Can't Launch ArmA 2 OA/BattlEye: Windows Test-Signing Mode Not Supported
Can't Launch ArmA 2 OA/BattlEye: Windows Test-Signing Mode Not Supported
February 28, 2015 in
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Can't Launch ArmA 2 OA/BattlEye: Windows Test-Signing Mode Not Supported19.6. Samba Server Types and the smb.conf File
19.6. Samba Server Types and the smb.conf File
19.6. Samba Server Types and the smb.conf File
Samba configuration is straightforward. All modifications to Samba are done in the /etc/samba/smb.conf configuration file. Although the default smb.conf file is well documented,
it does not address complex topics such as LDAP, Active Directory, and the numerous domain controller implementations.
The following sections describe the different ways a Samba server can be configured. Keep in mind your needs and the changes required to the smb.conf file for a successful configuration.
19.6.1. Stand-alone Server
A stand-alone server can be a workgroup server or a member of a workgroup environment. A stand-alone server is not a domain controller and does not participate in a domain in any way. The following examples include several anonymous share-level
security configurations and one user-level security configuration. For more information on share-level and user-level security modes, refer to .
19.6.1.1. Anonymous Read-Only
The following smb.conf file shows a sample configuration needed to implement anonymous read-only file sharing. The security = share parameter makes a share anonymous. Note, security
levels for a single Samba server cannot be mixed. The security directive is a global Samba parameter located in the [global] configuration section of the
smb.conf file.
workgroup = DOCS
netbios name = DOCS_SRV
security = share
comment = Documentation Samba Server
path = /export
read only = Yes
guest only = Yes
19.6.1.2. Anonymous Read/Write
The following smb.conf file shows a sample configuration needed to implement anonymous read/write file sharing. To enable anonymous read/write file sharing, set the read only
directive to no. The force user and force group directives are also added to enforce the ownership of any newly placed files specified in the
Although having an anonymous read/write server is possible, it is not recommended. Any files placed in the share space, regardless of user, are assigned the user/group combination as specified by a generic user (force
user) and group (force group) in the smb.conf file.
workgroup = DOCS
netbios name = DOCS_SRV
security = share
comment = Data
path = /export
force user = docsbot
force group = users
read only = No
guest ok = Yes
19.6.1.3. Anonymous Print Server
The following smb.conf file shows a sample configuration needed to implement an anonymous print server. Setting browseable to no as shown does not
list the printer in Windows Network Neighborhood. Although hidden from browsing, configuring the printer explicitly is possible. By connecting to DOCS_SRV using NetBIOS, the
client can have access to the printer if the client is also part of the DOCS workgroup. It is also assumed that the client has the correct local printer driver installed, as the use client
driver directive is set to Yes. In this case, the Samba server has no responsibility for sharing printer drivers to the client.
workgroup = DOCS
netbios name = DOCS_SRV
security = share
printcap name = cups
disable spools= Yes
show add printer wizard = No
printing = cups
[printers]
comment = All Printers
path = /var/spool/samba
guest ok = Yes
printable = Yes
use client driver = Yes
browseable = Yes
19.6.1.4. Secure Read/Write File and Print Server
The following smb.conf file shows a sample configuration needed to implement a secure read/write print server. Setting the security directive to
user forces Samba to authenticate client connections. Notice the [homes] share does not have a force user or force
group directive as the [public] share does. The [homes] share uses the authenticated user details for any files created as opposed to the force
user and force group in [public].
workgroup = DOCS
netbios name = DOCS_SRV
security = user
printcap name = cups
disable spools = Yes
show add printer wizard = No
printing = cups
comment = Home Directories
valid users = %S
read only = No
browseable = No
comment = Data
path = /export
force user = docsbot
force group = users
guest ok = Yes
[printers]
comment = All Printers
path = /var/spool/samba
printer admin = john, ed, @admins
create mask = 0600
guest ok = Yes
printable = Yes
use client driver = Yes
browseable = Yes
19.6.2. Domain Member Server
A domain member, while similar to a stand-alone server, is logged into a domain controller (either Windows or Samba) and is subject to the domain's security rules. An example of a domain member server would be a departmental server running Samba that
has a machine account on the Primary Domain Controller (PDC). All of the department's clients still authenticate with the PDC, and desktop profiles and all network policy files are included. The difference is that the departmental server has the
ability to control printer and network shares.
