Comments

hehe, brilliant.

Good luck on figuring out what it is you're now supposed to be doing, Adam! Sure you'll enjoy it anyway.

JoshRoss wrote:

I would like to nominate HP printer driver installers.

Seconded.

To anyone from HP who may be reading, installing a printer should NOT give me an error if:

1) I'm using RunAs
2) I'm using Remote Desktop
3) I don't have 32 bit colour depth selected. I mean WTF is that all about? How can an installer be that broken?

Sven Groot wrote:


The Power Users group is deprecated, the only reasons it's still there is for (wait for it) backwards compatibility (even says so in the group's description). You shouldn't be using it.

Oh, I know that. It's just that putting someone in the Power Users group does at least allow them to share folders, albeit after jumping through a few hoops.

There should be a cleaner way to delegate that right, I just can't figure out what it is.

Ok, you asked, so I'll tell you the one UAC issue that is bugging me right now: File sharing.

On XP members of both Power Users and Administrators can share folders on the network. The same appears to be true on Vista, but only if you create a custom MMC snap-in, as the 'Share...' context menu item insists that you must elevate to a full Administrator account (both with and without the wizard). Is there any workaround for delegating the right to share folders to standard users, or at least to make the experience a little less odd for members of the Power User group?

The other (minor) annoyance is the way Journal bugs you to elevate to add the printer driver every time you start it until you finally let it. Grrr.

Overall though, the UAC implementation is really well done and I'd congratulate everyone who worked on it as you've done a great job of making my job (a sys admin) a whole lot easier!

Very interesting video. Having been involved in rolling out a similar environment without granting developers full administrative rights, it's certainly interesting to see how Microsoft deal with things.

SecretSoftware wrote:

MS should have moved the WinKernel from Ring0 to Ring1 in that onion. PatchGuard can then secure Ring1 Code. This way you get rid of the impracticality of securing code with same priviliage level that exist in Vista.

Nice idea, but it would have broken every bit of virtualisation software out there. It is the way they are going by introducing low-level virtualisation support and a hypervisor though.

Well nobody sounded even remotely like what I'd have imagined (well except Charles obviously), but cool video nonetheless. Could probably do the weekend of the 28th/29th too, assuming it's nowhere too remote.

O fit. Emotion = me other rorty's "exit" interview or Beer (Not 28) Greet news Rory, you mother".

Mia'cova wrote:

 Being his first Channel 9 interview, I figure he'll be reading the comments like the rest of us. (And a nice interview too).

Actually, it's his second. You can watch his first Channel 9 video here.