I've been seeing talk of this on boards, and it's been kind of lingering in the back of my mind... Pardon if this comes off as an unbelievably stupid question. Many of mine are (as you'll soon learn ). A lot of people talk about how many PCs are set up to make the first user (the purchaser, most of the time) the admin. And people say that if you're an admin on your Mac, you can do damage, so people who could do damage shouldn't be admins. I understand those points... in principle. When a computer-newbie family member has a computer at their disposal, you might make yourself its tech and have them call you for help. But I'm flummoxed still at the idea of a computer's owner not having admin privileges. I'm admin on this Powerbook, and I'm its only user. I just don't see how a PC or Mac can be made such that the person who buys it and plugs it in doesn't have full rights. How would they install software or fix problems? This same issue comes up at work a bit. On the one hand, the decree is that most users should be normal users (we have a shared admin account among three of us, plus us three are admins of our own accounts). On the other hand, they say, oh, have your users run Software Update. To me, those two statements are contradictory. I feel like I'm missing something really stupid here, and I'm sure I am. I know we wouldn't want the less-techy going into their Terminal and typing random code, but I don't see how they could do basic things they'd need to do as the machine's owner.