UAC - discuss

[aidanjt]

I can't believe the Linux way of working with permissions grew on me

It has a way of doing that to you. And it's a lot more comfortable on Linux because *all* software is written with the default assumption that you do *not* run with root privilages, as such, it wont ever attempt to modify system-wide files and directories. And that's just how it should be done, because ordinarily, there's never a reason to do so. That's why the notion of self-installers and self-updaters deeply offend me. One programme should be designed to do that specific job, and do it very well.

[lodore]

It has a way of doing that to you. And it's a lot more comfortable on Linux because *all* software is written with the default assumption that you do *not* run with root privilages, as such, it wont ever attempt to modify system-wide files and directories. And that's just how it should be done, because ordinarily, there's never a reason to do so. That's why the notion of self-installers and self-updaters deeply offend me. One programme should be designed to do that specific job, and do it very well.

Hey aidanjt,
I completely agree.
If microsoft introduced UAC earlier on say 2k or xp then by now pretty much all programs would run fine under it and users wouldnt be complaining.

I also wish that there was a single updating program. i find it annoying that everyprogram seems to add an autorun entrie for checking for an update once a week....
if your checkin for an update once a week why do you need a process running all the time?

btw microsoft are gilty of doing the above fore their intellipoint mouse and keyboard software updater.
surely for checking for updates once a week a seduled task would be a much better way?


I wonder what would happern is microsoft didnt allow administrator logins lol.
Instead you had to login as a standard user and you get UAC prompts for admin stuff.

i dont see why there are still programs which arent UAC complient.
im hoping the talk at PDC "Best Practices for Developing for Windows Standard User" will help devolopers design their programs better

[jbro75]

Turned off UAC as soon as i started to use vista. Really annoying

[[GSV]Myocardial]

Those who object to UAC, or simply disabled it "cos they know what they're doing" usually don't really understand it, or are being plagued by prompts because they're either

a: running crap software that ought not to cause the prompts in the first place
b: regularly using the PC in a darn odd way - i.e. user error (and those who think this isn't the case present a good case for why you're doing it please)

As a developer, I do understand UAC - i've made our own software fully compliant and not a single prompt occurs as a result - and yet on my home Vista and W7 systems UAC is firmly turned on. About the only time I see prompts is when i'd expect it - installing, uninstalling or making (potentially) hazardous system changes. The only PC I have it OFF on, is my main development machine - and this is for credible reasons (i.e. Visual Studio isn't quite compliant and it will stop me doing my job which is, by nature, incredibly system invasive).

I'm sorry but you've highlighted exactly why UAC is such a problem. In your own post you've stated that Visual Studio is crap software and your using the pc in a damn odd way, if UAC is such a godsend of all the machines it should be enabled on it is the main development machine.

Many other people will be in the same boat as you are in, with it invading into their work and costing them time. It's another reason why I think most corporates haven't taken up Vista, they do not want their staff spending valuable time clicking the ok button just to get on with their jobs, that's time which could be better spent and time is money.

I have stuck with Vista for at least a year and I tried to keep UAC on but I eventually just got fed up of it. Every time I start programs such as xfire, BF2 and several others I have to click ok. Software is way over priced for most individuals and I couldn't afford to buy the latest and greatest software just to line the pockets of a load of programmers and as alot of older software seems to generate these problems it just makes using it hard work.

It's funny how I read thread after thread of the same people going on and on about how great Vista was, how great UAC is etc etc all of you seem to work within the IT industry and frankly you've fallen into the trap that most IT people seem to fall into. That is that your right and the users are always wrong, unfortunately the people making money from business other than IT really just want a system that works and is really easy to use, hence why XP in my mind is being clung on to.

If as you have highlighted visual studio doesn't work with Vista and gives you UAC prompts so often as a Microsoft product then UAC obviously isn't fulfilling the requirement of being easy to use.

I find it really condesending when reading thread after thread of people telling others that their stupid and using their pc in a crap way all the time or using crap software when some of the pieces of software are written by people just like you lot i.e IT workers!!!

