ASP.NET Machine A...

[BaDeR]

I have installed WindowsXP and added 3 users

I have checked the User Account and there was another user added to them
called ( ASP.NET Machine A... ) it is limited and password protected
and it does not apeasrs in the Welcome screen. any body knows about
this????

[Lenroc]

I can't speak with any certainty, but it likely is a login that ASP .NET (or
IIS) uses to login to the computer to perform ASP-related tasks. I honestly
don't know much, but I know that this is a common method to control the
abilities of scripts. (Often, scripts, or services, need access to the
computer, and giving them root access would not be a very good idea. This
way you can set policies to control that user's abilities.)

I'm sure someone will have more specifics, but I think this is the general
concept.

-Lenroc

"BaDeR" > wrote in message
...
> I have installed WindowsXP and added 3 users
>
> I have checked the User Account and there was another user added to them
> called ( ASP.NET Machine A... ) it is limited and password
protected
> and it does not apeasrs in the Welcome screen. any body knows about
> this????
>
>

[Andy]

On Thu, 15 May 2003 17:54:33 -0700, [BaDeR] mentioned :-

>I have installed WindowsXP and added 3 users
>
>I have checked the User Account and there was another user added to them
>called ( ASP.NET Machine A... ) it is limited and password protected
>and it does not apeasrs in the Welcome screen. any body knows about
>this????
>

Please fix your PC clock/timezone - you're posting from the future.

--
Andy
----
[ http://nz2002.users.btopenworld.com/ ] - New Zealand trip Jan/Feb 2002
[ http://firststop.users.btopenworld.com/pictures/ ] - almost 500 pictures
Please remove the obvious before replying by email.

[Don MacDougall]

"BaDeR" > wrote in message
...
> I have installed WindowsXP and added 3 users
>
> I have checked the User Account and there was another user added to them
> called ( ASP.NET Machine A... ) it is limited and password
protected
> and it does not apeasrs in the Welcome screen. any body knows about
> this????
>
>

It was installed as part of the .NET Framework update you installed from
Windows Update. You can find more information here:

http://www.microsoft.com/net/

Don

[Norm]

While your working on your machine, fix the time. It's rude to top post.
"BaDeR" > wrote in message
...
> I have installed WindowsXP and added 3 users
>
> I have checked the User Account and there was another user added to them
> called ( ASP.NET Machine A... ) it is limited and password
protected
> and it does not apeasrs in the Welcome screen. any body knows about
> this????
>
>
>

[Ken Blake]

"Norm" > wrote in message
m...

> While your working on your machine, fix the time. It's rude to
top post.


I'm not trying to start an argument over top-posting vs
bottom-posting, but I'm just curious as to why you, in a
**top-posted** message, say "It's rude to top post."

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup



> "BaDeR" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I have installed WindowsXP and added 3 users
> >
> > I have checked the User Account and there was another user
added to them
> > called ( ASP.NET Machine A... ) it is limited and
password
> protected
> > and it does not apeasrs in the Welcome screen. any body
knows about
> > this????
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Don MacDougall]

"Ken Blake" > wrote in message
...
> "Norm" > wrote in message
> m...
>
> > While your working on your machine, fix the time. It's rude to
> top post.
>
>
> I'm not trying to start an argument over top-posting vs
> bottom-posting, but I'm just curious as to why you, in a
> **top-posted** message, say "It's rude to top post."
>
> --
> Ken Blake
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>

Norm is referring to posting at the top of the newsgroup due to an incorrect
time setting in the op's computer.

Don

[Norm]

Don, your right on. I think more people do this on purpose than one would
think. Why would you not have the correct time set on your computer? I
don't care what your doing to it to try to fix it, that should have no
effect on the time.

