Auto-Restart Calc.exe After Crash
-
@mihi said:
Hey, most users here are programmers. Is it that hard to write a small Windows application that calls ExitWindowsEx with the EWX_RESTARTAPPS flag (in combination with the needed flags to reboot and to disallow aborting it in case you want a realistic simulation)?
Oh fuck, you're one of those OSS "fix it yourself, then" folken, aren't ya.
-
@bridget99 said:
In fairness to Microsoft, the update-at-all-costs mentality seems to be fed by a peanut gallery of people taking potshots at their security. Microsoft didn't ask for that.
If Windows' development were driven by the technology deparment and not by its marketing department, perhaps they would have taken security a little bit more seriously in the last decade, and they wouldn't have made such an obvious -and enduring- target.No such problems with Windows for me, though. I have a funny feeling that people who have all these problems with Windows either install loads of crapware, or they run hardware that they got for free with a Happy Meal, or they don't know what they're doing, or all of the above.
-
@Severity One said:
No such problems with Windows for me, though. I have a funny feeling that people who have all these problems with Windows either install loads of crapware, or they run hardware that they got for free with a Happy Meal, or they don't know what they're doing, or all of the above.
Or, perhaps more correctly, MS simply decide to ignore the user when they select the option saying "Download the updates by all means, but don't under any circumstances, install them until I ask" and installs the updates immediately anyway. Rebooting, of course, should the update require it. Without waiting/deciding the user is taking too long to acknowledge the reboot dialog.
Or have they finally fixed that particular 'bug'?
-
I seem to remember my windows 7 work PC a few months ago doing something similar. Originally I didn't have a password on it. I left it running as I had a few files I was working on and a needed to keep track of which ones I had edited. Next morning I came in to see some of my windows had been closed with the text editor displaying a "recover files" dialogue box. Chrome and a few other programs were running. One cygwin window was open with nothing on the buffer. after a few minutes the "your computer was restarted because of automatic updates" balloon appeared. No conspiracy though: I hadn't turned off auto install.
-
@PJH said:
have they finally fixed that particular 'bug'?
Are you one of Blakey's pod people? That link is from 2007
@Severity One said:If Windows' development were driven by the technology deparment and not by its marketing department
They would be Linux and nobody wants that
@Severity One said:they wouldn't have made such an obvious -and enduring- target.
The biggest problem really is that they are a big target. Mac OS security is a fucking joke and even some Linux distros have a lot of default setting that are retarddingly stupid securitywise. So pretty much everybody is shit but with MS you are at least aware of it.
-
@serguey123 said:
@PJH said:
Merely an example of said behaviour. I've been affected by it a lot more recently.have they finally fixed that particular 'bug'?
Are you one of Blakey's pod people? That link is from 2007
-
@Severity One said:
If Windows' development were driven by the technology deparment and not by its marketing department
.. it would have not become the success it has been, which in turn has driven down the cost of computing and its components.
Microsoft have a lot to be blamed for, but there's been a lot of developments that can be directly attributed to them also. It's very easy to see the coin form only one side and discard it without realising the other side will also be lost.
-
@PJH said:
@serguey123 said:
@PJH said:
Merely an example of said behaviour. I've been affected by it a lot more recently.have they finally fixed that particular 'bug'?
Are you one of Blakey's pod people? That link is from 2007
Using a link that old makes me wonder what recently means to you. This happened to you in a Win 7 (or newer OS) machine that you have direct control over? I ask because of course group policies and domain policies will overwrite local behaviour and also because if we aren't talking about a recent OS then it becomes a useless claim.
-
@Severity One said:
@bridget99 said:
In fairness to Microsoft, the update-at-all-costs mentality seems to be fed by a peanut gallery of people taking potshots at their security. Microsoft didn't ask for that.
If Windows' development were driven by the technology deparment and not by its marketing department, perhaps they would have taken security a little bit more seriously in the last decade, and they wouldn't have made such an obvious -and enduring- target.No such problems with Windows for me, though. I have a funny feeling that people who have all these problems with Windows either install loads of crapware, or they run hardware that they got for free with a Happy Meal, or they don't know what they're doing, or all of the above.
