New
#11
Large Public School district... We have used the "ComputerName" icon naming for the past couple of years in WinXP. It is very handy for our help-desk personnel when a user calls with a problem. We just simply ask what the desktop "My computer" icon says rather than trying to talk them through the computer properties clicking. It speeds things up when you have a client who does not know the difference between "Right Click on your Desktop" and actually writing "Click" on their wooden desk top with a pencil.
We are now testing out Windows 7 for a possible future migration and I wanted the same Mycomputer Icon labeling. After several searches I found this forum. I was also successful in applying this setting but only after one member mention "Taking Ownership". Here is what I did;
- in regedit navigate to the HK CLASSES ROOT\CLSID\[20D04FE0-3AEA-1069-A2D8-08002B30309D} key
- rightclick on that key and select PERMISSIONS
- select ADVANCED then OWNER
- change owner to your currently logged in administrator login
You should now be able to edit that key. To be safe, after editing that key change the ownership back to what it was before you started.
Hope that helps.
This is the reason why I'm trying to import the tweak in Windows 7. I'm a consultant to a financial services Company (who represents various Leasing Companies) for whom I developed various applications (mostly in Microsoft Access VBA and VB .NET). We have agents who perform as the salespersons in my quote.
If I understand correctly, you're talking about a scenario where a domain-joined workstation has been abandoned in a logged-on state, and you're got IT/support staff periodically roaming the "hot desking" area to try to deal with the situation?
If I haven't misunderstood, then IMHO the organisation has a fairly severe disciplinary problem on its hands, followed by a somewhat less severe but still substantial domain policy configuration issue, and finally a bit of a skills shortage in the roaming IT staff who inspect these machines. Without wishing to sound flippant in the least, the very last thing I'd worry about under those circumstances is haxx0ring the name of the computer icon on the desktop.
Disciplinary: Any user who walks away from a workstation without locking the thing is in breach of security best practices. It's bad enough when it's done for a two-minute loo break, but it's downright dangerous when they walk away for good and leave the computer logged on, especially given it's a financial services organisation. Remind me not to trust them with my money.
Configuration: Domain policy ought to be enforcing locking screen savers, and hence precluding the possibility of a machine being left unattended and logged on for longer periods of time. It may be different in an educational institution, but in a corporate environment there is really no excuse for this oversight.
Skills: Should one of the roving IT/support staff find a logged on machine, they can tell who's logged on in myriad ways. The WHOAMI command springs to mind. HOSTNAME would show them the computer name.
It's not my intention to be confrontational, but to help. With respect, in many financial orgs somebody (in IT) would get kicked down the stairs for merely allowing this situation to develop. It's better to fix it properly by educating users and the IT staff, than to seek workarounds for lax security practices.
Easy to see why you picked H2SO4 as your username :)
"FluffyWhiteRabbit" was already taken
The sad thing is, it's actually true. In a well-run enterprise, especially one which handles moola, allowing this situation to continue unchecked would result in a security audit, recriminations, probationary periods or firings... Better to suffer the rantings of some forum fascist than to discover the hard way that he was right.
===================================
"When I was insolent I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds, pretty standard really."
What is this useless ranting about disciplinary measures? I don't know who you are but I'm glad I never met you and hopefully never will.
It's evident you don't know how to answer the technical question so you hide behind useless and ridicule policy declamations.
If you represent the best this forum can offer it's really a sad situation.