "RunAsAdmin_Exe+.reg" if you want to restore the "Run as Administrator" Context Menu Item.

Install: Merge TakeOwn+.reg

Uninstall: Merge TakeOwn-.reg

> TakeOwn.zip ( 1,99 KB )

From: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=499870

Good luck :)

Hello Tantawi, thanks for the welcome.

Thanks for that reg fix. It looks like it adds a context menu which dumps you at a DOS command prompt. It's a start but I'd prefer a Full Admin account like XP.

Even if I didn't use it all the time it would be nice to know it's possible. For example I've not worked out how to be able to rename files in the WINDOWS\SYSTEM32 folder (unless I take ownership of that too) which you may need to do if you need to delete/rename a system file.

Has anyone worked how to do this? Surely it's possible. I believe the difference here is the Administrator account (the proper one) in Vista still doesn't own certain folders, they're owned by the SYSTEM account (which cannot logged in with) as opposed XP where you own each and every folder.

That thread is great though, it's chocker block with goodies. I'll have to get reading :D

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can I suggest you add a disclaimer to your first post explaining disabling UAC takes Vista's IE7 Protected Mode with it.

This basically lowers IE7 to a Limited User (lower than the Semi-Admin you're logged in with). This is something IE7 users may not be aware of, even if you enable Protected Mode from Internet Options it stays disabled (just like UAC). There is a fix however.

If you want UAC disabled but Protected Mode on use DropMyRights which was written for XP but works just the same in Vista (I tested it last night), not only that but using it actually turns Protected Mode back on (i.e - instead of saying Protected Mode: Off it will say On). Therefore proving Protected Mode and DropMyRights are on and the same thing.

What is DropMyRights I hear you say, read on: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972827.aspx

It was written by a Microsoft bloke but isn't officially supported. I use the /c switch to make it even more secure. I've been using it for months and bar ActiveX installs (which need admin rights) not one website has fallen over. You can prove it works by trying to save a file into the SYSTEM32 folder, it won't let you.

The great thing is it's completely seamless, works on XP or Vista (probably 2000 too) and lets you get the good bits out of UAC without the bad. Just set the shortcut for each Internet enabled program to use it and make sure you choose Open "Minimised" and it's seamless.

Edited by bradavon
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Turbo Pascal was my first real programming experience more than 30 years ago at university. I mostly taught myself from the included examples and help documentation, because the university only taught the basic syntax and philosophy of Pascal, without going deeply into Turbo Pascal’s advanced features. I still remember when I discovered that I could embed assembly language directly into Pascal code, call BIOS functions, manipulate screen memory, use mouse interrupts, and control peripherals from my programs. That opened huge doors for me. Programming back then felt really fun, direct, and close to the machine. What I loved about Pascal was its readability and the almost instant compile time. Turbo Pascal was an amazing environment, but unfortunately Turbo Pascal for Windows 3 did not feel like it fully carried that legacy forward. Later, Delphi got things back on the right track after the messy transition to TP for Windows. Sadly, Delphi suffered from years of uncertainty as it moved from Borland to CodeGear and then to Embarcadero. That instability made many developers lose confidence in it, even though Delphi itself remained a powerful and productive tool. I still work with Delphi from time to time, but I definitely miss the old days of Turbo Pascal.
    • I hope this encodes in to AV1 or AV2 as currently tiktok uses h265 and h264.
    • Qualcomm reportedly in talks to build custom video chips for TikTok parent ByteDance by Karthik Mudaliar Qualcomm is reportedly in advanced discussions to provide custom chip-design services to Chinese tech giant ByteDance, the same company behind TikTok. According to a report from Reuters, Qualcomm could be involved in designing custom silicon tailored for ByteDance's massive data-center workloads. If it goes through, the deal would make ByteDance one of Qualcomm's early anchor customers for its fastly growing custom chip-design division, For years, Qualcomm was the king of making smartphone processors and modems. The company has also been moving into the PC ecosystem and other formats such as on-device AI for Android XR headsets. However, this particular deal is about Qualcomm's custom Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs). For a platform like TikTok, ByteDance needs hardware that can help it ingest, process, and serve billions of short-form videos daily. Generalised hardware is no longer the most cost-effective and efficient route, which is why ByteDance is trying to develop custom Video Processing Units (VPUs). VPUs designed specifically for ByteDance’s algorithmic needs could drastically reduce data-center power consumption and improve encoding speeds at an unprecedented scale. The underlying tech behind these processors is actually from Qualcomm's recent acquisition of AlphaWave Semi, a high-speed connectivity specialist company. By combining AlphaWave’s high-bandwidth IP with Qualcomm’s architectural expertise, the company could begin mass production by the end of 2026, if the talks go through. All this also comes at a time when U.S.-China tech relations have dwindled. Escalating trade frictions between Washington and Beijing have severely impacted the export of high-end AI chips from U.S. firms like Nvidia, AMD, and Lam Research. Yet, the Qualcomm-ByteDance discussions show that U.S. tech companies are still actively seeking growth avenues and are open to doing business with China, where regulators still permit. Reuters notes that the outcome of this deal could be uncertain, and ByteDance might also seek partners other than Qualcomm. via Reuters | Image via DepositPhotos.com
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      OHI Accounting earned a badge
      One Year In
    • First Post
      Almohandis earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      DaviKar went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      461
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      169
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      119
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Xenon
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!