| Subject: Vista UAC on a Domain pc |
| Group: microsoft.public.windows.vista.security |
| Date: 9/5/2008 12:44:01 PM |
| From: =?Utf-8?B?Sm9obg==?= [Email Address Protection] |
Has anyone figured out a way to disable UAC in Vista Business without giving users the ability to add/remove software, yet STILL be prompted for admin priviledges when needed-similar to how XP Pro acts? We have a program that fails due to UAC, but when it is disable, it works. Disabeling UAC allows the user to install programs without having to be an admin...and NONE of our users have admin access. The exe for the program is on a server belonging to another department and they will not make any changes to the exe or let me run it in compatability mode for our users... Thanks!! John |
| Back |
| Subject: Re: Vista UAC on a Domain pc |
| Group: microsoft.public.windows.vista.security |
| Date: 9/5/2008 5:29:45 PM |
| From: "beoweolf" [Email Address Protection] |
Sometimes technology is not the solution. Have your manager talk to their manager to see if there is a resolution, some accord that can be reached to resolve this issue. There must be more to this than you are able to see. After all, the nature of business is to improve the prospects for the business not to build little Fiefdoms. Links, shortcuts or shares are not just for breakfast... "John" <John@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:77A23CBC-67E4-448B-8523-42EC50721BDA@microsoft.com... > Has anyone figured out a way to disable UAC in Vista Business without > giving > users the ability to add/remove software, yet STILL be prompted for admin > priviledges when needed-similar to how XP Pro acts? > We have a program that fails due to UAC, but when it is disable, it works. > Disabeling UAC allows the user to install programs without having to be an > admin...and NONE of our users have admin access. The exe for the program > is > on a server belonging to another department and they will not make any > changes to the exe or let me run it in compatability mode for our users... > > Thanks!! > John |
| Back |