Im so sick of this.... Plz tell me how to do this?

[farqueue]

Ok, How can i set up windows XP so that it requires a password to install programs or change settings like in OS X

Im sick and tired of my brothers and sisters runing my dads XP machine and i get the blame everytime. They keep downloading nonsesnse + viruses etc

 

[fivetoadsloth]

Hm. Im not 100% sure i try not to use xp but go to start control panel user accounts and i think there is a setting soemwhere in there, though im not sure you can have limitied access on an administrator account. You could make yoursef and account and tel lyour dad youll only use that one so that you wont get blamed for things on his account.

 

[Darwin]

The logical thing to do would be to get everybody using a Limited Account. The problem with this however is that a lot of Windows programs expect to be run as Admin so you might find yourself quite Limited indeed when it comes to even the most simplest of tasks.

 

[fivetoadsloth]

The logical thing to do would be to get everybody using a Limited Account. The problem with this however is that a lot of Windows programs expect to be run as Admin so you might find yourself quite Limited indeed when it comes to even the most simplest of tasks.

yeah, this would be a work around, all though a hassleish one, thought it is windows……

 

[Max Payne]

Smile... You are using Win XP SP2, VirusP10.

Good luck in finding a good way. If you do, please tell us so when can try it. Thank you.

 

[twanto]

Very simple.

Go into the control panel and go to user accounts. Set up different accounts. Give the people you want administrator access, and your siblings more restricted access. Also enable fast user switching, so that you can quickly switch between users. It works very nicely.

PS- best not to ask advice for general Windows help in a mac forum. Some people are very ignorant- hence the person who thought it would be difficult, or the other who had only to comment about viruses. what morons.

The logical thing to do would be to get everybody using a Limited Account. The problem with this however is that a lot of Windows programs expect to be run as Admin so you might find yourself quite Limited indeed when it comes to even the most simplest of tasks.

This is complete nonsense. See my solution.

 

[atszyman]

Very simple.

Go into the control panel and go to user accounts. Set up different accounts. Give the people you want administrator access, and your siblings more restricted access. Also enable fast user switching, so that you can quickly switch between users. It works very nicely.

PS- best not to ask advice for general Windows help in a mac forum. Some people are very ignorant- hence the person who thought it would be difficult, or the other who had only to comment about viruses. what morons.



This is complete nonsense. See my solution.

You're talking about setting up limited user accounts correct? Have you ever run an XP box with a limited account as your primary account? I have two computers at home that I run in this configuration and to get all of the applications working has always been a chore, and beyond that to get the application preferences to actually take hold in some instances still does not work.

I've had to teach my wife how to run some apps as administrator since they refuse to work for a limited account and every reboot brings messages of applications that need to finish their install requiring an admin account which I can fix easily if I truly get annoyed enough, but sometimes I'm just lazy, especially since reboots are fairly infrequent (yes I said it, my XP boxes are really very stable).

I've never had these issues on my PowerBook despite running a non-admin account for the last 2 years. Don't try to tell me it's simple to run a limited user account on XP. It's not the most difficult thing I've ever done and I won't stop doing it, but I wouldn't tell anyone who doesn't know computers well to run in a limited account normally unless I really wanted a tech support headache.

I may be doing something wrong, but even according to some of my more XP savvy friends, running a limited account as your primary computer access on XP is not an easy task.

 

[devman]

Very simple.

Go into the control panel and go to user accounts. Set up different accounts. Give the people you want administrator access, and your siblings more restricted access. Also enable fast user switching, so that you can quickly switch between users. It works very nicely.

PS- best not to ask advice for general Windows help in a mac forum. Some people are very ignorant- hence the person who thought it would be difficult, or the other who had only to comment about viruses. what morons.



This is complete nonsense. See my solution.

http://www.pluralsite.com/wiki/default.aspx/Keith/HallOfShame.html

 

[atszyman]

http://www.pluralsite.com/wiki/default.aspx/Keith/HallOfShame.html

I don't believe all of that list. They say Quicken won't run under a Limited User, yet my wife and I use it almost daily on our accounts. I had to jump through a few hoops to get it to work (run the Limited Account as admin for brief periods and make sure the drive/folder is at the very least an administrative share), but it does work. I've also gotten Real Arcade to work.

