Disable User Account Control (UAC) the Easy Way on Windows Vista
I've previously written about a way to enable or disable UAC from the command line. This is an easier method that you can use to do the same thing from the GUI interface. To recap my earlier article, UAC is ANNOYING.
Note: Disabling UAC will lead to a less secure system, so be warned.
Open up Control Panel, and type in "UAC" into the search box. You'll see a link for "Turn User Account Control (UAC) on or off":
On the next screen you should uncheck the box for "Use User Account Control (UAC)", and then click on the OK button.
You'll need to reboot your computer before the changes take effect, but you should be all done with annoying prompts.
The Geek is the founder of How-To Geek and a geek enthusiast. When he's not coming up with great how-to articles, he's probably writing at his personal blog. This article was written on 01/21/07 and tagged with: Windows Vista, Security
It is nice to be able to get rid of this annoying feature but it unfortunately replaces it with a Security Centre popup that UAC is not enabled.
You can disable the Security Centre popups and icons appearing but this also stops notification of antivirus and other more essential security issues.
Perhaps there is a registry tweak where the notification that UAC is disabled can be disabled, but all other notifications can continue to appear.
Haven't you missed the point with UAC?
Yes it is annoying - but that's only because as Windows users are not used to having to actually think about security issues - and as such we've had all the problems of the last few years. Critics continually slate Microsoft for not doing more to make the OS secure - and yet when they attempt to, there are numerous articles like this encouraging people to turn these features off.
I'm not saying your average user might not just click ok on a UAC dialog box (after the tenth one) without reading it - thereby negating any benefit - but it at least it encourages the majority of users to think before they click (and creates a greater awareness of security implications). I believe it also helps power users (more than they'd like to admit) since if some unknown application suddenly needs to elevate it's privileges and perform file operation commands then it alerts said power user that there's possibly a Trojan on the loose.
One thing that a significant proportion of the reviewers/critics of Vista/UAC tend to forget is that once the OS/drivers/basic software is installed (which would be the case for the average pre-built purchased PC), these UAC dialog boxes become much less frequent. Add to that the inevitable rewriting of post-Vista applications, so that they are coded properly (such that they don't require administrator privileges unnecessarily and are digitally signed etc), users will see the UAC prompt much less frequently when using software day-to-day on their PCs.
Anyway for those of you that have read all the way through - thank you - and really do think of the implications before you turn off UAC.
Ed,
I absolutely agree with you that turning off UAC for regular users is probably a bad idea.
I think UAC for average users is fine… it's just obnoxious that I've got an administrator account and I still get prompted every few seconds.
At least if they had made it more like Ubuntu, where I enter my password once in the "UAC"-like dialog, and then it stays good for a few minutes… that I would not just tolerate, but be very happy with.
I agree that it should be left on for the reg users. As for admins….etc. needs to remain off.
I have found a fix for the adminsitrator access without turning off UAC.
Open the Run Command and type secpol.msc
This will open the Local Security Policy.
Browse through the Local Policy to the Security Policy. Click on the Security Policy folder. In the window to the right locate:
User Account Control: Behavior of the Elevation prompt for administrator's in Admin Approval Mode.
Change it to: Elevate without Prompting.
Then reboot. This has gotten rid of a lot of problems for me.
I've actually written an article about disabling UAC for administrators only
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto.....tors-only/
Very usefull information indeed - but still even cooler would be to disable this check only for selected applications (e.g. SQL Server since for starting and stopping you need to start Management Studio in Admin Mode … and on Development environment you need this quite often) and keep the higher security level for the rest
i think UAC should be off no matter what. you didnt need it in XP so why vista. My sister tried her hardest to get used to UAC and ended up allowing a virus into her comp because she got so used to clicking allow to every little damn thing she did. If you have antivirus and antispyware then why do you need UAC. Even regular users like myself dont need it.
Hayu: you really should have let people know which version of Vista you're using; only Vista Enterprise and Ultimate can change specific settings for UAC. All other versions of Vista can only turn it completely on and completely off.
Megex, that isn't entirely true. If you do a search on the Web, you will find there is a way for Home users to change the elevation prompt level as well, but it takes a Registry entry.
As a security professional I think UAC is a great tool, for the common "User". that being said, it is annoying to power users and system admins. And even for some business users. For example we have an app that all our employees use, that is run 10 to 30 times a day on each computer. This application triggers UAC prompts because it tries to directly access the hard drive. So the users get so used to just clicking continue that it loses all effectiveness. Now the real kicker, if you leave UAC off, you will run into issues if you try to install a printer. Why? I have not clue, or a better question is why would changing DPI for a user require Admin permissions? UAC, while a great concept was not fully thought out before implementation.
In response to IT Guy's April 4th comment, I'd say that releasing Vista in its present form, when MS was undoubtably aware it would break many legacy apps, was the concept that was not fully thought out, period.
Regards,
JoeB
I'm thinking exactly same that "dussel" said. Drives me mad to click the continue several times per day
I think all posters have a valid point. I think as most do, that the UAC is a very valid feature to have. It does get annoying for those of us who are 'computer savvy' so to speak. I think that it might help some people but it also might confuse some. I don't know if it was a positive move on MS's part to make this a new feature in vista. It was not in XP, but neither were a lot of other features that are available in Vista. I think if someone really wants to turn it off they will use google and find a way to do it. No need to complain about it though because realistically it isn't going to change anything.
So why don't Macs and Linux users need UAC?
Why can't you exempt a specific program from triggering UAC?
"Why can’t you exempt a specific program from triggering UAC?"