19.6.2.1. Active Directory Domain Member Server
The following smb.conf file shows a sample configuration needed to implement an Active Directory domain member server. In this example, Samba authenticates users for services being run locally but is also a client of
the Active Directory. Ensure that your kerberos realm parameter is shown in all caps (for example realm = EXAMPLE.COM). Since Windows
requires Kerberos for Active
Directory authentication, the realm directive is required. If Active Directory and Kerberos are running on different servers, the password server directive may be required to help
the distinction.
realm = EXAMPLE.COM
security = ADS
encrypt passwords = yes
# Optional. Use only if Samba cannot determine the Kerberos server automatically.
password server = kerberos.example.com
In order to join a member server to an Active Directory domain, the following steps must be completed:
Configuration of the smb.conf file on the member server
Configuration of Kerberos, including the /etc/krb5.conf file, on the member server
Creation of the machine account on the Active Directory domain server
Association of the member server to the Active Directory domain
To create the machine account and join the Windows
Active Directory, Kerberos must first be initialized for the member server wishing to join the Active Directory domain. To create an administrative Kerberos ticket, type the following
command as root on the member server:
The kinit command is a Kerberos initialization script that references the Active Directory administrator account and Kerberos realm. Since Active Directory requires Kerberos tickets,
kinit obtains and caches a Kerberos ticket-granting ticket for client/server authentication. For more information on Kerberos, the /etc/krb5.conf file, and the
kinit command, refer to .
To join an Active Directory server (windows1.example.com), type the following command as root on the member server:
net ads join -S windows1.example.com -U administrator%password
Since the machine windows1 was automatically found in the corresponding Kerberos realm (the kinit command succeeded), the net command connects to
the Active Directory server using its required administrator account and password. This creates the appropriate machine account on the Active Directory and grants permissions to the Samba domain member server to join the domain.
Since security = ads and not security = user is used, a local password backend such as smbpasswd is not needed. Older clients that do not
support security = ads are authenticated as if security = domain had been set. This change does not affect functionality and allows local users not previously in the domain.
19.6.2.2. Windows NT4-based Domain Member Server
The following smb.conf file shows a sample configuration needed to implement a Windows NT4-based domain member server. Becoming a member server of an NT4-based domain is similar to connecting to an Active Directory.
The main difference is NT4-based domains do not use Kerberos in their authentication method, making the smb.conf file simpler. In this instance, the Samba member server functions as a pass through to the NT4-based domain server.
workgroup = DOCS
netbios name = DOCS_SRV
security = domain
comment = Home Directories
valid users = %S
read only = No
browseable = No
comment = Data
path = /export
force user = docsbot
force group = users
guest ok = Yes
Having Samba as a domain member server can be useful in many situations. There are times where the Samba server can have other uses besides file and printer sharing. It may be beneficial to make Samba a domain member server in instances where
Linux-only applications are required for use in the domain environment. Administrators appreciate keeping track of all machines in the domain, even if not Windows-based. In the event the Windows-based server hardware is deprecated, it is quite easy to
modify the smb.conf file to convert the server to a Samba-based PDC. If Windows NT-based servers are upgraded to Windows , the smb.conf file is easily modifiable to
incorporate the infrastructure change to Active Directory if needed.
After configuring the smb.conf file, join the domain before starting Samba by typing the following command as root:
net rpc join -U administrator%password
Note that the -S option, which specifies the domain server hostname, does not need to be stated in the net rpc join command. Samba uses the hostname specified by the
workgroup directive in the smb.conf file instead of it being stated explicitly.
19.6.3. Domain Controller
A domain controller in Windows NT is functionally similar to a Network Information Service (NIS) server in a Linux environment. Domain controllers and NIS servers both host user/group information databases as well as related services. Domain
controllers are mainly used for security, including the authentication of users accessing domain resources. The service that maintains the user/group database integrity is called the Security Account Manager (SAM). The SAM
database is stored differently between Windows and Linux Samba-based systems, therefore SAM replication cannot be achieved and platforms cannot be mixed in a PDC/BDC environment.
In a Samba environment, there can be only one PDC and zero or more BDCs.
Samba cannot exist in a mixed Samba/Windows domain controller environment (Samba cannot be a BDC of a Windows PDC or vice versa). Alternatively, Samba PDCs and BDCs can coexist.
