Hello, this is Just a Friendly Reminder: Builds 5308 CTP and 5342 are not
beta 2. They are Interim Builds and are not to be considered Official Beta
Quality. Beta 2 has been Delayed until Winds day, May 24th, 2006 according
to Paul (you know who) from http://www.winsupersite.com.

"Thomas Kluge" <T.Kluge@t-systems.com> wrote in message
news:%23TM9850TGHA.5884@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I dicovered a strange behavior of the CreateProcess() implementation under
>Vista Beta 2. I tried to run a Process with
>requestedExecutionLevel="requireAdministrator" from within a process with
>level="asInvoker".
>
> What I did expect is an Admin-Credential Box on standard users accounts
> (thats the case) and a an admin confirmation box on admin accounts (thats
> not the case). In the last case the execution fails with
> GetLastError()==740 which is: "The requested operation requires
> elevation". It's the same error which would occur if the user would press
> a "No". So what is the initiator of error 740? If I'm using the function
> ShellExecute() instead of CreateProcess the call leads to the expected
> confirmation box.
>
> Next one: If the parent process execution level is "asInvoker", a system
> message states compatibility problems and taken settings. The next time, I
> run the application, the error 740 is disappeared. If the parent process
> execution level is not given per manifest <requestedPrivileges> the
> described error 740 is permanent.
>
> note: both applications are standard VS6.0 MFC-applications.
> I did not change the standard lua settings :
> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
> administrators Prompt for consent
> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for standard
> users Prompt for credentials
>
>
> regards,
> Thomas Kluge
> T-Systems Enterprise Services GmbH
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

But that date isn't accurate and more than likely wrong. Paul Thurrott
doesn't work for Microsoft, never has and will unlikely never will. Think of
all the times where Paul has got a date wrong...

Too many times for me to remember.

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--
"Kevin John Panzke" <kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9D01E8F8-5599-42C3-9026-136677CA12F9@microsoft.com...
> Hello, this is Just a Friendly Reminder: Builds 5308 CTP and 5342 are not
> beta 2. They are Interim Builds and are not to be considered Official
> Beta Quality. Beta 2 has been Delayed until Winds day, May 24th, 2006
> according to Paul (you know who) from http://www.winsupersite.com.
>
> "Thomas Kluge" <T.Kluge@t-systems.com> wrote in message
> news:%23TM9850TGHA.5884@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>I dicovered a strange behavior of the CreateProcess() implementation under
>>Vista Beta 2. I tried to run a Process with
>>requestedExecutionLevel="requireAdministrator" from within a process with
>>level="asInvoker".
>>
>> What I did expect is an Admin-Credential Box on standard users accounts
>> (thats the case) and a an admin confirmation box on admin accounts (thats
>> not the case). In the last case the execution fails with
>> GetLastError()==740 which is: "The requested operation requires
>> elevation". It's the same error which would occur if the user would press
>> a "No". So what is the initiator of error 740? If I'm using the function
>> ShellExecute() instead of CreateProcess the call leads to the expected
>> confirmation box.
>>
>> Next one: If the parent process execution level is "asInvoker", a system
>> message states compatibility problems and taken settings. The next time,
>> I run the application, the error 740 is disappeared. If the parent
>> process execution level is not given per manifest <requestedPrivileges>
>> the described error 740 is permanent.
>>
>> note: both applications are standard VS6.0 MFC-applications.
>> I did not change the standard lua settings :
>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
>> administrators Prompt for consent
>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for standard
>> users Prompt for credentials
>>
>>
>> regards,
>> Thomas Kluge
>> T-Systems Enterprise Services GmbH
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Actually, it is one aspect of BETA 2, which is known as the Enterprise
Community Technology Preview. BETA 2 will be known as the Consumer
Technology Preview. Also, Jim Allchin said in a CRN interview, we will be
testing CTPs until RC1, so that means BETA 2 will be disguised by a CTP.
--
--
Andre
Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

