Re: "limited" blocks games

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

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 08:23:57 -0400, "Frank" <bbunny@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Tonyo, if they had XP Pro they would have five user groups instead
of the two provided with XP Home. Not looking at the boxes it is
hard to tell what they really have.

Hi!

Well, you are not wrong, but you are not fully correct either. To see
where I was coming from, you need to do the following experiment: on a
XP Professional PC, go to the "Control Panel", click on "User
Accounts", then pick the task "create a new account", name the account
"Foo" or whatever, then click on "Next". At that point, you will be
given two, and *only* two, account types to choose from. This is what
I saw when I set up these accounts, "Computer administrator" or
"limited" and nothing else. Nothing at all.

Now, I have done a lot learning in the last 24 hours. If I set up
other accounts, I will now do it using the MMC, where the five user
groups are, in fact, available.

As to the original problem that I am still working on, there is an
additional wrinkle. There is no Internet access at the grouphome. No
cables, no DSL, no phone lines. My Internet access is at home, not
work. If the solution to the problem involves an update from a web
site, then the solution will have its own problems.

Tonyo UK wrote:
|| Frank, read Pip's post again. He said they recently "switched from
|| old Macs to PCs with XP Pro."
||
|| "Frank" wrote:
||
||| Pip R. Lagenta wrote:
||||| Hi!
|||||
||||| At the grouphome for teenage boys, where I work, we recently
||||| switched from old Macs to new PCs with XP Pro. It fell to me to
||||| set up the PCs. I password protected the "STAFF" user which has
||||| administrator rights, and "limited" the "RESIDENT" user that has
||||| no password required. The idea being that some control over the
||||| use of the computer should be held by staff. We want the
||||| residents to be able to *use* the computer, but *not* to load
||||| every program the residents find onto it.
|||||
||||| I was very surprised to find how *few* choices were available in
||||| configuring the privileges on the computer. The choices were:
||||| "full rights", "limited", and "Guest". Well, the "RESIDENT" user
||||| should not have the "full right" that an administrator has, but
||||| they should still be able to *use* the computer. And that is the
||||| rub. Not only can the "limited" user not load games (which is
||||| good), they can't *play* games that have been loaded by staff
||||| (which is bad). So, "limited" renders XP useless. Staff has
||||| been passing out the password to the full rights "STAFF" user to
||||| the residents so that the kids can actually use the damn thing.
||||| This renders the whole point of passwords meaningless.
|||||
||||| So, here is the question: Is there a way to set up the
||||| privileges so that a limited user can be blocked from loading any
||||| damn thing, but still allow the "limited" user to use programs
||||| that have been loaded?
|||||
||||| The game in question is Diablo II. The "limited" user is blocked
||||| from accessing the data on the CD/DVD drive that is required for
||||| game play. The icon for the game is on the desktop.
|||||
||||| Thank you
|||
||| Penney wise, Pound foolish.
||| This is really the fault of the software writers.
||| You should have stayed with the Macs or at least loaded
||| XP Professional, which could be set up more securely.


--
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,
Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta
ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°

-- Pip R. Lagenta
President for Life
International Organization Of People Named Pip R. Lagenta
(If your name is Pip R. Lagenta, ask about our dues!)
<http://home.comcast.net/~galentripp/pip.html>
(For Email: I'm at home, not work.)
.

Relevant Pages