NPVR, GB-PVR and UAC

[zehd]

Well I'm trying NPVR... so far so good...

Trying the dual boot idea... was good then something went wrong not a huge biggy but I'd love it if someone could point out what happened...

I had GB-PVR 1.4.7 running well as a client (sometimes standalone for development) on my Windows 7 Laptop. UAC is set to default, and everytime I tried to open the GB-PVR config program, I was asked if it was alright to allow...

But The PVRX2.exe never asked me for admin access.... that was great because I could launch 1.4.7 with my remote from accorss the room.... great untill I installed NPVR

Now PVRX2 is asking for admin elevation

I'm not sure what NPVR did... I';m pretty sure it's not much... I have both of the services off, reboot, and then start the GB_PVR Recording service... still no dice... I'm not sure how NPVR changed GB-PVR... from what I read... it keeps to itself quite nicely...

Any ideas?

[pcostanza]

Since Vista, I've turned UAC off. Since I'm the only one that touches my PC's, I don't have to worry about someone messing it up (except me).
I have W7 firewall set to allow config, NextPVR, NRecord, NTray & PVRX2 access. You might check to make sure you've got firewall permissions set.

[7ore]

I have come to the conclusion that UAC is only an inconvenience for the user. This as my son clicked on a link he shouldn't have (no extra question if e wanted to let the thing in) and I had three hours hell to remove it. And one of the first thing I noticed were that UAC protected the thing I wanted to get rid of...
Just to remove the links that it had inserted to ...etc\hosts took an hour...

Since then I have removed UAC from all my computers.

[BigMoose]

I completely agree that it is just an inconvenience to me (it might well be useful in some situations, but none I've found!) so I also turn it off for all my personal machines. The PVR box is a PVR and only that. People only access it via the remote other than me and if I spanner it up that's my problem. UAC for me was a right pain in the backside on that box so served no purpose thus off it went. I take the same approach on my laptop as all it does is annoy me and provide no benefit.

[mvallevand]

People that don't like UAC are lazy or just unwilling to learn new things. Most programs are UAC aware not GBPVR was only half way there and NPVR (patches aside) is much better.

7ore gives a good example of how UAC could have worked, his son likely would have been prompted to accept UAC and the question is if the computer is important why is he running in an account where he can accept UAC?

zehd check your shortcut that start PVRx2 I'd suspect you simply told it to run as administrator.

Martin

[7ore]

7ore gives a good example of how UAC could have worked, his son likely would have been prompted to accept UAC and the question is if the computer is important why is he running in an account where he can accept UAC?
Martin

Thats, the thing, He didn't get any UAC warning and would not have continued if he had seen it. Of this I am sure.

So I see it as false safety.

[johnsonx42]

UAC is a nice idea, but it's poorly implemented by Microsoft and poorly supported by software vendors. It's far more headache than it's worth. While there are ways to make it work, I'm not interested in spending half of my day fighting with UAC. One of the worst aspects of it is that the problems it causes often appear completely unrelated to UAC, and you can spend hours tearing your hair out until you finally say "hmmm... I wonder if I just turn off UAC?". And the fight with UAC isn't just a one-time thing and you're done - every new application, every configuration change can bring a new batch of UAC related problems.

[imilne]

Yep, all they had to do was admit defeat and copy the Unix style of user account security (even though it would have broken a lot of existing software) but that's an option they were never going to pick.

[InVermont]

Yep, all they had to do was admit defeat and copy the Unix style of user account security (even though it would have broken a lot of existing software) but that's an option they were never going to pick.

How would that have helped at all? If people thing UAC is a pain, Unix style security would be a complete nightmare they would turn off. Or if they couldn't, they would never upgrade.
UAC makes some odd compromises, but has saved enough machines that I deal with (for regular users) to be more than worth while.
For GB-PVR, I simply set the "c:\program files\...\gbpvr" folder security settings to allow full access for everyone.
And if every new program install is causing a host of UAC problems, you are using really crappy software. Use stuff that is better written.

[BigMoose]

People that don't like UAC are lazy or just unwilling to learn new things

I was going to say that is a completely unfair comment, but on reflection I am guilty of both However relating to UAC, it's about fit for purpose. My PVR box does nothing else, no one has access to it other than me, so what value does UAC bring? It complicates my role for maintaining the system without any benefit to me the administrator or the purpose the machine was bought to fulfill. I fully appreciate in other situations it does have some benefit and wouldn't dream of turning off on my work laptop and leave the poor admins extra work when I screw it up.