This post is about the PC provided to me at work. I don't know what brand it is, but it was installed and configured by our IT department and doesn't have much on it other than Visual Studio, Office, and some SQL Server management tools (from Microsoft). There's zero "crapware" installed... both my IT guy and myself have little patience for that sort of thing.
-
Windows sucks. /thread
-
@dhromed said:
@mihi said:
Hey, most users here are programmers. Is it that hard to write a small Windows application that calls ExitWindowsEx with the EWX_RESTARTAPPS flag (in combination with the needed flags to reboot and to disallow aborting it in case you want a realistic simulation)?
Oh fuck, you're one of those OSS "fix it yourself, then" folken, aren't ya.
In fact, I'm an OSS guy, and most of the bug reports I send contain either a patch or a pull request, so I do try to fix the things that bother me myself. Which does not automatically mean I expect everyone else to do the same - but I won't count onto any vendor for any software (be it closed or open) to listen to the minority of "power users" and provide what they need out of the box (or an API/scripting environment to add it)...
Which is one of the reasons I'm still using macro recorders and wasp.codeplex.com on Windows.
By the way, as this is about Windows 7 (and not XP), you can avoid that little C++ acrobatics by just running
shutdown /g /f /t 120
in a command window (and in case you decide against it, abort it with shutdown /a within 2 minutes)
If you have opened a few calculators, you can have a look if they reappear (due to lack of a Win7 machine that I can reboot right now, I can't try it)
About the other thing with SetCapture, WindowFromPoint, GetWindowThreadProcessId and TerminateProcess in that thread, I think you can easily implement that for Windows as well, but probably someone else has already done it. But, since Windows by default creates a new message loop if an application is hang that handles the "Close" button and asks if you want to terminate the process, I've rarely seen need to have such a tool - and in the rare case of a window that does not behave like that, where I don't know to which process it belongs, I use Process Explorer's (http://live.sysinternals.com/procexp.exe if not installed) "Find" feature to find the process and kill it from there.
-
@jamesn said:
Windows sucks. /thread
I like most parts of it. A lot of the more recent consumer-driven / security-driven additions to Windows annoy me. Automatically opening up four Calc windows is an example.
-
@serguey123 said:
...even some Linux distros have a lot of default setting that are retarddingly stupid securitywise.
Not to mention that every application has a few dozen buffer overflows. Seriously, if you want to infect Linux with a virus, just dig through the source to some FOSS multimedia library until you find a buffer overflow, then craft a specially-formed MP3 that installs a virus.
I don't know why you'd want to infect Linux, though. That's like running over a retarded kid's bike.
-
So Windows 8 just informed me, as it does, that it will restart my computer in 2 days because of important updates.
It told me this on the login screen. Before I had logged in. When it had the perfect opportunity to just go ahead and install the updates.
Instead I had to hit the retarded charms bar, then the jarringly out of place sidebar settings thing and then choose Update & Restart myself. In oher words, I had to micromanage the computer's work. What a long way we've come!
-
@dhromed said:
...the jarringly out of place sidebar settings thing...
Goddammit, why does this exist? Here's the thing, I'm not bothered by the way it looks (I'm actually quite fond of its clean design). There are two things, if fixed, that would make this just fine:
-
It should be in a window. Even a very large window is fine. Why is it in its own screen? One you can't get out of without knowing the right key to press? I can't remember anything in Windows every behaving like that.
-
There should be links or something to take you to more advanced settings. And it's not like the settings I need are even that advanced; they're completely normal settings any normal human would need. But if you make me dig through the whole screen, hoping to find it, and then make me close the screen (how do I do that again?) and hunt down the Control Panel... why?? I usually think M$ does a good job at UIs, but this fucking thing..
-
-
@Cassidy said:
@Severity One said:
Yeah, so instead we got their most insecure application (Internet Explorer) as an "integral part" of the operating system, even on the so-called "server" versions of Windows, with no possibility to uninstall it. Ever wonder why Windows isn't more popular with server installations? Nobody in his right mind runs a server on Windows, and they've screwed over their server business for short-term gain against Netscape, also in the mean time collecting almost €1bn in fines from the EU.If Windows' development were driven by the technology deparment and not by its marketing department
.. it would have not become the success it has been, which in turn has driven down the cost of computing and its components.Microsoft have a lot to be blamed for, but there's been a lot of developments that can be directly attributed to them also. It's very easy to see the coin form only one side and discard it without realising the other side will also be lost.
