Re: Same question, still no answer!!!

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: David Candy (david_at_mvps.org)
Date: 03/29/04 

Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 05:21:04 +1000

Because it designed to work with a domain server. It has some basic facilities if there is no server available.

You can't apply policy, only security, to security groups. Without a domain server you can only apply policy to everyone. You can never apply policy to a user only to organisation units in a domain..

There are ways of forcing more granular application. But you don't say if it's a domain or not.

This is why network admins get paid a lot.

Actually you don't say anything at all just generalities. It is not possible to answer. Employ someone or state exactly what you want. 

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.g2mil.com/Dec2003.htm
"pjp" <pjp_is_located_at_@_hotmail_._com> wrote in message news:edZLG4bFEHA.1376@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Please, some one tell me how to "control" a specific individual user rather
> than the whole group?
> 
> Group polocies obviously control every user in that group and yet
> although I've "think" I've found how to create new groups it appears
> actually specifiying policy for that group is "problamatic". Additionally,
> it seems absurd one would have to basuically create a new group to place
> every single login user into their own group so that the policies for that
> group would only be applied to only that user.
> 
> Is it really "all of nothing" for everyone in that group and that's it!!!
> 
> If you can't tell me how, can someone at least answer if it's even possible
> using "right out of the box" tools. Even if it has to be direct registry
> editing acceptable. 3rd party tools seems an unacceptable solution but
> obviously if they exist (which Doug's tool seems to suggest) then the
> documentation at least for doing what I want must exists somewhere. The
> question then becomes where?
> 
> It's a pretty simple idea, given two user logins ...
> 
> I want user1 to be able to do this1, this2, this3 and not this4
> 
> where-as
> 
> I want user2 to be able to do this1, not this2, not this3 but allow this4.
> 
> Supposedly a modern, multi-tasking, multi-user operating system (XP Pro at
> least is touted as such) and it seems damn near impossible to get that done
> "out of the box" which has me completely confused about what the hell is
> going on?
> 
> 
>
Quantcast