stop synchronize other's files

[Guest ykffc]

In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and userB.

 

UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access permission to

\\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works

beautifully without problem.

 

Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a

She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files and

makes them available offline to him.

 

UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She also

has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is also

having a need to make its contents available offline.

 

But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize userB's

data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining' userA

data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

 

There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of offline

files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to access

violation.

 

The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is not

able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the

system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop with

the server?

 

You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are 'old

unwanted data', isn't it.

 

thanks.

[Guest Anthony]

Re: stop synchronize other's files

 

Hi ykffc,

Look for "re-initialize offline cache"

Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com

 

 

"ykffc" <ykffc@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:41E2FE4B-D581-4328-BD9F-28C196A4B096@microsoft.com...

> In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and userB.

>

> UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access permission

> to

> \\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works

> beautifully without problem.

>

> Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a

> She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files and

> makes them available offline to him.

>

> UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She

> also

> has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is also

> having a need to make its contents available offline.

>

> But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize

> userB's

> data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining'

> userA

> data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

>

> There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of

> offline

> files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to

> access

> violation.

>

> The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is

> not

> able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the

> system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop

> with

> the server?

>

> You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

> pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are 'old

> unwanted data', isn't it.

>

> thanks.

[Guest John John]

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can benefit?

Or at least provide a link to your site where the useful answer is

available? All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for services, a

useless site where nothing is available unless you register and pay.

 

John

 

Anthony wrote:

> Hi ykffc,

> Look for "re-initialize offline cache"

> Anthony,

>

>

> "ykffc" <ykffc@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:41E2FE4B-D581-4328-BD9F-28C196A4B096@microsoft.com...

>

>>In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and userB.

>>

>>UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access permission

>>to

>>\\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works

>>beautifully without problem.

>>

>>Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a

>>She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files and

>>makes them available offline to him.

>>

>>UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She

>>also

>>has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is also

>>having a need to make its contents available offline.

>>

>>But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize

>>userB's

>>data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining'

>>userA

>>data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

>>

>>There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of

>>offline

>>files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to

>>access

>>violation.

>>

>>The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is

>>not

>>able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the

>>system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop

>>with

>>the server?

>>

>>You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

>>pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are 'old

>>unwanted data', isn't it.

>>

>>thanks.

>

>

>

[Guest Meinolf Weber]

Re: stop synchronize other's files

 

Hello ykffc,

 

In the synchronisation window you can also setup the synchronisation. Just

expand it and choose to take out the old sync config.

 

Best regards

 

Meinolf Weber

Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers

no rights.

> In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and

> userB.

>

> UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access

> permission to \\servername\aaa and has made its content available

> offline. It works beautifully without problem.

>

> Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB

> (a She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and

> files and makes them available offline to him.

>

> UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She

> also has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server

> and is also having a need to make its contents available offline.

>

> But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize

> userB's data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some

> 'remaining' userA data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

>

> There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of

> offline files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed

> due to access violation.

>

> The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB

> is not able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we

> ask the system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in

> her laptop with the server?

>

> You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

> pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are

> 'old unwanted data', isn't it.

>

> thanks.

>

[Guest Anthony]

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Hello John,

That's amusing.

The OP needs to google for "re-initialize offline cache". The reason I give

the term is that if you are unfamiliar with it, it is not the most obvious

choice of words to look for. But a quick search will give the answer. This

is the top result. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/230738. I generally find

that re-phrasing the knowledgebase article adds no value, since all the

detail is contained there already. So if I can help the OP find the

information they need quickly, I think its a job well done.

The URL after my name is my "signature". Its what we do. I don't consider a

signature to be spam,

If you have any other comments or questions, or advice to offer, please feel

free to express them,

Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com

 

 

 

"John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message

news:ewzFz9YEIHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can benefit? Or

> at least provide a link to your site where the useful answer is available?

> All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for services, a useless site

> where nothing is available unless you register and pay.

>

> John

>

> Anthony wrote:

>

>> Hi ykffc,

>> Look for "re-initialize offline cache"

>> Anthony, "ykffc" <ykffc@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

>> news:41E2FE4B-D581-4328-BD9F-28C196A4B096@microsoft.com...

>>

>>>In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and userB.

>>>

>>>UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access permission

>>>to

>>>\\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works

>>>beautifully without problem.

>>>

>>>Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a

>>>She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files and

>>>makes them available offline to him.

>>>

>>>UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She

>>>also

>>>has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is

>>>also

>>>having a need to make its contents available offline.

>>>

>>>But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize

>>>userB's

>>>data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining'

>>>userA

>>>data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

>>>

>>>There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of

>>>offline

>>>files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to

>>>access

>>>violation.

>>>

>>>The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is

>>>not

>>>able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the

>>>system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop

>>>with

>>>the server?

>>>

>>>You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

>>>pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are 'old

>>>unwanted data', isn't it.

>>>

>>>thanks.

>>

>>

>>

>

[Guest Chris M]

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

John John wrote:

> Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can benefit?

> Or at least provide a link to your site where the useful answer is

> available? All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for services, a

> useless site where nothing is available unless you register and pay.

 

Forgetting about the link in Anthony's sig - that's a debate for another

day - but:

 

What was wrong with his answer? Did you try Googling for what he said?

 

I did. Whole page of relevant links, looked pretty useful to me, given

the nature of the user's problem.

 

Just because he didn't put a direct link to a MSKB article in his reply,

why does that make his answer useless?

 

Just curious.

 

--

Chris.

 

> Anthony wrote:

>

>> Hi ykffc,

>> Look for "re-initialize offline cache"

>> Anthony,

[Guest John John]

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

The way your web link appears so close to the text in your answer it

appeared to me like you were telling readers to go to your web site and

search there. Perhaps having your web link under your name in your

signature would have given a different impression. I apologize for my

error.

