How to share ATI AIW settings with multiple users?

[Wayne]

Yes you are required to login, if you want to ...

You said "if". Therefore, I'm right and you're wrong. You are not
"required" to log on.

I'll bet you can't even come up with one example of why you would power up
without logging on.

can you?

 

[Wayne]

YOU Did not push a button while at the login

screen and tell it to run right then and there.....

oh brother. You really are a little boy aren't you?

 

[Wayne]

And guess what Tim.... all that stuff happened without requiring anyone to
logon. Get it?

Nobody had to logon for that to happen? Listen little boy, you're wasting
my time.

I'm right and you're wrong. Nobody is "required" to log on.

 

[JAD]

why don't you two make up a list of things that can be done without fully logging in and things that require logging in, then argue
each and everyone....your both nickpicking words and meanings.....BESIDES THIS IS NOT alt -OS -windows .XP! What I'm not getting
anyway is why not just set up the damn MMC for each user, instead of trying to set up one profile to fit all users.

 

[Wayne]

What I'm not getting anyway is why not just

set up the damn MMC for each user, instead
of trying to set up one profile to fit all users.

THAT! is a productive question. Thank you.

There are several problems with the way MMC is set up in each profile.
First, it creates a new time-shift file for each user. Each one is based on
maintaining X amount of free disk space. In other words, one of them can be
a reasonable size and all other users are left without enough disk space to
do useful time-delay viewing. This means you need to logon with
administrator rights to access all profiles, search for *.vcr, and delete
the existing time-delay files to make the feature useful again for other
users.

Otherwise, with only three users, you'll be using 30 to 150GB when only 10
to 50GB could do the same job. With more users, the situation is even
worse.

But even if the sharing problem were solved, all this disk space gets used
on the system partition! So clearly, the goal is to allow us to point the
time-shift file to the one common place where we want all users to use it,
and share it.

Another problem with the way MMC is set up in each profile is that the
recording schedule is maintained for each user. That means if you schedule
a recording, it won't work if you have multiple users. That's because the
"Best Practice" is for each user to log off after using the computer, or let
the server force a log-off after a period of inactivity.

But even if nobody logs off, it won't work because someone else will have
logged on, and be using the computer in the evening, when most of the shows
you want to record are on. With three users, there's only a 33% chance that
the right user will be logged on at the right time. With more users, or
using the log-off best practice, the situation becomes even worse.

There are other problems that seem minor by comparison. For example, if you
prefer a particular "default" recording quality that fits your disk size, it
will surely get set differently in each of the profiles that matter.

The ideal situation would be for the MMC services to be run in the
background by the system, and for all users to share the same MMC settings.
Any user would be free to over-ride defaults when scheduling a recording.
And, yes, any user could potentially mess with another user's settings just
as they could today with printers and other resources that are shared.

In this way, the MMC could record a program while nobody is logged on.
After all, we all know that nobody is "required" to logon. Don't we?

why don't you two make up a list of things that can be done without fully

logging in and things that require logging in, then argue

each and everyone....your both nickpicking words and meanings.....BESIDES

THIS IS NOT alt -OS -windows .XP! What I'm not getting

anyway is why not just set up the damn MMC for each user, instead of

trying to set up one profile to fit all users.

 

[JAD]

Holy crap guys how many folks have more than 3 people logging onto the machine, and in a home environment why would you want such
security anyway? Or is this NOT the situation and this is in a commercial environment? Then MMC is not the first choice I would use.
It wasn't actually designed (properly?) to do this, obviously.

 

[Wayne]

You're funny. So, I'll say the obvious.

The average home has more than 1.01 people living in it. Therefore, if you
use Windows XP and ATI's MMC the way they were designed, ATI's MMC fails.

....oh, unless you're in a commercial environment. Then you've probably
bought Windows XP Professional and a PC for each user. But at home, normal
people use Windows XP Home edition and they expect products such as MMC 8.5
to work.

Holy crap guys how many folks have more than 3 people logging onto the

machine, and in a home environment why would you want such

security anyway? Or is this NOT the situation and this is in a commercial

environment? Then MMC is not the first choice I would use.

 

[Andre C]

True, but whats the answer re loopback. I am only offering it as a
possible solution. Someone here might know something about this.

Also I suspect ATI MMC cannot be run as a service.

Andre.

