Dear Bob ...We're going from Novell (dead end) to ActiveDirectory. And even as a developer (mostly Unix, but some PC), "they" want to lock down my desktop so I can't install apps (not even give me a login I can switch to to do the installs, and switch back).But, wait! There's more! I get a second computer to do development that isn't on AD so I can do installations.I maintain an app that has data that should be Dear Bob …We’re going from Novell (dead end) to ActiveDirectory. And even as a developer (mostly Unix, but some PC), “they” want to lock down my desktop so I can’t install apps (not even give me a login I can switch to to do the installs, and switch back).But, wait! There’s more! I get a second computer to do development that isn’t on AD so I can do installations. I maintain an app that has data that should be secure. But I have to work on it on an insecure desktop. I know this security thing is rough, and I don’t know all of the things going on, and I know they have a mandate from the big boss, and I don’t envy their decisions, but sometimes I scratch my head. Is this suboptimizing the parts to optimize the whole?– SuboptimizedDear Sub … No, it’s just strange. Or maybe there’s a budget problem. The way I learned it, IT creates development and test environments that replicate production. What I’d think you should have is a development desktop system, connected to the development network, which includes the development copy of ActiveDirectory and lets you install software.But I’m not there and it’s easy for someone as far away as I am to spout off. Perhaps there are good and valid reasons for setting things up the way they are.– Bob Powered by ScribeFire. Technology Industry