[aidanjt]

I'm sorry but you've highlighted exactly why UAC is such a problem. In your own post you've stated that Visual Studio is crap software and your using the pc in a damn odd way, if UAC is such a godsend of all the machines it should be enabled on it is the main development machine.

Many other people will be in the same boat as you are in, with it invading into their work and costing them time. It's another reason why I think most corporates haven't taken up Vista, they do not want their staff spending valuable time clicking the ok button just to get on with their jobs, that's time which could be better spent and time is money.

I have stuck with Vista for at least a year and I tried to keep UAC on but I eventually just got fed up of it. Every time I start programs such as xfire, BF2 and several others I have to click ok. Software is way over priced for most individuals and I couldn't afford to buy the latest and greatest software just to line the pockets of a load of programmers and as alot of older software seems to generate these problems it just makes using it hard work.

It's funny how I read thread after thread of the same people going on and on about how great Vista was, how great UAC is etc etc all of you seem to work within the IT industry and frankly you've fallen into the trap that most IT people seem to fall into. That is that your right and the users are always wrong, unfortunately the people making money from business other than IT really just want a system that works and is really easy to use, hence why XP in my mind is being clung on to.

If as you have highlighted visual studio doesn't work with Vista and gives you UAC prompts so often as a Microsoft product then UAC obviously isn't fulfilling the requirement of being easy to use.

I find it really condesending when reading thread after thread of people telling others that their stupid and using their pc in a crap way all the time or using crap software when some of the pieces of software are written by people just like you lot i.e IT workers!!!

^^ the exact mindset that cause the spread of viruses.

Hint, computers are a highly complex peice of quantum mechanical engineering, with even more highly complex software running on top of them. Nothing about them 'justworks'(tm). That is reality. If you find proper use of computers too intimidating. Then stop using them. Go back to post, the abicas, paper books, news paper, and other such rediculously outdated but straight forward things that neither requires thought on your part, or causes damage to the rest of the planet.

Oh, and how many tenths of a second does it take for you to click 'ok' again? Hardly a 'waste of time' compared to the hours it takes to back up data, reinstall an OS, install applications, restore data, retweak personal settings, etc...

Another hint, software is written by software developers, not IT admins. Many software developers are also idiots, they don't think in terms of how to write secure software. Which further propgates viruses. It's up to the IT guys to clean up the mess both idiotic users and software developers make.

See the difference?

[j.o.s.h.1408]

^^ the exact mindset that cause the spread of viruses.

Hint, computers are a highly complex peice of quantum mechanical engineering, with even more highly complex software running on top of them. Nothing about them 'justworks'(tm). That is reality. If you find proper use of computers too intimidating. Then stop using them. Go back to post, the abicas, paper books, news paper, and other such rediculously outdated but straight forward things that neither requires thought on your part, or causes damage to the rest of the planet.

Oh, and how many tenths of a second does it take for you to click 'ok' again? Hardly a 'waste of time' compared to the hours it takes to back up data, reinstall an OS, install applications, restore data, retweak personal settings, etc...

Another hint, software is written by software developers, not IT admins. Many software developers are also idiots, they don't think in terms of how to write secure software. Which further propgates viruses. It's up to the IT guys to clean up the mess both idiotic users and software developers make.

See the difference?

absolute rubbish in your last statement. software developers make a program based on what there boss says or what the users needs are

[Splash]

I'm sorry but you've highlighted exactly why UAC is such a problem. In your own post you've stated that Visual Studio is crap software and your using the pc in a damn odd way, if UAC is such a godsend of all the machines it should be enabled on it is the main development machine.

Many other people will be in the same boat as you are in, with it invading into their work and costing them time. It's another reason why I think most corporates haven't taken up Vista, they do not want their staff spending valuable time clicking the ok button just to get on with their jobs, that's time which could be better spent and time is money.

I have stuck with Vista for at least a year and I tried to keep UAC on but I eventually just got fed up of it. Every time I start programs such as xfire, BF2 and several others I have to click ok.

