Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How can I display the calendar - limited user?

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 3:36:24 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

When I want to see the calendar, I double-click the clock.
Ok, I appreciate that a limited user cannot change the systems clock, but
Windows XP won't even let me see the calendar!

It says:
You do not have the proper privilege level to change the System time.

What I want:
1. Please change this behaviour for XP and Server 2003 as a Windows Update.
2. How can I display the calendar?
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 9:37:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

"George Valkov" <null@somewhere.com> wrote:

>When I want to see the calendar, I double-click the clock.
>Ok, I appreciate that a limited user cannot change the systems clock, but
>Windows XP won't even let me see the calendar!
>It says:
>You do not have the proper privilege level to change the System time.

This is because the calendar is not designed as a tool but just for
easily adjusting the system date. You may want to download a
third-party calendar tool from sites like http://www.tucows.com/,
http://www.simtel.net/simtel.net/

--
(tm)
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 11:32:53 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

Thank You!
I will write the calendar utility by myself.
I posted the previous message, because it is easier to simply double-click
on the clock :-)



"Thorsten Matzner" <tmatzner@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:o LsAdx0lEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> "George Valkov" <null@somewhere.com> wrote:
>
> >When I want to see the calendar, I double-click the clock.
> >Ok, I appreciate that a limited user cannot change the systems clock, but
> >Windows XP won't even let me see the calendar!
> >It says:
> >You do not have the proper privilege level to change the System time.
>
> This is because the calendar is not designed as a tool but just for
> easily adjusting the system date. You may want to download a
> third-party calendar tool from sites like http://www.tucows.com/,
> http://www.simtel.net/simtel.net/
>
> --
> (tm)
Related resources
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 4:53:14 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

Hello Homer!
I love Your idea!
I do use IIS. I have never created a server side script page like ASP, but
it's my lobby to create HTML pages with client side script - they work just
fine on my system (I can even write to file-system or registry ;-)

SP2? I can always workaround it :-)



"Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:#w7x7Y3lEHA.952@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> "George Valkov" <null@somewhere.com> wrote in message
> news:euGJoP1lEHA.2224@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Thank You!
> > I will write the calendar utility by myself.
> > I posted the previous message, because it is easier to simply
double-click
> > on the clock :-)
>
> If you're running IIS, it might be easier to create a simple HTML page
that
> draws a calendar, and then embed it in the taskbar as a toolbar
(right-click
> on the taskbar, New Toolbar, then type in
http://localhost/mycalendar.asp).
> Make all the HTML generation code server-side and have it output plain
HTML
> so SP2 doesn't block anything. (I'd assume) even a restricted user should
> be able to access this file. Attached is a screenshot of my (vertical)
> taskbar to illustrate. If you prefer horizontal toolbars, I suppose you
can
> do that too but you'll probably have a hard time making the calendar fit
> into this little vertical space, unless you resize it to occupy two lines
or
> more.
>
> If you're not running IIS, I suppose you could point elsewhere (than
> localhost), but then you'd have to make sure the remote machine hosting
your
> file is always accessible...
>
>
>
Anonymous
September 14, 2004 12:15:51 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

Hello Homer!

I am interested in ActiveX controls. Unfortunately I know only two or three.
Can You give me a list of usefull ActiveX controls. Once I know it's name
and how to start it, I will find more information in the help of Visual
Studio .NET 2003.

Have You ever thought about using Your toolbar as a folder template for "My
Computer"?

If You like, we can share some of our ideas and knowledge.
I have a customized folder template for Audio/Video folders. It's rather
old, but I'm sure that You will like the idea. I am collecting information
and I will entirely rewrite the code.

h@t@t ?p:/~ /th0e -b!oss0 .1atl5ant iD s.bg G/pY ub/g~P l ay/

This is the place to download it. You will have to remove all UPPERCASE
LETTERS, spaces, numbers and other symbols, to restore the HTTP address.
Don't remove the Minus(-) sign!

Once You open the address, You will know my e-mail.

