it is my understanding that it is very difficult to make older Windows applications run in newer versions of Windows, especially applications that were written for Windows 95/98.
You understand wrong... It isn't all that hard, it is usually just a matter of setting the ACLs right of the folder of the application (RW for "Users") and the ACLs of eventual registry keys it uses (Again: RW for "Users"). The only risk in this is that the Users can screw up the application.
That's really just it....
My bet is also that many custom made apps are working under wine. After all, most corporate devs, stuck to the documented APIs. They did however assume "Admin" meaning full RW rights to the above mentioned parts of the system.
Just for the reference: I am pretty much a full time Linux user, I just have tons and tons of Windows experience form past times and from helping out people. (Users who use XP and whom I help, run "Limited User" full-time, and yes, that's completely feasible. It's just a bit more work to set up).
This has resulted in something akin to sublimation [wikipedia.org]; many Slashdotters have gone straight from not getting laid because they can't get a girl to not getting laid because they're married.;)
Couldn't you have posted that five years ago? Damnit! (Of course, I probably wouldn't have believed you back then....)
Yet you have no concepts of paragraphs whatsoever, even if it would only have taken a <p> and </p> to structure your comment. (XHTML compliant, other standards are more lax)
You have as such made my point: a dreamweaver user depends on the tool not on the knowlegde of the markup language.
Troll? Why is this a Troll? People who actually know what they do don't need hand-holding. I agree: Gimp, Vim and Firebug is all one needs. (Add in a bit Inkscape too)
A designer might need Dreamweaver, but that's most likely because he doesn't know the underlying structures. Now, I admit, the Designer-Tech profile is quite seldom though;-))
The person I was replying to had the slashdot nick "khellendros1984"
Now, I do understand you stance towards educating users. It's a good idea, but it simply doesn't work with the majority of users. I've tried your system... believe me. You do have to keep in mind that your kid is your kid and genetically probably predisposed to be more geeky.
However, I disagree on one point. The typical PEBKAC can be avoided by running Limited User. It simply is healthy computing. Essentially (for the bad analogy), you've explained how to wash your hands after going to the bathroom, but avoided the whole "to shower" concept.
In case I wasn't clear: I run Limited User myself on my machines? Why? Because it's the right thing to do. It is healthy computing, it protects me from a dumb moment (don't tell me you never had one ever) and puts me on the same footing as everyone. If someone complains, I can show them: look it's the same for me. I pretty much never need to login as Admin. Once it's set up correctly, it's bulletproof.
Times have changed a lot since you were 14.... Okay, perhaps not, if you're born in 1984, much less from when I was 14... Still, this means you give them Admin on the machine and I consider that a no-no for any regular user. Heck, even I run as Limited User and only log in as Administrator when strictly needed.
What was your computer? A Windows 9x machine? Well, there you go: no proper user separation. Even if someone would have wanted to do it right, they wouldn't have be able to do it.
I don't know how many times my kids have gotten themselves a PC game, even those specifically designed for kids, and the EULA would leave my 40 year old brain hurting trying to understand all the legal bullshit.
Why can your kids install any software would be a better question...
He's not suggesting to get a satellite connection and stream radio, he's suggesting that Sirius switches it's service to "internet provider" because they seem to have bandwidth enough to do streaming audio.
(What he oversees, though, is that this bandwith is all downstream and the same for everyone... one way broadcast communication...With Internet one needs two-way)
Applications produced these days rarely or never require admin. Those that do, should be relegated to the recycling bin and usually have a better open source alternative.
However, older programs still need to be run. I like being able to run an application which I used back in 1992. While it most likely isn't a good idea on modern hardware, most people do not have enough knowledge to virtualize.
To make a broad comparison: you are blaming rape victims that they're at fault for being raped for dressing sexy.
The culprits are the application developers. If these days they still assume "Admin", they need to stop working as programmers. However, faulting the customer for buying these applications is wrong. How would a customer know?
Oh, and this is no exclusive Mac trait... In Linux and BSD I have exact the same expectations and it does work. Windows only has this non-restricted legacy that has been handled in a really bad way.