Yeah - where the hell is the "exceptions" tab like for firewall? Or perhaps "Permit Always" option on the popup. I have one the hits at startup for a wireless USB device - and the only solution is to turn off the entire UAC system? Vista Blows. Yeah OSX!
The problem I ran into was that the UAC would prevent me from making changes to files that I needed to update unless I saved them as a new name.
Everyone has made valid points about UAC. I've been a computer tech for years and it really doesn't matter if you prompt people to install stuff or not because most of the time the average user does not know if they "are" or "are not" supposed to install something and they just click to install it anyways. That is why techs find so much crap like toolbars and such installed on computers. People think they need it or it must be ok to install because it's already prechecked in an application install program. I use Vista and the only prompt (warning) I find handy is when something new is trying to run during startup. That is the only time I like to be "annoyed". The bottomline is you are still going to have people clicking on things they shouldn't no matter how many chances you give them. Let's face it, mankind has not changed and children still burn themselves on the stove everyday and always will. You get burned once and most people learn the next time. Computers are no different than anything else in life.
As an IT manager I find UAC ill-concieved. Typical users should not be running all of the time in an admin account in the first place and MS should be trying much harder to get that message across rather than creating an app that nags you incessently. Users should login in as admin to install an app, then log back into the limited account. If they did that, the deeply annoying UAC prompts wouldnt be needed. On the other side of things, Admins techs should be able to disable the prompts without also having to see the red x in the sys tray that indicates elevated permissions. My hunch is that UAC will be overhauled whenever there is a service pack 1. As it stands now, the UAC doesnt help anyone.
I don't want to turn it off, yet there are a couple of programs that I use that every time I try to open it warns me about safety. and it gets old very fast. Is there any way to customize this so that it knows that the program is OK? Can I enter it is some list somewhere?
I'd love to know if that's possible.
Thanks
This was nice tricks and it work well, well done once again
Ok, I do like the fact that people are thinking about this instead of just turning it off completely. I can fully understand the IT people not liking it at all. My brother is also a MSCE and has told me repeated ly not even to screw around with Vista till at least the first SP. Since I get bored easy, then that is hard for me to do.
Anyway, I do not need the UAC at all. I have the computer setup the way I like it and do not want it to tell me how it wants me to do a specific task. But, one thing I noticed from your Local Sec Pol adjustment is that does infact shutdown UAC. I get a prompt that tells it is shut down. When I go look it is infact shut down. So, why do this when it gets shut down no matter what? I just wish I could also get ride of the damn notification aswell, but at least I only have to click it once in awhile to shut it up.
I'm trying to write a file into my windows folder. I have done turned off UAC, however, I'm still need permission when I attempt to write into folder. Any ideas?
If I am logged in as an administrator and turn the UAC off, its fine. I dont get the annoying popups, but if I log in as standard user, and turn off the UAC, it doesn't ask me to reboot in the first place and doesn't seem to do anything.. is this feature only for administrator accounts??
Is there a way to turn the UAC off for certain programs?
Ed, see that's a philosphy difference. Instead of securing holes, and problems in the OS security, rather then just saying "Ok, we tried, now you figure it out" like Vista does. I wonder how the grandmother would know what is dangerous and what is secure. I mean honestly, how many average, non comptuer savy people do you know actually read the warnings?
I would like to point out one thing about these instructions. When you open the control panel you must have the view set to Windows Vista Default. NOT "Classic view." If you are using the classic view then the search will not provide the link that you need to Enable/Disable UAC. So in your instructions you may want to note that they should make sure they are in the default view by clicking the "Control Panel Home" it the top left before they search for user accounts.
You guys should really get the program TweakUAC. It allows you to turn it down or turn it off. then you can turn it right back up or on after you finish doing whatever it is you do. Very simple UI that explains it very well.
THANK YOU thank you thank you!
Thank god! That was so annoying! I am the only one using my comp! I didn't need the prompts.
I use incredimail and the prompts would NOT allow me to make it my default email no matter what I did!
How annoying to be told I don't have the right to make it my default over and over!
Okay, well, that works if you are the administrator account on the computer. But what if you are only a limited account peon user and you simply want to turn UAC off so that you will be able to run programs without having the UAC pop up every stinkin time that you want to run the programs?
So why don't Macs and Linux users need UAC?
PWNED!!!!!!!!!
Because Mac and Linux are not even smart enough to build a system worth even talking about. Just look at legit security information and you will find that even Windows XP beats Mac and Linux on security. The only reason Windows is attacked more is do to the fact that it dominates the market from A to Z, and thats the bottom line.
Comment to some of the anti turn off UAC replies.
Why should I have UAC running, if I am the one and only person to use my computer?
"Because Mac and Linux are not even smart enough to build a system worth even talking about. Just look at legit security information and you will find that even Windows XP beats Mac and Linux on security. The only reason Windows is attacked more is do to the fact that it dominates the market from A to Z, and thats the bottom line."
hehe. Glad to see an educated comment on the security of Unix over Windows. Triel is really on to something here! You know what else? VHS was clearly a better technology than Beta. And George Bush is a brilliant leader.
Refreshing commentary!
J
I,ve trying to install Open Office and Adobe Acrobat reader on windows vista premium and progress to a point. The installation stalls set up begins to configuring the directory. A message saying I need to be an administration to proceed. I am the system administrator. How can I get pass this problem?
I've turn off UAC using control panel with zero success.