Combine that with their inability to conquer the mobile market (and they have been trying for the best part of a decade), the shrinking PC market and their loss-making game console business, they are relegated to selling office software. Which they do particularly well, but Windows 8 on a regular PC? It's a joke. Very fast to start up when combined with an SSD, but the Metro interface is competely useless on anything other than a small-ish touch screen.
-
@Severity One said:
Nobody in his right mind runs a server on Windows...
[citation needed]
Besides which, hasn't IE been removed from Windows Server for awhile now? And how is it a vulnerability unless you're browsing the web on your server, which would be pretty WTFy in itself.
Somewhere a Slashdot is missing one of its mindless drones..
-
@mihi said:
Hey, most users here are programmers. Is it that hard to write a small Windows application that calls ExitWindowsEx with the EWX_RESTARTAPPS flag (in combination with the needed flags to reboot and to disallow aborting it in case you want a realistic simulation)?
That would be cool if that's what we were trying to do.
But we don't actually know the default settings of a Windows7/8 forced reboot, so we don't actually know if it restarts the apps as bridget describes.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
Somewhere a Slashdot is missing one of its mindless drones..
Somebody hasn't spent the last year and a half improving his reading skills.As I mentioned before, I use Windows, I even like it, but the fact that Microsoft face an ever dwindling market share is squarely their own fault and can be traced back to the browser wars. They disenfranchised too many users and never recovered from that, especially not after Vista, despite that their software is more than decent these days.
Running anything other than Windows in an office environment is a pain, for both users and administrators, but the same goes for running Windows as a server platform. "Hey, let me login to this server to change something and no I can't because somebody else is already logged in."
-
1 Windows Server has shipped mega-locked-down for years now. (Decades? When did Server 2003 come out?)
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
3 Name a mainstream OS that ships without a browser. Microsoft was just the first to recognize the need.
-
@blakeyrat said:
1 Windows Server has shipped mega-locked-down for years now. (Decades? When did Server 2003 come out?)
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
Well... how will those poor UNIX eunuchs ever print out their TPS reports? And without Active Directory, where will they put the pictures of the Halloween party? We really need a place where only the correct people can see Cherie from Finance breaking her fingernail and singing "Red, Red Wine." In fact, it's a wonder the world even worked at all before .NET 2.0. Sad, sad times were those.
-
@Severity One said:
As I mentioned before, I use Windows, I even like it, but the fact that Microsoft face an ever dwindling market share is squarely their own fault and can be traced back to the browser wars. They disenfranchised too many users and never recovered from that, especially not after Vista, despite that their software is more than decent these days.
I call bullshit all around. As a desktop OS, Windows seems to have about the same market share it did a decade ago, within a few percentage points. As for smartphone OSes, they haven't done well here, but they never have, so it's hard to say they're "dwindling".
Also, the only people they disenfranchised with the browser wars were fat, pathetic FOSS nerds and laid-off Netscape employees. Seriously, the vast, vast majority of the computer-buying public simply does not give a shit.
And, yeah, IE lagged behind in the 2000s, but most people forget it was more standards-compliant than Netscape 4. So the dipshits who bash M$ for lack of standards compliance should be praising them for making standards compliance even a thing.
Besides which, the only reason for M$ to have improved IE would be to support web apps, which were an awful abuse of a technology mostly meant to display static, text-heavy documents. It's taken over a decade of "new browser wars" for the web standards to even get to a point where web apps aren't a laughable, shameful hack.
-
@bridget99 said:
@blakeyrat said:
1 Windows Server has shipped mega-locked-down for years now. (Decades? When did Server 2003 come out?)
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
Well... how will those poor UNIX eunuchs ever print out their TPS reports? And without Active Directory, where will they put the pictures of the Halloween party? We really need a place where only the correct people can see Cherie from Finance breaking her fingernail and singing "Red, Red Wine." In fact, it's a wonder the world even worked at all before .NET 2.0. Sad, sad times were those.
You know, it's pretty common for people in tech flamewars to accuse each other of deeper psychological issues, but with bridget I get the feeling that's actually the case..