I'm an IT admin, Dangel is a developer. I'm actually quite pleased with the way that the developers (or the good ones, anyways) have adapted to UAC.

How often are you running VS AND xfire, BF2 etc? A development environment is somewhat different to a production environment.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

I'm an IT admin, Dangel is a developer. I'm actually quite pleased with the way that the developers (or the good ones, anyways) have adapted to UAC.

How often are you running VS AND xfire, BF2 etc? A development environment is somewhat different to a production environment.

im a developer also

[Splash]

im a developer also

In which case...

absolute rubbish in your last statement. software developers make a program based on what there boss says or what the users needs are

Perhaps software developers should learn how to work with the tools that they have, rather than just providing the cheapest, easiest results.




Sorry, not a slight on any deveopers here, but the whole "it's what the PHB told me to do" attitude is what's wrong here, not anything else.

[aidanjt]

absolute rubbish in your last statement. software developers make a program based on what there boss says or what the users needs are

The boss and users tell you to write insecure software for the hell of it?

I call BS.

[[GSV]Myocardial]

^^ the exact mindset that cause the spread of viruses.

Now how did I not see that coming. Straight on the offensive of belittling someone else. By Dangel's logic ("your own" - mis quoted as aidanjt) logic he's ("your") exactly the same because he ("you") disabled UAC. Stop slagging people off just because they don't bow down to your presumed superior knowledge.

If UAC is the new savior in the fight against viruses it's going to do just as poor a job as all the other methods because uneducated users are just going to click OK to get on with whatever they were doing and won't pay a blind bit of attention to the pop up.

I run a software virus checker, a software firewall, a hardware firewall and have all my emails checked by a third paarty prior to arriving at my machine. I've personally never had a virus in the last 13 years of being online, my father has had a couple due to the fact that people have targeted him as an online business user but we have identified those very quickly and recovered to a non virus state the same day in both cases. If that is the exact mindset to cause the spread of viruses then I think we might aswell all stop now as UAC isn't going to help.

Hint, computers are a highly complex peice of quantum mechanical engineering, with even more highly complex software running on top of them. Nothing about them 'justworks'(tm). That is reality.

Think you really need to go have a read up, it'd be electronic engineering, most likely with a specialisation in microelectronics as we haven't got to the stage of computers using quantum mechanics in the mainstream yet! Maybe you should go read a few articles on quantum mechanics before spouting off a load of nonsense.

If you find proper use of computers too intimidating. Then stop using them. Go back to post, the abicas, paper books, news paper, and other such rediculously outdated but straight forward things that neither requires thought on your part, or causes damage to the rest of the planet.

Don't show up your own argumental flaw by talking down to me, you really haven't a clue what I do or what I am involved in and it really just outlines that you couldn't just create a non childish response.

Oh, and how many tenths of a second does it take for you to click 'ok' again? Hardly a 'waste of time' compared to the hours it takes to back up data, reinstall an OS, install applications, restore data, retweak personal settings, etc...

So why is Dangel not using it on his development machine, oh that's right he's using crap software in a dum way as per his own quote. How long does it take for him to just click OK on his development machine????

Another hint, software is written by software developers, not IT admins. Many software developers are also idiots, they don't think in terms of how to write secure software. Which further propgates viruses. It's up to the IT guys to clean up the mess both idiotic users and software developers make.

See the difference?

Read my post again and you will see I talk about IT workers not ADMINS !!! Maybe your not understanding what an IT worker is, it's someone who works in the IT industry not just sys admin

An IT admin cannot generally fix the mess that a software developer makes, they just bodge the system up to make it work correctly with the parameters that they are given, even if the solution is not ideal. They normally have to wait until a software developer can get around to adjusting the mistakes and shortcuts that they made initially to get a product out on time.

Many IT admins can show just the same amount of arrogance that you are showing in many workplaces and have done so to me on many occasions. And when I've helped those very same IT admins with a technical issue that they couldn't resolve it's a rather belittling experience to finally realise that we all need each other to earn our pay and that no-one knows it all or is right all of the time.