As I stated before, it's not an easy undertaking and most people I know have given up on trying to achieve what should be a "no-brainer" for running XP.

 

[twanto]

You're talking about setting up limited user accounts correct? Have you ever run an XP box with a limited account as your primary account? I have two computers at home that I run in this configuration and to get all of the applications working has always been a chore, and beyond that to get the application preferences to actually take hold in some instances still does not work.

I've had to teach my wife how to run some apps as administrator since they refuse to work for a limited account and every reboot brings messages of applications that need to finish their install requiring an admin account which I can fix easily if I truly get annoyed enough, but sometimes I'm just lazy, especially since reboots are fairly infrequent (yes I said it, my XP boxes are really very stable).

I've never had these issues on my PowerBook despite running a non-admin account for the last 2 years. Don't try to tell me it's simple to run a limited user account on XP. It's not the most difficult thing I've ever done and I won't stop doing it, but I wouldn't tell anyone who doesn't know computers well to run in a limited account normally unless I really wanted a tech support headache.

I may be doing something wrong, but even according to some of my more XP savvy friends, running a limited account as your primary computer access on XP is not an easy task.

What I'm suggesting is not giving administrator powers to his siblings. Yes, on a limited account you can only do so much. For example, you can't install programs or update them. You can't access other people's My Documents, and settings, etc.- but that is the point.

I can see how problems can arise if you have not installed programs for every user, as sometimes you are given the option to install for all users or a single user. If its installed for one user, then the settings will not be in place for the others and it will not work- you have to reinstall the program in this case. But this is only for certain programs.

Yes, I agree, it is no fun to run a limited account. But I see little difference on a Mac when I don't have admin access. If I want to do something, it asks for the user password, which I don't have.

If you hate limited accounts, then don't run off of them on your home PC.

 

[balamw]

http://www.pluralsite.com/wiki/default.aspx/Keith/HallOfShame.html

That list is a lot shorter than I would have expected. Especially if, like atszyman suggests, some are on there only because of the user's lazyness.

B

 

[twanto]

http://www.pluralsite.com/wiki/default.aspx/Keith/HallOfShame.html

Let's assume that this list is accurate. Is it not the fault of the programmers? Obviously not every application has this issue, so there must be a way to design it better.

Certainly unfortunate if you NEED one of those programs and you NEED to run it under a limited user account. But this is really the problem of the people who designed the software and not and inherent flaw in the limited access IMHO.

I'm on a library computer right now and the programs I'm using work perfectly fine, although it won't let me install anything. But hey, that's the point right?

 

[reflex]

I used to have my parents and sister as limited users on their computer, but it was too much hassle. Any obscure little program could cause problems.

Note that you can go a long way setting the correct permissions for folders though (especially the application's folder in Program Files).

 

[atszyman]

Yes, I agree, it is no fun to run a limited account. But I see little difference on a Mac when I don't have admin access. If I want to do something, it asks for the user password, which I don't have.

If you hate limited accounts, then don't run off of them on your home PC.

I don't hate limited accounts, I think they are a great idea however the structure and setup for Windows is not helpful at all. I've run a limited account as my main account on my Mac for 2+ years now. I get asked to authenticate when I install programs (as it should be) but I have never had issues running the program once they were installed.

On Windows I install as admin (when necessary) and then have to go through a bunch of extra steps (turning on admin access to the limited account briefly, or making sure the directories accessed are properly shared, or dealing with some annoying messages when booting/running certain programs). This is where things are just wrong for Windows. Some of it is due to poor applications and some is due the the whole registry setup and bits and pieces of the program installed everywhere. Getting limited users up on Macs is light-years ahead of doing it on Windows. I've even had the "install for all users" options not work, since as nearly as I can figure out it only puts the Start Menu shortcut in the all users Start Menu and doesn't address the drive sharing, registry access issues.