-
@bridget99 said:
My work system restarted overnight... like most of the crap computer people make these days, it has a mind of its own.
Are you sure it's Windows and not something that your IT department is doing? Sending out a command over the newtork to boot a computer has been around for quite some time. I don't even bother turning my computer off anymore because even if I do, it will be on when I get in to my office in the morning. Nobody in IT will explain why they need to do this every day.
-
@eViLegion said:
When I restart my machine I'm usually in the middle of trying to do something, and I'm only restarting because of some error, expecting it to take a minute or two and actually being delayed by an hour.
Hint: At an admin cmd prompt, enter "shutdown /r /t 5" (restart) or "shutdown /s /t 5" (shutdown). This does not install updates (unless WIndows 8 has waited its 48 hours or whatever and has decided that it knows more that you do about what to do, the bastard).
Also, I think that if you log off from Windows XP/Vista/7 then you can shut down the machine from the login prompt without applying updates.
As for IT departments that install updates without giving me the opportunity to postpone the shutdown, while I can see their point of view, I still want them to undergo paper cuts and lemon juice for every time my machine reboots when I am in the middle of work, even if it is at 3:00am. Arrgghh!
-
@El_Heffe said:
@bridget99 said:
My work system restarted overnight... like most of the crap computer people make these days, it has a mind of its own.
Are you sure it's Windows and not something that your IT department is doing? Sending out a command over the newtork to boot a computer has been around for quite some time. I don't even bother turning my computer off anymore because even if I do, it will be on when I get in to my office in the morning. Nobody in IT will explain why they need to do this every day.I think it's something our IT Director configured at the domain level, but that's just a guess. In general, auto-restart is something I perceive to largely emanate from Microsoft, but I could be wrong. I'll try and ask Señor Director when he returns.
-
@Severity One said:
"Hey, let me login to this server to change something and no I can't because somebody else is already logged in."
If you mean someone logged in and walked away with "lock this computer" then that's not a windows problem, that's a people problem. If they've walked away with it still logged in and unlocked then
feel free to play silly buggers with their unsecured accountlog them out first.Besides.. if you're logging into a server to change something then I'd assume you have enough privs to override the lock.
-
@blakeyrat said:
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
Too obvious.
-
@Cassidy said:
@blakeyrat said:
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
Too obvious.You ever notice how when a site reports on Linux server marketshare they're only counting web servers? You ever wonder why that is?
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Cassidy said:
@blakeyrat said:
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
Too obvious.You ever notice how when a site reports on Linux server marketshare they're only counting web servers? You ever wonder why that is?
Those web server stats are always nonsense anyway. The numbers mostly come from crawling and recording the Server: header, but lots of people obfuscate or disable the Server header (I always configure my Linux servers to return a Server header indicating IIS because it will trip up a lot of stupid script kiddies.)
It also usually counts something like # of domains, which is stupid because of all the crap web hosts that pack 10,000 crap sites onto a LAMP server. I'd be more interested in seeing large, high-traffic sites.
-
@blakeyrat said:
You ever notice how when a site reports on Linux server marketshare they're only counting *web* servers? You ever wonder why that is?
Because Gmail use Linux web servers as a front-end to their Exchange mail servers? Because facebook's cluster uses Win2008? Because the DoD, FAA, USA postal service, federal court system or stock exchange would never consider anything like Linux? And as for those amateurs over at CERN...
Yeah, you're right. Linux couldn't possibly be used for anything other than simple web-serving.
-
@blakeyrat said:
1 Windows Server has shipped mega-locked-down for years now. (Decades? When did Server 2003 come out?)
2 Nobody in their right mind would use Linux as a server for anything other than web pages. Its printer support sucks, directory services sucks, and email and fileserving is a pain to set up and maintain. And its file system sucks compared to decades-old NTFS.
3 Name a mainstream OS that ships without a browser. Microsoft was just the first to recognize the need.
Man, if the Linux file system sucks compared to NTFS, it must really blow in comparison with FAT32.
-
@Cassidy said:
...USA postal service...
Wait, what? If USPS does use Linux, I'd say that's an argument against. They can't even deliver a package without opening it up, throwing away the contents and replacing them with a 3-gallon jug of human feces. I have received numerous packages that were literally nothing but an empty box missing two of its sides.
