SuperSite Blog

No surprise here, unless you actually believed people don't "want" Windows:

Microsoft and the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) initiative announced Thursday that the Windows operating system would soon be available on the so-called XO, also known as the "$100 laptop." In interviews, executives made it clear that this could be a catalytic shift in perception and market success for the innovative but up-to-now aberrant laptop intended for the poor children of the world.

The Windows version of the XO will go on sale by September. Like the regular, Linux-based version, it will at first actually cost closer to $200, because the project has not yet achieved the volumes that could drive costs down.

Making Windows available on the XO could make it far more palatable for developing-world governments to make the huge investment necessary to purchase large numbers of XOs for their children. "It's a very big deal," said OLPC chairman Nicholas Negroponte in an interview.

To get Windows working on the XO took time, because it has a number of unique hardware features, like an e-book reading mode. Microsoft will include its super-cheap $3 version of Windows and Office called the Student Innovation Suite with the Windows XO, which will thus be a full-fledged Windows NT computer.

With Microsoft applying its entire ecosystem to the task, the XO is far more likely to get traction in countries around the world. The company will recruit its system integrator partners, its own consulting unit, and involve the XO in its teacher training programs, among other efforts.

Negroponte says when he made the rounds in Egypt trying to interest the government in buying XOs, four ministers he met all asked "by the second sentence" whether they ran Windows.

Yep. I bet they did.

Frankly, the built-in software in today's XO is horrific. Assuming it runs OK, XP will be a huge improvement.

Related: Microsoft and One Laptop per Child Partner to Deliver Affordable Computing to Students Worldwide (press release)

Microsoft finally addresses an issue some Windows XP users have had in slipstreaming Service Pack 3 (SP3) into their installation media:

This blog entry covers a issue that some customers have encountered with the release of SP3 for Windows XP. The service pack supports the use of the /integrate command to integrate(or also called slipstream) SP3 into a Windows XP flat. It is supported to run the command with the following media

Windows XP Professional RTM

Windows XP Professional SP1

Windows XP Professional SP2

The problem arises if the /integrate command is run under Windows Vista or Windows Server 2008. The /integrate process will not report any error and appear to work but if you try to install from the media your product key may not be accepted. Luckily the fix is easy. Run the /integrate command under Windows XP or Windows Server 2003. For more information around this issue see http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;950722

Related: My preliminary XP SP3 Slipstreaming Guide

I was amused to discover the headline Another Microsoft Headache: OpenOffice.org 3.0 popping up in my search of Yahoo! News this morning, and just had to look. In a low-caffeine version of the "This is the year of desktop Linux" type-story, Ed Moltzen at CRN engages in a bit of wishful thinking:

The OpenOffice.org community is now beta testing the next major upgrade to its office productivity suite, version 3.0, and there is enough in it to cause Microsoft some more worry.

For starters, the latest version is offering native GUI support on the Mac OS X platform, where growth rates are far outpacing Windows PCs (another Microsoft headache). That will make it easier for all those folks buying MacBook Air notebooks or iMacs to download it, install it and get to work.

And face it: it's a different PC market with many, many more people working on more than one PC. How attractive an option is it to throw an extra $499 for a second Office license onto a second PC that only runs $399 itself?

Wow. I mean, wow.

Two points here:

1. Virtually no one who buys a Mac is ever going to consider OpenOffice.org. We've had "native GUI" versions of this suite for years on the Windows side and we don't care about it either, so there's nothing to suggest that the Starbucks-visiting, Izod-wearing MacBook Air crowd is going to be any more susceptible to the almost-compatible-with-Office tomfoolery offered by this free product. You don't spend $2000+ on a MacBook Air and then cheap out on the most important software you need, sorry.