Make sure you are running both programs as an Administrator. Right click the exe file and you will see "Run As Administrator". Or try and download Tweak UAC and shut off the UAC for the install of these programs.
http://www.tweak-uac.com/
Thanks Triel. I tried your suggestion without success. The message I get is: error 1303 the installer has insufficient privilege to access this directory. then the path, followed by you need to log on as an administrator etc. I am logged on as an administrator!! I tried to set up a new admin account, in control panel, but found there was an account with administrator as the user name. Do you know why this is? and how can I get access to that account?
The only way to access the real admin account is via "Safe Mode". It may not work though since most of the MS installer is blocked in Safe Mode.
Is your exe file on a disc? If so, try and copy all the files to the HD and see if that helps.
Let me know if it works or not.
Thanks Triel. The exe file was part of a download, so it on my hard disc!! Installer is blocked in Safe mode.
Can I alter the registry to affect my admin status?
PS this problem persists with acrobat reader 8 also???
Hello
I turned off the user account. when I try to turn it back on a message says
Security Center can't enable user control on this computer.
Whilst the UCA was off I don't know what I did but the screen the became blue and full of writing,
I couldn't exit or use esc. or Ctrl Alt Del so I powered down with the on button.
Can you help me please
Paul Rafferty
LinX Hooper,
I think I remember having issues with Acrobat 8. Try to unpack the downloaded file with WinRAR or other porgram. Another way is to start the install and after it goes through the unpacking process (that is what the Adobe downloaded files do first) go to your temp folder and collect the files it unpacks. I think there may be a command line prompt also that does this for you and allows you to save them where you want to. Finally, try and look this issue up in the Adobe Support section.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Paul,
Do you have more then one User Account? If so then that is mostlikely the cause of the errors.
It is not just UAC that irks me about Vista. I have come to the conclusion that Vista leaves me feeling that if I had wanted a MAC I would have bought one.
If you type …control userpasswords2…in the run box from the start menu, you will see a list of the users. My user account that I had created during installation was assign "debugger" status.
I changed it to Administrator status. A few days later I found it had reverted to "debugger" so I changed it again. It seems stable now.
Debugger did not allow full permissions UAC.
My thoughts on: Windows Vista
and the User Account Control
Quite possibly one of the worst bungles in Microsoft’s long and glorious history of dominating the computer industry, the User Account Control (UAC) in Windows Vista is simply unnecessary.
The UAC tries to prevent security breaches in your system by requesting your permission to continue before it uses any program or application with what it deems as a “potential threat”. Now, how does it know if something is a potential threat or not, anyway? Well, we’ll discuss that later.
UAC is a great idea for home users, such as a family with small children. But for networks and businesses as well as single users, the UAC is just simply ridiculous. Businesses probably already have filters and good network security programs that they’ve paid thousands of dollars for. So why would they need this crappy version of security that limits everything when they already have a $20,000 network security program as well as security hardware for their network. The point is that they don’t. Also, if you run a LAN in your home, one would think that the computers on the network would be run by people smart enough to use a computer on their own without having to be constantly pestered by the UAC.
If there is a family using a network of Vista-enabled PCs, one would think that the parents would only give the children a computer of their own if they were smart enough and responsible enough to handle a computer and not ruin the files or software. Surely the parents know that, and they should teach their children that as well. In my personal experience with Windows Vista, I have to say that it’s basically the worst operating system I have ever seen in my life. I want Mac OS10 Tiger, Windows XP Professional, or Fedora Core Linux instead. These operating systems work well and trust the users to do the right thing with their own security. After all, would a person use a computer and not have ANY idea what they are doing with the computer? No, I think not. I think if anyone makes the choice to buy a computer, they know fully well what they are getting into. I also believe that the parental controls included with Windows Vista are basically too strong. If a kid is old enough to know what they are doing with a computer, and to be responsible with the computer, I think that they’re going to be more responsible than the parental controls give them credit for. I believe that the parental controls included with Windows Vista give the administrator account too much control over the other users and basically make it pointless for other users to use the computer, depending on the level and severity of the parental controls that are used by the administrator on the other account. For example, I am using a Vista-enabled PC and my father has enabled the parental controls. He has used the time limits and program limits and game limits and Internet access limits. I think that the game limits idea is really quite stupid. There’s no point to it. I take using the compute rmore seriously than just using it to play games. The program limits is also stupid because what if something happens while you are using the computer, and Windows needs to run an emergency process? There’s nothing you can do about it. Then the time limits is just stupid. Because I was working on a research paper for school, and then my time was up five minutes later. So, when the time went out, Windows just logged me off of the computer, and I later found out that my paper had been deleted (the entire thing), that it had basically closed Microsoft Word without even saving my document for me. See, that right there is an example of the stupidity of the UAC for you (parental controls as well). I think that the parental controls would be good for kids who are, like, 4 years old, or something like that. But for me, someone who’s about to graduate high school and move on to college where I am pursuing a COMPUTER SCIENCE DEGREE I think it’s a bit ridiculous, don’t you agree?
Furthermore, if there is only one user using a PC, then what’s the point of having UAC on the PC? If there is one user, they will obviously be the administrator account and the administrator doesn’t need to constantly be bugged by some stupid Windows Vista dialog box that tells them Windows needs their permission to continue. I’m sorry, but that’s a load of bullshit. If I had a PC with Windows Vista, and I were the sole user, UAC would be kicked in the pants the first day. And I’d never put it up there again.