No user is idiotic they work with what they have to get the job done. IT people often fail to realise that the rest of the workforce of a company are doing just the same as them in working with the tools they are given to get a job done. But NO they often insist on calling the user stupid, most of the time this is because they have no interest in how the system works, they just need it to work in order to allow them to get on with their own job or task. The amount of times I've been talked down to in the way you have just done only to find that the person knows diddly squat in relation to myself is really amusing and really goes to show at times that there are so many in the IT industry that really don't know what the user of most IT systems wants. And I profess to knowing jack all about computers, I just read alot and try and find answers to the questions that I need to answer.

It's rather annoying how IT professionals blame the stupid user for the fact that their software is like a swiss cheese and allows a virus to utilise dupes and facades to replicate or shield itself from detection. If the people making the stuff could make a more secure product in the first place we wouldn't have half the issues that we do.

Also how IT admins are so quick to blame users when they utilise something they shouldn't have. My old university managed to leave their guest accounts to all the servers unpassworded and because of this we were happily using the space that was openly available to us to share files around. When they found out the head of IT tried to get the police involved and expel over 30 of us, when one of us went and spoke to the deputy dean of the university over the poor administration of their server security and lack of proper account management the truth was outed that they hadn't been doing their job properly and we all ended up hearing nothing about it after that, but I do know that certain members of their staff didn't last too long, oh but again it was us stupid users who were at fault, having no way of knowing that a drive wasn't open to us because it was mapped on our profiles and open for us to right and read to and from.

My point is still that UAC is the wrong way of implementing the security that is required. If we had had this back in the windows 2000 days I seriously doubt if computers would have become such a useful tool, as people would have got very frustrated with the software developers idea of security and many IT people can be very closed off to other peoples views and opinions.

I think windows 7 goes some way to toning down the notifications that vista made and so far I think they have taken that on board well and tried to adapt it to what users want rather than people like yourself who would impose that we click ok every 10 seconds just to make sure that you don't have any harmful software entering your environment. Not everything that is shiny and new is great, vista has certainly been a good example of how users will vote with their feet if they don't like what you are trying to force them to accept.

[[GSV]Myocardial]

I'm an IT admin, Dangel is a developer. I'm actually quite pleased with the way that the developers (or the good ones, anyways) have adapted to UAC.

How often are you running VS AND xfire, BF2 etc? A development environment is somewhat different to a production environment.

xfire asks for permission on vista every time I boot up and every time I try and join a game through it. BF2 will ask every time I start it up and occasionally when I try and join servers where it drops me back to desktop. Occasionally this will also crash the program for me. It also used to do this on the occasional map change where it would bomb me out to ask my permission.

I'd imagine that it is badly coded for the modern os as it is quite and old game, as to xfire I'm not sure why and I haven't been able to get it working with Windows 7 to see if the revised UAC controls cause any problems when you raise the setting from never notify to always notify. Unfortunately to be able to play BF2 on Windows 7 I have to slide the control bar down to never notify otherwise I get notifications at most of the points above at times and with only certain servers working due to punkbuster it is a little hard to test as Evenbalance are not supporting the beta at all, which is fair enough.

Overall I've found the UAC experience with windows 7 much more plesant than on vista, but will be reinstalling vista as a dual boot to alleviate my problems with punkbuster support.

A question about the development environment, is it connected to the network if it is used for business purposes? If so and not used in total isolation then by Dangel's (sorry quoted it as aidanjt's, when it wasn't him who said it) own comment it is a danger to the entire network due to the potential for viruses as he points out. By his own mindset he is risking the spread of viruses to any machine connected to that one, due to disabling UAC because he "knows what he's doing". It's a microsoft program, if it doesn't work with UAC properly then I'd be getting onto MS about getting their butt into gear and fixing it, Vista has been out a fair while. I'd expect them to be releasing patches for that type of software or a new version that is compatible.

[aidanjt]

Think you really need to go have a read up, it'd be electronic engineering, most likely with a specialisation in microelectronics as we haven't got to the stage of computers using quantum mechanics in the mainstream yet! Maybe you should go read a few articles on quantum mechanics before spouting off a load of nonsense.