"Kevin John Panzke" <kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9D01E8F8-5599-42C3-9026-136677CA12F9@microsoft.com...
> Hello, this is Just a Friendly Reminder: Builds 5308 CTP and 5342 are not
> beta 2. They are Interim Builds and are not to be considered Official
> Beta Quality. Beta 2 has been Delayed until Winds day, May 24th, 2006
> according to Paul (you know who) from http://www.winsupersite.com.
>
> "Thomas Kluge" <T.Kluge@t-systems.com> wrote in message
> news:%23TM9850TGHA.5884@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>I dicovered a strange behavior of the CreateProcess() implementation under
>>Vista Beta 2. I tried to run a Process with
>>requestedExecutionLevel="requireAdministrator" from within a process with
>>level="asInvoker".
>>
>> What I did expect is an Admin-Credential Box on standard users accounts
>> (thats the case) and a an admin confirmation box on admin accounts (thats
>> not the case). In the last case the execution fails with
>> GetLastError()==740 which is: "The requested operation requires
>> elevation". It's the same error which would occur if the user would press
>> a "No". So what is the initiator of error 740? If I'm using the function
>> ShellExecute() instead of CreateProcess the call leads to the expected
>> confirmation box.
>>
>> Next one: If the parent process execution level is "asInvoker", a system
>> message states compatibility problems and taken settings. The next time,
>> I run the application, the error 740 is disappeared. If the parent
>> process execution level is not given per manifest <requestedPrivileges>
>> the described error 740 is permanent.
>>
>> note: both applications are standard VS6.0 MFC-applications.
>> I did not change the standard lua settings :
>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
>> administrators Prompt for consent
>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for standard
>> users Prompt for credentials
>>
>>
>> regards,
>> Thomas Kluge
>> T-Systems Enterprise Services GmbH
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Ahh... so no Beta 2 build then? CTP's all the way?

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--
"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Kjv7j6WGHA.1192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Actually, it is one aspect of BETA 2, which is known as the Enterprise
> Community Technology Preview. BETA 2 will be known as the Consumer
> Technology Preview. Also, Jim Allchin said in a CRN interview, we will be
> testing CTPs until RC1, so that means BETA 2 will be disguised by a CTP.
> --
> --
> Andre
> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
>
> "Kevin John Panzke" <kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9D01E8F8-5599-42C3-9026-136677CA12F9@microsoft.com...
>> Hello, this is Just a Friendly Reminder: Builds 5308 CTP and 5342 are
>> not beta 2. They are Interim Builds and are not to be considered
>> Official Beta Quality. Beta 2 has been Delayed until Winds day, May
>> 24th, 2006 according to Paul (you know who) from
>> http://www.winsupersite.com.
>>
>> "Thomas Kluge" <T.Kluge@t-systems.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23TM9850TGHA.5884@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>I dicovered a strange behavior of the CreateProcess() implementation
>>>under Vista Beta 2. I tried to run a Process with
>>>requestedExecutionLevel="requireAdministrator" from within a process with
>>>level="asInvoker".
>>>
>>> What I did expect is an Admin-Credential Box on standard users accounts
>>> (thats the case) and a an admin confirmation box on admin accounts
>>> (thats not the case). In the last case the execution fails with
>>> GetLastError()==740 which is: "The requested operation requires
>>> elevation". It's the same error which would occur if the user would
>>> press a "No". So what is the initiator of error 740? If I'm using the
>>> function ShellExecute() instead of CreateProcess the call leads to the
>>> expected confirmation box.
>>>
>>> Next one: If the parent process execution level is "asInvoker", a system
>>> message states compatibility problems and taken settings. The next time,
>>> I run the application, the error 740 is disappeared. If the parent
>>> process execution level is not given per manifest <requestedPrivileges>
>>> the described error 740 is permanent.
>>>
>>> note: both applications are standard VS6.0 MFC-applications.
>>> I did not change the standard lua settings :
>>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
>>> administrators Prompt for consent
>>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for standard
>>> users Prompt for credentials
>>>
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Thomas Kluge
>>> T-Systems Enterprise Services GmbH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

No designated build for BETA 2, just a CTP.
--
--
Andre
Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

