Vista less secure than XP.
by Carl Mercier
I’ve been saying it for months, it was obvious, but yet, Microsoft apparently failed to see that coming..
Security company Kaspersky claimed that Vista’s User Account Control (UAC), the system of user privileges that can be used to restrict users’ administrative rights, will be so annoying that users will disable it.
As many know, I’ve never been in the “anti-MS” camp, but considering the money that was invested in it, Vista is by far the most dissapointing piece of software they have ever released. And I mean it.
I thought you had a mac? or do you have paralles with vista installed on it?
I do have a Mac. I’m sticking with XP in Parallels. I installed Vista on some relatives computers, but they hated it so much that I had to reinstall XP. Not only they hated it, but it was incompatible with a lot of software/hardware they had.
Sorry Carl, but you can’t really say that it’s less secure if the people actually *turn off* the security feature.
I’m more at risk if I don’t wear the seatbelt in my car, and some find it very annoying. Still, it’s not the manufacturer’s mistake if you die in a crash and you’re not wearing it.
I haven’t used Vista yet though, so I can’t really comment on the “annoyingness” (if that’s a word).
Max,
I understand your point. Try Vista and you’ll see how annoying it is and how often you’re asked: Allow or Deny? Without a doubt, you’ll quickly start clicking “Allow” all the time without even reading the message. That’s what “regular” users do, anyway, especially since they don’t understand the risks.
That’s a serious usability and design flaw in my opinion. One of the many Vista flaws. By designing Vista this way, they are passing on the security blame to the users while they should have fixed security for real and for good.