This comment is a direct result of failure to understand both what a semi-conductor is, and what quantium mechanics is. As a matter of fact, we've been harnessing quantum mechanics for over 200 years. We just didn't realise it.

So why are you not using it on your development machine, oh that's right your using crap software in a dum way as per your own quote. How long does it take for you to just click OK on your development machine????

I am using it on my development machine. Whatever made you think otherwise?

No user is idiotic they work with what they have to get the job done.

False, every user is an idiot, and I've seen many do exceptionally idiotic things, and the more privilages they have, the more idiotic they are, and they more damage they do. Likewise, any software which triggers UAC prompts is the one most likely to be riddled with security vulnerabilities.

IT people often fail to realise that the rest of the workforce of a company are doing just the same as them in working with the tools they are given to get a job done. But NO they often insist on calling the user stupid, most of the time this is because they have no interest in how the system works, they just need it to work in order to allow them to get on with their own job or task.

Which is exactly why their system doesn't work, and they go moaning to IT staff

The amount of times I've been talked down to in the way you have just done only to find that the person knows diddly squat in relation to myself is really amusing and really goes to show at times that there are so many in the IT industry that really don't know what the user of most IT systems wants.

We know what users want, they want their computer to do all their work for them without them thinking about it. But that's not how computers work.

And I profess to knowing jack all about computers, I just read alot and try and find answers to the questions that I need to answer.

And that's great.. The first step in learning anything is realising you have something to learn.

It's rather annoying how IT professionals blame the stupid user for the fact that their software is like a swiss cheese and allows a virus to utilise dupes and facades to replicate or shield itself from detection. If the people making the stuff could make a more secure product in the first place we wouldn't have half the issues that we do.

Actually, the vast majority of malware out there is in the form of trojan. Which is a type of virus which requires users to install it.

My point is still that UAC is the wrong way of implementing the security that is required. If we had had this back in the windows 2000 days I seriously doubt if computers would have become such a useful tool, as people would have got very frustrated with the software developers idea of security and many IT people can be very closed off to other peoples views and opinions.

The alternative is forcing *everyone* to be a standard user. And that would make me very happy. But it would have made lots and lots of **** software break. And lots and lots of previously mentioned idiotic users moan profusely about their **** software not working anymore.

I think windows 7 goes some way to toning down the notifications that vista made and so far I think they have taken that on board well and tried to adapt it to what users want rather than people like yourself who would impose that we click ok every 10 seconds just to make sure that you don't have any harmful software entering your environment. Not everything that is shiny and new is great, vista has certainly been a good example of how users will vote with their feet if they don't like what you are trying to force them to accept.

And Microsoft introduced a trojan attack vector in Windows 7 because of the less frequent prompting.

[[GSV]Myocardial]

This comment is a direct result of failure to understand both what a semi-conductor is, and what quantium mechanics is. As a matter of fact, we've been harnessing quantum mechanics for over 200 years. We just didn't realise it.

Although broadly based on the same principle of atoms and their component parts, conventional computing utilises the electron state of atoms to move the bonding of the electrons whereas in quantum computing relates to the state of the components of each atom including the spin direction of electrons amoungst other factors. So although conventional computing could be seen as being caused by the principles of quantum mechanics we have not actually been using quantum mechanics to do the calculations.

I am using it on my development machine. Whatever made you think otherwise?

Apologies it was actually Dangel who stated this not yourself as per my first quote. Have adjusted my post above to reflect this. But why is a Dangel not using the UAC as a developer, most developer machines still run connected to the network so would still pose a threat from what you have implied of me.

False, every user is an idiot, and I've seen many do exceptionally idiotic things, and the more privilages they have, the more idiotic they are, and they more damage they do. Likewise, any software which triggers UAC prompts is the one most likely to be riddled with security vulnerabilities.