19.6.3.1. Primary Domain Controller (PDC) using tdbsam
The simplest and most common implementation of a Samba PDC uses the tdbsam password database backend. Planned to replace the aging smbpasswd backend,
tdbsam has numerous improvements that are explained in more detail in . The passdb backend directive controls which backend is to be used
for the PDC.
workgroup = DOCS
netbios name = DOCS_SRV
passdb backend = tdbsam
security = user
add user script = /usr/sbin/useradd -m %u
delete user script = /usr/sbin/userdel -r %u
add group script = /usr/sbin/groupadd %g
delete group script = /usr/sbin/groupdel %g
add user to group script = /usr/sbin/usermod -G %g %u
add machine script = /usr/sbin/useradd -s /bin/false -d /dev/null
-g machines %u
# The following specifies the default logon script
# Per user logon scripts can be specified in the user
# account using pdbedit logon script = logon.bat
# This sets the default profile path.
# Set per user paths with pdbedit
logon drive = H:
domain logons = Yes
os level = 35
preferred master = Yes
domain master = Yes
comment = Home Directories
valid users = %S
read only = No
[netlogon]
comment = Network Logon Service
path = /var/lib/samba/netlogon/scripts
browseable = No
read only = No
# For profiles to work, create a user directory under the
# path shown.
mkdir -p /var/lib/samba/profiles/john
[Profiles]
comment = Roaming Profile Share
path = /var/lib/samba/profiles
read only = No
browseable = No
guest ok = Yes
profile acls = Yes
# Other resource shares ... ...
If you need more than one domain controller or have more than 250 users, do not use a tdbsam authentication backend. LDAP is recommended in these cases.
19.6.3.2. Primary Domain Controller (PDC) with Active Directory
Although it is possible for Samba to be a member of an Active Directory, it is not possible for Samba to operate as an Active Directory domain controller.
Note: This documentation is provided {and copyrighted} by Red Hat(R), Inc. and is released via the Open Publication License. The copyright holder has added the further requirement that Distribution of substantively modified versions of this document is prohibited without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. The CentOS project redistributes these original works (in their unmodified form) as a reference for CentOS-5 because CentOS-5 is built from publicly available, open source SRPMS. The documentation is unmodified to be compliant with upstream distribution policy. Neither CentOS-5 nor the CentOS Project are in any way affiliated with or sponsored by Red Hat(R), Inc.From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article has multiple issues. Please help
or discuss these issues on the . ()
This article's
does not adequately
key points of its contents. Please consider expanding the lead to
of all important aspects of the article. Please discuss this issue on the article's . (September 2016)
Windows Vista, an
released by
for consumers on January 30, 2007, has been criticised by reviewers and users. Due to issues with privacy, security, performance, driver support and ,
has been the subject of a number of negative assessments by various groups.
This section may contain misleading parts. Please help
according to any suggestions provided on the . (June 2014)
For security reasons,
versions of Windows Vista (and of
as well) allow only
to be installed in . Because code executing in kernel mode enjoys wide privileges on the system, the signing requirement aims to ensure that only code with known origin execute at this level. In order for a driver to be signed, a developer/software vendor will have to obtain an
certificate with which to sign the driver. Authenticode certificates can be obtained from certificate authorities trusted by Microsoft. Microsoft trusts the certificate authority to verify the applicant's identity before issuing a certificate. If a driver is not signed using a valid certificate, or if the driver was signed using a certificate which has been revoked by Microsoft or the certificate authority, Windows will refuse to load the driver.
The following criticisms/claims have been made regarding this requirement:
It disallows experimentation from the hobbyist community. The required Authenticode certificates for signing Vista drivers are expensive and out of reach for small developers, usually about $400–$500/year (from ).[]
Microsoft allows developers to temporarily or locally disable the signing requirement on systems they control (by hitting F8 during boot) or by signing the drivers with self-issued certificates or by running a kernel debugger.
At one time, a third-party tool called Atsiv existed that would allow any driver, unsigned or signed to be loaded. Atsiv worked by installing a signed "surrogate" driver which could be directed to load any other driver, thus circumventing the driver signing requirement. Since this was in violation of the driver signing requirement, Microsoft closed this workaround with hotfix KB932596, by revoking the certificate with which the surrogate driver was signed.
