Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #13930 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-09-27 19:59 -0700 |
| Last post | 2013-11-17 01:06 -0700 |
| Articles | 1 on this page of 41 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded
OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-27 19:59 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-09-27 21:46 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-27 23:01 -0700
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-09-28 02:25 -0500
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 09:21 -0700
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-09-28 12:31 -0500
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 13:21 -0700
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-09-29 01:47 -0500
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms@charter.net> - 2013-09-28 12:33 -0500
Re: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 13:27 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-28 10:34 +0100
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 16:23 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Herbert Kleebauer <klee@unibwm.de> - 2013-09-29 10:50 +0200
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-29 09:15 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2013-09-28 04:00 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 09:29 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2013-09-28 13:15 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 13:20 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2013-09-28 23:07 +0100
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 15:41 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Rich Webb <webb.ra@example.net> - 2013-09-28 09:56 -0400
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 09:32 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-09-28 09:58 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 16:35 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-09-28 20:12 -0400
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-09-28 18:09 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation krw@attt.bizz - 2013-09-29 11:24 -0400
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-09-30 10:24 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-30 12:11 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-10-01 00:12 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-10-01 17:37 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation krw@attt.bizz - 2013-10-02 15:32 -0400
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation krw@attt.bizz - 2013-09-30 19:39 -0400
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 18:33 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-09-28 09:37 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 16:38 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-09-28 18:30 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-28 18:39 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-29 23:13 +0200
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-29 15:43 -0700
Re: OT: Inhibiting persistent changes to a workstation Don Y <This.is@not.Me> - 2013-11-17 01:06 -0700
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | Don Y <This.is@not.Me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-11-17 01:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <l69te2$8m3$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #13930 |
Update: On 9/27/2013 7:59 PM, Don Y wrote: > Well, today I was formally told that W7 will be installed on > these machines (see "OT: Disk 'imaging' SW" thread). They, in fact, changed their minds and wanted XP -- I guess some of the staff felt this to be a better choice as THEY would have to support the students! > *And*, I've been asked to set up 10 machines in a "lab" > for students to "drop in", as needed. > So, I'm looking for something that will "discard" any changes > made to a system (W7) after a login session terminates. > > How effective is "PC Safeguard" in this regard? Is it worth > pursuing a 3rd party product, instead (e.g., "DeepFreeze")? > Any other suggestions? > > [Again, I *really* want to keep myself out of the maintenance > loop. So, <someone_else> should be able to make the sorts of > "normal" changes to such a system without fear of them being > "discarded" at the end of the session] Given XP, I opted to save a few bucks for them and went with MS's SteadyState (free if you can find an archived copy). This was tedious to install (cuz it keeps wanting to throw away your changes!) and poorly documented (probably 100 settings and the documentation for each consists of essentially the *label* alongside each checkbox!!). Most annoying is the MS approach that "they know best" how things should be set up. So, they silently make changes to your settings that aren't immediately visible -- unless you are disciplined to VERIFY them, after the fact! So, after a fair bit of experimentation, I've been able to set up *a* (test) machine with all the applications they wanted/needed to see how well it fares, deployed. It's a bit sluggish booting and shutting down/restarting. But, nothing unusual for a MS product :-/ I'll clone the first system onto the remaining 9 once they bless its operation. Maybe next week... This *may* be a viable solution (kludge) for folks wanting to keep XP running past April...
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded
csiph-web