The Great UAC Debate!


UAC  

1412 members have voted

  1. 1. Do You Use UAC?

    • Yes
      477
    • Yes, On "Silent Mode"
      91
    • No (I use an Admin Account)
      496
    • No (I use a Standard Account)
      39
    • I don't use Windows Vista
      118
  2. 2. Have You Ever Been Saved By UAC?

    • Yes
      226
    • No
      932
    • I don't use Windows Vista
      106


Recommended Posts

So it did not work for you? I am not sure why really since that is how I get RM CPU Clock and Battery Status (both require elevated privileges) to run without getting blocked.

I think MS chose not to provide an exclusion. I don't remember what their defense was, but it was by design. Unfortunately, that makes it rather annoying having to click three times just to run the blocked program. Since you've two, it would take you six clicks total just to get them started.

Did you put a check box on "Run with highest privileges"?

Make sure to disable the program's built-in autostart within its settings or preferences. For example, my RM CPU Clock program has the option to "Run at Windows startup". This box is unchecked to prevent conflict. Maybe it's starting from some start key rather than using the Task Scheduler.

Edited by KevinN206
I think MS chose not to provide an exclusion. I don't remember what their defense was, but it was by design. .

sorry kevin, i should have stated in my last post that using task scheduler DOES fix the 'problem'. those screenies in first post are before workaround with ts. i just don't agree with having to resort to a 'workaround' to have a valid program open on boot. i understand why they have implemented it. but if ms would just add a tick box to 'remember choice' for each new program loading at boot so you wouldn't have to click 3 times to start OR use task scheduler i'd be happy. :) i'll have to google their defense.

sorry kevin, i should have stated in my last post that using task scheduler DOES fix the 'problem'. those screenies in first post are before workaround with ts. i just don't agree with having to resort to a 'workaround' to have a valid program open on boot. i understand why they have implemented it. but if ms would just add a tick box to 'remember choice' for each new program loading at boot so you wouldn't have to click 3 times to start OR use task scheduler i'd be happy. :) i'll have to google their defense.

Having a 'remember' option could leave systems open to vulnerability. If any app you set to 'remember' so much as uses a file open dialog, you've just made a pretty big privilege escallation exploit.

UAC is by far the best feature of Vista. i honestly don't understand why anyone would have a problem with it. i guess they don't like to be in control.

For me I feel leaving UAC enabled is jsut being paranoid, I know enough about what to run and what not to run to keep my system safe, without the annoyance of UAC popping up and forcing me to respond. I run Nod32, plus Windows Defender is running, and a firewall on my router. ANything more than that for me is overkill.

Without UAC I have been running Vista smoothly for about 6 months, with no issues. So I really don't see the point for users, who are already 'in control' of their system.

For me I feel leaving UAC enabled is jsut being paranoid, I know enough about what to run and what not to run to keep my system safe, without the annoyance of UAC popping up and forcing me to respond. I run Nod32, plus Windows Defender is running, and a firewall on my router. ANything more than that for me is overkill.

Without UAC I have been running Vista smoothly for about 6 months, with no issues. So I really don't see the point for users, who are already 'in control' of their system.

I don't mean for this to sound demeaning in any way but you do realise that "Nod32, plus Windows Defender is running, and a firewall on my router" can't protect you from what UAC does?

Won't happen.

If users (and I mean a statistically significant number, not Neowin members) wanted those options, we'd build them. We don't build them becuause nobody wants them, and there are better things to be building that people do want. Perhaps you misread my statement?

I'm not sure what you're referring to. If users wanted a less-intrusive UAC, then you'd build those options? Given from a lot of the reviews of Vista that I've read and the fact that Apple specifically made an ad about UAC being annoying, I'm going to say it's a big issue.

Will people defect to OSX and all? Not in large numbers, but if you stop listening to your customers, you're doomed. People don't like UAC because it's annoying. Shouldn't be too hard to think of a way to fix... in fact, a third-party ap did it. If you think it's so vital that people keep it on, you all should have made something like that the default.

People don't like UAC because it's annoying.

Speak for yourself my friend - because a vast majority of people don't switch off UAC - I can imagine that lots of people don't even know you can.