"Don MacDougall" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ken Blake" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Norm" > wrote in message
> > m...
> >
> > > While your working on your machine, fix the time. It's rude to
> > top post.
> >
> >
> > I'm not trying to start an argument over top-posting vs
> > bottom-posting, but I'm just curious as to why you, in a
> > **top-posted** message, say "It's rude to top post."
> >
> > --
> > Ken Blake
> > Please reply to the newsgroup
> >
> >
>
> Norm is referring to posting at the top of the newsgroup due to an
incorrect
> time setting in the op's computer.
>
> Don
>
>
>

[Amethyst]

Norm wrote:
> Don, your right on. I think more people do this on purpose than one would
> think. Why would you not have the correct time set on your computer? I
> don't care what your doing to it to try to fix it, that should have no
> effect on the time.

Norm,

You might want to correct your jargon. Top posting is posting the answer
above the question (which is what you're doing). When someone posts with an
incorrect clock it's known as 'post-dating' (just like you would do with a
cheque, so it isn't cashed until a certain date).

Top posting is also frowned upon - it also makes no sense. Think of a Q and
A page in a computer magazine. It would be a bit daft if the answers were
all printed before the questions, wouldn't it? ;o)

P.S. The word you're looking for is 'you're' not 'your'. Just a friendly
pointer.


--�
Cassandra
Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'

Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot) uk.
Change the obvious to the obvious.
Requests for private assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.

[Norm]

I stand corrected. Your (could not resist) right on both my incorrect
jargon and my terrible grammar. In any event, I hate top posting and post
dating.

"Amethyst" > wrote in message
...
> Norm wrote:
> > Don, your right on. I think more people do this on purpose than one
would
> > think. Why would you not have the correct time set on your computer? I
> > don't care what your doing to it to try to fix it, that should have no
> > effect on the time.
>
> Norm,
>
> You might want to correct your jargon. Top posting is posting the answer
> above the question (which is what you're doing). When someone posts with
an
> incorrect clock it's known as 'post-dating' (just like you would do with a
> cheque, so it isn't cashed until a certain date).
>
> Top posting is also frowned upon - it also makes no sense. Think of a Q
and
> A page in a computer magazine. It would be a bit daft if the answers were
> all printed before the questions, wouldn't it? ;o)
>
> P.S. The word you're looking for is 'you're' not 'your'. Just a friendly
> pointer.
>
>
> --�
> Cassandra
> Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'
>
> Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
> of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot) uk.
> Change the obvious to the obvious.
> Requests for private assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
> correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.
>
>
>

[mrtee]

And I hate bottom posting. Especially when all the posts that have gone =
before are included.

--=20
Just my 2=A2 worth
Jeff
_____in response to_____
"Norm" > wrote in message =
. com...
| I stand corrected. Your (could not resist) right on both my incorrect
| jargon and my terrible grammar. In any event, I hate top posting and =
post
| dating.



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release Date: 5/13/2003

[DJ]

On Thu, 15 May 2003 16:24:08 -0400, "Don MacDougall"
> wrote:
>
>Norm is referring to posting at the top of the newsgroup due to an incorrect
>time setting in the op's computer.
>
>Don

Maybe. However that is not what top posting means. Also, if you
think about it, his message only appears at the top in certain news
readers configured to show posts by date a certain way. Not exactly
the way most people look at things.

[DJ]

On Thu, 15 May 2003 19:34:47 -0500, "mrtee" <hingelickeratnew.rr.com>
wrote:

>And I hate bottom posting. Especially when all the posts that have gone before are included.

Well bottom posting is the standard that has been in place long before
MS came up with Windows, or even DOS for that matter. In order of
preference among computer professionals, inline posting is first,
bottom posting is second. Note, I can not count high enough to tell
you where top posting came in.

[David Candy]

This has always been a top posting group.

--=20
http://www.g2mil.com/Apr2003.htm
http://prorev.com/forbesrussia.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------
David Candy
http://www.mvps.org/serenitymacros
---------------------------------------------------------------
"DJ" > wrote in message =
...
> On Thu, 15 May 2003 19:34:47 -0500, "mrtee" <hingelickeratnew.rr.com>
> wrote:
>=20
> >And I hate bottom posting. Especially when all the posts that have =
gone before are included.
>=20
> Well bottom posting is the standard that has been in place long before
> MS came up with Windows, or even DOS for that matter. In order of
> preference among computer professionals, inline posting is first,
> bottom posting is second. Note, I can not count high enough to tell
> you where top posting came in.

