Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
I totally disagree. If you are designing security rules you are designing them for real human beings and you have to take into consideration how they usually behave. If you do not do that your security rules are broken.
|
Funny how people are saying how Windows is inferior to *nix based systems (e.g. Linux and Mac) in terms of security but when Microsoft adopts *nix-like security (Vista), everyone's complaining.
HarryT is correct. A lot of the problems with UAC is not due to Vista per se. While these "rules" might be new to Windows, similar rules have existed in Linux and MacOS for a long time. Linux and MacOS programmers have been trained to abide by these rules, while Windows programmers are just beginning to get used to it. From the earliest Windows up to XP, programmers have been writing directly to the application installation folder and it's hard to change those habits. Besides, can you imagine how difficult it would be to modify pages upon pages of existing source code?
I think the main complaint against UAC is it makes things more difficult than people are used to. Unfortunately, convenience and security don't exactly go hand in hand. Sure, you can leave your house unlocked so it's easy for you to enter - no need to fumble for keys or anything. However, it'll also make it easier for robbers to steal your things.