• PhiAU@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Of the many grievous faults of Windows to pick on, file system permissions like this are not one.

    As admin you have permission to change ownership and override permissions. And a relic copy of the OS folder is going to have some of the most restrictive permissions possible.

    I would expect similar behaviour on any modern OS.

    • Psythik@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      OP is probably young and doesn’t remember the pre-Vista days, when viruses ran rampant because the concept of admin rights didn’t exist yet.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, it existed. It was just much more difficult to use and required an understanding of what you’re doing to set it up first.

        The UAC version from Vista+ is implemented by default and far easier to run/manage for the typical end user. Most users find it hella annoying, but it’s easier than the alternative, since they’ve never used the alternative, they don’t know that.

        Basically, you’d have to create an admin account, and a user account, then intentionally not use the admin account except for admin things… I did this, and it kept me out of trouble in a couple of close calls. Windows power users trend up like to endorse or brag(?) About how often they reinstall, and bluntly, I almost never reinstall my PC. I just don’t bog it down with garbage constantly. :)

    • gornius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Actually ACL on Windows is very bad. Recursively changing owner of directory can take minutes, same operation on any UNIX-like OS takes seconds.