2. Office doesn't cost $499. Or $399. It costs $149 ... or much less. Normal people--i.e. the vast majority of individuals who actually use Office get new versions of the suite with a new PC, where the cost of Office is typically much lower. Those who buy it at retail--all 17 of them--get Office Home and Student 2007. Which costs $149, max. That's assuming you don't find it for less. Which you will: It's $109 on Amazon.com today. (There's even a Mac version for $129, today at Amazon.com. Guess which version Mac users are buying in bigger-than-ever numbers?  Hint: It's not the expensive version.)

If you're looking for basic Office productivity software with middling Microsoft Office compatibility, OpenOffice.org is there for the taking. It's been there for the taking for years. There haven't been very many takers. And for good reason: The only headache it causes is for users. Not for Microsoft.

Obviously.

Side-note: As we move to the cloud computing future, old-fashioned, copy-cat office productivity suites like OpenOffice.org are about as exciting as The MSN Network (MSN) was in 1995: The world is moving on, people. While today's cloud computing solutions like Google Docs aren't quite as "full-featured" as OpenOffice.org, I think they make more sense, especially if you can get an offline Google Gears-based thing going. Check out Zoho Writer for an even better example. It may not be giving Microsoft headaches (yet), but I bet there's a low-grade twitch starting up somewhere in Redmond.

At its Xbox 360 Spring Showcase 2008 special event today, Microsoft and its game maker partners unveiled a number of Xbox 360 game titles that will ship this year, including Fable 2, Ninja Garden III, Too Human, Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise, Banjo-Kazoole: Nuts & Bolts, and Penny Arcade Adventures: On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness Episode One. None of that matters. Because developer Epic also unveiled details about the campaign version of Gears of War 2, due in November. GOW2 is, of course, the follow-up to the best-selling original game from 2006 (see my review and multiplayer review). From what little we've seen so far of the sequel, it looks at least as good as the original.

As a quick reminder, the single player campaign from GOW is still among the best single player experiences ever made for any game system (take that, Bioshock). However, GOW's multiplayer experience is still among the absolute worst of any shooter I've ever played. Hopefully, they'll fix that for GOW2, and the developers at Epic seem to at least be aware of the problem, promising this week that GOW2 multiplayer will be "bigger and better" and "incredibly robust," and will include "lots of multiplayer maps, lots of modes." But the best comment I've seen so far has come from GOW creator Cliff Bleszinski, who said, "We'll have the multiplayer functionality that gamers have come to expect this day and age." I take that to mean it will be nothing like the original GOW and that someone at Epic is at least aware of the criticisms I and others have levied against GOW's incredibly poor multiplayer.

But back to this week's announcement. What we've gotten is a glimpse at a single player level called "Assault," in both screenshot and video form. (See the shots below.) The graphics look incredible, and even better than those featured in the original GOW, though clearly of the same type. It's nice to see some blue sky for a change, too: One of the few graphical complaints I've made about the original GOW is that the game's palette was largely made up of different types of gray. Here, finally, we see a few colors peeking through, including some appropriately dark red blood spattered on the virtual camera lens. There's also a lot more going on in this demo than we see anywhere in the original GOW: In one scene, a decent-sized army of baddies is marching up a hill below a huge moving truck during a battle between humans and airborne Reavers and monstrous Brumacks.

There are a few new capabilities shown too. Later in the same scene, our hero, Marcus Feenix, picks up a fallen bad guy and uses him as a shield, later snapping his neck and toppling him off the top of the huge truck they're riding. The mini-chainsaw sees some new bits as well, including an attack from the rear and a nice duel.

OK, it's not much. But GOW was a big enough deal--it did sell about 5 million copies, after all, and was easily the best game of 2006--that it's hard not to look forward with some excitement at the sequel. I just hope they get multiplayer right this time.

From the publisher
Here's some GOW2 information direct from Microsoft and Epic:

"Gears of War 2" is the highly anticipated sequel to the 4.7-million-selling blockbuster third-person tactical action game, one of the most popular Xbox 360 games in history. "Gears of War 2" picks up six months after the events of "Gears of War," and thrusts players back into a deep and harrowing story of humankind’s epic battle for survival against a nightmarish force of underground creatures known as the Locust Horde.