To sum up what I’ve discussed here today, I want to say that Windows Vista’s User Account Control is basically a major programming flaw and certainly there are some problems that need to be worked out. Maybe the Windows OS could leave UAC dormant if there is only one user, and then later, add the UAC if another user is added to the PC. This discussion of Windows Vista’s major flaws should point out that Microsoft has made a serious error and they need to fix it as soon as they possibly can for they’ve really got a problem on their hands.
–Matthew Burt
–October 2007
Thanks for the help in shuting off this annoying popup.
Now I have ANOTHER one warning me that it's off and that I should turn it back on. (no gain)
I'm starting to HATE VISTA!!!
Bill Gates STOP trying to micromanage my life!
sudo apt-get remove Vista…. lol
I use Vista on my Media Centre for the Media Centre functionality..Nothing Else.
My laptop is XP (Soon to be replaced by a Macbook…) and my Main PC is XP. All three systems are more then capable of running Vista, But I won't be rushing to upgrade my other systems. Why ? You tell me.
What does Vista offer me ? Vista's biggest opposition at the moment is XP. DirectX 10 Gaming…hasn't really arrived yet. The widgets in the sidebar are nice, but come on… I find Vista is a more efficient OS then XP, it doesn't leave temp files everywhere. (Something XP shouldn't do anyway??) Dual/Quad Core ? Available in XP. 4GB+ Memory ? poorly implemented in XP 64Bit and Vista 64bit. (My macbook will be running 4GB of RAM on a 64Bit OS…cool eh.) I read of people having problems with the RAM being installed/recognised fully. Thats before we get on to the severe lack of software on 64bit. So 4GB of RAM is pretty much a nono. Vista uses more resources then XP. To run Vista well you need 1GB, Dual Core machine with half decent graphics, for most of us that means chucking your old machine away. As opposed to 512MB of RAM, 2Ghz CPU to run XP well. and the 'sweet spot' is roughly double the RAM for each OS.
Call me a Mac fanboy if you like, I've setup XP on over 400 systems, and built over 50. At home, I use two Hi-Spec PC's built by me, I've had enough of XP, and seen how 'good' Vista is for myself. I'm not tech support, and have no qualifications to prove it as I'm self taught. But after setting up just one Powerbook, I fell in love with the Mac OS. It's simple and doesn't treat you like a child. I've seen many user's systems, and UAC or not, they will download what they want, when they want, how they want. Vista is an OS not ready for release, and why I will be waiting to see if SP1 improves things any.
"Because Mac and Linux are not even smart enough to build a system worth even talking about. Just look at legit security information and you will find that even Windows XP beats Mac and Linux on security. The only reason Windows is attacked more is do to the fact that it dominates the market from A to Z, and thats the bottom line."
Triel - Ask anyone in the Graphics or Music industry what they use. It's not even about PowerPC's anymore. it's just down to the OS. Don't get me wrong though - I have no desire to see Apple where M$ are now. It would be more of a closed market then what M$ currently offer.
Oh, and Name (required) whoever you are…UAC is M$'s way of attempting to remove the user from the Admin account. Apple don't allow the user to be Admin 24/7. Neither does any Linux distro. (See Dell.co.uk for ubuntu on their entry level systems btw.)
Note: I deleted some comments in this thread that were really not so friendly. Everybody has their own opinions and should be allowed to express them freely.
Let's try and keep things on a friendly basis here!
UAC is a good idea in principle but poorly thought out as regards execution.
I'd like to address a couple of issues.
1) Dialogs don't protect the user unless they already know what they are doing, They either lead to wholesale ignoring even of important ones, as previously discussed, or worse they lead to wholesale panic and fear of using the computer. This is certainly the case for people of my mother's age etc.
To address Mathew above. It is a fact that the a large % of home users don't know what they are doing and have no understanding of computers. Many parents do provide compueters to kids who don't know about computers, for doing school work etc. The parent's themselevs have no knowledge of computers becuase they aren't interested in them except for writing letters etc. These are the facts. Thus for them UAC is actually a hinderence not a boon. OK Younger parents may know some stuff but most likely in many cases, how to plug in a playstation and stick in the DVD.
2) Lack of configurablity is the Microsoft way and its always been the wrong way. Its fine to have wizards but for users in the know, the option to actually configure the options manually and in detail is a must. In converse however the good old Linux way is just as bad. A perfect system would provide auto setup and easy wizards for basic users, and for advanced users who don;t know about the hardware itself (in detail). I'm sorry I don;t want to spend weeks learning about how to configure each individual hardware, unless it becomes necessary. Likewise though when I need to, I want the power to do so. In this case, way can I not configure exceptions to the rule and do so on a number of parameters. Why are there only 2 levels of security. This is why UAC doesn't float my boat. Tweak UAC is nice as far as it goes, but I still lack power to say this is ok and this I would like to be reminded about.
3) It doesn't actually adress the fundamental problem. The problem is that developers etc and infact many users cannot work in a user account (especially on their home PC) for a lot of regular tasks. It is most annoying to have to keep swiching users to o it but this is the only way to provide security. The answer however is not to only have 2 levels, but have several allowing a proper power user account, which however still protects the system against abuse in critical areas, such as modification of the system itself (software installation, driver upgrades etc). The limited user account should be for users who really don;t understand computers and for business use. For most other situations, the admin account is too open really and the imited account is far too closed. Therefore what actually happens is that no-one uses a limited account. I certanly don't and couldn't do my job if I did.
Instead of UAC as it is, it should have worked as an improved local policy system, with nicely organised and simply named options for configuration, similar to AD but less obtuse to use. With the Windows Installer service, and the fact that it keeps track of components, Security for instance could have been sepcified in Add/Remove Programs… sorry Programs and Features. As well as a more detailed one in policy settings. No most users would never need to touch it if there appropriate defaults, but it would give the power to do so and make UAC actually usable.