If You want to post me some files, You will find a folder named
/InPort
on the FTP site, hosted by the same server.
You can only write files and folders there. Read file and delete is not
allowed!

If You like the colours of my Windows, I will share You my entire manually
created theme.

Bye!
Anonymous
September 14, 2004 12:15:52 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

"George Valkov" <null@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:o e5jhVbmEHA.2500@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Hello Homer!
>
> I am interested in ActiveX controls. Unfortunately I know only two or
> three.
> Can You give me a list of usefull ActiveX controls. Once I know it's name
> and how to start it, I will find more information in the help of Visual
> Studio .NET 2003.

For the most part I just stick with those built into Windows or come with
standard dev tools. There's the usual FileSystemObject, the ADO objects,
microsoft.xmlhttp (which is useful for getting raw HTTP data), and the
Microsoft Graph control, which is useful if you need to dynamically generate
graphs (this is what I used to generate my piecharts). Other than that, the
Outlook object model is fairly well documented and straightforward to use.
Check out microsoft.public.scripting.wsh, you'll find tons of snippets and
URLs to good sites. There's also some third-party ActiveX control that let
me read/write INI files, whose name escapes me at the moment...But nothing
special beyond that.

> Have You ever thought about using Your toolbar as a folder template for
> "My
> Computer"?

Not really, either I don't have a use for folder templates, or I just don't
"get" them. :-) A long time ago, I had this all running on the desktop
itself (via ActiveDesktop), but the problem was in keeping all this stuff
visible at all times--to me, quick access to tons of functionality was the
key, so having it all hidden behind 15 layers of windows defeated that
purpose... When I realized that the toolbars could contain embedded HTML, I
moved everything over to a toolbar format.

> If You like, we can share some of our ideas and knowledge.
> I have a customized folder template for Audio/Video folders. It's rather
> old, but I'm sure that You will like the idea. I am collecting information
> and I will entirely rewrite the code.
>
> h@t@t ?p:/~ /th0e -b!oss0 .1atl5ant iD s.bg G/pY ub/g~P l ay/
>
> This is the place to download it. You will have to remove all UPPERCASE
> LETTERS, spaces, numbers and other symbols, to restore the HTTP address.
> Don't remove the Minus(-) sign!

Wow, that was almost enough to keep me away from your site. You *really*
don't want to have it found, do you? :-p

As an aside, I stumbled upon this thread
http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=208325&... today. Same
idea, but this guy is using ActiveDesktop instead of toolbars. You might
find useful things in there.
Anonymous
September 14, 2004 12:17:07 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

UPS!!!

the last "P" in the address I gave You... Don't remove it - it's gPlay.
Anonymous
September 14, 2004 5:33:00 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

X-noarchive: yes

"Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:e#1BM3cmEHA.3756@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Wow, that was almost enough to keep me away from your site. You *really*
> don't want to have it found, do you? :-p
>

The web site is hosted on my home PC.
This newsgroups are spyed by Google
and computers infected by Mass Mailing
worms and other bad software.

I hope that now You understand why I
don't want to post the address in a
clear form. You are Welcome to see
anything You have access to. There are
no secrets. You will find some interesting
ideas on my web-site. Run this script, to
see the addresses.

' file.vbs
Dim hostName, BossPage, gPlay, inPort

hostName = Replace(Replace("the~boss?atlantis?bg","?","."),"~","-")

gPlay = InputBox("Media player integrated in a folder template.", "gPlay",
"http://" & hostName & "/pub/gPlay/")

BossPage = InputBox("My Home Page.", "BossPage", "http://" & hostName & "/")

inPort = InputBox("You can post files here.", "inPort", "ftp://" & hostName
& "/inPort/")
Anonymous
September 14, 2004 5:33:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

>> Wow, that was almost enough to keep me away from your site. You *really*
>> don't want to have it found, do you? :-p
>
> The web site is hosted on my home PC.
> This newsgroups are spyed by Google
> and computers infected by Mass Mailing
> worms and other bad software.

No firewall, no nothing?