"Gears of War 2" is developed by Epic Games exclusively for the Xbox 360 video game and entertainment system. Players continue the story of Marcus Fenix, a reluctant war hero, as he leads Delta Squad on a series of perilous and adrenaline-pumping missions. "Gears of War 2" blends a best-in-class third-person shooter with unsurpassed high-definition visuals, all layered on top of an engaging story of survival, loss and retribution.

Features:

Bigger, better and more badass gameplay. "Gears of War 2" builds upon the gameplay of the first title in every way. First, the scope of the action is bigger. New characters, more weapons, nastier enemies, bigger vehicles and grander locales offer players more action, more emotion and more thrills. Next, every major aspect of the game has been refined to create heightened, more immersive experiences. Finally, the overall tone of "Gears of War 2" is more badass — replete with new weapon-specific executions, chain saw duels and shocking boss fights.

Jaw-dropping visuals. "Gears of War 2" raises the graphics bar for next-generation games through its breathtaking visual effects, which are made possible through advances in Unreal Engine 3. New visual effects in "Gears of War 2" include ambient occlusion, dynamic shadows, improved character lighting, the ability to render hundreds of on-screen characters simultaneously, improved water physics, additional blood and bullet decals, advanced destructible environments, new weather effects, and the introduction of fluid objects. When combined with the sweeping vistas and evocative locales in the world of Sera where the "Gears of War 2" story unfolds, these additions help make "Gears of War 2" the most gorgeous game available this generation.

Gripping story that pulls you in and won’t let go. "Gears of War 2" continues to push deep, immersive storytelling in video games to greater heights. Humanity’s epic battle for survival is felt on both personal and epic levels as players explore multiple story arcs that introduce new characters and flesh out the histories of familiar ones.

Unparalleled Xbox LIVE competitive and co-op action. "Gears of War 2" takes full advantage of the industry-leading Xbox LIVE service. Xbox LIVE, which is home to millions of gamers, is a robust online entertainment network, and allows gamers to enjoy "Gears of War 2" either competitively or cooperatively. Enhanced competitive multiplayer gameplay over Xbox LIVE will introduce new modes and weapons, and a multitude of new maps.2 Also new to "Gears of War 2" is the ability for gamers to drop in and drop out of the co-op campaign at any time, while playing at their own difficulty setting. Enjoying the visceral thrills of "Gears of War" has never been easier.

Box shots
 

Screenshots
  

Video
You can view the entire "Assault" demo video on the Microsoft Web site.

The Windows Vista Blog is promoting (a new release of?) Windows Live for Windows Mobile:

Windows Live for Windows Mobile is now available to download for your Windows Mobile phone. Windows Live for Windows Mobile lets Windows Mobile users sync their email from Windows Live Hotmail as well as their Windows Live Contacts.

To download, just head on over to this URL on your Windows Mobile phone:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/mobile/wl/download-en-us.mspx

Just download the .cab file for the version of Windows Mobile you are running (Standard or Professional). Windows Live for Windows Mobile works on phones running both Windows Mobile and Windows Mobile 6 (and 6.1).

Ah, nothing like a nice simple URL to type on that tiny keyboard (real or virtual), eh? Was something like mobile.live.com too difficult to set up?  :)

Anyway.

Push email support for Hotmail: Good.

But this? Not so good...

Windows Live for Windows Mobile however does not come with a Windows Live Messenger client for your Windows Mobile phone.  We've chosen to do this to support carrier's plans for IM services for their phones. If there is no IM client on your phone, you can try our browser based version of Windows Live Messenger to chat with friends or ask your carrier about IM options for your phone.

This statement speaks volumes to my primary problem with Windows Mobile: Unlike with Apple's iPhone, Microsoft is beholden to the Gatekeepers of the Wireless World (tm), i.e. the wireless carriers. And rather than step on their toes and, God forbid, actually add some useful functionality to Windows Mobile, Microsoft has decided to ship a third rate Web client for Windows Live Messenger and let the Gods at Verizon, AT&T, and elsewhere decided whether their peon customers deserve a real working executable for that service.