It doesn't matter to me... In essence it's both: to people who don't know how to secure a Windows machine it's Interesting. To Linux people (to which I count myself) it's funny because it looks like their own how-tos where several arcane commands are to be invoked.
I have enough Karma, it could stay on +1 for all I care. The only thing I hope is that I helped someone out there shedding his "Admin Addiction".
I installed the patch on my brothers machine, and I wish I had bookmarked the page and/or kept the installer. Not that I can't use cacls.exe, but having the interface is easier.
My experience with setting up Windows XP boxes with limited users is that a lot of software will just work.
That is indeed exactly my experience. OSS software is actually most likely to support it. The most problematic software is either ancient (95 area) or it's (older - c.a. up until 2005) Games that require admin for DRM purposes. The weirdest one I know is MS Train Simulator. While it works in Limited user, it is extremely slow. Run it as Admin, and it runs fluidly. (Yes, I know someone who bought that. It's actually a very relaxing game)
I surely had hoped that people here would be able to read within context. I never said anywhere that this is within the ability of a normal OEM customer.
Someone on slashdot (comment by mspohr) complained that he couldn't do it. By being on slashdot, and actually admitting he knows how to install operating systems, I assumed certain level of proficiency. It is in that light that my comment needs to be read.
That this is way beyond the OEM user: yes, I know... I also know that you can't setup a machine this way, give it to the user and let him go. The day he needs an application, even with the Admin password he is lost. Do note however, that explaining these simple rules to power users, do enable them even if they do not understand the details of why and how one should do this.
Last, but not least: we all should be clean on who is the "culprit" that this "doesn't just work on Windows" as it does on Linux and that is not Windows itself. Windows is actually doing exactly as it is told. The culprits are the badly behaved programs. That this is, of course, not clear to the average OEM user is clear to me. However, as technologists we cannot put the blame on Microsoft on this one.
I am actually a Linux/BSD fan, and use Windows less and less, but I also don't like that it's accused of something that it isn't.... namely unable to run as Limited User.
Slashdot Mirror
You understand wrong... It isn't all that hard, it is usually just a matter of setting the ACLs right of the folder of the application (RW for "Users") and the ACLs of eventual registry keys it uses (Again: RW for "Users"). The only risk in this is that the Users can screw up the application.
That's really just it....
My bet is also that many custom made apps are working under wine. After all, most corporate devs, stuck to the documented APIs. They did however assume "Admin" meaning full RW rights to the above mentioned parts of the system.
Just for the reference: I am pretty much a full time Linux user, I just have tons and tons of Windows experience form past times and from helping out people. (Users who use XP and whom I help, run "Limited User" full-time, and yes, that's completely feasible. It's just a bit more work to set up).
Couldn't you have posted that five years ago? Damnit! (Of course, I probably wouldn't have believed you back then....)
Yet you have no concepts of paragraphs whatsoever, even if it would only have taken a <p> and </p> to structure your comment. (XHTML compliant, other standards are more lax)
You have as such made my point: a dreamweaver user depends on the tool not on the knowlegde of the markup language.
I have used it myself before.... I agree... However, I did revert to the basics...
Troll? Why is this a Troll? People who actually know what they do don't need hand-holding. I agree: Gimp, Vim and Firebug is all one needs. (Add in a bit Inkscape too)
A designer might need Dreamweaver, but that's most likely because he doesn't know the underlying structures. Now, I admit, the Designer-Tech profile is quite seldom though ;-))
That's okay... :-) Shouldn't you be buying a Mac Pro in the first place? ;-))
Yeah, I was surprised too...
I don't call it a major upgrade, because I don't care about games.... Like many, many, many people...
As, an ex-teacher, I wish you good luck. You'll need it.
Why not? They were all with high profile Hollywood stars.... Am I missing something?
I the last two months? "Doubt", "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" and "Revolutionary Road". Don't they qualify as "major releases"?
Revo Plus owner, here... Lovely little machine...
The person I was replying to had the slashdot nick "khellendros1984"
Now, I do understand you stance towards educating users. It's a good idea, but it simply doesn't work with the majority of users. I've tried your system... believe me. You do have to keep in mind that your kid is your kid and genetically probably predisposed to be more geeky.
