“UAC was introduced in Windows Vista as a security feature designed to prompt users for permission before allowing applications to run. Criticised as intrusive and annoying by some, Microsoft is working on a revamped version with increased granularity for Windows 7.”
That people are now complaining is too lax.
Those people should not be connected to the internet and led should be led away from voting booths.
Of course the only reason to have any kind of protected operating system architecture at all is to prevent a malicious program from succeeding in its mission once it is running on a machine. These engineers have been working on Windows operating systems for so long that they have forgotten that you actually can design and build a secure operating system - one where processes run in a mode with limited access to system resources, and hence the inability to trash the system.
The security problems in Microsoft's products all flow from their poor design and architecture decisions.
People whine if the UAC is on. They whine if the UAC is off.
Back in the 90s, people would whine that Windows lacked certain features. So MS would put in those features. Then folks would whine that MS only put in those features to drive other companies out of business.
So then MS would buy the business and incorporate the features into the operating system. People would then bitch because MS wasn’t writing their own code.
And on and on and on and on.
Fact of the matter is, people just like to bitch.
Or, as the recent fun showed, simply plug in a USB key. Only now UAC can do nothing to protect you from giving the payload access to the entire system.
Duh, another worthless article from Microsoft bashers.