Windows Vista and Irrlicht

Daaark · Post by **Daaark** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:45 am

olivehehe_03 wrote:EDIT: As for UAC, I didn't like it, turned it off

Why?

Running as Admin all the time is dumb. Running under a normal account with UAC protection is best. If you need admin privileges for something, you can input your admin password and temporarily up your access. It stops your applications from doing things they shouldn't, instead of the old way of giving any app free-reign.

If you didn't like it because of the prompts, I haven't seen one now in about 2 months.

Once you set the permissions on all your everyday programs, they disappear until you start to use something new again.

After that, UAC is invisible to you, and only benefits you.

rooly · Post by **rooly** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:01 pm

http://irrlicht.sourceforge.net/phpBB2/ ... 1&start=51

just check that first post from there, that's what vista is. stick with winxp.
i by far am not a linux fan-boy, however vista convinced me that linux is indeed the way to go.

just because an OS is installed default doesn't make it better. Why don't you try doing something other than waiting for your machine to cooperate? (granted it'll do so much sooner with 2.5ghz dual core processors...but won't anything?)

vermeer · Post by **vermeer** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:41 pm

not so dumb.

A good windows user (I know, there are soooo few...) anyway wont do or let do anything really dangerous...And anyway, I prefer to configure that, not that comes preconfigured, like historic defaults of Ms Word, which in my experience, haven't been really great for big majority of users...

I mean, at work , in any place, I run as Admin. Why not, if you have stuff under control... ?

vermeer · Post by **vermeer** » Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:43 pm

they disappear until you start to use something new again.

but then, is quite unconfortable if you instal new stuff very often...
Besides, graphic aplications are having problems of several kinds in Vista, but that's another story....

Daaark · Post by **Daaark** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:52 am

vermeer wrote:not so dumb.

A good windows user (I know, there are soooo few...) anyway wont do or let do anything really dangerous...And anyway, I prefer to configure that, not that comes preconfigured, like historic defaults of Ms Word, which in my experience, haven't been really great for big majority of users...

Because UAC goes beyond that. It's not about you, it's about what the software can do. Program X shouldn't be able to write a file to c:\randomlocation\ unless you allow it to.

Why do you need write access to your whole harddrive for your normal day to day activities.? If you keep everything in your user folder, you don't make a mess of your HD. When you need to move your files to another HD, or back them up, you can take your whole account with you very easily. All the settings for all your software and al the data files you own are in one spot.

Why does your average software need to be able to mess with your registry and write files all over your HD? UAC lets you control that. UAC offers a nice solution with virtual registries and stuff. So your main, real registry is left alone. If you have a program that needs the higher privileges, you elevate that program, and the rest still stay at normal access.

So If I post a demo game here I made with Irr, and it has code that throws a ton of crap in your registry, writes files in your system folder, messes with your HOSTS file, plays with your network config, and all this other junk, you are at it's mercy, because you're a 'good windows user' and you turned off your ability to police your own system. You leave your PC in a mode where it's legs are spread opened, and it doesn't know the word 'no', any program that runs gets full control of everything instead of you.

With UAC on, the most you can ever do is hose your user account.

rooly · Post by **rooly** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:32 pm

oh, so like linux, mac, freeBSD, and virtually every other operating system ever?

It's nice that the MS guys start doing something smart after 20 some-odd years of crapware, however just because you change your application launch menu from a silver or green button saying "start" to a blue circle with your logo doesn't make your operating system anything more than a 5gb service pack.

Dorth · Post by **Dorth** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:52 pm

Would you mind just reading what Microsoft themselves give you as agreement first? Not caring about smear or anything?

http://www.google.com/search?q=palladium+Vista

and btw, palladium was blocked in court many times under many forms always for the same reason. And still they try and sneak it back in. Just read a bit on it and decide for yourself.

sRc · Post by **sRc** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:07 pm

most of the palladium stuff isnt in Vista, Microsoft threw it back for reworking. the only thing there is the use of the TPM chip for Bitlocker authentication, and the Secure Startup function. and from what I can find, not even all of Secure Startup is there, only parts of it exist and theyve been merged into Bitlocker. and Bitlocker is only available on Enterprise and Ultimate versions, and on Ultimate versions its an extra and not installed by default

why dont you do some research on the current state of things instead of linking to plans from years ago

Dorth · Post by **Dorth** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:17 pm

Oy, dunno the google results, but I'm pretty up-to-date. Now most of Palladium has been moved to EULA form. Any EULA analyzer would throw a fit at Vista's EULA especially if you compare it to XP. It's all in the wording.

vermeer · Post by **vermeer** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 8:23 pm

er...Daaark, is not a bad thing that UAC does things which allways were done in Linux, which are indeed good, but my point is there are user capabilities, utilities, and knowledge that can control all that and more (that is, more than what MS expect you to be doing) without no need of UAC. but I don't think there's more than a 2% knowing some essential things...

I don't have a mess of my HD at all, having all access, and I certainly have doubts on what and how Vista writes in the registry, in whatever the kind of registry..neither other internal stuff.

But you make a good point, though. For many users will be a solution, and for sys admins trying to control those users, probably a real nice thing to have.

Is not one of my worse points against Vista, though.

Q-efx · Post by **Q-efx** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:41 pm

Well

i use vista since a few month, first i owned a radeon x1300, pritty slow and buggy ( well as far as i know around 1 month ) opengl 2.0 didtn worked realy well

bought a geforce 880 gts with 320 MB ram and damn it is a good card oO

even irrlicht in a window dont drops the fps down ^^

Yarcanox · Post by **Yarcanox** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:53 am

It is really irrational to turn the UAC off, as today's programs are very complex and have often some hidden functions that not every user might want. At least, if you got a virus, he nearly can't do anything bad with UAC turned on, think about it, and there are a lot of programs out there which aren't viruses but have one or two functions that are just a bad idea and can be stopped with the help of UAC.

It is not about thinking about having the full control or being reasonable enough to run the system as admin, it is just about security as much too many programs try to do things which they just shouldn't do and which should be stopped to save one's system and data.

At least I hate windows because of their EULA which allows them to turn off every program on your computer with their nice and shiny windows defender without even notifying you!! and some other crazy stuff like that. But the UAC thing is definitely good. Disclaimer: I might have got something wrong about the content of the EULA, no warranty that this is right as I don't want to be sued. I read it on one page in the internet and I am sure that it wasn't a joke, but I didn't read the original EULA myself

G3LO · Post by **G3LO** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:33 am

Does Irrlicht 1.3.1 and 'SkinnedMesh' branch works on Windows Vista with no problems?
I`m working on XP witch minGw compiler and i wonder if my application will work on Vista too (perhaps after recompiling).

MasterGod · Post by **MasterGod** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:19 am

olivehehe_03 wrote:...Most people just see the word Microsoft attached to it and assume it sucks...

Yeah baby! thats me!

Syrus · Post by **Syrus** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:17 am

the UAC is annoying as hell though it is a safety feature. However people don't seem to quite understand how it works and with a properly secured system it is not needed.