> I hope that now You understand why I
> don't want to post the address in a
> clear form.

Email addresses in the clear, I understand, but I've never seen anyone try
to hide a URL in fear of getting worms and what-not.

Besides, self-propagating worms will try to find new machines to infect by
IP address; nobody tries to discover sites by name...
Anonymous
September 15, 2004 2:38:55 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

X-noarchive: yes

> >> Wow, that was almost enough to keep me away from your site. You
*really*
> >> don't want to have it found, do you? :-p
> >
> > The web site is hosted on my home PC.
> > This newsgroups are spyed by Google
> > and computers infected by Mass Mailing
> > worms and other bad software.
>
> No firewall, no nothing?

Talking about this, I wonder if your antyvirus software saved your conputer
at least once, can You tell me? On my network (Windows shares), there are
thousands of computers and a big number of infected. The latest viruses
available on the Internet are spreading around. Just as you mentioned: No
fire-wall, and no Antivirus software, but I havent noticed problems, slow
performance or memory leaks.


> > I hope that now You understand why I
> > don't want to post the address in a
> > clear form.
>
> Email addresses in the clear, I understand, but I've never seen anyone try
> to hide a URL in fear of getting worms and what-not.
>
> Besides, self-propagating worms will try to find new machines to infect by
> IP address;

It's not a good practice to post private addresses in a clear form not just
e-mails, but all kind of private addresses. This is my advice. By the way
You didn't tell me if You like my web site? :-)


> nobody tries to discover sites by name...

Have You got a server on the Internet? I mean a piece of hardware that's on
Your own.
Anonymous
September 15, 2004 2:38:56 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

>> No firewall, no nothing?
>
> Talking about this, I wonder if your antyvirus software saved your
> conputer
> at least once, can You tell me?

Depends what you mean by "saved". Sure, my anti-virus has flagged plenty of
garbage being sent my way. As part of my job I wrote some code that gets
executed by an Exchange machine that processes roughly 2000 emails a day,
and anytime it encounters something it doesn't recognize it automatically
forwards it to me for manual analysis. Did I ever get infected though, no,
never. Neither did the Exchange machine, which has been in operation for
over 4 years. You're not suggesting that having a virus sitting in a
mailbox as a message attachment qualifies as "being infected", right?

> On my network (Windows shares), there are
> thousands of computers and a big number of infected.

Absolutely, I consider Intranets and LANs to be hostile environments,
especially when there's a few thousand machines hooked up to it and well
beyond my control. In this situation, a good dose of paranoia is just
common sense.

> The latest viruses
> available on the Internet are spreading around. Just as you mentioned: No
> fire-wall, and no Antivirus software, but I havent noticed problems, slow
> performance or memory leaks.

:-) It doesn't take an awful lot of computing power to send a 40KB file
over the LAN or SMTP or what not. You think you would "notice" everything a
decent anti-virus program is better positioned at identifying?

Seriously, you need an anti-virus. No "but"s or "if"s about it.

>> Email addresses in the clear, I understand, but I've never seen anyone
>> try
>> to hide a URL in fear of getting worms and what-not.
>>
>> Besides, self-propagating worms will try to find new machines to infect
>> by
>> IP address;
>
> It's not a good practice to post private addresses in a clear form not
> just
> e-mails, but all kind of private addresses. This is my advice.

The fallacy I was trying to point out is that by scrambling a URL you're
avoiding problems. Automated processes such as viruses and worms don't care
about your machine's domain name or directory structure; as long as they get
*some* sort of response (which they'll do by IP address) they'll start
hammering it. By scrambling a URL you're only preventing people from easy
access, and not accomplishing much else. By posting your scrambled URL and
instructions to "decode" it, your machine is effectively just as much of a
target for a human as it would be if you posted the URL in plain text.
You're just scramling your URL for the wrong reasons. If you really,
absolutely, positively need a private folder, you don't post it in Usenet,
scrambled or not. Do you really care whether Google indexes the page you
sent me?

MY advice is to get a decent firewall and anti-virus, download the patches
as they become available, and you won't have to act so paranoid.