I'm not joking--the postman knocks on my door and is like "Hey, I have these packages I need you to sign for" and they're just mangled cardboard and he's like "Yeah, it looks like the contents fell out somewhere along the way. But this is how we got it." And I'm like "The shipper gave you an empty box to ship to me?" And he's like "Oh no, I'm just saying when our post office got it, it was an empty box. It must've happened in the regional sorting center." (as if I really care where my package was disemboweled, and as if the regional sorting facility were not part of the same company..)
And this happened on multiple occasions. I was out probably $1000 due to this shit (and yes, I had insurance on the packages, but they wanted receipts for everything in the boxes and I'm like "A lot of this stuff is a decade old. I don't still have receipts for it.." so that was a wash.)
So when people talk about the post office being in financial trouble and layoffs and maybe the postal employees and their families ending up starving in the streets, I say bring it on.
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@Cassidy said:
...USA postal service...
Wait, what? If USPS does use Linux, I'd say that's an argument against. They can't even deliver a package without opening it up, throwing away the contents and replacing them with a 3-gallon jug of human feces. I have received numerous packages that were literally nothing but an empty box missing two of its sides.
I'm not joking--the postman knocks on my door and is like "Hey, I have these packages I need you to sign for" and they're just mangled cardboard and he's like "Yeah, it looks like the contents fell out somewhere along the way. But this is how we got it." And I'm like "The shipper gave you an empty box to ship to me?" And he's like "Oh no, I'm just saying when our post office got it, it was an empty box. It must've happened in the regional sorting center." (as if I really care where my package was disemboweled, and as if the regional sorting facility were not part of the same company..)
And this happened on multiple occasions. I was out probably $1000 due to this shit (and yes, I had insurance on the packages, but they wanted receipts for everything in the boxes and I'm like "A lot of this stuff is a decade old. I don't still have receipts for it.." so that was a wash.)
So when people talk about the post office being in financial trouble and layoffs and maybe the postal employees and their families ending up starving in the streets, I say bring it on.
I've had people try to sell me crap on several occasions based on the argument that "the U.S. Navy uses it."
-
@morbiuswilters said:
They can't even deliver a package without opening it up, throwing away the contents and replacing them with a 3-gallon jug of human feces.
yum install shit
@morbiuswilters said:
I'm not joking--the postman knocks on my door and is like "Hey, I have these packages I need you to sign for" and they're just mangled cardboard
gzip -d mangled.cbd
@morbiuswilters said:
"Yeah, it looks like the contents fell out somewhere along the way. But this is how we got it."
par2repair morbs.pkg
@morbiuswilters said:
"Oh no, I'm just saying when our post office got it, it was an empty box. It must've happened in the regional sorting center."
md5sum empty.box
diff sorting-center post-office | patch -u
@morbiuswilters said:
So when people talk about the post office being in financial trouble and layoffs and maybe the postal employees and their families ending up starving in the streets, I say bring it on.
UK PO is also in the shit, primarily because they didn't move with the times and found many services were being eroded by competitors to the point that their only customers were ageing coffin-dodgers who also didn't move with the times and preferred to queue up in the freezing cold outside a dingy Orwellian outlet to obtain their pension because $deity_on_horseback if only there was some electronic means to transfer those funds directly into your bank account.
And their package delivery arm is just as bad as USPS.
-
@Cassidy said:
And their package delivery arm is just as bad as USPS.
They actually named their parcel subsidiary "Parcel Force"??
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@Cassidy said:
And their package delivery arm is just as bad as USPS.
They actually named their parcel subsidiary "Parcel Force"??
In Canada and Australia, a lot of crap seems to be named following the pattern "(Noun)(Country Name)," e.g. "Forces Canada" or "Animal Health Australia." (EDIT: Deleted the mean part; it's OK that there are nicer people than me in the world. They have a right to exist.)
-
@bridget99 said:
They have a right to exist.
They also have a right to not exist by your definition of rights. In fact, they have a right to call you and ask you if you're thinking of adopting a companion for your -- wait, that's not a dog?That's YOU?
