Program virtualization vs. installer virtualization

Since programs which insist on writing user data to the programs'
directories in C:\Program Files can be run on Vista using directory
virtualization, so that a program P run as user U sees a virtual C:\Program
Files\P which is actually a union of the real C:\Program Files\P and
C:\Users\U\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files\P, and the program's
writes are stored to the latter, why can't the program's installer also be
virtualized in the same way, so that non-admin users can install their own
private programs and the installers will think that they're running as
administrator even though they're really not?
Of course system-level utility programs, drivers, etc couldn't be
virtualized using this simple mechanism, but installers which must currently
run as administrator for no other reason than to be able to write to
C:\Program Files (and corresponding registry locations, and the start menu,
etc) could be virtualized using the current filesystem and registry
virtualization mechanisms.

This virtual stuff.....when saving Office document writer print jobs I have
been saving them to DESKTOP but Vista is saving them to a virtualised store
under Temporary internet files which is then not accessible even though I am
an administrator. I have from the command prompt tried to copy/move these
files but cannot.

Why is Vista behaving this way and Desktop is not Desktop for my user
account. I guess I am missing something fundamental here can you shed any
light for me?

Thanks

Chris

<DIV>&quot;Roof Fiddler&quot; &lt;fiddler@roof.com&gt; wrote in message
news:eY3XwgQ3GHA.4924@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>> Since programs which
insist on writing user data to the programs'
> directories in C:\Program Files can be run on Vista using directory
> virtualization, so that a program P run as user U sees a virtual
> C:\Program Files\P which is actually a union of the real C:\Program
> Files\P and C:\Users\U\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\Program Files\P, and the
> program's writes are stored to the latter, why can't the program's
> installer also be virtualized in the same way, so that non-admin users can
> install their own private programs and the installers will think that
> they're running as administrator even though they're really not?
> Of course system-level utility programs, drivers, etc couldn't be
> virtualized using this simple mechanism, but installers which must
> currently run as administrator for no other reason than to be able to
> write to C:\Program Files (and corresponding registry locations, and the
> start menu, etc) could be virtualized using the current filesystem and
> registry virtualization mechanisms.
>