Earlier you referred to users as just users. Quit twisting stuff around.
User is a User is a User... You wanted to use a specific name for them by branding them 'standard' so I did the same.
My stance is that UAC is very handy being able to grab admin rights from within a resrticted permissions user account. That user account being standard user.
Your stance is very good at making an admin's life difficult. Since the admin is going to aprove anything he or she does
anyway, there is no point. You also specified that admins should run in standard user mode with UAC. This includes admins in your stance, and makes them relevant.
I was referring to UAC in one specific usage from the beginning. In this one specific usage, it's quite useful. All you said was UAC sucks UAC sucks UAC sucks it's only for people who don't know what they're doing. And then you proceeded to assume way too much about me.
If you had read, I have no problems giving a "standard user" a "standard user account" and leaving UAC on.
You chose to be pissed off by my rhetorical statement by reading too much into it. All it meant was that it was dumb to just reject the advice.
You chose to make the arrogant remark that your way is best and everyone who disagrees is stupid. No one has taken your side. By that extension, you have called everyone here stupid. You're suprised at the result?
Running as admin 24/7 makes need for all of these specialty programs (ccleaner, spybot, windows defender, avast, avg, zonealarm, biglistitis). So, don't run as admin and you'll be making use of these programs a lot less and watch your computer work how you intended too. Increase productivity; let the computer work for you instead of you constantly working for it.
It was actually do more with less. It's a concept about efficiency. Figurative example is: As an admin going through which software is needed and what is not. Like disabling windows defender in favor of a real virus scanner that works. Getting rid of spyware cleaners if the virus scanner takes care of all forms of malware. Using a firewall and other software that compliments the abilities of the admin. The admin making sure that none of what he does gets in the way of the users, particularly what on the computer will impede the user. This means less for the admin to do, less complaints from users, and less use of special admin tools. It helps lead to a computer environment that keeps working and requires less up keep.
I wasn't saying don't use a virus scanner or firewall or other programs.
Ya... I'll let that one explain itself. You're going back on yourself and still haven't told me what you have to run by using admin over standard. In both cases it is
only one anti-virus and firewall. Anything beyond that is choice, and is a convenience that said admin would use in standard mode anyway. No program works 'better' in standard mode, and you need (or use) just as many in standard mode. You're making up random crap at this point by even thinking standard magically uses less.
You're using it to take libery in assuming way too much about me with constant put downs. Your accuracy will be in question, because in reality, you have no idea if you're right about all or none of your unscrupulous claims about me.
I have made
one assumption about you. I placed you in a group that conforms to your beliefs as to how a computer should be run. You deviate from it slightly by trusting users more then most of that group, but you do fit it. In case you are wondering, which I doubt, it would be "-Actually knows what isn't safe, doesn't do it". You simply do not take enough risk like myself or Nuke to fit in that final group. Perhaps you think this group makes you less of a capable tech and therefore took it as an insult? I don't know, but I also really don't care.
Why would i want to include myself in a list written by a jackass
Because the list, as any real tech will tell you, is true, and the only way to
not fit in it is to never touch a computer. The list applies to everything, not just computers. For example, in the world of automotive, I would be in that second group.
The dumb statement i made after giving my advice in my first post in this thread...
I'm glad you agree.
...was rhetorical.
Bull****.
Holy crap you are offensive.
I don't recall calling you any names, but you seem to think its just fine to do so. I'm the offencive one?