-
@morbiuswilters said:
@Cassidy said:
Yes. And it's not like it's a monopoly on incompetence in the delivery of packages or anything.And their package delivery arm is just as bad as USPS.
They actually named their parcel subsidiary "Parcel Force"??
-
@Cassidy said:
@Severity One said:
No, what I mean is that I cannot log in because somebody else is already logged in. Whether he's browsing pr0n, or maintaining his Counter-Strike server, or forgot to log out, or on the off-chance is actually doing some work is irrelevant, just like it's irrelevant that I could forcibly log him off, or walk to his desk and punch him in the face."Hey, let me login to this server to change something and no I can't because somebody else is already logged in."
If you mean someone logged in and walked away with "lock this computer" then that's not a windows problem, that's a people problem. If they've walked away with it still logged in and unlocked thenfeel free to play silly buggers with their unsecured accountlog them out first.Besides.. if you're logging into a server to change something then I'd assume you have enough privs to override the lock.
What is relevent is that there's a restriction for the maximum number of logged-in users on a server for absolutely no good reason.
-
@Severity One said:
What is relevent is that there's a restriction for the maximum number of logged-in users on a server for absolutely no good reason.
MONEEEEEYYYYY
I think.
-
@Severity One said:
What is relevent is that there's a restriction for the maximum number of logged-in users on a server for absolutely no good reason.
Of course there's a good reason.
-
-
@Severity One said:
No, what I mean is that I cannot log in because somebody else is already logged in.
Then perhaps he can change the something for you.
I'm not really seeing the problem here.
I'm certainly not seeing it as being a problem with running Windows as a server platform, according to your original post.
If you perceive the problem to be someone using the console when you require it... that's a problem completely independent to the OS of choice.
-
If the account you're using to RDP to a Windows 2008 (and newer) server has admin privileges, it will show you the list of (max 2) logged in users, and offer an option to force-logoff them.
In case of Win2003 and older, often the third, console session (mstsc /admin /v:servername , or if you're on XP pre-SP3 mstsc /console /v:servername) is available.
You also can open Terminal Services Manager / Remote Desktop Services Manager console on any other server or the RSAT pack on your workstation, use "Connect to Computer" to connect it to the server in question remotely, and force-logoff the user from there.
Now, if the account you use has connect-via-RDP privilege but not local admin privilege on the server... well, you're screwed.
-
@Cassidy said:
@Severity One said:
No, what I mean is that I cannot log in because somebody else is already logged in.
Then perhaps he can change the something for you.
I'm not really seeing the problem here.
ASASFACFGHKFDGL what?
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you have an incomplete idea of what we mean.
If I remote-login to a server, and I have account credentials, I expect access. Period. No ifs and butts, just access. I have things I need to do on that server for some amount of time. You can't seriously expect me to ring up the other dick and ask them to "do it for me".
-
-
@boomzilla said:
@dhromed said:
ASASFACFGHKFDGL what?
@Google Search said:Did you mean ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYX?
Well, I meant to use a selection from that set, so, close enough right?
-
@PJH said:
@Severity One said:
Well, yes, it's a very good reason for Microsoft, but not for me. Usually, I put my own requirements before those of the vendor.What is relevent is that there's a restriction for the maximum number of logged-in users on a server for absolutely no good reason.
Of course there's a good reason.
-
@Cassidy said:
@Severity One said:
Um, no, indeed you're not seeing the problem.No, what I mean is that I cannot log in because somebody else is already logged in.
Then perhaps he can change the something for you.I'm not really seeing the problem here.
I'm certainly not seeing it as being a problem with running Windows as a server platform, according to your original post.
If you perceive the problem to be someone using the console when you require it... that's a problem completely independent to the OS of choice.
The problem is created by Microsoft: only two people or so can be logged in at the same time in Windows 2003 plus , despite the fact that it's a multi-user, multi-tasking system. There's absolutely no technical reason for it, only a commercial one, because Microsoft thinks it's not enough to just charge you for the OS. Compare this to other commercial OSs, such as Solaris at the time, and you don't have this limitation. I'm not mentioning Linux, because it's free and therefore it doesn't make sense to have a limitation on the number of logged in users, but charging customers if more than two people want to do something on a system is just a cynical way to get more money, because you're charging to remove an artificial limitation, not for extra functionality.
