Re: Quick: Where is the equivalent of the Display control panel in Vista?

On Apr 5, 9:37 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175823257.528300.31180@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On Apr 5, 9:08 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175821004.896112.144220@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 7:06 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175814199.892368.249500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 6:58 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175813584.212797.114950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 6:45 pm, "Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 5, 6:42 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175812641.256456.82080@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 6:30 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175812166.802085.242520@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 6:22 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175810876.043788.46240@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 6:02 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jesus" <rustybucket...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175810172.611673.89440@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Apr 5, 5:21 pm, "John" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
*snip*

So what's this limited Administrator status
you
seem
to
believe
setup
files get after clicking "Continue"?

How many programs have you installed? I
have
installed
OVER
400!

On Vista? Sure you have. I bet you use each
of
them
every
day,
too.
How about giving me this list of over 400 apps?

Not for a dimwit like you!!

...right.

ave explained it to you in simple terms. You
have
simply
shown
yourself
to be technically incompetent.

Still can't explain this supposed "limited
Administrator"
elevation
status? Why's that? Oh, right... because it
doesn't
exist.

\

I already did. I don't recall what term
Microsoft
uses
for
it
but
you
should be able to find it in an administrators
guide.

Sure you did. That must be why you can point me to
the
post
where
you
explained how this supposed "limited Administrator"
status
works
along
with what rights are granted with it.

GOSH fucking Windows Mail screws up just like
Outlook
did!!!

GOSH fucking John screws up just like he always
has!!!

Actually my only screwup was expecting Windows Mail
to
work!!!
I
wasn't
aware you had to use some special procedure THAT NO
OTHER
news
software
requires. I thought all I had to do was hit Reply to
Group,
type
message,
and hit send.

What precisly am I doing wrong hotshot? What is my
method
for
"screwing
up" Windows Mail?

I meant you screw up in general. Why didn't you
address
any
of
the
other stuff I wrote in that post?

I can't discuss anything technical with someone WHO
WON'T
READ
THE
FUCKING
MANUAL!!!!!!

LOL! I should've used that on you a long time ago.

Point me to documentation that supports your argument.

LOL!!! You can't get ahold of an administrators
guide!!!

An administrator's guide? You're telling me Microsoft
didn't
publish
ANY information about "limited Administrator" status online?
And
it
really exists? Sure.

Also, I know there is no exclusive book called
"Administrator's
Guide". What book are you claiming to have? Exact title.
Or
won't
you give that because specific information would allow me to
call
you
on BS more easily?

You're too dumb to look up what books Microsoft puts out for
Vista!!!
I
know they have a pocket administrators guide. I saw it at
Borders
the
other day . LOL!!!

There is no book titled simply "Administrator's Guide". Also,
if
you
just saw it at Borders and don't actually have it, you haven't
actually read it and you're just blowing smoke.

Point me to documentation on the Internet that supports your
case.

Here, I'll start:

http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVista/en/library/00d04415-2b2f-4...

Read that, fool. Especially read "Installer Detection
Technology".
Note how anything that gets elevated gets the Administrator
token,
meaning that process gets full access to the machine.

And your position is that the all of the same permissions are
elevated
as
would be for a Win 2000 or Win XP installation from an
administrators
account?

I think you need to do a couple of hundred installations or so!!!
LOL!!!!

So you're saying the Microsoft TechNet article is wrong?

Not at all. It just doesn't go into the level of detail required for
this
discussion.

Bull***. The crap you're trying to spread would be a FUNDAMENTAL
part of UAC. It's not there because it doesn't exist. That page is
meant for IT administrators. Maybe that's why you don't understand
anything in it.

You didn't answer my question. Is it your position that when running
an
install from a Vista administrators account are granted the same
default
permissions that you had when using a Win XP administrators account
for
example?

No. Processes are launched with standard permissions unless they get
elevated to full administrator status by UAC. That's what I've been
trying to tell you, but you keep coming up with crap about setup files
getting ELEVATED to "limited Administrator", a level which does not
exist.

You DID NOT answer the question. Still trying to run. It just isn't
worth the time to try and talk FACTS to someone sooo stupid!!

Actually, I did answer the question. You must not have enough of a
brain to understand that.

So you answered "No"? Well you are soooo stupid as you don't see the
answer CONFLICTS with your MISTAKEN description of how UAC works.

You are soooo stupid as it is just not worth wasting more time on the
subject UNTIL YOU READ THE FUCKING MANUAL!!!!!

Not really. I just restated what I was saying earlier. The installer
will get full administrative rights when the user grants them through
UAC. Assuming Windows recognizes the installer as an installer, Vista
will automatically prompt for permission to elevate the process. How
does that contradict anything I've said?

.

Quantcast