Security researchers
and Mark Dowd have developed a technique that bypasses many of the new memory-protection safeguards in Windows Vista, such as
(ASLR). The result of this is that any already existing buffer overflow bugs that, in Vista, were previously not exploitable due to such features, may now be exploitable. This is not in itself a vulnerability: as Sotirov notes, "What we presented is weaknesses in the protection mechanism. It still requires the system under attack to have a vulnerability. Without the presence of a vulnerability these techniques don’t really [accomplish] anything." The vulnerability Sotirov and Dowd used in their paper as an example was the 2007 animated cursor bug, -.
One security researcher (Dino Dai Zovi) claimed that this means that it is "completely game over" for Vista security though Sotirov refuted this, saying that "The articles that describe Vista security as 'broken' or 'done for,' with 'unfixable vulnerabilities' are completely inaccurate. One of the suggestions I saw in many of the discussions was that people should just use Windows XP. In fact, in XP a lot of those protections we’re bypassing [such as ASLR] don’t even exist."
Another common criticism concerns the integration of a new form of
(DRM) into the operating system, specifically the
(PVP), which involves technologies such as
(HDCP) and the
(ICT). These features were added to Vista due to licensing restrictions from the HD-DVD consortium and Blu-ray association. This will concern only the resolution of playback of protected content on
discs, but it has not been enabled as of 2012. A lack of a protected channel does not stop playback. Audio plays back as normal but high-definition video downsamples on Blu-ray and HD DVD to slightly-better-than-DVD quality video.
The Protected Video Path mandates that encryption must be used whenever content marked as "protected" will travel over a link where it might be intercepted. This is called a User-Accessible Bus (UAB). Additionally, all devices that come into contact with premium content (such as graphics cards) have to be certified by Microsoft. Before playback starts, all the devices involved are checked using a
(HFS) to verify if they are genuine and have not been tampered with. Devices are required to lower the resolution (from
to 960×540) of video signals outputs that are not protected by HDCP. Additionally, Microsoft maintains a global revocation list for devices that have been compromised. This list is distributed to PCs over the Internet using normal update mechanisms. The only effect on a revoked driver's functionality is that high-level protected c all other functionality, including low-definition playback, is retained.
, a computer security expert from the , New Zealand, has released a
in which he raises the following concerns against these mechanisms:
Adding encryption facilities to devices makes them more expensive, a cost that is passed on to the user.
If outputs are not deemed sufficiently protected by the media industry, then even very expensive equipment can be required to be switched off (for example, -based, high-end audio cards).
Some newer high-definition monitors are not HDCP-enabled, even though the manufacturer may claim otherwise.
The added complexity makes systems less reliable.
Since non-protected media are not subject to the new restrictions, users may be encouraged to remove the protection in order to view them without restrictions, thus defeating the content protection scheme's initial purpose.
Protection mechanisms, such as disabling or degrading outputs, may be triggered erroneously or maliciously, motivating denial-of-service attacks.
Revoking the driver of a device that is in wide use is such a drastic measure that Gutmann doubts Microsoft will ever actually do so. On the other hand, they may be forced to because of their legal obligations to the movie studios.
conducted a campaign called "" against Vista on these grounds.
, author of Windows Vista Inside Out, has published a three-part blog which rebuts many of Gutmann's claims.
Bott's criticisms can be summarized as follows:
Gutmann based his paper on outdated documentation from Microsoft and second-hand web sources.
Gutmann quotes selectively from the Microsoft specifications.
Gutmann did no experimental work with Vista to prove his theories. Rather, he makes mistaken assumptions and then speculates wildly on their implications.
Gutmann's paper, while presented as serious research, is really just an opinion piece.
Technology writer George Ou states that Gutmann's paper relies on unreliable sources and that Gutmann has never used Windows Vista to test his theories.
Gutmann has responded to both Bott and Ou in a further article, which states that the central thesis of Gutmann's article has not been refuted and the response of Bott is "disinformation".
Microsoft has published a blog entry with "Twenty Questions (and Answers)" on Windows Vista Content Protection which refutes some of Gutmann's arguments.
Paul Smith has written a response to Gutmann's paper in which he counters some of his arguments. Specifically, he says:
Microsoft is not to blame for these measures. The company has been forced to do this by the movie studios.
The Protected Video Path will not be used for quite a while. There is said to be an agreement between Microsoft and Sony that Blu-ray discs will not mandate protection until at least 2010, possibly even 2012.