Oh and Tiel, Linux is more secure than Windows for many reasons. What you say has some truth, yes more viruses are written for Windows users because MS have a greater market share. However its also true that Linux is much harder to write a virus for, becuase its a lot harder for them to infect the system. You can't just run a virus from a webpage in Linux and hope to get away with it for instance. Under windows you can and its up to software on top of the operating systemt o prevent it, unless you;re in a limited account which as I said earlier is simply not practical. There are so many ways in which MS could have prevented thewholesale spread of viruses by email for instance, without being offcious. For instance instead of the download pictures removal for instance. They should have llowed the user to specify Text only email and be **** with the vendors and their pretty adverts. This is just a simple example. Others include the codecs for MP. They should have forced the vendors to use specific known formats, rather than allowing user coding. The web browser should have been prevented entirely from modifying the system, Downloads should only be possible through actual proper links and not through automated scripting. This is of course if they wanted a truely secure OS and actually cared more about the end user than the vendors, this is not the case for good business reasons.
hi all,
nice to see honest-to-goodness minds at work from many angles. if my topic's off, please point me in the right direction.
i have Vista Premium, and what bugs me the most is that i'm the one and only user of this PC, and yet i have to laboriously dig around my C:, my personal user folders, as well as "shared", etc. folders to find my own files that i'm looking for. in XP, i could just click "My Docs", or "Program Files", etc., and now i have to spend 3+x time finding the right "user" folder and/or HD i.e. C:/Computer just to find simple files of my own. it has me running in circles, and i find the structure of the new Windows Explorer interface frustrating, on top of the frustration of *within* Explorer finding the right User or "Public" files. ie.: i just dumped MP3s from my old PC onto my new vista pc, only to find that i placed them in the wrong "music" directory, and none of them showed up in Media Player, let alone all in the same universal "music" folder. it's like a dang idiot folder hunt to find most files in the confusing new, extraneous user/file interface. in XP it was a snap. in Vista, i'm either missing something, or they've just plain over-complicated things in their new "user friendly" OS. i'm no novice, and i'm no master; though i must say a good friend who owns a PC company in town swears he'll not install Vista on any PC that leaves his shop because of such absurd complications.
-oh yeah, i also turned off UAC hoping to avoid crap, but still have that bright and shiny red shield with the X on it telling me to turn it back on. i feel like slaping the big B.G.-Man in the face. i bought my new HP 1 month ago, and it didn't even come with a flip-flappin' physical-in-hand Vista installation disc…that seems wrong (as well as another topic). there's a seperate partition, apparently, on my C drive for system recovery, but if that's ever Virusized… i've made recover back ups, and think i'm allowed to send for a physical disc (which i'm going to do), but why MS+HP didn't include a friggin' OEM registered OS disc is beyond my comprehension.
-Skywarp, with best regards to all
Skywarp: It's really an issue that old habits die hard. At least that was the case for me. I do a lot of video work and work as an IT on both PC's and Macs. My laptop is still XP, and will stay that way untill I get a new one, but not because I prefer it, but because I think it should run the OS it was designed for. Don't get me wrong, I cursed Vista when I first got it. It would crash non-stop. Then I did a total restore. As an IT there are few things more frustrating than talking to techincal support on the phone, since I've never found one that could help me beyond what I already knew or couldn't find out by googling it. That aside, I found that the problem was a codec that I didn't really need in the first place, that I had installed in a package with other things. Once I fixed that and opened up to a different way of operating (closer to Macs actually) life on Vista is a breeze.
The lack of discs doesn't bother me because it's cutting costs, and I don't blame companies for doing so, and you still have the ability to restore it.
The directory structure is much simpler than XP, you just have to re-learn it. Extreemely superior is the media center, with it I have the Tivo equivalent (I have a TV card). LOVE IT. The side bar is a gadget that I'm addicted to as well.
The UAC dilemma: I quit fighting it and left it on eventually and this is why: I do not run virus protection nor spyware on my PC, and I recommend my clients (except for a select few) not to use them. They use up a vast amount of resourses and slow down the system exponentially (like any evolving programs they are not getting leaner). Some virus protection programs are better than others, but for the most part they'll bog you down and do nothing to stop a virus that most likely are more advanced than your "virus protection". The reason being is that if the virus is spreading, it means it found a way around, so you're screwed anyway. If you use your intelligence and not click on everything that comes your way, especially when adding "free" programs, you'll be much better off. This is why the UAC is handy, because I too sometimes click aimlessly, and the UAC, which is only one extra click, is way worth the extra resources you get to play with.
The Red Shield eventually goes away, believe me on this one, hidden with other useless icons. We ITs tend to be OCD (guilty as charged) so I wanted mine to go away really bad (showing because of no Virus Protection). Once I let go of my obsession, I got to breathe and relax, it doesn't really matter, if you know what you're doing, and since you're in this forum, it's safe to assume you do.
Graham: OS, on PCs, Macs or wherever, are getting more complex and will use more resources. If you think the next Vista or Leopard is going to be leaner, you're just going to be agravated. I work with Macs because most of my Graphics and Video collegues have Macs, but there's nothing that they do on Macs that a PC won't do and for substantially smaller price. Yes, Macs are cool, and designwise are amazing and I love them, but when it comes to shedding an extra couple thousand for the same system, I shy away. As systems get more complex Apple's rigidness has to loosen up and MS open architecture will become more rigid (the UAC is a prime example). And it's not about egos, but plain numbers. The computer can't make all the decisions for you and it can't ask you about everything either, so where's the middle ground? With things getting so complex both sides have to let out. Macs are great for artists who know zilch about computers, PCs give you freedom to canibalizing them and build your one of a kind machine for a low price (Linux more than Windows). As things progress there are too many options for any one person to handle and the artists are finding they want more options. So I believe both will grow closer, but remain at arm's length to target differnt types of customers.
