Re: Administrator Rights?

From: Caeser Augustus (
Date: 12/06/04

  • Next message: Spigga: "Re: DMZ / Firewall rule diagramming"
    Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 17:33:03 +0530

    Hi Gerald,

    Is that CSDVersion key that you were talking about?


    On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:26:52 -0800,
    <> wrote:
    > Morning,all:
    > I don't believe this is entirely correct. The Admin credentials do need to
    > be present and verified, but the "run as" secondary logon is sufficient.
    > Someone with Admin credentials does not have to be the primary logon for the
    > updates to fire and install.
    > I am not dead sure what you are implying with the "Windows update will not
    > install ANY update if the Admin is not logged on." statement. I have been
    > using the "runas" method in our company for over three years, and other than
    > an occasional hickup where Admin or otherwise the update service just stops
    > functioning, every pc just updates like a clock once a day no matter who is
    > logged on to the pc. The odd update failure seems to involve a reg entry
    > that gives a corrupt version that I manually change, and off it goes again.
    > Servers, of course, are a different story. To set those up with "auto
    > update" without any sandboxing should only be done if your resume is updated
    > and your next prospective employer is in sight.
    > Good luck, and kudos to MSFT on the Update service. I don't see anyone else
    > doing anything even remotely close to this level of customer service.
    > The driver updates included in this service are a real blessing. Any
    > printer vendor, for example, that comes onsite is immediately quizzed on
    > whether they participate in the MSFT update service. If not, adios. I
    > consider a vendor who doesn't participate actively in this driver update
    > service to be jacking up the TCO (total cost of ownership) to my company to
    > save themselves some cash. Canon is the worst at participation,
    > zero email notification of new drivers. They just don't seem to get it.
    > Gerald
    > Investment Advice
    > >
    > > If you bought $1000 worth of Nortel stock one year ago, it would now
    > > be worth $49.
    > >
    > > If you bought $1000 worth of Budweiser (the beer, not the stock) one
    > > year ago, drank all the beer, and traded in the cans for the nickel
    > > deposit,you would have $79.
    > >
    > > My advice to you is to start drinking heavily....
    > > And save your cans!
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Caeser Augustus []
    > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:07 PM
    > To:
    > Subject: Re: Administrator Rights?
    > Hi,
    > Windows update will not install ANY update if the Admin is not logged on.
    > If you are running XP, then I have noticed that going through with the pre
    > SP1 updates is a pain nowadays. They seem to download OK but fail to
    > install.
    > Manually installing the updates may be an option, but I also wonder if the
    > XP systems are using the new V5 site or the older V4 one.
    > On a seperate note, for the updates to work properly with the V5, an update
    > is required. If WIndows update does not install it automatically then, you
    > may install it seperately from
    > 983d-eb19368f9047&displaylang=en
    > And you may also have a look at
    > Hope this helps:
    > On 1 Dec 2004 03:31:58 -0000, <>
    > wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > > I'd like to think I'm somewhat computer savvy, but this one escapes
    > me...running XP, trying to run Windows Update. All but one or two updates
    > will fail. I've done some research that suggested a necessary service may
    > not have started, but this is not the case. When looking at the user
    > account, they are designated as Administrator. However, Windows Update says
    > it won't install the updates unless it's accomplished by an administrator.
    > Any suggestions?
    > >

  • Next message: Spigga: "Re: DMZ / Firewall rule diagramming"