Everyone that has responded in this thread thus far ought to know what UAC is and does by now. This has been debated on countless occasions.
Yes they got the messaging to us wrong, I blame marketing and over zealous security PM's.
The fact of the matter is that most computers needs an expert to maintain them, that is fine if you are a developer or computer enthusiast, but a general user finds it difficult. Foisting this upon billions of users is not commercially adriot - look at XP!
If you were in charge of a multi-billion product, and one of the chief complaints was
security prompts what would you do? Obviously that complainant is a fool, but it is better to sell the product (like XP sold in droves), and leave that individual under the control of AV companies. It is less complicated that way, and you have
less complaints - far less by the way.
If users get a virus or their security is compromised, Microsoft's response will be elevate UAC, you complained when we had it high, now see what happened.
This is an economical descicion, and totally, wholly incontrovertibly the correct one!
this is an economical descicion, and totally, wholly incontrovertibly the correct one!
It's undoubtedly a marketing decision, but even then I don't think it's the right one. UAC got complaints because it was seen as annoying
AND switching it off (the only choice exposed in the UI) caused Windows to nag you to switch it back on. Having the default remain as Vista but providing the UI to tone it down,
if you wanted to, would have kept the security without making individuals feel they didn't have control over there computer any more.