"Zack Whittaker" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:OPuhyA8WGHA.4768@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Ahh... so no Beta 2 build then? CTP's all the way?
>
> --
> Zack Whittaker
> » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
> » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
> » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
> not
> of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
> that up!
>
> --: Original message follows :--
> "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Kjv7j6WGHA.1192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Actually, it is one aspect of BETA 2, which is known as the Enterprise
>> Community Technology Preview. BETA 2 will be known as the Consumer
>> Technology Preview. Also, Jim Allchin said in a CRN interview, we will be
>> testing CTPs until RC1, so that means BETA 2 will be disguised by a CTP.
>> --
>> --
>> Andre
>> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
>> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
>> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
>> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
>>
>> "Kevin John Panzke" <kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9D01E8F8-5599-42C3-9026-136677CA12F9@microsoft.com...
>>> Hello, this is Just a Friendly Reminder: Builds 5308 CTP and 5342 are
>>> not beta 2. They are Interim Builds and are not to be considered
>>> Official Beta Quality. Beta 2 has been Delayed until Winds day, May
>>> 24th, 2006 according to Paul (you know who) from
>>> http://www.winsupersite.com.
>>>
>>> "Thomas Kluge" <T.Kluge@t-systems.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23TM9850TGHA.5884@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>I dicovered a strange behavior of the CreateProcess() implementation
>>>>under Vista Beta 2. I tried to run a Process with
>>>>requestedExecutionLevel="requireAdministrator" from within a process
>>>>with level="asInvoker".
>>>>
>>>> What I did expect is an Admin-Credential Box on standard users accounts
>>>> (thats the case) and a an admin confirmation box on admin accounts
>>>> (thats not the case). In the last case the execution fails with
>>>> GetLastError()==740 which is: "The requested operation requires
>>>> elevation". It's the same error which would occur if the user would
>>>> press a "No". So what is the initiator of error 740? If I'm using the
>>>> function ShellExecute() instead of CreateProcess the call leads to the
>>>> expected confirmation box.
>>>>
>>>> Next one: If the parent process execution level is "asInvoker", a
>>>> system message states compatibility problems and taken settings. The
>>>> next time, I run the application, the error 740 is disappeared. If the
>>>> parent process execution level is not given per manifest
>>>> <requestedPrivileges> the described error 740 is permanent.
>>>>
>>>> note: both applications are standard VS6.0 MFC-applications.
>>>> I did not change the standard lua settings :
>>>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
>>>> administrators Prompt for consent
>>>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for standard
>>>> users Prompt for credentials
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> Thomas Kluge
>>>> T-Systems Enterprise Services GmbH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Nice )

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--
"Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23$KN5kLXGHA.3848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> No designated build for BETA 2, just a CTP.
> --
> --
> Andre
> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
>
> "Zack Whittaker" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:OPuhyA8WGHA.4768@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Ahh... so no Beta 2 build then? CTP's all the way?
>>
>> --
>> Zack Whittaker
>> » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
>> » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
>> » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
>> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
>> not
>> of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
>> that up!
>>
>> --: Original message follows :--
>> "Andre Da Costa [Extended64]" <andred25@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Kjv7j6WGHA.1192@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Actually, it is one aspect of BETA 2, which is known as the Enterprise
>>> Community Technology Preview. BETA 2 will be known as the Consumer
>>> Technology Preview. Also, Jim Allchin said in a CRN interview, we will
>>> be testing CTPs until RC1, so that means BETA 2 will be disguised by a
>>> CTP.
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Andre
>>> Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
>>> Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
>>> Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
>>> http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
>>>
>>> "Kevin John Panzke" <kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9D01E8F8-5599-42C3-9026-136677CA12F9@microsoft.com...
>>>> Hello, this is Just a Friendly Reminder: Builds 5308 CTP and 5342 are
>>>> not beta 2. They are Interim Builds and are not to be considered
>>>> Official Beta Quality. Beta 2 has been Delayed until Winds day, May
>>>> 24th, 2006 according to Paul (you know who) from
>>>> http://www.winsupersite.com.
>>>>
>>>> "Thomas Kluge" <T.Kluge@t-systems.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23TM9850TGHA.5884@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>>I dicovered a strange behavior of the CreateProcess() implementation
>>>>>under Vista Beta 2. I tried to run a Process with
>>>>>requestedExecutionLevel="requireAdministrator" from within a process
>>>>>with level="asInvoker".
>>>>>
>>>>> What I did expect is an Admin-Credential Box on standard users
>>>>> accounts (thats the case) and a an admin confirmation box on admin
>>>>> accounts (thats not the case). In the last case the execution fails
>>>>> with GetLastError()==740 which is: "The requested operation requires
>>>>> elevation". It's the same error which would occur if the user would
>>>>> press a "No". So what is the initiator of error 740? If I'm using the
>>>>> function ShellExecute() instead of CreateProcess the call leads to the
>>>>> expected confirmation box.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next one: If the parent process execution level is "asInvoker", a
>>>>> system message states compatibility problems and taken settings. The
>>>>> next time, I run the application, the error 740 is disappeared. If the
>>>>> parent process execution level is not given per manifest
>>>>> <requestedPrivileges> the described error 740 is permanent.
>>>>>
>>>>> note: both applications are standard VS6.0 MFC-applications.
>>>>> I did not change the standard lua settings :
>>>>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
>>>>> administrators Prompt for consent
>>>>> User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for
>>>>> standard users Prompt for credentials
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Thomas Kluge
>>>>> T-Systems Enterprise Services GmbH
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>