Given that most people install "Look, have a gorilla on your desktop" apps that then fuck everything up...most people leave it on. UAC in Win7 isn't at all obtrusive, and the only place I left it off was at work because I got tired of having to elevate VS & cmd.exe... UAC in Win7 actually is useful. In Vista days, we all turned it off.
But here's the problem: 99% of all applications do not need admin rights. And if they don't need them, they shouldn't have them. That said, I don't mind Win7's UAC, unless like I said, I'm at work having to elevate all the stuff i use. But I bet you hate linux because you're not supposed to sign in as an admin...and MS did the same thing, except they allowed you to sign in as an admin, and keep apps from elevating.
I don't know why would you want to elevate VS. Also Trickster is a troll, he's probably proud that every simple virus has it easier now to delete all disk contents instead of just user's. No one in Linux world is whining that limited user + sudo is bad. It's the same solution. User with sudo can sudo but isn't admin by default. But people don't like security. They could have perfect one but sometimes it's just inconvenient or they're lazy. Or worse: they have old habits which are hard to get rid off. In UAC case it's Windows trolls who like to think they know something about computers and like to flame Microsoft.
Exactly - I'm not bashing Linux - I'm saying that he probably hates Linux for the same reasons then...or just signed in as admin and wonders how some critial file was deleted. As for the Windows way of doing it, it makes sense...no way you can expect people to type sudo in to CMD.exe. Hell, even rooted Android phones have a similar experience. As for VS elevating, I attach to processes that are system level/elevated so I need to elevate VS. I don;t look forward to windbg though...
