Does anyone use a Limited Account in Windows XP?

If you are the only one using your Windows XP laptop, do you use a Limited account and keep a separate Admin account OR do you use the Administrator account for your everyday purposes?

I read many articles including one from Microsoft saying that I should keep two accounts, one Limited and one Administrator. I should use the Limited account for everyday use. What do the rest of you do?

 

I have only one account - Administrator. I feel that having more than one account will slow down my computer, but I may be wrong.

 

Most experts will say to use a limited account mianly for protection. Under a limited account, you can not install software or have access to the major changes. You have access to all of the programs that are installed for all users, and are allowed to surf the net, but this way nothing could be installed with out your permission.

With Admin account, things can be installed without your permission as well as you can get access to the major control functions. You really don't lose any performance with having 2 accounts (AFAIK).

With that said - i only have one account (actually a copy of my admin account). I've just always preferred XP to be this way and I've never had any trouble problems with it. Then again, i'm the only user on my laptop so I pretty much know everything that goes on with it.

 

i found out about this recently and on my new laptop have been using a limited account for everyday use. sometimes it's a pain in the butt though, like i can't even look at the calendar by double-clicking on the time in the taskbar.

one question, windows update only seems to work when you're logged in as an admin, so if you only log in as a user, would you miss all the updates?

 

I don't think so. What you can do is go to your admin account and schedule XP to update every week or something.

This is what we do at our office computers. All of us are on limited accounts, but they have the computer schedule to update every Thurs. Night even if you are logged in under a limited account.

 

You should run as a limited user. Unfortunately, Windows was never designed to be a multi-user OS, making a limited user account a very frustrating experience. However, limited user is MUCH more secure as SouthernGirl said. It does not allow you to do things like install stuff. You also cannot do other things like update your AV, you see how this could be difficult.

This is one of the things that make OS X inherently more secure. UNIX was originally designed as a multiuser OS and makes running as a limited user very easy. You can do everything you want to do, but cannot make system changes without an admin user name and password.

Unfortunately, Vista will not fix this problem as it would break alot of software. Most software requires admin privelages in Windows.

 

Yeah, I agree, it's more secure. However the extra security provided isn't worth the extra work made in my case. I just run an admin account

 

Yeah, it's such a hassle. I'd much prefer to spend time cleaning out malware...

As has been mentioned several times above, a limited access account makes installing software a pain. Perhaps it would be better to say that it makes installing software without your knowledge impossible.

Funnily enough, this is one of the major complaints being levelled at Vista. People aren't used to the OS asking for authorisation to install software or change configs.

 

I run admin 24/7, I like the feeling of control.

 

The hacking community thanks you, I'm sure.

 

If I'm connected to the internet only once a week (I don't have internet at my house so I go to my college and use its wireless network to update my security apps), is it okay to run as an admin in windows xp?