... if they are not functional? Running Vista and I try to uninstall a program. The installshield window pops up and after a minute, I decide it is not doing anything, so I clicked the canel button. After a while, I try to access the task manager 3 times, but to no avail. However, I can still open up firefox and tell the world how much Vista sucks on medium hardware. Even 2GB of ram and 2 cores at 1.9GHz apperantly isn't enougn for Vista.

The laggy cancel and the User Account Control are only in Vista to annoy the user.

The cancel button sometimes malfunctions for me and my XP as well. By your definition that clearly means that 2 GB of RAM and 2.2 GHz AMD64 X2 is not enough for XP.

When shots at Vista get to this level of lame I feel sorry for Microsoft. I can only admire their efforts at creating operating systems for a user base full of people trying their best to find a target to shoot at. Windows Vista is a young OS and naturally full of bugs, but seeing how the complaints have sunk this low, doesn't it mean all the major/common bugs have been squashed? When I have to ditch XP for good, it might not be so bad after all.

Anyway, lets get back to the cancel button. It seems to me like this is the first time you experience it, just restart the uninstall process after you manage to close the frozen app and try again. That is what I do and it works great.

Ummm....NO.....
The UAC does actualy have a working function....and yes, the new security model in Vista does actually help against viruses and spyware/malware etc. But if you turn the UAC off, you have no last line of defense...it is the same concept as the Linux security model. If you are not a complete unrestricted user on the system, you cannot damage the OS too much...

But, rules are meant to be broken, so I guess some-one will eventually...

Cancel button woes are normally issues with the various peices of software running...not normaly the OS...

The cancel button may be found on the windows of many applications, 3rd party or not, but to my knowledge the cancel function is a part of an OS API. But isolated cases like these pretty much confirm that the problem is in the hands of InstallShield, not WinVista.

Oh, I thought the installshielf was a part of Vista, produced by the same company that made vista. Guess i was wrong.

InstallShield ships with Windows OSs, but is a separate application never the less, just like Internet Explorer or Windows Media Player.

And Microsoft have nothing to do with InstallShield's development at all, by the way.

Well, I believe the cons of UAC outweigh the pros in my case.

I still use Windows Defender and the other anti-virus programs, but the hassles of UAC are not worth the extra protection.

My new computer's UAC labels my old computer's files as foreign and does not allow me to access them while it is active. The only reason I can run any of my games is because it has been disabled.

It has also placed several files in my C: drive in the 'above admin' security level. Which means that I cannot delete or modify my S.T.A.L.K.E.R. files because Windows thinks they're core files.

I've heard from some people say they have observed the UAC simply train people to click "accept", just like junk mail trains me to hit "delete". It still won't stop people from doing stupid things, it just say "hey, stupid, that thing you're gonna do might be stupid, not that I know...". However, after I turned off UAC, indexing, and that whatever-it's-called that loads a bunch of stuff into RAM, my laptop is handling Vista pretty well.

I've learnt to just use the task manager and end the process,NOT the task.

If you try to end task anymore windows 'looks for a solution',when you want something to end NOW end process is the way to go,just don't end the wrong one.

This UAC stuff doesn't sound appealing. I've read that Vista is more or less a babysitter if everything is left at default settings. I'll definitely read tweak guides and such before making the switch.

@bjossi... I used vista business 32 bit when I went to votech in missouri and I hated it. imo, either stick with XP or 2000 for an os. I'm not trying to decide for you, but I suggest you stick with XP or 2000. sorry for OT

That is what I plan to do, but as you should know that isn't possible forever. When XP starts to sail a fair distance behind in terms of hardware and software support, I will make the switch. No second thoughts needed there.

Speaking of babysitting, an interesting read: http://badvista.fsf.org/blog. Not that I'm saying Vista is all bad.

That webpage tells me that the blog doesn't exist. . .

Remove the dot behind the link.

Now it's a hyperlink.

That guy doesn't like Vista very much it seems.