Hope this helps.
thanks a lot thomas, you helped clear up a lot of questions with great advice. i tried to go into more detail in this reply, but despite not using any spam or bot talk, the message was blocked. perhaps it will work tomorrow.
Skywarp
you can set your security center options to notify and display the icon, or not notify and display icon, and Don't notify but not show the icon
Personally I think there should be a Notify but DO NOT show the icon option too… that way you would be notified but then you could ignore it or do something without the constant nag in the bar.
If you don't know how to turn this nag off..
Go to your "Start Search" and type in security center
-next go to the option on the left side that says "change the way Security Center alerts me
-then choose your option
Does UAC stop "Blue screen" happening? Blue screen as in- Playing games online, once in a while screen switches off (hear game running) then systems shuts down and ya see a blue screen with white writing. Im running a sweet system as well so i know it aint thaT. I BELIEVE ITS WHEN YA COMP GETS TROPPED UP BY OTHER THINGS HAPPENING ON YA COMP WHEN YA DOIN SOMTHIN ELSE. And i read somewhere UAC prevents this cos of course another process would need ya permission to start. Gona leave UAC on an see how long i go b4 getin blue, if i get it at all. Any1 know if this will defo stop blue screen?
Thats Tripped* up not tropped lol
The reason why I disable UAC is because my games and some software isn't compatible with my games. PunkBuster (A cheat/hack preventer) is disabled by U.A.C automatically and would not let me play my games online that needs punkbuster. And when I had problems installing an add-on (Areosoft FDC Cockpit) for Flight Sim X. So I disabled U.A.C and MOST of my vista problems have been solved.
I didnt not mind the prompts when this was on but we couldnt get any games to download when this was on, wow and lord of the rings neither one would download, you dont pay that much for a computer to spend so much time trying to figure out how to get things to work on it. My son also has ventrilo, his voice chat, wouldnt work when he would shrink it, turn off the user account control and it worked
Maybe people should just always think. Thereby eliminating the need for "are you sure" boxes.
the way i see it is this…..in general, we as consumers and members of the public, are 'forced' into buying products we may not actually need…..so, theres a whole raft of people who dont actually need a pc, have no knowledge of pcs, yet own one…because they can "email their kids in australia or whatever".
So, the assumption that if you have a pc, you must know how to use it….doesnt always apply.
Ive worked in the IT side of the banking industry for 15years now…running systems from server based, right up to IBM mainframes, and you wouldnt believe the skill differences ive come across….never ever assume people know what theyre doing (remember the jokes about using cd players as coffee cup holders? people have in fact done it)
So UAC is good for these sorts of people…as long as they can apply a modicum of common sense….nothing to do with pc literacy, just good old fashioned common sense….ie, they WONT allow "big fats wobbly naked women.com" to turn their pc into an internet brothel….common sense isnt it.
If your distruibuting Vista in a large enviroment, you should know, and be able to use group policies to stop most of the pop ups getting to users in the first place anyway, if you dont, then you are an end user trying to install something on the works pc that you shouldnt!
rgrds
saracen
Am I missing something. Why don't they take a leaf out of firewall programs and allow you to "allow certain programs in" so you dont have to be asked everytime?!?! Then it will only annoy you once! i have to keep being asked for the same programs i run day in day out. Thats bl**dy stupid! That will make people turn in off.. and then how secure are their systems then!
JoeB
In response to IT Guy's April 4th comment, I'd say that releasing Vista in its present form, when MS was undoubtably aware it would break many legacy apps, was the concept that was not fully thought out, period.
Regards,
JoeB
Joe, every one is missing the point, from Microsoft's financial point of view, this is exactly what they wanted!!!
hello everybody, im really startaing to get annoyed with uac. I understand how to turn it off, but i only have one problem. I'm logged onto a limited account user and the Administrator is locked with a password. secpol.msc command doesnt work, control userpassword2 doesn't work? anyone know how to disable uac from alimited account with a protected password?
mitch,
unless you're a damn good hacker, it can not be done. For a fee (of course), you can contact microcrap, and they will tell you how to unlock the admin account from the recovery console. But again, your easiest option is to search astalavista for a hack.
papa smurf,
thankyou for your advice papa smurf ill check it out. but, before do that i think i found a solution. i'm going to download tweakuac.exe on my other computer and send it to myself through email. hopefully, on my vista it will open and work to disable uac from my limited account. I'll try to remember to update you on the news. Thanks!
I am working on a Dell laptop that has Windows Vista Home Premium. I am trying to install a program that is downloaded from one of our hospital vendors to view xrans online. Whenever we attempt to download and install the software we receive an error stating that there isn't enough disk space. I've seen this before in Windows XP Prof and it was related to Admin rights. There's only one user account on the laptop and he has Admin rights, but it still fails to install the program correctly. How can I get around this? I've made all sorts of UAC changes and nothing seems to work. Help!
