My biggest Vista annoyance

L

LstBrunnenG

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
6,676
The one thing that annoys me about Vista the most is that you can't pull the quicklaunch off of the taskbar and place it elsewhere. In XP I used to love having the quicklaunch docked at the top of the screen.

I didn't make this thread simply to complain - I was wondering if there might be some kind of registry hack that makes it possible to put the quicklaunch elsewhere?
 
there is a quick launch gadget and you can place that anywhere you want
 
i think you've got me hooked on the separate toolbar thing. I used quicklaunch, but usually for a few things. Now I'm working on icons for some of those things that are hard to distinquish. We'll see how long it lasts... - mind you, with vista at home, I do use the gadgets that are available.
 
My pet peeve is that annoying pop up dialog box that ask you to allow or cancel. Anoying as hell.
 
celwin said:
My pet peeve is that annoying pop up dialog box that ask you to allow or cancel. Anoying as hell.
Click to expand...

My biggest gripe about Vista in general is people that watch too many Apple "Mac vs PC" commercials and believe the hype.

It doesn't say "Allow," it says "Continue." To be honest it doesn't say anything at all, but the buttons are labeled "Continue" or "Cancel."

'Nuff typed.
 
Nick picking here are we? The point is it's annoying.

bbz_Ghost said:
My biggest gripe about Vista in general is people that watch too many Apple "Mac vs PC" commercials and believe the hype.

It doesn't say "Allow," it says "Continue." To be honest it doesn't say anything at all, but the buttons are labeled "Continue" or "Cancel."

'Nuff typed.
Click to expand...
 
...or take a bloody chill pill!

It's only annoying when you are first configuring the system. You hardly ever see it afterwards.
 
celwin said:
My pet peeve is that annoying pop up dialog box that ask you to allow or cancel. Anoying as hell.
Click to expand...

That's one of the first things I turned off. If I hadn't been able to, I wouldn't be using it ever.
 
Since the alert message only comes up when you are making system-level changes, once your system has the software and settings you prefer you shouldn't see it any longer. I dealt with the alerts for two or three days initially, maybe a few individual times since as I added or removed software, and that's it. The alert never gets in my way, because it only comes up when I am actually making a change to the OS itself.

All you guys who are complaining about it must have never used any *nix or OS X, since they do the exact same thing (with different wording). The only advantage I'll give *nix (and I'll assume OS X, though I never tried it) is that there is a way to run with root privs until your task is complete, then switch back to user-mode. So, if I were going to gripe about Vista (I'm not), it would be that there isn't an -su function for doing install / uninstall / maintenance / change stuff on a system level.

It's quite amusing to see just how deep the bad habit of "run as admin" runs in users, from normal end-users even up to the self-styled [H]ard-users around here. Running as admin (or root) and then blaming the OS for security breaches is ridiculous. Either you run securely or you take the risk of someone or something hijacking your system. It's that simple. The reason the *nix crowd is considered "more secure" is because a breach-- which can happen often, especially in web servers-- only affects the user that has been breached in most cases, not the whole system. If that user is running with root (or admin) privs or the escalation path is not secure, then the system is owned.

Keep that in mind, guys, the next time your relatives ask you to clean out their spyware or fix an infected system.
 
GreNME is right. That pop-up appears a lot when you set up the system, but for about the last 20 days or so, neither of my Vista boxes prompt me that often. This is a perfect example of how no matter what MS does, people bitch. Those pop-ups are there for a reason...and I sure as hell wouldn't have gone to Vista, only to disable a security feature. Putting my seatbelts on in the car is a hassle, but I sure as hell wouldn't take a knife and cut them out, now would I?
 
My biggest annoyance so far is with Mozilla Thunderbird. Everytime I access my inbox it asks me whether or not I want to use Thunderbird as my default email client. It doesnt matter that I say yes everytime and have checked the option to make it the default application.

Pretty small issue though and probably Mozilla's fault anyway.

My Vista experience has been awesome so far. I havent had any major issues and hardly any minor issues. It runs so smooth on my older rig (see sig) too. I expected a slowdown from XP but Bill proved me wrong.
 
Thunderbird doesn't have the permission necessary to change the default e-mail client.

Run it as an administrator once, and click yes when that pop-up appears. Next time you start as a regular user, it shouldn't bother you again.
 
GreNME said:
...I were going to gripe about Vista (I'm not), it would be that there isn't an -su function for doing install / uninstall / maintenance / change stuff on a system level.
Click to expand...
Actually there is and has been since at least XP (probably 2k as well):
Code: 
runas /user:administrator "exectuable /options"
or you could take Keith Brown's advice and use a command line with administrative credentials. It really is not that difficult. What is more of a problem is that many developers do not cater towards the ``I run a limited user account'' crowd.
 
drizzt81 said:
Actually there is and has been since at least XP (probably 2k as well):
Code: 
runas /user:administrator "exectuable /options"
or you could take Keith Brown's advice and use a command line with administrative credentials. It really is not that difficult. What is more of a problem is that many developers do not cater towards the ``I run a limited user account'' crowd.
Click to expand...
Dude, if you think that's even close to what -su does, you are sorely mistaken. In the command-line, the equivalents are close. On a graphic desktop, Windows has no equivalent. Vista's latest security features are the closest Windows has come yet, which is why I not only like it, but I prefer it and recommend keeping it running.

Yes, I use runas all the time at work. Considering I also keep a list of command-line commands/utilities handy, I'd say I'm way ahead of you there, buddy. Don't mistake my pining for su in Windows as not being aware of the alternatives.

I agree with you about the development companies writing sloppy programs, and I blame it on Windows 98. The segregation of user space and system space has been around with pretty good framework since Windows 2000 (arguably NT4, but that was a dog of an OS), but 9x allowed mainstream development companies and their developer employees to pick up really bad habits that should have died back in 1999.

Ironically, the reason the shoddy development hasn't stopped is because people still (stupidly, IMO) run as root (or admin) by default. So, in the end, I don't blame developers, I blame lazy users who demand total security even while running with full system privs. It's downright ridiculous, if you ask me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top