G
Guest
I'm using Windows XP Professional SP 2.
After installing KB927891 using the automatic update from the Administrators
ID, I found my limited access ID getting numerous "Application failed to
initialize properly (0xc0000022)" errors. (The following programs got the
error: ACTray, ACMLIcon, scheduler_proxy, pdservice, PIFSvc, osCheck, ccApp,
reader_sl.)
I went back to the Administrator ID and all worked fine. Back to the
limited ID, same errors. From the Administrator's ID I granted administrator
authority to the limited ID and the limited ID now worked fine. I removed
Administrator authority and the limited ID got all the errors again.
I removed KB927891 and tried the limited ID again - still got all the errors.
Are my problems caused by some quirk in KB927891 or are my problems a
coincidence? I've read about many successes with KB927891 but I did find one
posting by someone in England (on another board) with what sounded like the
same problem. His "fix" was to restore his system to pre-KB927891 - I hope
to not have to do that. Anyone have a better solution?
After installing KB927891 using the automatic update from the Administrators
ID, I found my limited access ID getting numerous "Application failed to
initialize properly (0xc0000022)" errors. (The following programs got the
error: ACTray, ACMLIcon, scheduler_proxy, pdservice, PIFSvc, osCheck, ccApp,
reader_sl.)
I went back to the Administrator ID and all worked fine. Back to the
limited ID, same errors. From the Administrator's ID I granted administrator
authority to the limited ID and the limited ID now worked fine. I removed
Administrator authority and the limited ID got all the errors again.
I removed KB927891 and tried the limited ID again - still got all the errors.
Are my problems caused by some quirk in KB927891 or are my problems a
coincidence? I've read about many successes with KB927891 but I did find one
posting by someone in England (on another board) with what sounded like the
same problem. His "fix" was to restore his system to pre-KB927891 - I hope
to not have to do that. Anyone have a better solution?