However, I disagree on one point. The typical PEBKAC can be avoided by running Limited User. It simply is healthy computing. Essentially (for the bad analogy), you've explained how to wash your hands after going to the bathroom, but avoided the whole "to shower" concept.
In case I wasn't clear: I run Limited User myself on my machines? Why? Because it's the right thing to do. It is healthy computing, it protects me from a dumb moment (don't tell me you never had one ever) and puts me on the same footing as everyone. If someone complains, I can show them: look it's the same for me. I pretty much never need to login as Admin. Once it's set up correctly, it's bulletproof.
Times have changed a lot since you were 14.... Okay, perhaps not, if you're born in 1984, much less from when I was 14... Still, this means you give them Admin on the machine and I consider that a no-no for any regular user. Heck, even I run as Limited User and only log in as Administrator when strictly needed.
What was your computer? A Windows 9x machine? Well, there you go: no proper user separation. Even if someone would have wanted to do it right, they wouldn't have be able to do it.
Why can your kids install any software would be a better question...
Yes, spelling for example...
That was nice of you... Really... I appreciate it. Glad some people got it.
He's not suggesting to get a satellite connection and stream radio, he's suggesting that Sirius switches it's service to "internet provider" because they seem to have bandwidth enough to do streaming audio.
(What he oversees, though, is that this bandwith is all downstream and the same for everyone... one way broadcast communication...With Internet one needs two-way)
You should frequent people outside of IT a bit more...
Ehm, no...
Applications produced these days rarely or never require admin. Those that do, should be relegated to the recycling bin and usually have a better open source alternative.
However, older programs still need to be run. I like being able to run an application which I used back in 1992. While it most likely isn't a good idea on modern hardware, most people do not have enough knowledge to virtualize.
To make a broad comparison: you are blaming rape victims that they're at fault for being raped for dressing sexy.
The culprits are the application developers. If these days they still assume "Admin", they need to stop working as programmers. However, faulting the customer for buying these applications is wrong. How would a customer know?
Oh, and this is no exclusive Mac trait... In Linux and BSD I have exact the same expectations and it does work. Windows only has this non-restricted legacy that has been handled in a really bad way.
It doesn't matter to me... In essence it's both: to people who don't know how to secure a Windows machine it's Interesting. To Linux people (to which I count myself) it's funny because it looks like their own how-tos where several arcane commands are to be invoked.
I have enough Karma, it could stay on +1 for all I care. The only thing I hope is that I helped someone out there shedding his "Admin Addiction".
I installed the patch on my brothers machine, and I wish I had bookmarked the page and/or kept the installer. Not that I can't use cacls.exe, but having the interface is easier.
That is indeed exactly my experience. OSS software is actually most likely to support it. The most problematic software is either ancient (95 area) or it's (older - c.a. up until 2005) Games that require admin for DRM purposes. The weirdest one I know is MS Train Simulator. While it works in Limited user, it is extremely slow. Run it as Admin, and it runs fluidly. (Yes, I know someone who bought that. It's actually a very relaxing game)
I know you're being sarcastic, but please read my reply above to similar critisism.
I surely had hoped that people here would be able to read within context. I never said anywhere that this is within the ability of a normal OEM customer.
Someone on slashdot (comment by mspohr) complained that he couldn't do it. By being on slashdot, and actually admitting he knows how to install operating systems, I assumed certain level of proficiency. It is in that light that my comment needs to be read.
That this is way beyond the OEM user: yes, I know... I also know that you can't setup a machine this way, give it to the user and let him go. The day he needs an application, even with the Admin password he is lost. Do note however, that explaining these simple rules to power users, do enable them even if they do not understand the details of why and how one should do this.
Last, but not least: we all should be clean on who is the "culprit" that this "doesn't just work on Windows" as it does on Linux and that is not Windows itself. Windows is actually doing exactly as it is told. The culprits are the badly behaved programs. That this is, of course, not clear to the average OEM user is clear to me. However, as technologists we cannot put the blame on Microsoft on this one.
I am actually a Linux/BSD fan, and use Windows less and less, but I also don't like that it's accused of something that it isn't.... namely unable to run as Limited User.