P
Pip R. Lagenta
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--
¤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.)
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--
¤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.)