I don't necessarily blame Windows or the Application developers for this flaw since both need to address it but it is definitely not a walk in the park to run as a limited user in Windows and even worse if you are the administrator trying to make sure everyone's programs work properly. I like it at home this way since if anyone needs to use our computers they are always up in the limited accounts so I don't have to worry about people installing anything, but for the computers I've done for my in-laws I don't ever try to set this up because of the headache it would be for supporting.

 

[twanto]

I don't hate limited accounts, I think they are a great idea however the structure and setup for Windows is not helpful at all. I've run a limited account as my main account on my Mac for 2+ years now. I get asked to authenticate when I install programs (as it should be) but I have never had issues running the program once they were installed.

On Windows I install as admin (when necessary) and then have to go through a bunch of extra steps (turning on admin access to the limited account briefly, or making sure the directories accessed are properly shared, or dealing with some annoying messages when booting/running certain programs). This is where things are just wrong for Windows. Some of it is due to poor applications and some is due the the whole registry setup and bits and pieces of the program installed everywhere. Getting limited users up on Macs is light-years ahead of doing it on Windows. I've even had the "install for all users" options not work, since as nearly as I can figure out it only puts the Start Menu shortcut in the all users Start Menu and doesn't address the drive sharing, registry access issues.

I don't necessarily blame Windows or the Application developers for this flaw since both need to address it but it is definitely not a walk in the park to run as a limited user in Windows and even worse if you are the administrator trying to make sure everyone's programs work properly. I like it at home this way since if anyone needs to use our computers they are always up in the limited accounts so I don't have to worry about people installing anything, but for the computers I've done for my in-laws I don't ever try to set this up because of the headache it would be for supporting.

Personally I have not had problems with the limited accounts with different programs like you have. But I agree that the Apple implementation seems more straightforward. Suffice to say, that does not mean that you can't have an easy going time with the Windows limited accounts, or that you just can't do it at all as some people have suggested. We're now more than a bit off topic though.

It does not make sense to me why you would want to set up limited accounts for people in the first place (such as your in laws) if they won't be utilizing those accounts.

Anyway, an easy workaround is just DON'T use the limited accounts when you don't want to be limited. Have a guest account for guests, and a user account for users with all privileges. You'll have to sign in, but your settings will be unique and no one will mess with your stuff, and YOU can mess with your stuff as much as you want without having to sign off the limited account and then sign on the admin account.

Also, it is annoying that Windows places everything everywhere. But this is getting off topic. We aren't really debating whether mac is better than windows at this, just that it can be done in windows, and for the OPs purposes it is quite easy to set up and implement, contrary to what some posters have been suggesting.

 

[atszyman]

It does not make sense to me why you would want to set up limited accounts for people in the first place (such as your in laws) if they won't be utilizing those accounts.

Anyway, an easy workaround is just DON'T use the limited accounts when you don't want to be limited.

I don't like the account that is online most often to have full access to the computer which is why I use limited accounts normally.

I would like to do it for my in-laws just to keep them from downloading and installing anything they feel like from the web and keep some of the spyware, and superfluous programs that get installed off of their systems. Most of them would think twice about the install if they had to enter the password to do it. This would make some of my tech support much easier but the issues I've had with limited account as my main account are more of a support nightmare than cleaning the stuff off of their computers.

 

[bearbo]

Anyway, an easy workaround is just DON'T use the limited accounts when you don't want to be limited. Have a guest account for guests, and a user account for users with all privileges. You'll have to sign in, but your settings will be unique and no one will mess with your stuff, and YOU can mess with your stuff as much as you want without having to sign off the limited account and then sign on the admin account.

the OP asked a question, you suggested a solution that is not very easy to implement, and now you are saying "well, don't use it, it doesn't suit you", ya?

to OP... there are parental control softwares out there... i have not used any of those, but i'm sure some would work nicely... so the user cannot install, cannot download, for instance.

 

[twanto]

the OP asked a question, you suggested a solution that is not very easy to implement, and now you are saying "well, don't use it, it doesn't suit you", ya?

to OP... there are parental control softwares out there... i have not used any of those, but i'm sure some would work nicely... so the user cannot install, cannot download, for instance.

It IS very easy to implement. Have you tried it???????????

The reply you are referring to was to another poster, not the OP.