Way to go, Microsoft.

Until this situation is reversed, Windows Mobile will always be a hobbled joke. I can't stress this enough: The primary innovation of the iPhone has nothing to do with technology and everything to do with Apple's ability to loosen the stranglehold that wireless carriers have on the devices they sell. Microsoft plays within the confines of this system and Windows Mobile (and its users) suffer as a result.

I want to qualify what I'm about to describe here with the following: Bill Gates is leaving (full-time) Microsoft. Soon. I get the feeling he doesn't necessarily ever accurately describe what's going on at the company. For example, he was recently (mis)quoted as saying that Windows 7 would ship as soon as "next year." (He didn't really say that, necessarily. See this post for details.)

Anyhoo.

Gates recently appeared at the Windows Digital Lifestyle Consortium in Japan where he gave a little talk. (See the complete transcript.) And since we're such tools, geeks the world over are hanging on every little mention of Windows 7, as if the seer of Redmond actually had something notable to say about a product that will ship two years after he leaves full-time work at the company. Here's what he says about Windows 7 in this speech:

We're hard at work, I would say, on the next version, which we call Windows 7. I'm very excited about the work being done there. The ability to be lower power, take less memory, be more efficient, and have lots more connections up to the mobile phone, so those scenarios connect up well to make it a great platform for the best gaming that can be done, to connect up to the thing being done out on the Internet, so that, for example, if you have two personal computers, that your files automatically are synchronized between them, and so you don't have a lot of work to move that data back and forth.

This is a description of Live Mesh, not Windows 7. And that alone should give you pause about the accuracy of his other comments here. For example:

• Lower power, take less memory, be more efficient. This is awfully vague and basically meaningless, but an implicit reaction to some of the criticism of Vista.
• Lots more connections up to the mobile phone. Today, Windows has zero connections "to the mobile phone." In fact, you have to download separate software, the Windows Mobile Device Center, in order to use a Windows Mobile-based phone with Windows Vista at all. Is WMDC going to be included in Windows 7? I mean, that's all it would take for this sentence to be true. Big deal. And totally expected.
• Great platform for "the best gaming that can be done." Arguably, with its support for DirectX 10.1, Windows VIsta already achieves this. Given the lifetime of video game consoles, what Gates is really saying her is that Windows 7, an OS that will ship two years from now, will be a better gaming platform than the Xbox 360, a system that first shipped over two year ago. Exciting, eh?
• Connect up to the thing being done out on the Internet. This is my favorite line, thanks to the tortured sentence structure. He's saying that Windows 7--get this--will be compatible with the Internet and the Internet services that Microsoft is already creating. Stop the presses, people. We have a headline.

But wait, there's more.

Also the effort to upgrade, I think that's an area we got a lot of feedback in Vista, that we need to invest in that, and we're going to make that very, very simple for people. So Vista is doing well, and we're hard at work putting even more investment now in the version that comes after that.

So... Microsoft will make it easier for people to upgrade to a new version of Windows? This is something that Microsoft worked on in both XP and Vista, so we're talking a simple evolution of pre-existing functionality. Big deal.

Oh, and Microsoft is hard at work on Windows 7.

So I ask you: Did Gates really say anything about Windows 7 here? Really?

No, not really.

So why do we hang on his every word again?

I spent a lot of time during Longhorn's early days debunking fake screenshots people had created of Microsoft's then-next-OS. It's happening again with Windows 7, of course. And while I'd like to keep this kind of thing to a minimum, this video is fake.

Not just fake. Fake, fake, fake. Really fake. Obviously fake. Stupidly fake. The "screen capture" part shows off SnagIt, a third party application I use nearly every single day. This is "didn't even try hard" fake.

So please don't email me about it. But please do feel free to ridicule and/or ignore those who weren't savvy enough to figure it out.

Moving on....