John,
Have you tried Safe Mode yet? If not and you are unsure on how to get there:
Turn on your computer and continuously tap the F8 key. Advanced option menu will appear, go to Safe Mode using the direction keys and click enter. After it is done loading there will be a login screen similar to the same screen that you see when you login normally. Click Administrator. If there is no Administrator click your account. A screen will appear asking about system restore. Unless you want to restore click 'Yes' to continue. In this mode you have more power over files etc… But be very careful and read everything! There should be no need to run regedit or any such program. If you can still says you do not have enough disk space, maybe you don't have enough. Or if it is just because of your user privedges you can repeat the process I instructed above but instead of clicking 'Safe Mode' click, 'Safe Mode with Networking' and download the software there. Also, you may be saving the data on a seperate hard drive with his disk space.
@John De Leon:Click right on your installation exe (e.g. setup.exe) and choose "Run with admin..", that's all, I hope. Otherwise choose here "properties" and the "compatibility" tab and choose the XP Setup with admin rights. Turning off UAC or other Vista Features is stupid - ever !
I just tried to install Motorola Phone Tools (from a cd) I got told 11 times by Vista that the publisher wasn't verified. I don't know if that counts as UAC but they sure as hell got the balance wrong, I'd prefer one virus - to a billion warnings personally. Probably cost me less time.
I could almost stand a warning first. However all i get is a blank screen (lets call it a grey screen of death) .
@Anthony: Try the newest version of Moto-Tools on their homepage. The versions on CD are mostly older ones. Many manufacturers still have bad vista compatible software. That's also the reason, why Microsoft still doesn't release it's new (RTM) SP1. If you still have these problems, write Moto! They need to fix this problems. If you disable UAC you just accept their bad programming skills. Give the quality pressure back to the causer. Good luck.
There's even another way: hit your window key + R this will open the System Configuration Tool (a very useful tool by the way) move to the Tools tab and locate: Disable UAC hit the Launch button and that's it, reboot your system. Every single method does the same with the same result. Happy "unsafe" Vista Experience.!
CORRECTION
There's even another way: hit your window key + R AND TYPE: MSCONFIG, this will open the System Configuration Tool (a very useful tool by the way) move to the Tools tab and locate: Disable UAC hit the Launch button and that's it, reboot your system. Every single method does the same with the same result. Happy "unsafe" Vista Experience.!
Most of the people here see the UAC as a "security feature", as a firewall or an antivirus.
In fact, it is not. Strictly speaking, it warns you when you do something that has a potential impact on other profiles/users on the same machine and then asks you to confirm. It has nothing to deal with "computer security", but more about "profile security".
If you are the single user on the computer, the added value is poor because except yourself you may not harm anybody, and as some said most people click yes and then read the question. But for others users, it does not show a shield and asks you to confirm: it claims for the administrator password.
If you are a family and share a computer, as a Daddy that bought your brand new PC with Vista OEM, you will be glad not to see your computer in a mess every week because your 11-year boy installs a new crappy thing every day. So the Dad makes everybody "regular users" and then he is sure that he computer will boot every time he needs it to work and he will find his applications.
On this point of view, the question "why Linux don't have this ?" has no sense. Seriously, do you know a lot of family computers that runs under Linux ?
tried all of sugested solutions, none worked. just need to install a printer. can't.
UAC is a great feature. Disabling it should not be necessary for normal home users. It keeps them a little safer while spelonking through the internet. However, for system administrators it can get in the way. Thanks for sharing this little gem.
Personally, Vista has great features and the UAC is a great feature. People have their opinions and say its annoying and sucks and it's true. The biggest problems is that it is over protective. I think sooner or later, they should eventually put up an update or patch or something to take off so many limitations and warnings for all this and only notify when the system will majorly be affected.
vista wont even let me access programs ive installed says i don have permission from the administrator i bought the computer its sitting on my desk in my home im the only one using it i feel like smashing the ##### thing in a million pieces and getting an apple surely ms could have come up with a more user friendly system than vista not everyone is a computer geek
on windows vista not able to login to other users on my system apart from administrator.
(before i was able to login to other users also. i even scanned my system for virus but did not find any.
as soon as i login with other users i get the screen preparing the desktop setting & later i get a logoff screen. )
Windows Explorer Stops Responding when i open the UAC
I'm a tech writer so not as "power" a user as a sys admin or developer, but I'm doing more than writing docs and email and surfing porn.
I had a problem with my NetBeans IDE controlling a GlassFish application server that was installed to Program Files. I had a WAR file in GLASSFISH/domains/../autodeploy and I was trying to update and redeploy it from a NetBeans project. Just would not work, kept giving me a message that the WAR file could not be renamed to "temp." Then a developer suggested I turn off UAC and voila! everything works.
Not only would it be nice if you could turn off UAC for specific programs, but if you could authorize programs to change files elsewhere in Program Files. Of course, you can always install the application server to somewhere else, like a data partition, and then UAC lets you change any files you want!
Concerning UAC in Vista, click START. At the top right of the drop down, there is a 1″ square with a flower in it [daisy?]. Left click the square and it takes you to UAC. No muss, no fuss, no typing.
Joeabby
Holy cow, I thought that was just a decoration.
@joeabby
That's a good point.. much simpler!
ive tried everything and it still wont work what should i do.
please help
For Vista Home Premium….. you can't bring up the secpol.msc, but you can still disable UAC very easily in the System Configuration page (command prompt, type in MSCONFIG) and select the TOOLS tab, where you will find settings that allow you to either enable or disable UAC.
I understand the intensions behind creating UAC in Vista, however the proper way of using XP was to create and use an Admin account only when you needed it, and otherwise use a Power User or standard user account so that an outsider wouldn't have access to Admin privileges. I may be wrong, but this seems like the way to go, it’s certainly a lot less annoying.