> By the way You didn't tell me if You like my web site? :-)

I thought I'd do you a favor by keeping quiet. :-) Let's just put it this
way: I'm far from being color-coordinated, but ...my eyes! :-p The baby
blue and pink/purple scheme clashes...badly. The main page is also quite
minimalistic and hard to navigate (though that could be me not
knowing...Russian?)

>> nobody tries to discover sites by name...
>
> Have You got a server on the Internet? I mean a piece of hardware that's
> on
> Your own.

I personally don't, but know plenty of people who do and work for a company
that can use all the exposure it can get. They all get pinged externally
every once in a while--that's become the norm and to be expected. However,
nobody's ever managed to do any harm of any sort.
Anonymous
September 17, 2004 2:51:54 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

> > Talking about this, I wonder if your antyvirus software saved your
> > conputer
> > at least once, can You tell me?
>
> Depends what you mean by "saved". Sure, my anti-virus has flagged plenty
of
> garbage being sent my way. As part of my job I wrote some code that gets
> executed by an Exchange machine that processes roughly 2000 emails a day,
> and anytime it encounters something it doesn't recognize it automatically
> forwards it to me for manual analysis. Did I ever get infected though,
no,
> never. Neither did the Exchange machine, which has been in operation for
> over 4 years. You're not suggesting that having a virus sitting in a
> mailbox as a message attachment qualifies as "being infected", right?

I do receive viruses in mail attachments sometimes. My policy is to block
any unknown address who sent me a letter with attachment. I usually block
*@domain.com, but this is for my private e-mail. I don't have incoming
trafic (executable code) that needs to be checked. I prefer spending my
computer's resorces for programs and fast performance. In my case a good
security policy, up to date software and keeping an eye on what is running
is enough to keep me safe from viruses and hackers.

In your situation you do need an antivirus program.


> > On my network (Windows shares), there are
> > thousands of computers and a big number of infected.
>
> Absolutely, I consider Intranets and LANs to be hostile environments,
> especially when there's a few thousand machines hooked up to it and well
> beyond my control. In this situation, a good dose of paranoia is just
> common sense.

Although a secured computer without a fire-wall will be fully functional in
a Windows shares LAN, It's always good to block anything unused - that means
fire-wall the Internet door.


> > The latest viruses
> > available on the Internet are spreading around. Just as you mentioned:
No
> > fire-wall, and no Antivirus software, but I havent noticed problems,
slow
> > performance or memory leaks.
>
> :-) It doesn't take an awful lot of computing power to send a 40KB file
> over the LAN or SMTP or what not. You think you would "notice" everything
a
> decent anti-virus program is better positioned at identifying?

The chance to notice a virus just when it arrives is very poor. I would
notice it some time afterwards and proceed to recovery. In general a secured
computer won't get infected that easy...


> Seriously, you need an anti-virus. No "but"s or "if"s about it.

Well, I do make a full system scans from time to time, but for performance
reasons I never install the antivirus software on the working OS.


> >> Email addresses in the clear, I understand, but I've never seen anyone
> >> try
> >> to hide a URL in fear of getting worms and what-not.
> >>
> >> Besides, self-propagating worms will try to find new machines to infect
> >> by
> >> IP address;
> >
> > It's not a good practice to post private addresses in a clear form not
> > just
> > e-mails, but all kind of private addresses. This is my advice.
>
> The fallacy I was trying to point out is that by scrambling a URL you're
> avoiding problems. Automated processes such as viruses and worms don't
care
> about your machine's domain name or directory structure; as long as they
get
> *some* sort of response (which they'll do by IP address) they'll start
> hammering it. By scrambling a URL you're only preventing people from easy
> access, and not accomplishing much else. By posting your scrambled URL
and
> instructions to "decode" it, your machine is effectively just as much of a
> target for a human as it would be if you posted the URL in plain text.
> You're just scramling your URL for the wrong reasons. If you really,
> absolutely, positively need a private folder, you don't post it in Usenet,
> scrambled or not. Do you really care whether Google indexes the page you
> sent me?