Vista does not degrade or refuse to play any existing media, CDs or DVDs. The protected data paths are only activated if protected content requires it.
Users of other operating systems such as
will not have official access to this premium content.
Microsoft also noted that content protection mechanisms have existed in Windows as far back as .
According to Microsoft, "nearly all PCs on the market today will run Windows Vista" and most PCs sold after 2005 are capable of running Vista.
Some of the hardware that worked in Windows XP does not work, or works poorly in Vista, because no Vista-compatible drivers are available due to companies going out of business or their lack of interest in supporting old hardware.
published benchmarks in January 2007 that showed that Windows Vista executed typical applications more slowly than Windows XP with the same hardware configuration. A subset of the benchmarks used were provided by
(or SPEC), who later stated that such "results should not be compared to those generated while running Windows XP, even if testing is done with the same hardware configuration." SPEC acknowledges that an apple-to-apples comparison cannot be made in cases such as the one done by Tom's Hardware, calling such studies "invalid comparisons." However, the Tom's Hardware report conceded that the SPECviewperf tests "suffered heavily from the lack of support for the
graphics library under Windows Vista". For this reason the report recommended against replacing Windows XP with Vista until manufacturers made these drivers available.
The report also concluded in tests involving real world applications Vista performed considerably slower, noting "We are disappointed that CPU-intensive applications such as video transcoding with XviD (DVD to XviD MPEG4) or the MainConcept H.264 Encoder performed 18% to nearly 24% slower in our standard benchmark scenarios". Other commonly used applications, including
and , also performed worse under Vista.
Many low-to-mid-end machines that come with Windows Vista pre-installed suffer from exceptionally slow performance with the default Vista settings that come pre-loaded, and laptop manufacturers have offered to "downgrade" laptops to Windows XP—for a price. However, this "price" is unnecessary, as Microsoft allows users of Windows Vista and Windows 7 to freely "downgrade" their software by installing XP and then phoning a Microsoft representative for a new product key.
When first released in November 2006, Vista performed file operations such as copying and deletion more slowly than other operating systems. Large copies required when migrating from one computer to another seemed difficult or impossible without workarounds such as using the command line. This inability to efficiently perform basic file operations attracted strong criticism. After six months, Microsoft confirmed the existence of these problems by releasing a special performance and reliability update, which was later disseminated through Windows Update, and is included in Service Pack 1.
Nonetheless, one benchmark reported to show that, while improving performance compared to Vista's original release, Service Pack 1 does not increase the level of performance to that of Windows XP. However, that benchmark has been questioned by others within ZDNet. Ed Bott both questions his colleagues' methods and provides benchmarks that refute the results.
Early in Vista's lifecycle, many games showed a drop in frame rate compared to that experienced in Windows XP. These results were largely the consequence of Vista's immature drivers for , and higher system requirements for Vista itself. Some recent benchmarks seem to suggest that, as of mid-2008, Vista SP1 is now on par with Windows XP in terms of game performance. However, game developers' recommended memory requirements on Vista are still higher (usually double) than on XP.
Concerns were expressed that Windows Vista may contain . Speaking in 2007 at the University of Illinois, Microsoft distinguished engineer
said, "A lot of people think of Windows as this large, bloated operating system, and that's maybe a fair characterization, I have to admit." He went on to say that, "at its core, the kernel, and the components that make up the very core of the operating system, is actually pretty streamlined."
expressed skepticism about the claims of bloat, noting that almost every single operating system that Microsoft has ever sold had been criticized as "bloated" when even those now regarded as the exact opposite, such as .
Two consumers sued Microsoft in United States federal court alleging the "Windows Vista Capable" marketing campaign was a
tactic as some computers with Windows XP pre-installed could only run Vista Basic, sometimes not even running at a user-acceptable speed. In February 2008, a
judge granted the suit
status, permitting all purchasers in the class to participate in the case. Released documents in the case, as well as a
presentation in March 2007, discussed late changes to Windows Vista which permitted hardware to be certified that would require upgrading in order to use Vista, and that lack of compatible drivers forced hardware vendors to "limp out with issues" when Vista was launched. This was one of several Vista launch appraisals included in 158 pages of unsealed documents.
