jay pettitt on 12/8/2009 at 08:46
Oh god, I wasn't even thinking of that. But you're right - it was terrible.
Nameless Voice on 12/8/2009 at 08:51
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Only the ignorant disable UAC. It provides the Windows platform with a tiered levels of read/write permissions structure that's comparable to Unix/Linux based OSes. Microsoft's way of implementing in Vista was very intrusive, yes, but it's a security feature that the Windows had sorely lacked of many many years and as mentioned in the previous paragraph they've addressed the complaints in W7.
It's insanely annoying in Windows 7, even in the less intrusive mode, as it asks me before it will let me even
rename a file on the other (non-Windows 7) hard disk. That's crazy levels of security.
I don't mind, and approve of the idea of, warnings for changing system-critical stuff, but MS have just made that thing pop up so often for every little thing that I think there's no way I'd ever be able to use W7 for any length of time without being forced to disable it.
Actually, I think once a program has been flagged as "run as administrator" in the properties, there should be an option that makes it not have to be okayed before it can run.
Renzatic on 12/8/2009 at 14:51
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
That's true actually - Media DRM is noticeable when you don't use Vista and you can't view a file because you're on the wrong platform.
How often have you ran into DRM issues? It's happened to me only once in the 8 years I've used XP, and I'm fairly sure it's because Netflix forced me to install a bunch of random crap before it'd let me watch streaming movies.
The UAC though, it seems to act differently for different people. I haven't used Vista much at all beyond the beta back in the day, but with it knocked down to the least intrusive setting in 7, it only ever bothers me when I'm installing something, changing something deep-level, or running a program in compatibility mode. I've never had it spaz out on me and throw a few popups my way while renaming a file on another HDD, thumbdrive, or doing simple tasks like changing my background. For me, it's an almost transparent thing.
Aja on 12/8/2009 at 21:07
Can someone explain to me the difference between RC and RTM? Should I be upgrading?
thefonz on 12/8/2009 at 21:39
RTM = release to manufacturing.
That is, its the gold, final, officially signed off by Microsoft for sending out to the dvd makers and OEM companies to start developing software.
RC = release candidate.
Essentially, the beta for testing.
So if you can get the RTM then go for it!
(so long as its not illegal or anything)
Renzatic on 12/8/2009 at 23:00
I'd call the RC a post beta if anything. Beyond maybe a couple of loose screws needing tightening, the code is pretty much finalized and fairly well tested.
Aja on 13/8/2009 at 00:01
Ah, I see. I thought the RTM was something a beta-tester could upgrade to for free. But I've had next to no problems with the release candidate. I plan on riding this out until next June or whenever it expires.
Nameless Voice on 13/8/2009 at 00:26
Release Candidates are exactly that, a version which they think might be suitably polished for a release. So, it's more like a "final beta".
Aerothorn on 13/8/2009 at 02:23
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
I read much the same. Though the release candidate is time limited - shortly after 7 hits the shops it will stop being solid and start shutting down every two hours, which hopefully the official release won't do. Hopefully.
I guess that depends on how you define "shortly". It won't start shutting down till March, a good 4+ months after Windows 7 hits shop.
jay pettitt on 13/8/2009 at 09:06
I guess that's how I define shortly. Quite often when I say I'll get back to you shortly it takes about 4 months also, so there you go.
Quote Posted by "Renz"
How often have you ran into DRM issues? It's happened to me only once in the 8 years I've used XP, and I'm fairly sure it's because Netflix forced me to install a bunch of random crap before it'd let me watch streaming movies.
DRM can be quite prevalent. I'm a hippy and tend to gravitate toward copyleft stuff anyway, but until very recently things like the BBC's iPlayer content was off limits to me - that's a fairly big chunk of the internet missing if you're a Brit.
My point though is that all this garbage - the DRM, the pop-up windows that can't be closed easily, the branding, opening up the desktop for all sorts of third party junk is Microsoft courting commercial interests, often at the expense - not the benefit for the average bod sitting in front of their PC. I'm sure the 7 release candidate is looking pretty neat. But I suspect Vista was in a similar same boat back in the day - except Vista didn't have the advantage of replacing something that so many people hate with a ferocious loathing.
What I think is going to happen is that 7 RTM will go out to Toshiba, HP and all those high-street brands. They'll have contracts with certain producers of anti-virus software and desktop utilities and so on which will get added to the basic package, and then they'll develop their own unique 'value-adding' junk and what most people will end up with is the same kind of mangled hellish mess they got with Vista. And that's before they get started.
MS seem hopelessly naive for a multi-billion dollar industry. XP was great, except that it wasn't safe to attach to a network. Vista went some way to fixing that, but volunteered to have itself compromised, not by viruses and trojans this time, but by commercial interests who are intent on bugging you all day long with retail opportunities. Mark my words, it will end in tears.
