Windows Vista

[GordonSweet]

So what are your opinions on this wondefull new Windows Vista if you have already tried it. Of course many of the marvelous improvements such as 3D graphics I understand are only available if you cough up for the most expensive version.

Have you noticed crafty MS apparantly charge nearly twice as much for it in the UK as the US such as £99 or $99

Gordon

[NecrosIhsan]

The sarcasm rolls off your tongue like water off of a duck's back.

In other words...you're boring.

There are about 10 million of these kinds of threads all over the internet right now. Must this forum be polluted with one too?

[wallace]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaIUkwPybtM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QdGt3ix2...ted&search=

I like Vista, when I switch to Vista through parallels it acts just like my Mac Seriously though I do like Vista, much much better than XP. It seems more stable. One feature I wish they had was spaces though. Linux, Solaris, OSX (leopard) all have spaces, when will Windows get them? Grr.

[Josiah Tobin]

The rumors (perhaps more) of the completely ludicrous, paranoid copy protection present in Vista are enough to turn me against it right off the bat.

[seph]

I had no trouble stealing illegal software and music and movies and television shows inside of Vista. None at all. Or copying it onto my digital media devices (iPod and LifeDrive). Don't fret =) As long as you purchased a genuine copy of Vista or are on one somehow, you should be able to steal everything else

[TheAdventMaster]

There are about 10 million of these kinds of threads all over the internet right now. Must this forum be polluted with one too?

We wouldn't be in the "in" crowd if not.

[GordonSweet]

It would appear wonderfull Vista is no friend of Amateur Programmers to judge by the following from the designer of BBC BASIC for Windows, who unlike some does know what he is talking about. So presumably the same problems will apply to compiling programs to EXE files with QuickBasic and FreeBasic especailly if you hope to market them.

Gordon

Running compiled BB4W programs under Vista
Posted by: "Richard Russell" yahoo@rtrussell.co.uk rtrussellcouk
Fri Feb 2, 2007 10:32 am (PST)
Now Windows Vista is finally released, anybody compiling their BBC
BASIC for Windows programs to executables needs to think about Vista
compatibility. Although in many respects Vista is not dissimilar to
its predecessors, there is one area - UAC or User Account Control -
which can raise serious compatibility issues.

In all previous versions of Windows user programs have, by default,
run with administrator privileges. Although it is possible to log
into an XP machine as an ordinary user it is very rarely done, and
many programs don't run properly if you do. Vista is different: the
default mode (and the one which everybody is expected to use to
achieve the much-publicised security benefits) prevents write access
to many areas of the filing system and registry, for example
the 'Program Files' folder and its sub-folders.

Because so many existing programs expect to be able to write to the
Program Files folder, Windows Vista incorporates a 'trick' to
improve compatibility. If it determines that the program hasn't
been written specifically to run under Vista it 'virtualizes' the
Program Files folder, giving the program its own private copy.
Hence if the program attempts to write to it it will succeed, but
crucially any files it writes there will be invisible to all other
applications!

Whilst this can be effective, it can also be very confusing. For
example a BB4W program which writes out a text file and then uses
SYS "ShellExecute" to display it will fail. According to the BB4W
program the text file will be there, but according to Notepad (or
whatever utility was run to view it) it won't. When I first saw
this I was very puzzled!

To cut a long story short, if your BB4W program is likely to be
confused by virtualization of the file system, which it probably
will if it ever writes out to a sub-directory of Program Files, you
should consider modifying it for Vista so that it only writes to
legitimate areas of the disk (e.g. the user's My Documents folder).

It is also advisable to select the 'Use Windows XP Visual Styles'
option in the BB4W Compile dialogue. If you do that Windows will
recognise the program as having been written with Vista in mind and
rather than virtualizing the file system it will issue an error if
it detects a write to the Program Files folder (etc.). This is a
lot less confusing than successfully writing to a virtual folder!

Richard.

[thegrogen]

Although it is possible to log
into an XP machine as an ordinary user it is very rarely done

O rly?

My high school has a laptop program going, and they never let us log on to admin accounts, and for good reason; restricting access to the Program Files and Windows directories keeps certain viruses and spyware from being installed properly, and hence the security benefits. It also prevents the user from installing software that might bring such security threats into the system.

So this apparently isn't done at larger organizations than my little 750-student private school?

I agree that it's a major pain in the ass when a program needs admin rights to run, but that's just badly designed software IMO. A program shouldn't NEED admin rights just to run itself.

[LooseCaboose]

Thats not a problem with Vista, its a problem with amateur programmers who think its a good idea to write to areas like the programs folder. Why would any application other than an installer (which should be run as the superuser) need to write files there? Any program which fails this way under Vista will also fail as an ordinary user under Windows XP. While many people use XP as the admin at home, most businesses, universities, etc use ordinary user accounts.

The new security model in Vista is a good thing. Fix your broken code, don't complain about the operating system having better security.

[Kevin_theprogrammer]

Thats not a problem with Vista, its a problem with amateur programmers who think its a good idea to write to areas like the programs folder. Why would any application other than an installer (which should be run as the superuser) need to write files there? Any program which fails this way under Vista will also fail as an ordinary user under Windows XP. While many people use XP as the admin at home, most businesses, universities, etc use ordinary user accounts.

The new security model in Vista is a good thing. Fix your broken code, don't complain about the operating system having better security.

...better security that will be bypassed in a matter of months.