 

John

 

Anthony wrote:

> Hello John,

> That's amusing.

> The OP needs to google for "re-initialize offline cache". The reason I give

> the term is that if you are unfamiliar with it, it is not the most obvious

> choice of words to look for. But a quick search will give the answer. This

> is the top result. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/230738. I generally find

> that re-phrasing the knowledgebase article adds no value, since all the

> detail is contained there already. So if I can help the OP find the

> information they need quickly, I think its a job well done.

> The URL after my name is my "signature". Its what we do. I don't consider a

> signature to be spam,

> If you have any other comments or questions, or advice to offer, please feel

> free to express them,

> Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com

>

>

>

> "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message

> news:ewzFz9YEIHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>

>>Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can benefit? Or

>>at least provide a link to your site where the useful answer is available?

>>All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for services, a useless site

>>where nothing is available unless you register and pay.

>>

>>John

>>

>>Anthony wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Hi ykffc,

>>>Look for "re-initialize offline cache"

>>>Anthony, "ykffc" <ykffc@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

>>>news:41E2FE4B-D581-4328-BD9F-28C196A4B096@microsoft.com...

>>>

>>>

>>>>In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and userB.

>>>>

>>>>UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access permission

>>>>to

>>>>\\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works

>>>>beautifully without problem.

>>>>

>>>>Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a

>>>>She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files and

>>>>makes them available offline to him.

>>>>

>>>>UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She

>>>>also

>>>>has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is

>>>>also

>>>>having a need to make its contents available offline.

>>>>

>>>>But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize

>>>>userB's

>>>>data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining'

>>>>userA

>>>>data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

>>>>

>>>>There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of

>>>>offline

>>>>files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to

>>>>access

>>>>violation.

>>>>

>>>>The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is

>>>>not

>>>>able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the

>>>>system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop

>>>>with

>>>>the server?

>>>>

>>>>You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

>>>>pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are 'old

>>>>unwanted data', isn't it.

>>>>

>>>>thanks.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>

>

[Guest John John]

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Chris M wrote:

> John John wrote:

>

>> Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can

>> benefit? Or at least provide a link to your site where the useful

>> answer is available? All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for

>> services, a useless site where nothing is available unless you

>> register and pay.

>

>

> Forgetting about the link in Anthony's sig - that's a debate for another

> day - but:

>

> What was wrong with his answer? Did you try Googling for what he said?

>

> I did. Whole page of relevant links, looked pretty useful to me, given

> the nature of the user's problem.

>

> Just because he didn't put a direct link to a MSKB article in his reply,

> why does that make his answer useless?

 

I didn't expect that he post a link. The way his web site appeared so

close to the text in his signature and without being delimited it

appeared to me that he was telling readers to go to his site and search

there. The confusion would have been avoided if he placed his web link

under his name or if he would have said "Do a search on the net for..."

 

My error...

 

John

[Guest Anthony]

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

Re: SPAM! stop synchronize other's files

 

I accept your apology. I think if I had said "google for" you would not have

made that mistake. Because I said "look for" I think you misunderstood and

jumped to conclusions.

Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com

 

 

"John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message

news:uEk%23yYZEIHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> The way your web link appears so close to the text in your answer it

> appeared to me like you were telling readers to go to your web site and

> search there. Perhaps having your web link under your name in your

> signature would have given a different impression. I apologize for my

> error.

>

> John

>

> Anthony wrote:

>

>> Hello John,

>> That's amusing.

>> The OP needs to google for "re-initialize offline cache". The reason I

>> give the term is that if you are unfamiliar with it, it is not the most

>> obvious choice of words to look for. But a quick search will give the

>> answer. This is the top result. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/230738. I

>> generally find that re-phrasing the knowledgebase article adds no value,

>> since all the detail is contained there already. So if I can help the OP

>> find the information they need quickly, I think its a job well done.

>> The URL after my name is my "signature". Its what we do. I don't consider

>> a signature to be spam,

>> If you have any other comments or questions, or advice to offer, please

>> feel free to express them,

>> Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com

>>

>>

>>

>> "John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message

>> news:ewzFz9YEIHA.3880@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>

>>>Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can benefit?

>>>Or at least provide a link to your site where the useful answer is

>>>available? All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for services, a

>>>useless site where nothing is available unless you register and pay.

>>>

>>>John

>>>

>>>Anthony wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>Hi ykffc,

>>>>Look for "re-initialize offline cache"

>>>>Anthony, "ykffc" <ykffc@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

>>>>news:41E2FE4B-D581-4328-BD9F-28C196A4B096@microsoft.com...

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and

>>>>>userB.

>>>>>

>>>>>UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access

>>>>>permission to

>>>>>\\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works

>>>>>beautifully without problem.

>>>>>

>>>>>Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a

>>>>>She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files

>>>>>and

>>>>>makes them available offline to him.

>>>>>

>>>>>UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She

>>>>>also

>>>>>has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is

>>>>>also

>>>>>having a need to make its contents available offline.

>>>>>

>>>>>But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize

>>>>>userB's

>>>>>data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining'

>>>>>userA

>>>>>data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal?

>>>>>

>>>>>There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of

>>>>>offline

>>>>>files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to

>>>>>access

>>>>>violation.

>>>>>

>>>>>The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is

>>>>>not

>>>>>able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the

>>>>>system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop

>>>>>with

>>>>>the server?

>>>>>

>>>>>You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his

>>>>>pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are

>>>>>'old

>>>>>unwanted data', isn't it.

>>>>>

>>>>>thanks.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>

>>

>