Read Only Programs

[BOB PARSONS]

What problems have you guys encountered making programs "read only" for protection purposes ?

[Matthew D. Hoedeman]

Well, they can STILL be altered while open and executed and you get the annoying little error that Pcdmis can't save when you close and the stat count remains at what it was when you protected it, as well as the file name it wants to print too. Sure, the file name will index, but ONLY if the old reports are still there.

[JamesMannes]

What problems have you guys encountered making programs "read only" for protection purposes ?

None. And our's are on our network.

[#2#]

Like Matt said.

You can get around the close error with either training them to use "quit" and/or remove close (remove save while you are at it) from the file menu.

[cmmguy]

Bob, is this about storing them as read-only or using them as read only... There are two answer streams here and it makes a difference what you mean and what the answers mean.

[BOB PARSONS]

Bob, is this about storing them as read-only or using them as read only... There are two answer streams here and it makes a difference what you mean and what the answers mean.

They would be stored and used as read only unless your answer makes a really compelling reason to do it otherwise. We just have too many programs being changed w/out sufficient thought, causing crashing or other issues down the road!

[dwade]

Make them run in "Operator" mode. Then you won't have to worry about it.

[Matthew D. Hoedeman]

They would be stored and used as read only unless your answer makes a really compelling reason to do it otherwise. We just have too many programs being changed w/out sufficient thought, causing crashing or other issues down the road!

Therein lies the BIGGEST (well, one of the biggest) problems with Pcdmis. Thereis NO WAY to keep the programs from being changed. If you can open it, you can change it, even if you can't save the change. We have all b1tched about this and NOTHING IS BEING DONE ABOUT IT!

[cmmguy]

They would be stored and used as read only unless your answer makes a really compelling reason to do it otherwise. We just have too many programs being changed w/out sufficient thought, causing crashing or other issues down the road!

Then matts and goodlucks answers cover it. I am wondering if jim means he loads them from the network as read only. With all the negative reactions about using the network.... maybe he can elaborate.

I only asked to clarify your question and the answers. It seems READ-ONLY is one of the ways to protect them but it sure seems to limit the usefulness of some of the functions. There is another way and that is to make the folders secured by user to make them non-writable. This would also prevent unauthorized SAVE-AS functions so that altered copies cant be saved with new names and then reused later and also unapproved programs to be saved in the master directories.

[BOB PARSONS]

Therein lies the BIGGEST (well, one of the biggest) problems with Pcdmis. Thereis NO WAY to keep the programs from being changed. If you can open it, you can change it, even if you can't save the change. We have all b1tched about this and NOTHING IS BEING DONE ABOUT IT!

It would slow them down ( read only ) and hopefully stop some of the frivolous and accidental changes!

[cmmguy]

Therein lies the BIGGEST (well, one of the biggest) problems with Pcdmis. Thereis NO WAY to keep the programs from being changed. If you can open it, you can change it, even if you can't save the change. We have all b1tched about this and NOTHING IS BEING DONE ABOUT IT!

It is a show stopper if you have a mandate to maintain and USE unaltered and approved(certified) programs.

[JamesMannes]

Then matts and goodlucks answers cover it. I am wondering if jim means he loads them from the network as read only. With all the negative reactions about using the network.... maybe he can elaborate.

I only asked to clarify your question and the answers. It seems READ-ONLY is one of the ways to protect them but it sure seems to limit the usefulness of some of the functions. There is another way and that is to make the folders secured by user to make them non-writable. This would also prevent unauthorized SAVE-AS functions so that altered copies cant be saved with new names and then reused later and also unapproved programs to be saved in the master directories.

I open my programs from our network. I run the program. I quit out of the program. I go on to the next project/part (as of right now I have been running our "in process" parts for the last 2.5 months while our corporate people got thier heads out of their buttts and ponied up $$$ to fix one of my machines). Anyways I have been using the "in process" programs stored on our network with no problems. But of course I am using 4.2mr1 that may be why I am not having any problems?

[BOB PARSONS]

Make them run in "Operator" mode. Then you won't have to worry about it.

Unfortunately, this option is not on the table for political and necessary editing reasons. This is mostly, though not always a nite-shift issue were trying to address.

[Matthew D. Hoedeman]

Unfortunately, this option is not on the table for political and necessary editing reasons. This is mostly, though not always a nite-shift issue were trying to address.

What a surprise, a night shift-issue. I have seen SO MANY of those in my day, fortunately, I have this department under a steel-toed boot now. Long ago, we had this one guy who USED to be in change of this department, but then he just totally fell apart so they put him on nights and me on days. For the next 6 months, he wouldn't do what I lined him up to do on nights, he spent 95% of his time re-doing all the work I had done on days. They finally gave him to boot.

[cmmguy]

I open my programs from our network. I run the program. I quit out of the program. I go on to the next project/part (as of right now I have been running our "in process" parts for the last 2.5 months while our corporate people got thier heads out of their buttts and ponied up $$$ to fix one of my machines). Anyways I have been using the "in process" programs stored on our network with no problems. But of course I am using 4.2mr1 that may be why I am not having any problems?

I have never really got a full handle on the network problems... some of these things go back to when networks were not always reliable. I just dont understand why using programs stored on a network are a problem - except for using the same program at the same time. About every other program on the planet easily used files stored on the network. Maybe the older versions of PCDMIS could not handle the UNC part of networks but netork drives that are mapped are relatively transparent today.