Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates
From: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\) (user_at_#notme.com)
Date: 08/13/04
- Next message: Rock: "Re: start up problem"
- Previous message: Steve Shattuck: "Re: Pro and Home. Mine's Pro."
- In reply to: KV: "Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates"
- Next in thread: KV: "Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates"
- Reply: KV: "Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:26:43 -0700
No we are not!
This is peer to peer support and if you scan these newsgroups you'll note
that most of the users posting to them are either novices or intermediate
users and frankly, even the most advanced should stay out of the registry.
99% of the people posting to these groups don't even back up regularly and
anyone who doesn't backup NEVER belongs in the registry.
Never make such assumptions in public newsgroups.
There are a lot of very knowledgeable people here but most of the users
asking questions and just lurking should not be making the kinds of changes
in the registry that you described.
-- Michael Solomon MS-MVP Windows Shell/User Backup is a PC User's Best Friend DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/ "KV" <nainlbb@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:10ho6tvg76qbna2@corp.supernews.com... > Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote: >> It would have helped had you stated given these parameters in your >> initial post as there are simpler and less hazardous ways of disabling >> the firewall in XP than hacking the registry. > > I understand the need for clarity; however, my original post was not about > the firewall. My discussion of the firewall was simply an FYI, nothing > more. > > But... now that you've brought it up, why is editing the registry such a > bad thing? Sure its hazardous, but we're all professionals here, aren't > we? > > IMHO, Microsoft is trying so hard to push people into upgrading that its > becoming difficult to apply their patches and updates. Microsoft is > beginning to assume that users have the latest tools at their disposal. In > my case, "hacking" the registry is the only way I've found to achieve the > desired result. > > I'd venture to say that many enterprise users will simply disable the > firewall because it doesn't make sense in a corporate environment like we > have. Sure, laptops are the exception, but none of my workstations really > need the extra protection. If I add a new program, like an antivirus > program, to my workstations I don't want to fool with opening new ports on > my workstations. If I was running AD it would be different, because I > could use a group policy. But I'm not running AD, and there are many > others who still aren't. There are many like me who still run a large > number of NT4 machines. > > My mention of the firewall was simply to help enterprise users easily > disable the firewall if they wish. > >> Single desktop systems or even Non-Enterprise networked systems, small >> home networks for example, can simply and easily turn off the XP Firewall >> either in the Security Center in XP SP2, or by right clicking their >> connection in Network Connections in Control panel, selecting properties, >> going to the Advanced tab and making sure the "Protect my computer and >> network...." options is not selected. > > I think I understand where you are coming from. You don't want to see > home users and non-IT people mess up their computers. That's fine by me. > > Given that I'm an enterprise user, who isn't running AD, the registry is > my only alternative to walking around to all 500 workstations. At > least... that's what I think. Am I wrong? > > -Kevin
- Next message: Rock: "Re: start up problem"
- Previous message: Steve Shattuck: "Re: Pro and Home. Mine's Pro."
- In reply to: KV: "Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates"
- Next in thread: KV: "Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates"
- Reply: KV: "Re: XP SP2 - Automatic Updates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