 

[J.Clarke]

You're funny. So, I'll say the obvious.

The average home has more than 1.01 people living in it. Therefore,
if you use Windows XP and ATI's MMC the way they were designed, ATI's
MMC fails.

...oh, unless you're in a commercial environment. Then you've
probably bought Windows XP Professional and a PC for each user. But
at home, normal people use Windows XP Home edition and they expect
products such as MMC 8.5 to work.

I think you'll find that most home machines have a single account, not a
separate account for each person in the house. Perhaps if enough people
are using multiple accounts then ATI will decide that support for them
is a desirable feature and will provide such support.

 

[Tim]

Sure, you keep thinking that.... and be sure to let all your computer gurus know
that to. You just might make their day.

And for the record, I only got quite offensive when you refused to understand
what I was telling you. I take no fault in for your obvious low knowledge
regarding NT-based operating systems.

 

[Tim]

Do YOU want to use the computer or not? If so, you log in. If not, you don't do
anything but sit there and watch it while it only does automated tasks which you
cannot even see being performed except a system standard screen saver.

 

[Tim]

YOU Did not push a button while at the login

oh brother. You really are a little boy aren't you?

Ha no, but I'm wondering if you are really Wanette......

 

[Tim]

And guess what Tim.... all that stuff happened without requiring anyone to

logon. Get it?

Yes, the system initiated the event. YOU did not. That is my point which you
fail to comprehend.

If you wanted to setup a system task, you logon with administrative privelges.
You go to All Programs, Accessories, System Tools, and then Scheduled Tasks. You
setup a task to be performed there. Then later you turn off the system. When
you start it back up, those events will be peformed at the times/dates you
specified. But you will not initiate those events, the system will. Sure, you
scheduled the system to have it done, but you didn't start the programs, the
system did.

Nobody had to logon for that to happen? Listen little boy, you're wasting
my time.

Ok Ma'am... listen here.

To setup the tasks, yes they did. To have the system run them, no they didn't,
because the system will execute the commands; while the person sitting in front
of the computer does not a thing but sit there and hope/assume it's working...

I'm right and you're wrong. Nobody is "required" to log on.

To setup tasks, to run programs, to view files, to access the internet, to read
newsgroups, to chat with friends, to send/receive email... shall I go on? YES
you DO.

 

[Wayne]

You're wrong. You said you're "required" to log on. But that's not true is
it?

 

[Wayne]

See? I'm right again. You can't even come up with one reason or one method
for using a computer without logging on. ...but then that's your
limitation, not ours.

 

[Wayne]

Then later you turn off the system. When

you start it back up, those events will be
peformed at the times/dates you specified.

Thank you. You finally got it. Nobody logged on, and the schedule was
executed anyway.

See? I was right. You were wrong. neh neh neh neh

 

[Tim]

My goodness, how pathetic you are! and you've proved it over and over again.

Read this carefully. It requires at least a 6th grade reading level...

The person sitting in front of the computer did not execute the automated tasks.
The computer did all by itself! How about that?!? Computers do things on their
own! WOW!

 

[Tim]

Simple. You can't USE the computer (as in interacting with it) unless you logon.
That's why I can't come up with a reason, because you can't. Or do I need to go
to a 3rd grade reading level to get you to understand?

This thread has gone on long enough. I'm through talking to a brick wall.
Either you're too old and feeble to understand what is being told to you, or you
are too young to comprehend. I teach classes of home users learning Windows XP
at a local community center. One of my students just had a birthday last month,
he turned 73. But he still amazes me at what he has learned regarding his new
computer system I built for him. Coming from an old "Franklin" computer (older
than an Apple-II) up to a new Pentium-4 system running Windows XP....

Quite frankly, I have expected people here to show a mental capacity higher than
his, but you have proved me wrong. I thank you. It tells me I have too high of
expectations.for people, and I should work on lowering those. Perhaps getting
an MCT didn't do any good. It obviously hasn't done good to teach someone here
something useful...

 

[J.Clarke]

Simple. You can't USE the computer (as in interacting with it) unless
you logon.

Depends on how you define "use". I use my news proxy just fine just
fine without logging on for example. The same for the firewall.

That's why I can't come up with a reason, because you

 

[Wayne]

from an old "Franklin" computer

(older than an Apple-II)

You're wrong. The Apple II came before the Franklin.