That's where your problem lies, you are looking at them as doing idiotic things, they don't care about privaleges they are just working within a framework that you have imposed on them and unfortunately many IT people aren't working from the same hymn sheet that the rest of the workforce are working from and so see things in a totally different light. Unfortunately this leads to many IT people failing to meet the actual needs of their users and only meeting the perceived needs that they are atributing to their users which therefore leads to users working around those systems, causing you more headaches in trying to fix those problems.

Which is exactly why their system doesn't work, and they go moaning to IT staff

And the same reason why I end up calling our IT department morons when they cost me far more in lost time and potential legal ramifications as they have failed to provide me with the correct tools as their interpretation of what I needed is totally different to what I asked for.

We know what users want, they want their computer to do all their work for them without them thinking about it. But that's not how computers work.

That can be seen from both sides, it's not how computers work, it's how the individuals who program them and implement them work. I don't want my computer to do that, but I do want it to not virus scan just after 5pm becasue they think that I won't be using my machine at that time because they don't work at that time themelves, but when I ask them to put a better option in place they instead just change the time of the scan to some other time when they think appropriate instead of listening to what the actual problem is and that is that a service is incorrrectly consuming all the systems resources while I'm sat in front of it trying to work.

And that's great.. The first step in learning anything is realising you have something to learn.

It's a shame that many IT proffesionals don't follow the same idea to other areas and are instead so dogedly focused on IT. But then I'm just another user who has to humour the muppet IT person who decided to install music on the telephone switchboard and get them to compile a list of all the sites using this so I can arrange to be licensed for such activity and deal with the fine that it generated because they discovered a new option in their fancy computer arsenal.

Actually, the vast majority of malware out there is in the form of trojan. Which is a type of virus which requires users to install it.

As I said if the systems were less buggy then most of these trojan's wouldn't be able to hide from the antivirus software or distribute themselves so widely before they were erradicated, it's all the users fault not the person who wrote a piece of software to a timeframe or a cost point.

The alternative is forcing *everyone* to be a standard user. And that would make me very happy. But it would have made lots and lots of **** software break. And lots and lots of previously mentioned idiotic users moan profusely about their **** software not working anymore.

Maybe if IT departments were a little more careful with what they sourced and provided to the user then they could infact implement that type of administration. I personally think that software development has become lazy and bloated with components that most users don't need. I hardly utilise what word has to offer let alone some of the more powerful programs, what is the need for all the bolted on junk other than IT proffesionals being able to write it. I have hardly ever come across someone in the office who has wanted to do something so fancy with a word document that it required that they use more than 10% (if that) of the options available to them.

And Microsoft introduced a trojan attack vector in Windows 7 because of the less frequent prompting.

And it'll help to keep you in a job supporting your users and making sure they can access their emails, type their letters and input their data in spreadsheets. At the end of the day IT departments are only there in most businesses to facilitate the needs of the actual business and I find alot of the time they forget that they are only employed to try to enable the rest of the employees to get on with earning some money so they can continue to be employed, if we did all go back to using pen and paper you'd be a pretty useless bunch of people to employ

[aidanjt]

Although broadly based on the same principle of atoms and their component parts, conventional computing utilises the electron state of atoms to move the bonding of the electrons whereas in quantum computing relates to the state of the components of each atom including the spin direction of electrons amoungst other factors. So although conventional computing could be seen as being caused by the principles of quantum mechanics we have not actually been using quantum mechanics to do the calculations.

Wrong. We use QM formulas to figure out Energy-momentum dispersion, thermal profiles, die shrinking (electron migration issues), manufacturing, et cetra..

Apologies it was actually Dangel who stated this not yourself as per my first quote. Have adjusted my post above to reflect this. But why is a Dangel not using the UAC as a developer, most developer machines still run connected to the network so would still pose a threat from what you have implied of me.

Developers still have ways of mitigating the risk. For example, you can create a local machine standard user account, and a local machine administrative account. And if the UAC prompting becomes tedious, all you need to do is start Visual Studio itself with your local machine administrative account to minimise the risk involved to both the individual machine, and the network as a whole. Although truely.. Microsoft should have already fixed the issue with VS itself. They should know better.