Please let me know if my thinking here is screwed up. I don't want to jeopardize my new system.
Dave
Dave
To disable uac easily just do this: start menu –> run –> msconfig, click on tools tab then scro.ll down to disable uac then click launch.
I have Windows Vista Business on my laptop and I hate the damn thing. The laptop had good specs like 2GB RAM + 1GB TurboCache, 250GB hard drive and ATI 2600 with 256 dedicated RAM, but it is not fast at all like it should be. I miss XP so much that I will be installing it soon. I am too tired of seeing the windows cursur spinning around in a circle and having programs say "not responding", because vista is taking its time.
As for the user account control, after 4 months, I have disabled it, as it is a royal pain in the ass. What the hell do you need it for anyway when you have a top internet security program that gives warnings and asks for permission to tasks like changing pc settings. The user account control is so irritating coming up all the time. It can't even let you tell it that a specific program is trusted by you and not to bother you about it again. I have been reading up on the user account control and Kaspersky Labs says that their staff have found no less than 5 ways to get past it. Symantec has also said in news that they are trying to make a function in their software to control the user account control, as user find it too irritating and turn it off, just like me.
Clever idea, not cleverly executed.
All of this is very useful stuff, the UAC i mean, the only thing I find infuriating is that as an administrator I cannot save applications into the program files folder. For this fact alone I have disabled the UAC but if I could set I could give permission to myself to save where I want with the click an ok button, I would turn it back on.
Is there a way to allow access to save to the programs file, even if it has a security warning? at the moment it just says I do not have permission to save in this location and to ask an administrator, even though I am he.
My only question for MSFT is "Why the hell do I have to trigger UAC if I want to change the text on a friggin desktop shortcut? What kind of security issue is that, huh?"
I hate how whenever I switch on Itunes, that thing pops up!!!!
Maybe its to make ppl think twice about using an apple media player software on a windows computer………..
But UAC is still improtant.
What I don't get is what is the point of having 'unidentified publisher' but still expect to accept or deny it? If it is for your security, shoud'nt you know the name of the thing? at least put something! I mean, if I am meant to deny all 'unidentified publisher' popups because it might be a virus (or not), then I will be denying microsoft because MICROSOFT STUFF COMES UNDER 'UNIDENTIFIED PUBLISHER!!!!'
Weird huh?
UAC idea is good, but its implementation of The Corporation is weird. No one need to approve "elevation" for any single run of any single app. It can be done only once - by default when is run by user for the first time - and put on list of insecure apps if necessary. So simple it is - but try to explain it to a smart asshole just out of college - wasted time!
Hi there! Is there any way to change UAC from a standard account? I used to have an admin account but I ended up changing it into a standard account and now only my older brother has an admin account and everytime I need something done, I have to go to him. Its really annoying. Please help me out. Thank you.
What about the annoying prompts from the System Tray that you get each time you restart - reminding you that you have turned off UAC? Anyone to turn *those* off?
hi i have vista ultimate on my pc with 2 accounts, admin and user. I would like to permit access to an application for the user without having him type in the admin password cause the user can't run the application without the admin password, it worked with turning off UAC but i didn't recommend it cause it just makes my system less secure, so if there is a way to apply permissions just to that application without turning off UAC( Maybe editing UAC) it would be very helpful (and also not changing the app directory where it is located in program files)
thanks
hi, i have installed a codec then play a movie file and i notice if i enable the UAC the codec is not installed properly to the registry and my playback was very lagg. After i turn off the UAC then i installed the codec. The file can be played smoothly. May i know the location at registry where those files were installed??
I would be much happier with UAC if it allowed you to remember settings, I have had to disable UAC because a program that loads on startup is blocked by windows (Don't even get an annoying message)
Quote Ed M
Yes it is annoying - but that's only because as Windows users are not used to having to actually think about security issues - and as such we've had all the problems of the last few years. Critics continually slate Microsoft for not doing more to make the OS secure - and yet when they attempt to, there are numerous articles like this encouraging people to turn these features off.
What about linux? No annoying popups every five seconds there, yet it's still nice and secure!
I've see several comments about why doesn't Mac and Linux have this. They do. Difference is, they have security built in the kernel from the start, not as an afterthought implemented so all the legacy stuff kinda works mostly.
Near as I can tell UAC is little more than an over engineered nag pop up that doesn't really fulfill it's goal. What it has done is break my software product and cost me untold time and grief in customer support. And I'm not the only one complaining. Neosmart is publicly complaining. http://neosmart.net/blog/2008/.....mitations/
After reading through all these, I can say, I don't agree with a lot of the hoopla. All Vista does is create an annoying atmosphere and user experience. I have gotten more computers in of people just trying to figure out how to use them, thinking something is wrong than infections lately. They still allow crap no matter what. So there are users who can't think for themselves, so there are users who will learn the hard way, so some users simply are not savvy, oh well, that's life, so instead our OSs decide what's best for us huh? You know, computing is much like real life and I say, Freedom is not Freedom, if you have to be in a shell and be controlled in order to have it. Using my PC freely, living freely, either way, I would rather take my hits than live in a plastic bubble and it's getting no different with MS , they are creating the Vista plastic bubble. A useless one at that. I laugh as it'll be to the point that when someone gets an infection, the only one who won't be able to do anything about it, will BE the user. Scare tactics, don't disable UAC, you won't be secure… BS. What OS is secure by MS anyway? It's just some red tape, nothing more, I hate UAC. Begone!
**sigh**