As for Apple and the FUD they spread in their adverts - well only a complete mug will believe marketing speak....

For me I feel leaving UAC enabled is jsut being paranoid, I know enough about what to run and what not to run to keep my system safe, without the annoyance of UAC popping up and forcing me to respond. I run Nod32, plus Windows Defender is running, and a firewall on my router. ANything more than that for me is overkill.

Without UAC I have been running Vista smoothly for about 6 months, with no issues. So I really don't see the point for users, who are already 'in control' of their system.

Zero-day vunerabilities.

Speak for yourself my friend - because a vast majority of people don't switch off UAC - I can imagine that lots of people don't even know you can.

As for Apple and the FUD they spread in their adverts - well only a complete mug will believe marketing speak....

I said "People." I never said "everyone." I was giving a reason why people don't like it.

I said "People." I never said "everyone." I was giving a reason why people don't like it.

Ok - so by "People" did you mean the majority or the minority?

For me I feel leaving UAC enabled is jsut being paranoid, I know enough about what to run and what not to run to keep my system safe, without the annoyance of UAC popping up and forcing me to respond. I run Nod32, plus Windows Defender is running, and a firewall on my router. ANything more than that for me is overkill.

Without UAC I have been running Vista smoothly for about 6 months, with no issues. So I really don't see the point for users, who are already 'in control' of their system.

A virus protector will only catch known threat is considered a virus. For eg. some key loggers would not be caught as a virus or threat even by Nod32. There are web sites that can run scripts in the background and you will never know since all programs have admin rights.

I have not had a virus in years so should I decide not to use a virus protector?

Edited by Deihmos
I didn't imply either. Don't put words in my mouth. I don't know if it's a majority or minority and never even pretended to know as much. :rolleyes:

So you are asking Microsoft to fix UAC problem which only the minority of users may be complaining about ?

And TweakUAC doesn't fix UAC and make it less intrusive - it actually makes it pointless as processes which request elevation at startup are granted it at automatically - even if the code is malicious.

So you are asking Microsoft to fix UAC problem which only the minority of users may be complaining about ?

And TweakUAC doesn't fix UAC and make it less intrusive - it actually makes it pointless as processes which request elevation at startup are granted it at automatically - even if the code is malicious.

It still manages to prevent a process from running amok without spawning another one that requests the privileges explicity first. It's better than nothing, I guess.

If Vista ever made UAC unable to be turned off, I'd leave Vista forever. That's how frustrated I get from the relentless, stubborn messages asking me to confirm an action I just committed.