That's where your problem lies, you are looking at them as doing idiotic things, they don't care about privaleges they are just working within a framework that you have imposed on them and unfortunately many IT people aren't working from the same hymn sheet that the rest of the workforce are working from and so see things in a totally different light. Unfortunately this leads to many IT people failing to meet the actual needs of their users and only meeting the perceived needs that they are atributing to their users which therefore leads to users working around those systems, causing you more headaches in trying to fix those problems.

What the user actually needs, and what they *want* are two entirely different things. There's this thing called the Principle of Least Privilage. What this means, is that a user and programme should be run with the bare minimum of privilages required to perform a certain role. So, general work as a standard user, administrative (system-wide) work as an administrative user. Now, because idiotic developers thought it would be a neat idea to ignore this principle for the last twenty years, Windows software is a mess, and requires administrative privilages to do day to day things.

And the same reason why I end up calling our IT department morons when they cost me far more in lost time and potential legal ramifications as they have failed to provide me with the correct tools as their interpretation of what I needed is totally different to what I asked for.

Because, what you *want* is probably unsafe. Imagine the legal ramifications if their entire network was compromised and all the client data was stolen just because some whining user wanted to do something in an unsafe way.

That can be seen from both sides, it's not how computers work, it's how the individuals who program them and implement them work. I don't want my computer to do that, but I do want it to not virus scan just after 5pm becasue they think that I won't be using my machine at that time because they don't work at that time themelves, but when I ask them to put a better option in place they instead just change the time of the scan to some other time when they think appropriate instead of listening to what the actual problem is and that is that a service is incorrrectly consuming all the systems resources while I'm sat in front of it trying to work.

Might be a good idea to ask them to use a decent antivirus solution that doesn't suck up system resources while it's being used. Background scans shouldn't render a system unusable beyond a little I/O contention.

As I said if the systems were less buggy then most of these trojan's wouldn't be able to hide from the antivirus software or distribute themselves so widely before they were erradicated, it's all the users fault not the person who wrote a piece of software to a timeframe or a cost point.

Actually, it usually is their fault. Users/Managment constantly demand what they want yesterday. So there's demand pressure from that, and competition from the rest of the market, to release software as fast as inhumanly possible, and clean up the train wreck afterwards.

Maybe if IT departments were a little more careful with what they sourced and provided to the user then they could infact implement that type of administration. I personally think that software development has become lazy and bloated with components that most users don't need. I hardly utilise what word has to offer let alone some of the more powerful programs, what is the need for all the bolted on junk other than IT proffesionals being able to write it. I have hardly ever come across someone in the office who has wanted to do something so fancy with a word document that it required that they use more than 10% (if that) of the options available to them.

This, I entirely agree with. The feature-creep boat has saled a long long time ago. Now it's just utterly rediculous. But it's also what users have been demanding. They don't want 100 different £5 programmes. They want 2 £70 programmes. Because it's cheaper for them, and they don't need to hunt around and go 'umm, i think thats it'. It's another example of users not paying attention to how they're using their computer. And making demands which are unsafe.

And it'll help to keep you in a job supporting your users and making sure they can access their emails, type their letters and input their data in spreadsheets. At the end of the day IT departments are only there in most businesses to facilitate the needs of the actual business and I find alot of the time they forget that they are only employed to try to enable the rest of the employees to get on with earning some money so they can continue to be employed, if we did all go back to using pen and paper you'd be a pretty useless bunch of people to employ

True. But it's nicer to be investing your time looking at the network and finding ways of improving it for everyone (including the IT staffs weekend sessions of Quake, UT, CS, or something), rather than having to go plodding down to each individual user with their mostly unimportant gripes.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

In which case...



Perhaps software developers should learn how to work with the tools that they have, rather than just providing the cheapest, easiest results.




Sorry, not a slight on any deveopers here, but the whole "it's what the PHB told me to do" attitude is what's wrong here, not anything else.

but its true though. a developer gives an idea of a product only for there boss or user to say no. developers build what there told to build. are u a developer?