Turn Off Autoplay Question

I have two external hard drives. Whenever I turn one on, I get a
couple of unwanted windows asking me what to do. Ergo I want to
disable autoplay in this case, in order to speed things up. I have
tried gpedit.msc to get a Group Policy window from which I selected
Administrative Templates \ System. I turned off Autoplay.

I see that I had only two choices - turn off autoplay for ALL DRIVES
or for just CD drives. I wanted just the reverse, leaving autoplay ON
when I play a CD in the CD drive.

Can I get what I want here?

Thanks

Duke

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:13:31 -0500, VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Note: The following unrelated newsgroup was omitted in my reply:
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware
> Not a hardware issue but instead a Windows configuration issue.
>

>
>Get the TweakUI powertoy for Windows XP. It's gives you the following
>choices regarding AutoPlay:
>
>- Enable autoplay for CD and DVD drives
>- Enable autoplay for removable drives

I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.

>
>In your case, you want to select the first option but deselect the
>second option. Is there a reason why you want to allow malware to
>auto-run on an infected optical disc when you insert it into the drive?

Good point. I just wanted to retain PnP on known audio and video and
tutorial optical disks. I do not want PnP on my removable (external)
hard drives.

>
>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/967715 shows you the bitmask used to
>determine which drive *types* have auto-run/play disabled or not.
>Policies are just registry settings.


Thanks

Duke

Note: The following unrelated newsgroup was omitted in my reply:
microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware
Not a hardware issue but instead a Windows configuration issue.

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> I have two external hard drives. Whenever I turn one on, I get a
> couple of unwanted windows asking me what to do. Ergo I want to
> disable autoplay in this case, in order to speed things up. I have
> tried gpedit.msc to get a Group Policy window from which I selected
> Administrative Templates \ System. I turned off Autoplay.
>
> I see that I had only two choices - turn off autoplay for ALL DRIVES
> or for just CD drives. I wanted just the reverse, leaving autoplay ON
> when I play a CD in the CD drive.

Get the TweakUI powertoy for Windows XP. It's gives you the following
choices regarding AutoPlay:

- Enable autoplay for CD and DVD drives
- Enable autoplay for removable drives

In your case, you want to select the first option but deselect the
second option. Is there a reason why you want to allow malware to
auto-run on an infected optical disc when you insert it into the drive?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/967715 shows you the bitmask used to
determine which drive *types* have auto-run/play disabled or not.
Policies are just registry settings.

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:46:34 +0200, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.

No luck

Duke

No luck with what? Using TweakUI or coming up with it? Both are quite easy.
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:46:34 +0200, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>>I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.
>
> No luck
>
> Duke

jw wrote:

> jw wrote:
>
>> I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.
>
> No luck

You are claiming that you never heard of Google? It still works:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%2B%2...ui+%2Bpowertoy

In news:i85l74$k3l$(E-Mail Removed),
VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
> jw wrote:
>
>> jw wrote:
>>
>>> I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.
>>
>> No luck
>
> You are claiming that you never heard of Google? It still
> works:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=%2B%2...ui+%2Bpowertoy

There is absolutely nothing to indicate the poster never heard of Google,
dunderhead.

Twayne wrote:

> In news:i85l74$k3l$(E-Mail Removed),
> VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
>> jw wrote:
>>
>>> jw wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.
>>>
>>> No luck
>>
>> You are claiming that you never heard of Google? It still
>> works:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=%2B%2...ui+%2Bpowertoy
>
> There is absolutely nothing to indicate the poster never heard of Google,
> dunderhead.

Oh, and now you're claiming that the OP actually tried Google but had
"no luck". Uh huh. Come on, Twayne, wait until after that 2nd cup of
coffee if you're really this bad at following the threads.

In news:i88cuf$c73$(E-Mail Removed),
VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
> Twayne wrote:
>
>> In news:i85l74$k3l$(E-Mail Removed),
>> VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> typed:
>>> jw wrote:
>>>
>>>> jw wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'll see if I can come up with TweakUI.
>>>>
>>>> No luck
>>>
>>> You are claiming that you never heard of Google? It still
>>> works:
>>>
>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=%2B%2...ui+%2Bpowertoy
>>
>> There is absolutely nothing to indicate the poster never
>> heard of Google, dunderhead.
>
> Oh, and now you're claiming that the OP actually tried
> Google but had "no luck". Uh huh. Come on, Twayne, wait
> until after that 2nd cup of coffee if you're really this
> bad at following the threads.

I only had to read your post; whatever you responded to, by etiquette,
should be part of the post IF you're claiming it WAS there in an earlier
thread. It wasn't in your post, making your post less than understandable
without reconstructing the thread, something pretty rude & crude f you do
have that attitude. It's akin to someone saying they don't like coffee and
sugar together, but you snip that out and ask if they never heard of salt?
You'd have a higher readership for those who are looking first for
solutions, not how the solution came about. Once the OP's data is gone, the
thread is no longer known to be accurate. Lots of places on ... BING ... or
.... Google ... will assist you with how to assemble a good response to a
querant. If you have any real intention of being helpful, that is.

HTH,

Twayne`

On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 11:48:16 -0400, "Twayne"
>I only had to read your post; whatever you responded to, by etiquette,
>should be part of the post IF you're claiming it WAS there in an earlier
>thread. It wasn't in your post, making your post less than understandable
>without reconstructing the thread, something pretty rude & crude f you do
>have that attitude. It's akin to someone saying they don't like coffee and
>sugar together, but you snip that out and ask if they never heard of salt?
>You'd have a higher readership for those who are looking first for
>solutions, not how the solution came about. Once the OP's data is gone, the
>thread is no longer known to be accurate. Lots of places on ... BING ... or
>... Google ... will assist you with how to assemble a good response to a
>querant. If you have any real intention of being helpful, that is.
>
>HTH,
>
>Twayne`
>

Good golly guys. I am sorry I asked. Whew.

Thanks

Duke