I, too, do a lot of photography, have a lan and servers, et al, and it took me weeks of hand crafting settings to get things at least workable. That just isn't right. I also keep a sharp eye on services, and vista has an order of magnitude more. They seem to change a lot in vista too... There are several web pages that show how to 'take ownership' of a file or folder, and place it on the context menu in explorer. It's two commands rather than just cacls in xp. I found that useful. The ONLY way to get things to work (if you don't just buy MS Office and use it as an expensive, single function office appliance :( ) is by overriding a lot of what they call 'protection'. I came across a study by an anti-malware vendor that showed, based on infections, that vista was 30% less secure than XP (win2k was best). I don't believe it's from people 'taking ownership' either, as some of those changes are deeper than most are comfortable with. The root cause of all of this is over complexity. It isn't even manageable by microsoft any more! I also found out a possible cause for the network slowness. Prior tcpip.sys drivers allowed the full 65,000 ports to be open at any time. Vista home allows 2 at a time. Even xp sp2 reduces it to 10 in the service pack, but there are hacks to raise it to 50+ available. I personally find it onerous that an 'update' reduce such functionality like that. Like Ford taking their cars back and giving you a bicycle instead as an 'upgrade'. Any serious network work will have to be Linux from now on. Dario Greggio wrote: > Apptech wrote: > >> reason. It also can't seem to decide whether I am allowed >> (with full permissions) to write to C:\ or to make >> subdirectories / folders there. Sometimes I can and >> sometimes not and I don't know what makes it change its >> mind. Single user, full admin access rights ... . > > > same here.... ! > -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist