Tweak Vista Home Premium to join a Domain!

Hey all,

Just checking to see if anyone has come around or knows of a Tweak to
have Vista Home Premium join a Domain.

I know of one that worked with XPMC 2005 and it worked great!!!

The only reason I'm looking for such a Tweak is so that after mapping a
Drive, Login and restarting my system I don't have to re-login to the
mapped Drive again, because MS didn't think this through!

You are given the option to Manage Your Network Passwords, but you
really *CANNOT!!! *Because that option is Shaded Out! You can only
manage a user name and password for a Web Site or Program...

I hope someone can relate...

Thx!


--
Niggiebro

Niggiebro wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Just checking to see if anyone has come around or knows of a Tweak to
> have Vista Home Premium join a Domain.
>
> I know of one that worked with XPMC 2005 and it worked great!!!
>
> The only reason I'm looking for such a Tweak is so that after mapping a
> Drive, Login and restarting my system I don't have to re-login to the
> mapped Drive again, because MS didn't think this through!
>
> You are given the option to Manage Your Network Passwords, but you
> really *CANNOT!!! *Because that option is Shaded Out! You can only
> manage a user name and password for a Web Site or Program...

You can't "tweak" Vista Home to join a domain. The reason you were able
to get one particular version of XP MCE to join a domain is that MCE is
a superset of XP Pro, not Home. XP Pro can join a domain; XP Home can't.

If you need a Vista Home machine to join a domain, upgrade it to
Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise.


Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

Niggiebro wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Just checking to see if anyone has come around or knows of a Tweak to
> have Vista Home Premium join a Domain.
>

Upgrade to Vista Business or Enterprise.


> I know of one that worked with XPMC 2005 and it worked great!!!
>
> The only reason I'm looking for such a Tweak is so that after mapping a
> Drive, Login and restarting my system I don't have to re-login to the
> mapped Drive again,....


All you need do is please a simple drive mapping script in your Start
folder to handle the task for you


> because MS didn't think this through!
>

Microsoft isn't the one who purchased an OS that doesn't meet his needs.




--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:50:50 -0700, Bruce Chambers wrote:

> Microsoft isn't the one who purchased an OS that doesn't meet his needs.

Unfortunately MSFT *is* the one who defined the features for the
various SKUs[1], without much apparent thought. The selection issue
became so complex, many people ended up with the edition they
thought they needed, but which disabled some feature the customer
really needed![2]

[1] this stupid piece of jargon apparently means: stock keeping
unit.

[2] See
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/conte...ows_vista.html
point 10.

--
Chris Game

Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Chris Game wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:50:50 -0700, Bruce Chambers wrote:
>
>> Microsoft isn't the one who purchased an OS that doesn't meet his needs.
>
> Unfortunately MSFT *is* the one who defined the features for the
> various SKUs[1], without much apparent thought.



Which part of the word "Home" (see subject line) do you not understand?
When did Microsoft ever offer a "Home" OS that was capable of joining
a domain?

I'd say it was the OP who made the purchase "without much apparent
thought," wouldn't you?


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

The OP's real concern isn't joining a domain, but the inability of Home
versions to cache credentials (a common misstatement by less technical end
users). That's a serious limitation even in "Home" versions used in a home
workgroup setting. This can sometimes be circumvented by using non-password
(guest) file sharing, but not always, depending on the mix of OS's involved.

As you advised, using a batch file in start up had been generally the best
solution, and we use that frequently with XP Home. Note however that this
doesn't work as easily in Vista as UAC prevents it from running. Many of
these version distinctions, exist purely for marketing reasons to drive up
the price of Windows while circumventing possible oversight given MS's
monopoly status. This problems causes considerable frustration to average
users who just want to share a few files in a simple home network. I would
respectfully suggest that blaming the user for not being an expert and
anticipating the problem is somewhat lacking in fairness.
--

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
news:%23Q17UG3QIHA.5692@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Chris Game wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:50:50 -0700, Bruce Chambers wrote:
>>
>>> Microsoft isn't the one who purchased an OS that doesn't meet his needs.
>>
>> Unfortunately MSFT *is* the one who defined the features for the
>> various SKUs[1], without much apparent thought.
>
>
>
> Which part of the word "Home" (see subject line) do you not understand?
> When did Microsoft ever offer a "Home" OS that was capable of joining a
> domain?
>
> I'd say it was the OP who made the purchase "without much apparent
> thought," wouldn't you?
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
>
> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand
> Russell
>
> The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
> killed a great many philosophers.
> ~ Denis Diderot

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:08:50 -0500, GTS wrote:

> As you advised, using a batch file in start up had been generally
> the best solution, and we use that frequently with XP Home. Note
> however that this doesn't work as easily in Vista as UAC prevents
> it from running. Many of these version distinctions, exist
> purely for marketing reasons to drive up the price of Windows
> while circumventing possible oversight given MS's monopoly
> status. This problems causes considerable frustration to average
> users who just want to share a few files in a simple home
> network. I would respectfully suggest that blaming the user for
> not being an expert and anticipating the problem is somewhat
> lacking in fairness.

Fairly put; I'm afraid though that Bruce follows the MSFT line in
pigeon holing 'home' users without any real knowledge of what they
need in an OS. Forcing users to upgrade to the ultimate version just
to get simple things to work properly is downright underhand, and of
course the information available to purchasers before sale is
usually severely limited, it's only when you get the DVD home and
install it that the limitations come to light.

--
Chris Game

"Drawing on my fine command of language, I said nothing."
-- Mark Twain

"Chris Game" <chrisgame@example.net> wrote in message
news:i946xrgf8vtl$.dlg@example9876.com...
>
> Fairly put; I'm afraid though that Bruce follows the MSFT line in
> pigeon holing 'home' users without any real knowledge of what they
> need in an OS. Forcing users to upgrade to the ultimate version just
> to get simple things to work properly is downright underhand, and of
> course the information available to purchasers before sale is
> usually severely limited, it's only when you get the DVD home and
> install it that the limitations come to light.

I would have thought the real issue was overhead. Takes more resources
to run a domain. It also has to be administered. Then you need
to set up clients and servers, etc. More resources than the normal
home user needs or wants to waste. Then there's how.

Plus, there's security issues. Too complex for a stand alone system like
home basic or premium.

--
Curtis D. Levin KD4ZKW

I would have thought the real issue was overhead. Takes more resources
to run a domain. It also has to be administered. Then you need
to set up clients and servers, etc. More resources than the normal
home user needs or wants to waste. Then there's how.

Plus, there's security issues. Too complex for a stand alone system like
home basic or premium.

--
Curtis D. Levin KD4ZKW

You guys are all right! ! ! It's true what M$ is doing, but to take away a
simple thing like mapping a drive and managing a network account, (that
means Windows saving you login and password), things that were easily done
on Windows 95 - Me... I mean come-on!

I understand yes that servers, clients, group policies, active directory,
accounts, permissions..... is a bit too much for your everyday HOME USER,
but yes don't you think they have the right the share a file or two and stay
locked on it the next time you start-up your system?

I know there's some developer out there just hating this very thing and
everthing that M$ is during, that they'll find the tweaks to get around
these issues and will put it out there and that's why I am just asking?


--
Niggiebro