With the new features of Vista, criticism has surfaced concerning the use of battery power in laptops running Vista, which can drain the battery much more rapidly than , reducing battery life. With the
visual effects turned off, battery life is equal to or better than Windows XP systems. "With the release of a new operating system and its new features and higher requirements, higher power consumption is normal", as Richard Shim, an analyst with IDC noted, "when Windows XP came out, that was true, and when Windows 2000 came out, that was true."
According to Gartner, "Vista has been dogged by fears, in some cases proven, that many existing applications have to be re-written to operate on the new system." Cisco has been reported as saying, "Vista will solve a lot of problems, but for every action, there's a reaction, and unforeseen side-effects and mutations. Networks can become more brittle." According to PC World, "software compatibility issues, bug worries keep businesses from moving to Microsoft's new OS." Citing "concerns over cost and compatibility," the
prohibited workers from upgrading to Vista. The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center said that the rollout of Vista is significantly behind schedule because "several key programs still aren't compatible, including patient scheduling software."
As of July 2007, there were over 2,000 tested applications that were compatible with Vista. Microsoft has published a list of legacy applications that meet their "Works with Windows Vista" software standards as well as a list of applications that meet their more stringent "Certified for Windows Vista" standards. Microsoft has released the Application Compatibility Toolkit 5.0 application for migrating Vista-incompatible applications, while
solutions like ,
or those from
can also be used as a last resort to continue running Vista-incompatible applications under legacy versions of Windows.
Microsoft also provides an Upgrade Advisor Tool ( must be installed and an Internet connection is required) which can be used on existing XP systems to flag driver and application compatibility issues before upgrading to Vista.
Windows Vista was criticized for removing familiar Windows features and components. A quite exhaustive list of removed features covers the removals which were deemed unnecessary and unjustified.
Microsoft has also been criticized for removing some heavily discussed features such as
in May 2004,
in August 2004,
in August 2005 (though this was released separately from Vista prior to Vista's release, and is included in Vista's successor, ),
Support in May 2006,
in June 2006. The initial "three pillars" in Vista were all radically altered to reach a release date.
Microsoft's international pricing of Vista has been criticized by many as too expensive. The differences in pricing from one country to another vary significantly, especially considering that copies of Vista can be ordered and shipped worldwide from the United S this could save between 42 (EUR26) and $314 (EUR200). In many cases, the difference in price is significantly greater than was the case for Windows XP. In Malaysia, the pricing for Vista is at around RM799 ($244/EUR155). At the current exchange rate, United Kingdom consumers could be paying almost double their United States counterparts for the same software.
Microsoft has come under fire from British consumers about the price it is charging for Vista, the latest version of Windows.
British (and French) customers will pay double the US price. The upgrade from Windows XP to Vista Home Basic will cost ?100 (EUR126), while American users will pay only 51 ($100, EUR64).
Since the release of Windows Vista in January 2007 Microsoft has reduced the retail and upgrade price point of Vista. Originally Vista Ultimate full retail was priced at $399, and the upgrade at $259. These prices have since been reduced to $319 and $219 respectively.
Vista includes an enhanced set of anti-copying technologies, based on Windows XP's , called Software Protection Platform (SPP). In the initial release of Windows Vista (without Service Pack 1), SPP included a reduced-functionality mode, which the system enters when it detects that the user has "failed product activation" or that the copy of Vista is "identified as counterfeit or non-genuine". A Microsoft white paper described the technology as follows:
The default Web browser will be started and the user will be presented with an option to purchase a new product key. There is no start menu, no desktop icons, and the desktop background is changed to black. [...] After one hour, the system will log the user out without warning.
Some analysts questioned this behavior,[] especially given an imperfect false-positive record on behalf of SPP's predecessor, and given at least one temporary validation server outage which reportedly flagged many legitimate copies of Vista and XP as "Non-Genuine" when Windows Update would "check in" and fail the "validation" challenge.
Microsoft altered SPP significantly in . Instead of the reduced-functionality mode, installations of Vista left unactivated for 30 days present users with a
which prompts them to activate the operating system when they log in, change the desktop to a solid black colour every hour, and periodically use notification balloons to warn users about software counterfeiting. In addition, updates classified as optional are not available to unactivated copies of Vista. Microsoft maintains a technical bulletin providing further details on product activation for Vista.