A report from PC Tools last week claimed that Windows Vista was, in fact, more susceptible to malware than Windows 2000, an operating system Microsoft released almost a decade ago, and well before its Trustworthy Computing initiative:

Leading security software vendor, PC Tools, today released research confirming that the widely debated Windows Vista is still a long way from having immunity to online threats and that additional protection is essential.

"Ironically, the new operating system has been hailed by Microsoft as the most secure version of Windows to date. However, recent research conducted with statistics from over 1.4 million computers within the ThreatFire community has shown that Windows Vista is more susceptible to malware than the eight year old Windows 2000 operating system, and only 37% more secure than Windows XP," said Simon Clausen, Chief Executive Officer, PC Tools.

PC Tools cautions that because Vista has a smaller market share than its predecessor, targeted attacks are less frequent. However, once Vista’s market-share increases, it is likely to become a more lucrative platform for attack.

Sensational. Widely reported.

Too bad it's all baloney.

Windows Vista and Malware

Recently there have been some questions raised about the susceptibility of Windows Vista to malware – specifically, that it’s more susceptible to malware than Windows 2000. I’d like to show why we reject that claim. We study the malware space very carefully and publish our results twice a year in the Security Intelligence Report. This report is compiled from statistics on malware infections based on over 450 million executions of the Malicious Software Removal Tool (MSRT) every month. Microsoft is a member of AMTSO (Anti Malware Testing Standards Organization) and its charter includes defining test methodology so that there is a minimum quality bar to all testing of this type.

Our results published in the April 2008 version of the Security Intelligence Report show that Windows Vista is significantly less susceptible to malware than older operating systems. In fact, from June – December 2007, using proportionate numbers, the MSRT found and cleaned malware from 60.5% fewer Windows Vista-based computers than from computers running Windows XP with Service Pack 2 installed. How about Windows 2000? Using proportionate numbers, MSRT found and cleaned malware from 44% fewer Windows Vista-based computers than Windows 2000 SP4 computers and 77% fewer than from computers running Windows 2000 SP3. Note that the Windows 2000 numbers include both Windows 2000 client AND server versions, while the Windows XP numbers of course are only clients. Servers tend to be less likely to get infected with malware.

This one is so obvious I'm embarrassed to even post this. Anyone who really believes that Windows 2000 is more secure than Windows Vista is--sorry--an idiot. There's just no kind way to say it.

In an article about Microsoft's smart phone hopes and dreams, some interesting numbers are revealed:

Around 118 million smartphones were sold last year, according to market researcher Canalys.

Symbian captured 67 percent of the OS market.

Microsoft came in second at 13 percent.

RIM [in third place] took 10 percent.

Microsoft says it will sell almost 20 million copies of its Windows Mobile OS in fiscal 2008, which ends June 30. The previous year (July 2006 to June 2007), the company sold 11 million units. It's goal is to capture 40 percent of the smartphone market by (fiscal?) 2012. If the smart phone market doesn't grow at all in the interim (and it will, of course) that means that Microsoft will need to sell almost 50 million units a year, over twice what it's now doing. Given recent excitement around devices from Apple and Google's Android platform, it's unclear how this can happen, but there you go.

Oh, and did I mention recently that Windows Mobile is crap? Because it is.

Just got an email about some free, high-quality designer templates that Microsoft is now offering to users of Office 2007:

In conjunction with the launch of Office 2007, Microsoft today went live with designer templates that utilize many of the new Office 2007 features.  MS tapped advertising and design firm Bradley & Montgomery for the creation of designer templates that allow businesses to seamlessly incorporate their branding and present themselves in a confident and elegant manner.

Most small businesses do not have the budgets to hire outside firms for their marketing and design needs.  With the release of Microsoft Office 2007, small businesses have greater ability than ever to create professional-looking presentations and documents quickly and easily.  The purpose of the templates is to demonstrate the new functionality of Office 2007 while giving small businesses something useful in the process.