[Ed C]

I like top posting. I hate when you have to scroll through 1-2 sometime 3 A
to the Q to see what the last person wrote. I have already read the Q, I
want the A. Now if you have your (That's not "you're" (double Quotes)) news
reader setup different than I do and for some reason don't see the OP Q then
I can see/understand why you would want the Q in every A post. But that also
takes up bandwidth, which is what I'm doing now.


--


Ed C
NRA


"Amethyst" > wrote in message
...
> Norm wrote:
> > Don, your right on. I think more people do this on purpose than one
would
> > think. Why would you not have the correct time set on your computer? I
> > don't care what your doing to it to try to fix it, that should have no
> > effect on the time.
>
> Norm,
>
> You might want to correct your jargon. Top posting is posting the answer
> above the question (which is what you're doing). When someone posts with
an
> incorrect clock it's known as 'post-dating' (just like you would do with a
> cheque, so it isn't cashed until a certain date).
>
> Top posting is also frowned upon - it also makes no sense. Think of a Q
and
> A page in a computer magazine. It would be a bit daft if the answers were
> all printed before the questions, wouldn't it? ;o)
>
> P.S. The word you're looking for is 'you're' not 'your'. Just a friendly
> pointer.
>
>
> --�
> Cassandra
> Card carrying member of the Fresh Start Club 'The Undead Are People Too!'
>
> Reply address is fake. Please send all praise, abuse, insults, bequests
> of £1million to cassandra (at) craigy34 (dot) freeserve (dot) co (dot) uk.
> Change the obvious to the obvious.
> Requests for private assistance will not be acknowledged. Please post all
> correspondence to the group so that all may benefit. Thank you.
>
>

[Ken Blake]

"Norm" > wrote in message
. ..

> Don, your right on. I think more people do this on purpose
than one would
> think. Why would you not have the correct time set on your
computer? I
> don't care what your doing to it to try to fix it, that should
have no
> effect on the time.


That's not top posting. Top posting is replying *above* the quote
in your message, the opposite of what I'm doing here.

Setting the date to one in advance of the actual date may or may
not put the message at the top of the list in your newsreader.
You're assuming, incorrectly, that everyone sorts the displayed
messages in reverse date order. I don't, for example.

Moreover, if a message is sent with a date/time more than
slightly in advance of actual, not only will it not appear at the
top of my listing, it won't appear here at all, since it will be
automatically deleted by my news server.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup




> "Don MacDougall" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Ken Blake" > wrote in
message
> > ...
> > > "Norm" > wrote in message
> > > m...
> > >
> > > > While your working on your machine, fix the time. It's
rude to
> > > top post.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm not trying to start an argument over top-posting vs
> > > bottom-posting, but I'm just curious as to why you, in a
> > > **top-posted** message, say "It's rude to top post."
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ken Blake
> > > Please reply to the newsgroup
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Norm is referring to posting at the top of the newsgroup due
to an
> incorrect
> > time setting in the op's computer.>

[JimC]

With respect to top, inline, and bottom posting, I have
noticed that bottom posters are the laziest. Bottom posters
rely too much on the context of what precedes their posts.

"DJ" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 15 May 2003 19:34:47 -0500, "mrtee"
<hingelickeratnew.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >And I hate bottom posting. Especially when all the posts
that have gone before are included.
>
> Well bottom posting is the standard that has been in place
long before
> MS came up with Windows, or even DOS for that matter. In
order of
> preference among computer professionals, inline posting is
first,
> bottom posting is second. Note, I can not count high
enough to tell
> you where top posting came in.

[]

Amethyst wrote:
>
> Top posting is also frowned upon - it also makes no sense. Think of a Q and
> A page in a computer magazine. It would be a bit daft if the answers were
> all printed before the questions, wouldn't it? ;o)

Neither does hitting Start to Shutdown, or typing Exit to Start Windows
whilst in dos in some MS OS's.

--
http://www.bootdisk.com/