Windows Vista Ultimate users can download exclusive . These extras have been released much more slowly than expected, with only four available as of August 2009, almost three years after Vista was released, which has angered some users who paid extra mainly for the promised add-ons. Barry Goffe, Director of Windows Vista Ultimate for Microsoft states that they were unexpectedly delayed on releasing several of the extras, but that "Microsoft plans to ship a collection of additional Windows Ultimate Extras that it is confident will delight its passionate Windows Vista Ultimate customers."
This section needs expansion. You can help by . (October 2015)
commented during a
keynote that many features on
originated on . Among these features were , , , , and . On December 18, 2006,
published a sarcastic video on YouTube trying to prove that Windows Vista did not copy macOS (named "Mac OS X" at the time).
This term was coined as a disparaging substitute for the proper name of the Vista operating system. Use of the term was popularized by its use on The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs, a technology and pop culture comedic blog where author
writes in the persona of then
CEO . This use is in reference to the failure of Vista to meet sales and customer satisfaction expectations. Lyons published and article in
using the term, and it was soon picked up by international media outlets: , , , , and .
. Heise Security UK. .
. Archived from
Marsden, Richard. .
van Eerde, Matthew. . Microsoft 2012.
Gregg Keizer (). . Computerworld. Archived from
. Searchsecurity.techtarget.com.
Marsh, Dave (). . . Archived from
on November 16, 2006.
Marsh, Dave (). . Windows Vista team blog. Microsoft. Archived from
(). . Also available:
Bott, Ed (). .
Ou, George (). .
Peter Gutmann (computer scientist). .
Nick White and Dave Marsh (). . Archived from
Smith, Paul (). .
Fisher, Ken (). .
Judge, Elizabeth (). . . London.
Spooner, John G.; Foley, Mary Jo (). . eweek.com.
(). . WindowsITPro.com.
. Apcmag.com.
. WinTuts.com.
Santo Domingo, Joel (). . tomshardware.com.
Williams, Ian (). . Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation.
Schmidt, Patrick (). . tomshardware.com.
. Engadget.
. Archived from
on August 18, 2007.
. Archived from
on September 2, 2007. (See 'Performance' section)
Kingsley-Hughes, Adrian (). .
Abazovic, Fuad (). . theinquirer.net. Archived from
Williams, Rob (). . techgage.com.
Cheatham, Miles (). . bjorn3d.com. Archived from
on September 27, 2007.
Cross, Jason (). . extremetech.com.
Wall, Jason (). . enthusiast.hardocp.com. Archived from
Durham, Joel (). . extremetech.com.
. pcgamerequirements.com. Archived from
on . (Minimum Requirements) Memory 512MB (Windows XP), 1GB (Windows Vista)
. crysis-online.com. Archived from
on . (Minimum Requirements) RAM: 1GB (1.5GB on Windows Vista)
. ign.com. RAM: 1 GB for XP / 2 GB for Vista
Ed Bott. .
McDougall, Paul. . informationweek.com.
– Dell Pointed Out Vista Mistakes, Internal Documents Show
Fried, Ina (). . news.zdnet.com. Archived from
Krazit, Tom (). . news.zdnet.com. Archived from
. zdnetasia.com.
. zdnetasia.com.
. IDG, quoted on PC World.
. Information week [www.informationweek.com].
. MS NBC [www.msnbc.com].
. . . p. 1. Archived from
on September 2, 2007.
. Archived from
. Archived from
March 17, 2013, at the .
. Techweb. .[]
. PC World. . Archived from
. IT Wire. .
. New Zealand Harald. .
Warne, Dan (). . apcmag.com. Archived from
. The Inquirer. .
. VNU Business Publications. February 2007. Archived from
Protalinski, Emil (June 25, 2009).
Computerworld. . Archived from
Microsoft PressPass. . Archived from
(). Microsoft PressPass. .
. . p. 15. Archived from
Bott, Ed (). . Ed Bott's Microsoft Report.
Ed Bott (). . Ed Bott's Microsoft Report.
. . Archived from
Phillips, Josh (). . windowsconnected.com. Archived from
Dunn, Josh (). . windowsconnected.com.
Long Zheng. .
. . Archived from
. 16 August 2006 – via YouTube.
. 18 December 2006 – via YouTube.
Posted by Steve (). . Fakesteve.net.
. Forbes.com. .
. Tv1.rtp.pt. .
. lanacion.com.
. Chosun.com. .
. Money.163.com.
: Hidden categories: