On 1 Aug 2005 at 14:24, Diane Poremsky wrote: > You only just figured this out? :)
Indeed - I"ve only used /Home for about a week... > It was a favorite complaint by beta testers. Two of the reasons for ...making some features impossible to use in Home is 1) to reduce ... configuration problems by the level of user likely to use Home But if that was the goal, then they should have put in proper [even if "simplified"] tools to allow the security machinery to be set up. Just because it was "home" doesn't mean that the users should be stuck with Win98-like-security... > If you need policies then you shouldn't be using Home. I disagree -- as I pointed out, a 'policy' [that I apparently can't change] prevented my limited account from accessing the network. Another policy [that I can't change] wouldn't allow me to access a shared drive unless I had a password on the account [easily fixed, of course, but a PITA]. And given the huge number of apps still living in the W98 world, having access to the NTFS ACLs to 'tweak' things to get apps to run is also necessary.... altogether, I don't see how you can state that Home users don't "need" that stuff... Unless what you're saying [which may be the MS party line], that XP/Home was intended to be a replacement for Win98 and so they *expect* [nearly _demand_] that users run as admin by intentionally making limited accounts totally unuseable??? /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- -- ---------------------------------------- WIN-HOME Archives: http://PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM/archives/WIN-HOME.html Contact the List Owner about anything: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Official Win-Home List Members Profiles Page http://www.besteffort.com/winhome/Profiles.html