There are six template families with 9 colors to choose from located at the Microsoft Web site.  Each template has a place for a business to place its logo along with text and picture boxes to simply add their content.  The templates are completely free, and businesses can also download a free 60-day trial of Office 2007 to use the templates to the fullest extent.

They're actually quite nice if you're into this kind of thing.

Instructions for using the templates can be found here (PDF format).

Can we finally put the "no variable pricing on iTunes" baloney to the side. It's never really been true and it's pretty clear that Apple will actually bend over backwards for content providers if the company feels it's important enough. Case in point: HBO just joined iTunes today (finally) and while there's no truly old content on there (which I'd love to see, incidentally), the pricing on what's available is kind of telling:

The Wire $1.99 per episode
Flight of the Conchords $1.99 per episode
Rome $2.99 per episode
The Sopranos$2.99 per episode
Sex and the City $1.99 per episode
Deadwood $2.99 per episode

There's a curious mix of shows there. In each case, only a single season is offered. So with Rome, it's Season 1. But with The Sopranos, all you can get is Season 6, Part 2. Odd.

And for the record, Deadwood is one of the best TV shows, ever. Rent it on DVD.

Anyway, on to the Apple PR spin:

HBO and Apple® today announced that programming from HBO is now available for purchase and download on the iTunes Store. New HBO programs on iTunes include the Emmy Award-winning programs “The Sopranos,” “Sex and the City,” “Deadwood” and “Rome,” as well as the critically acclaimed hits “Flight of the Conchords” and “The Wire.”

While Apple does call out the price of the individual shows, it doesn't highlight their official policy change with regards to TV shows. But I guess HBO really is more than just TV. It certainly can cost more.

Not that many people would notice, but Microsoft's Live Search got a nice makeover recently. Here's the front page:

Nice.

The search results page(s) have similarly been streamlined. For good or bad, Microsoft has done away with the Windows Live common toolbar, which had previously been turning up on all their sites/services:

The Windows Live Blog explains:

Along with the release of our new search experience, we'd like to give some background into the design team and process that went into all the changes you see. You might not immediately think of design as being a critical part of a search product, but we think it is, and we have a growing team of designers, researchers, and developers who believe it, too. We have a growing, pro-design community here at Microsoft as well.

Simple and powerful. Human. Fast. These were our guiding principles for this latest version of Live Search.

Here's the nickel tour:

• Simple and powerful is about getting just enough, having information and tools when you need them, and revealing functionality without being overwhelmed.
• Being human reminds us that all good products speak to people and we should always design for them.
• Being fast has particular relevance to search where so much depends on rolling up the world of information to support people's countless other activities and passions.

OK, fair enough. I'm just curious whether any of this means anything. I mean, does anyone really care?

Related: Live Search Design: Too many cooks? (LiveSide)

Wired Blog shows their true colors:

Microsoft's Zune picked up a percentage point in the MP3 player market, bringing its share to a whopping four percent, with two million units sold. Microsoft has said from the start that it will stick with the Zune for as long as it takes for the player to gain traction, and it looks like that's starting to happen.

Apple's share of the MP3 player market share dropped a single point to 71 percent, according to the NPD Group's study, but its lead is still monstrous. The bigger loser between Q1 2007 and Q1 2008 was Creative, which saw its share halved to two percent.

This is more than kind of snarky (though I've also pointed out that the Zune is doing horribly). I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Wired/Wired Blog/Wired.com/whatever never condescendingly refers to the Mac's sub-four percent market share as "whopping." Just a guess.

Imagine this story reworked for the PC market:

Apple Eats Packard-Bell's Meager Lunch, Grabbing 4 Percent of PC Market

Apple's Mac picked up a percentage point in the PC player market, bringing its share to a whopping four percent, with two million units sold. Apple has said from the start that it will stick with the Mac for as long as it takes for the platform to gain traction, and it looks like that's starting to happen.

