Comments on: “Microsoft: Vista feature designed to ‘annoy users’”

By: Head Geek

Head Geek — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:44:42 +0000

Windows NT was multi-user, and apparently had decent security — not great, not even really very good, but decent considering the security knowledge of MS people at the time. All of the home versions (3.0/3.1, 95/98/ME) were designed to be *single*-user. There were good reasons for that at the time, but once MS got everyone used to the single-user model, they had a bitch of a time trying to switch them over to a more secure model, so they were pretty much stuck with the single-user model long after it had outlived its usefulness. Now, with Vista, they’re trying to switch everyone over at once, at the same time as they introduce an OS that has other major problems (drivers, DRM, etc), and people are fed up with it.

By: Ploni Almoni

Ploni Almoni — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:14:48 +0000

People building multitasking/multiuser operating systems such as Unix have known this for years.

By: Head Geek

Head Geek — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:05:28 +0000

XP didn’t really have a security model. To be honest, I can’t blame MS for that one… it’s hard for a computer person to realize that you have to protect computers from people who will damage things just for kicks, and even harder to realize that you can’t rely on the guy behind the keyboard to know not to say yes to everything that pops up on the screen. At least, until it’s shoved into our faces.

By: Joshua Lee

Joshua Lee — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:24:35 +0000

The hidden ones I’m aware of, like improved security, don’t quite work as-advertised either. Though to be fair, they’re an improvement over XP’s “swiss-cheese” security model.

By: Head Geek

Head Geek — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 02:09:08 +0000

Just the ones you can see.

By: Joshua Lee

Joshua Lee — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 01:41:41 +0000

Which feature? All of them?