The less unwanted requests, the less traffic I pay for. An indexed link in
clear form causes a lot of unwanted requests daily.


> MY advice is to get a decent firewall and anti-virus, download the patches
> as they become available, and you won't have to act so paranoid.

I already answered that.


> > By the way You didn't tell me if You like my web site? :-)
>
> I thought I'd do you a favor by keeping quiet. :-) Let's just put it
this
> way: I'm far from being color-coordinated, but ...my eyes! :-p The baby
> blue and pink/purple scheme clashes...badly. The main page is also quite
> minimalistic and hard to navigate (though that could be me not
> knowing...Russian?)

The site is not for the big audience. I don't have much resources to put on
it - this is just a lobby - writting HTML and scripts. The menu has links to
the entire content of the "public area". In fact it is a very fast and easy
way to navigate. Originally it was created with Bulgarian language interface
and that's why You can't navigate from it. Because of Your idea, now it
speaks English (unless You go to Regional Settings in the Control Panel and
choose Bulgarian from there ;-)
I also spent some time in changing the colours - if You don't like this
colour scheme, just open the Display properties and pick another one... Try
it, it's fun! ;-)
Anonymous
September 17, 2004 2:57:27 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

[sensible replies snipped]

I'm glad you answered my remarks the way you did. Upon re-reading my post,
I thought you might construe it as degenerating towards a flame. That
wasn't my intent. :-)

>> Do you really care whether Google indexes the page you sent me?
>
> The less unwanted requests, the less traffic I pay for. An indexed link in
> clear form causes a lot of unwanted requests daily.

Very true and valid point. I'm not used to thinking in those terms since,
as I mentioned, I don't have a machine directly exposed to the net or pay
for bandwidth.

>> > By the way You didn't tell me if You like my web site? :-)
>>
>> I thought I'd do you a favor by keeping quiet. :-) Let's just put it
>> this
>> way: I'm far from being color-coordinated, but ...my eyes! :-p The
>> baby
>> blue and pink/purple scheme clashes...badly. The main page is also quite
>> minimalistic and hard to navigate (though that could be me not
>> knowing...Russian?)
>
> The site is not for the big audience. I don't have much resources to put
> on
> it - this is just a lobby - writting HTML and scripts. The menu has links
> to
> the entire content of the "public area". In fact it is a very fast and
> easy
> way to navigate. Originally it was created with Bulgarian language
> interface
> and that's why You can't navigate from it. Because of Your idea, now it
> speaks English (unless You go to Regional Settings in the Control Panel
> and
> choose Bulgarian from there ;-)

I assumed Russian because of the characters being rendered by IE on my end.
:-)

> I also spent some time in changing the colours - if You don't like this
> colour scheme, just open the Display properties and pick another one...
> Try
> it, it's fun! ;-)

:-) Who am I to criticize someone's color choices? My desktop is
configured to use Windows Classic with all the defaults except for a black
background. My willingness to spend time making things look good end right
there. :-)
September 28, 2011 5:57:36 AM

i really don't get what all this fuss is about here!
is not it understandable, that someone wants to look up the current date with the system-provided calendar-app, which he knows for who-knows-how-long?

can windows not restrict the "date/time-setting"-process _only_ without messing with the whole common usage?
obviously not!
to criticise means to _single out_ the criticizable matter, to provide a reason, and, if possible a solution for the distinct problem, not to invent a new one.

accordingly, the windows tray would not show the current time/date, because it is only "designed" to _change_ it, and the "limited user" has no right to do so, and so he has not the right to even _see_ it! are you nuts?
the time-tray would be blank!

but let us give the solution:
use "surun" and create a "surun"-user-group, that can run fe the system controls(and all programs) under admin rights within a limited user-account and goto syscon/surun/prefs and choose "..to change system time"..

..believe me, no-one will want to really change the system time, if it is alright, apart from kids, which will not get the right to do so.

but the critics still stand: bad (non-)solution by micrsoft!
!