Microsoft's share of the desktop OS market share dropped a single point to 91 percent, according to the NPD Group's study, but its lead is still monstrous. The bigger loser between Q1 2007 and Q1 2008 was Packard-Bell, which saw its share halved to two percent.

Not so funny any more is it? Until you realize that Apple's share of the PC market--alas--is actually just a whopping 3.26 percent.

Put even more simply, the Zune--widely recognized as a complete failure after just 2 years on the market--is actually doing better in its market than the Mac--on the market for 24 years, or about 11 years since the return of Steve Jobs--is doing in its own market.

Hardy-har-har, eh Wired? Hardy-har-har indeed.

Looks like Google will finally launch its long-awaited social networking play tonight. How does it announce such a thing? By announcing ... that it will soon make an announcement:

Tonight at Campfire One at the Googleplex, Google will announce a preview release of Google Friend Connect, a service that helps Web site owners grow traffic by enabling any site on the web to easily provide social features for its visitors.

Web sites that are not social networks may still want to be social -- and now they can be, easily. With Google Friend Connect (see the site following this evening's Campfire One), any Web site owner can add a snippet of code to his or her site and get social features up and running immediately without programming -- picking and choosing from built-in functionality like user registration, invitations, members gallery, message posting, and reviews, as well as third-party applications built by the OpenSocial developer community.

Visitors to any site using Google Friend Connect will be able to see, invite, and interact with new friends, or, using secure authorization APIs, with existing friends from social sites on the web, including Facebook, Google Talk, hi5, orkut, Plaxo, and more.

Google Friend Connect has been developed to lower two barriers to the spread of social features across the web. First, many Web site owners want to add features that enable their visitors to do things with their friends, but the technology and resource hurdles have been too high. Second, people are tiring of needing to create new logins and profiles and recreate their friends lists wherever they go on the web. Google Friend Connect offers a solution to both these issues.

Unclear on how this is going to work? You're not alone. Fortunately, Google provides this image, which clears things up nicely:

OK, maybe not. :)

Readers of this site and listeners of the Windows Weekly podcast know that I advocate the use of User Account Control (UAC), Microsoft's unfairly maligned security technology. UAC does a lot more than just prompt you when you're about to make a potentially dangerous change to the system or run a program you downloaded from the Internet. It's also behind such related features as Internet Explorer 7's Protected Mode and Vista's virtualized file system and registry. So running UAC is, I think, a necessity for all Vista users.

That said, I do understand that some people find UAC's regular prompts to be somewhat annoying. Fortunately, you can leave UAC enabled but turn off the prompts. The following tip refers to Windows Vista users utilizing an administrator-class account (which I assume is most people) and should be utilized by power users and others who really know what they're doing.

Windows Vista Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate
Open Local Group Policy Editor (Start Menu Search, gpedit.msc), and navigate to Computer Configuration, Windows Settings, Security Settings, Local Policies, Security Options. In the right pane, scroll down to User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for administrators in Admin Approval Mode. Double-click this entry and use the drop-down box in the Local Security Setting to change the value from Prompt for consent to Elevate without prompting. Then click OK and chose the Local Group Policy Editor. (Users looking for even more stringent security controls can go in the opposite direction and change the value to Prompt for credentials. This will cause every UAC dialog that appears to require you to enter your password.)

Windows Vista Home Basic and Home Premium
Open the Registry Editor (Start Menu Search, regedit.exe) and navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, SOFTWARE, Microsoft, Windows, CurrentVersion, Policies, System. In the right pane, find the value named ConsentPromptBehaviorAdmin. Double-click it and change its value data from 2 to 0. Then click OK and close the Registry Editor.

Like other UAC changes, this change will trigger a Windows Security Center warning. To turn off this warning--not recommended unless you really know what you're doing--launch Security Center and click the link titled Change the way Security Center alerts me in the left side of the window. Then, choose Don't notify me and don't display the icon (not recommended) from the resulting dialog.

This tip is derived from Chapter 9 of Windows Vista Secrets 2nd Edition, coming soon from Wiley & Sons.