On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:14:53 -0000, "Paul Smith"
wrote:

"Kerry Brown" *a*m wrote in message
.. .

I'll make another broad generalization and say that most Vista users who
have considerable experience with OS' than Windows leave UAC on. It's
mostly the long time Windows users and programmers who haven't used other
OS' who are whining the loudest about UAC.

Good observation.

I've just started the update manager on Linux to download some patches, I
had to supply my password for it to start up. That's just normal.

Running with administrative rights is *bad*.

If running with administrative rights is bad (agreed) then why in the
heck does Microsoft under Vista give all installer applications
Administrative rights?

Hint: That means any malicious code can pretend to be a "installer"
too and in effect gain access to anything on your computer including
Windows kernel or YOUR data. It doesn't make much sense to me. Wish
somebody would attempt to explain why UAC as presently configured is
such a great idea. I even see several MVP's saying they turned it off,
now if we could just get them to stop top posting. snicker