Being a programmer, I move files around a lot, copy them to different folders, and delete what I don't need anymore. UAC bugged me until I finally did a Google search to read on how to disable it.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • They thought value of their goods would forever only drop like it used to and didn't account for sudden increase in price because of all the Ai hype. Tough luck Samsung, don't try to weasel this one out. Also American customer protection laws are a**. In Europe, you need to be compensated for a functioning product of same or better characteristics (not same price point as when it was originally bought!) if it can't be repaired and when you receive a replacement product your warranty starts from scratch because you received a different item than you previously had and old warranty thus cannot apply to it anymore. If your actual item was successfully repaired, warranty gets extended for the period the item was in service. If item is repaired to a significant extent, warranty also starts over from scratch because major part of it was replaced. Americans need to fight to get this kind of consumer protections because they are constantly getting screwed over.
    • Microsoft releases new Windows 11 Media Creation Tool with the latest updates by Taras Buria Patch Tuesday updates arrive every month, bringing users new features and security updates. To make sure customers have access to the most recent images, Microsoft also releases updates to the Media Creation Tool app, its official utility for Windows 11 installation. Today, the company pushed new ISOs to Media Creation Tool, allowing you to create images with the June 2026 Patch Tuesday updates. With the latest update, the Media Creation Tool now downloads KB5094126. It is Windows 11 version 25H2, build 26200.8655, which is also available via Windows Update. Note that the app itself remains on the previous version, which you can check in Properties > Details. The only change is that it now downloads a more recent Windows 11 build, so the only way to check is to download an ISO. The June 2026 Patch Tuesday update is a special release for Windows 11, as it brings a new performance profile to make the operating system more responsive and snappier when rendering various user interface surfaces, including the Start menu, quick settings, and more. It does so by spiking processor speeds for a brief moment, resulting in higher loads for a second or two. The so-called “Low latency profile” is rolling out gradually, but you can force-enable it with the ViVeTool app. Other changes include webcam improvements, Task Manager updates, shared audio support, and more. You can download the Media Creation Tool app from the official Microsoft website using this link. Besides MCT, Microsoft lets you download Windows 11 ISO as a file directly from the official Windows 11 website. However, you will need a third-party app to write it to your USB drive. Check out this guide if you want to know how to do that.
    • Louis Rossmann suing Samsung over "990 Pro SSD warranty scam" by Sayan Sen Back in 2023, if you recall, Neowin reviewer Robbie Khan had a dispute with Samsung over his 990 Pro SSD, which was rapidly losing its health. After significant back and forth, the tech giant had finally released firmware to "stop" the issue. Interestingly, its previous flagship at the time, the 980 Pro was also facing problems leading to two consecutive sets of firmware fixes. Three years later, it looks like a similar conflict has now broken out between tech repair entrepreneur YouTuber Louis Rossmann and Samsung, as it has escalated into a threatened lawsuit after the company allegedly refused to appropriately replace a failing 990 Pro SSD that remained under warranty. According to Rossmann, a 4TB Samsung 990 Pro NVMe SSD purchased for approximately $330 less than two years ago, began experiencing major hiccups and issues, even though he claims it had been operated under ideal cooling conditions. It was installed in a RAID 1 array and cooled by a heatsink and dual high-speed fans. However the drive reportedly started dropping out of the array, exhibiting controller-level failures that eventually became not useable in any meaningful way. Rossmann said Samsung’s support process was marked by delays and confusion from the very start. After initially contacting the wrong regional support channel, he was redirected to Samsung’s memory support division where he submitted detailed diagnostics, logs, and proof of purchase. Rossmann runs a repair company and owns an ACE Lab PC-3000 machine, which is a professional-grade data recovery equipment. As such, he had been confident in his diagnostics. Samsung even seemingly acknowledged that later. Regardless, Rossmann claims that his initial support ticket was automatically closed before a full 24-hour response window had elapsed, forcing him to reopen the case and resubmit documentation. The controversy however intensified further from here after Samsung accepted the drive for warranty evaluation but later returned it with a repair report stating that the drive had passed its testing and that the SSD had been verified as functional. Rossmann strongly disputed those claims citing that his own independent testing on PC-3000 showed write speeds reducing to as low as 40–60 MB/s before the drive failed entirely. Samsung subsequently informed him that the SSD had been reset and reflashed, passing internal stress tests. However, the company also stated that replacement units were unavailable due to an industry-wide memory shortage and suggested that a refund process could be initiated if further testing confirmed the fault. Thus, to settle, the company offered a refund of $330, the amount that was initially paid by him to make the purchase. Here, Rossmann pointed out the seeming hypocrisy of the tech giant as in how no Samsung drive was apparently allocated for warranty replacements, but they were abundantly available for retail sales especially when using business accounts. As you can see, Rossmann is indeed right, there are Samsung 990 Pro 4TB SSDs on Amazon currently for $950 (shipped and sold by first-party Amazon US itself), and they are also available on Samsung's own store too, albeit for an even higher price of $1100. Thus Rossmann argues that Samsung’s inability or unwillingness to provide a replacement while the same model remains available for purchase at significantly higher market prices reflects a failure to honor its warranty obligations. He has issued a formal 60-day notice and says he intends to file suit in Texas small claims court, asserting that companies should face greater costs for denying legitimate warranty claims than for fulfilling them. You can check out the full video titled "Samsung's 990 Pro SSD warranty policy is a scam; I'm taking them to court," at the link below. Source and image: Louis Rossmann (YouTube) As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases
    • Was it too much to ask to show the icon in this article?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      davidbazooked earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Jamswaz earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Jamswaz earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      Marzoid went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Community Regular
      coch went up a rank
      Community Regular
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      509
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      184
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      83
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      75
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!