if vista had a button that u could click that disabled all the crap u dont need and got rid of all those security questions everytime u want to do something, i would buy vista tomorow

i mean u want to delte a file and u get asked like 3 times are u sure and the screen start going dark then u delete it and sometimes its not even in the rycling bin, wtf

you can disable that (UAC) :D
www.petri.co.il/disable_uac_in_windows_vista.htm

Gian-Payou can disable that (UAC) :D
www.petri.co.il/disable_uac_in_windows_vista.htm

That's not the point. You don't buy a new OS and start disable it's core functionality right off the bat. It defeats the purpose of why you purchased it to begin with. If you are going to buy Vista and disable the main feature(s) that distinguish it from XP then there is no reason to buy Vista.

Deal with it!

EastCoasthandleThat's not the point. You don't buy a new OS and start disable it's core functionality right off the bat. It defeats the purpose of why you purchased it to begin with. If you are going to buy Vista and disable the main feature(s) that distinguish it from XP then there is no reason to buy Vista.

Deal with it!

... your post puzzles me. That double checking feature is in no way a "main feature" of vista. If he wan'ts to disable it he can, thats the wonders of PCs you can do just about anything you want with them if your not lazy.

By disabling one feature you are making the assumption hes going to disable others, thats not right, you really should relax a little.

No he shouldn't deal with it, dealing with it is the worst solution to anything.

By the way I think your sigs a little big, I reccomend you talk to a mod/Admin about its size.

So why is so much crap being reported as news???

I've been reading these forums for a while and in the past couple months ive seen more and more of this...

I think the people that report the news should report news not something posted on some other site thats fake.

jjnissanpatfanSo why is so much crap being reported as news???

I've been reading these forums for a while and in the past couple months ive seen more and more of this...

I think the people that report the news should report news not something posted on some other site thats fake.

I can understand that people get annoyed about fake news, but unfortunately, once a number of reputable sites post stories such as the Vista sales figures as 'news', us news posters have a hard time filtering out what is true and what is fake.

Admittedly the R600 caused a lot of false news posts, and because of this the news posters have stepped up their attempts to post only real news and you may have noticed that sites like the Inquirer are being used much less as a consequence. The reason that some false stories make it onto the site is because we try our best to release news to you as quickly as possible - and waiting two weeks for a manufacturer to confirm or dismiss rumours isn't really what most people are looking for.

Other than the R600 stories over the last few months, I personally feel that nearly all news that is posted turns out to be true, and on the occasions that a story turns out to be untrue we do our best to correct the problem with follow up stories such as this. :toast:

it gives us something to read, i rarther read a rumour than checking this site everyday and no new news

EastCoasthandleThat's not the point. You don't buy a new OS and start disable it's core functionality right off the bat. It defeats the purpose of why you purchased it to begin with. If you are going to buy Vista and disable the main feature(s) that distinguish it from XP then there is no reason to buy Vista.

Deal with it!

This doesn't make any sense, East. Don't most of us here disable a bunch of features in XP? I know I do, and so do most of the people that post benchmarks in the numerous benchmark threads we have floating around. Before I load my drivers, XP boots to about 80mb of ram for me. 150mb after all drivers are installed. What's the difference between disabling features in XP and Vista?

What I posted makes perfect sense. UAC (as well as other features) is what makes Vista different from XP.

You don't buy a new OS and start disable it's core functionality right off the bat. It defeats the purpose of why you purchased it to begin with. If you are going to buy Vista and disable the main feature(s) that distinguish it from XP then there is no reason to buy Vista.

And, it makes perfect sense. There are no XP specific features I need to "disable".

EastCoasthandleWhat I posted makes perfect sense. UAC (as well as other features) is what makes Vista different from XP. Denying that it is not is a flat out lie and you know it.


And, it makes perfect sense.

There are many more features to Vista that you don't see(and some you do) that make Vista what it is. Better networking stack, more secure(even with UAC disabled), Aero, Superfetch, Readyboost, and the list goes on and on. So no, denying that the UAC is what differentiates XP and Vista is not a flat out lie. Disabling it doesn't take away from the OS at all.

And are you gonna sit there and try to tell me that you don't disable anything in XP? Automatic Update? The way Security Center alerts you? Windows Firewall? So, by what you are saying, we shouldn't disable services in XP, because they are what makes it different from earlier Windows versions like 2000 and ME. People have been tweaking XP since the day of it's release, that's the SAME EXACT principal as disabling services in Vista. We shut off what we don't use. It will be the same with the next Windows version as well. It will bring some features that we like, and some features that we don't, and therefore try to disable. And, fyi, disabling the UAC isn't a hack, you don't use services.msc to disable it, you don't use reg edits, or anything of that nature. It's something you can turn off in your control panel. AKA: A setting Microsoft officially allows you to change.

So, no, your statement doesn't make any sense.

Wile EThere are many more features to Vista that you don't see(and some you do) that make Vista what it is. Better networking stack, more secure(even with UAC disabled), Aero, Superfetch, Readyboost, and the list goes on and on. So no, denying that the UAC is what differentiates XP and Vista is not a flat out lie. Disabling it doesn't take away from the OS at all.

And are you gonna sit there and try to tell me that you don't disable anything in XP? Automatic Update? The way Security Center alerts you? Windows Firewall? So, by what you are saying, we shouldn't disable services in XP, because they are what makes it different from earlier Windows versions like 2000 and ME. People have been tweaking XP since the day of it's release, that's the SAME EXACT principal as disabling services in Vista. We shut off what we don't use. It will be the same with the next Windows version as well. It will bring some features that we like, and some features that we don't, and therefore try to disable. And, fyi, disabling the UAC isn't a hack, you don't use services.msc to disable it, you don't use reg edits, or anything of that nature. It's something you can turn off in your control panel. AKA: A setting Microsoft officially allows you to change.

So, no, your statement doesn't make any sense.

I definitly agree!

All these news postings are probably for the money, lol... I've seen 2 news posts dealing with things occurring right here in TPU! I recall a post about Slater going to surgery and one about the photoshop contest, lol..

hatAll these news postings are probably for the money, lol... I've seen 2 news posts dealing with things occurring right here in TPU! I recall a post about Slater going to surgery and one about the photoshop contest, lol..

LOL, i don't remember ex_reven paying zek for posting about the photoshop contest :wtf:
hey, can't a site never have it's own news :p

EastCoasthandleWhat I posted makes perfect sense. UAC (as well as other features) is what makes Vista different from XP.


And, it makes perfect sense. There are no XP specific features I need to "disable".

Nobody is forcing you to buy vista. If not disabling UAC is so important to you, stick with XP - or buy a Mac. I, on the other hand, enjoy Vista, and can't wait for DX10 games to start coming out. It'll make the 3 seconds it took me to disable UAC worth the time wasted.

hatAll these news postings are probably for the money, lol... I've seen 2 news posts dealing with things occurring right here in TPU! I recall a post about Slater going to surgery and one about the photoshop contest, lol..

Zek doesnt get paid for those posts. He specifically instructed w1z not to. W1z only pays his staff the post REAL news. Those news articles were just extra articles on top of the news he had already written for the day.

Hopefully w1z doesnt pay them too much. I often find the news articles contain grammatical/spelling errors. Also, they dont seem to fully comprehend what they are writing on much of the time.

WeStSiDePLaYaHopefully w1z doesnt pay them too much. I often find the news articles contain grammatical/spelling errors. Also, they dont seem to fully comprehend what they are writing on much of the time.

That little outburst just earned you an all-expenses-paid 10-day revocation of posting ability.