RE: How effective is a Limited User Account?
- From: AreWeThereYet <AreWeThereYet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:25:02 -0800
Setup a limited user account for everyday activities and use an
Administrator account only for installing new trusted software. Linux
has always done this...
I went from '98 to linux and started using XP just within the last 2 years
because I needed specific apps...
Obviously I followed your logic in configuring the new XP box. Except I ran
into numerous problems with programs not running or not running correctly
from a limited-user account! Even worse - calls to various software-support
groups were met with that "deer in headlights look" -
- 'umm... we didn't consider that possibility. Why do you want to run our
app in limited-user again?'
- 'There's a limited-user account? '
-'Of course I understand what your saying, if you don't want to run
applications as administrator why don't you just use linux?'....
.... admin mode it is. And honestly it hasn't been a problem. Even though the
machine has been down more than up, Microsoft has largely been off the hook.
And I take full credit for installing the only virus in two years (last
week..) - which leads us to -
I'll drink to that - or because of it... Let me just say NORTON ANTI-VIRUS
The worst security is having the IMPRESSION you're secured...
and WINDOWS DEFENDER are WORTHLESS!
I haven't had a virus in about 10 years, because I'm careful. But I figured
I'd get caught sooner or later, and so I diligently pay my dues to Symantec
and AAA every year.
When I finally clicked the wrong thing last week, NAV promptly let me know -
before taking a core-dump on my front lawn. Symantec's virus-specific removal
tool didn't even DETECT the virus (even though the normal AV did) and manual
removal instructions didn't even apply. (Windws Defender slept soundly
through this ordeal...)
Turns out you can only view symantec support pages in Internet Explorer WITH
Active-X and Java. Useful when your systems being overrun by virus' that
exploit Java, Active-X and IE...
Finally I get Symantec's Product Support Specialist:
Abul-Jzmal-Bin-Dhali-Laden on the phone. He forms me that "tis is a fee based
service. my option to pay $99.95 for Premium Viriess Remo-val"...
(no not $100, $99.95 - apparently there's a difference...)
Isn't that why I paid the last $50 (x 6 of the last 10 years)????
Me:
"You've got to be kidding me. What are my real options?"
Abul-Bin-NAV-laden
"I'm vry srry sirra - tis is a fEE based Service Oly...."
Me:
"Forget it, I'm downloading bit-defender now, and I'm taking 100 customers
with me. I'm going to apply for my refund tomorrow (renewed <60 days ago!)."
Abul-Bin-NAV-laden
"Vry GooOd - U have GooOd Day Sirra <click...>"...
*** Not only did I get HUNG UP ON! I tried again in Symantec-CHAT the next
day. Almost Identical conversation - AND they terminated the connection AGAIN
before I even got to get nasty...
http://anti-spyware-review.toptenreviews.com/
http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com/
Turns out we still live in a competitive free-market society, where OTHER
people want my money too. Who knew...
On a side-bar my openSUSE-box is running MUCH faster these days as well.
Funny how problems solve themselves....
Sorry for the long story, but wanted to throw in my $39.95 - and two-cents.
Think it's about beer-thirty now so gotta run! ;-)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: How effective is a Limited User Account?
- From: Shark
- Re: How effective is a Limited User Account?
- References:
- How effective is a Limited User Account?
- From: Shark
- How effective is a Limited User Account?
- Prev by Date: Re: UNC and authentication
- Next by Date: Re: How effective is a Limited User Account?
- Previous by thread: How effective is a Limited User Account?
- Next by thread: Re: How effective is a Limited User Account?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
