| Author | Messages | |
deji
Posts:140
 | | 12/15/2006 12:39 PM |
| >>> People don't seem to have a problem with that concept when it comes to game consoles :)
Bad analogy. Go stand in the corner, no wii for you :)
When people start running their businesses on game consoles, then you can come back and compare. For now, it's just plain incomprehensible that you can't manage ADMX from anything but Vista. Yeah, ideally we would want to encourage clients to NOT manage things directly from servers, and to ensure that IF they are going to introduce Vista, the IT folks' machines should be doing the dog-fooding, but realistically, the "ideal" is always the exception in this field. Microsoft should know that. People will insist on managing GPO directly from the DCs, best practices be damned.
Sincerely, _____ (, / | /) /) /) /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _ ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_(_/ /) (/ Microsoft MVP - Directory Serviceswww.akomolafe.com- we know IT-5.75, -3.23Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon
From: Darren Mar-EliaSent: Fri 12/15/2006 9:18 AMTo: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
I hear you Rich. I had a long discussion with someone on the GP newsgroups
who thought that the fact that XP and 2003 couldn't read Vista GP settings
was an abomination and a scandal of the highest order and that MS should be
beaten for their insolence (I'm paraphrasing :-)). But, yes, we should all
be used to the fact that sometimes, you have to adopt the new stuff to get
the new toys. People don't seem to have a problem with that concept when it
comes to game consoles :)
Darren
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:04 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Sorry, I understand it's different, what I meant was merely that we had
some growing pains like this when XP first came out. Our practice then
became to use only XP desktops for GP management. I think there's a
tendency to think this is such a terrible thing, this
backwards-incompatibility, and we might forget that Vista is not new
with this, we had similar issues before. And who remembers the
teeth-pulling to get people to move to Active Directory??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" - anonymous
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 10:05 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
This is actually a little different because if you view a GPO that was
created with Vista, using XP or 2003, none of the ADMX settings can
actually
be read at all, because they are a completely new format that GPEditor
or
GPMC on those older platforms don't understand. In fact, those XP or
2003
will happily copy up the ADMs into the Vista GPO like they used to do,
and
you're back to each GPO storing ADMs in SYSVOL. What I've been
recommending
to folks is that once you introduce Vista desktops into your
environment,
use Vista for all your ongoing GP management. The Vista ADMXs are a
superset
of the latest and greatest ADMs (i.e. they include 2003, XP and Vista
settings) so you can happily manage Vista and non-Vista targeted GP
settings
from a Vista machine.
Darren
Darren Mar-Elia
CTO & Founder
www.sdmsoftware.com
darren@sdmsoftware.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 6:49 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
You may recall, there was a similar case when XP came out too - if
memory serves, you had to manage XP GPO settings from an XP box - if you
opened them on Win2K, there were problems (I can't recall now exactly
what those problems were... it would corrupt the policy? Lose the
settings?) anyway so there are tons more settings (+ side) and you have
to use Vista for now (- side, sorta). I wouldn't be too surprised if
they fix that with the next server and XP SP... but I haven't actually
heard that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" - anonymous
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:13 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Vista introduces a new Admin Template format called ADMX. These are
found on Vista in C:\windows\policydefinitions and, unfortuately cannot
be consumed by earlier versions of Windows. That is you must manage
Vista GP from Vista.
Darren
-----Original Message-----
From: "Za Vue"
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Sent: 12/14/2006 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Sorry. Exactly what Ben wrote.
Thanks..
-Z.V.
WATSON, BEN wrote:
> Maybe he may be referring to the location of any possible new ADM
files
> included with Vista.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren
Mar-Elia
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 10:34 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> What do you mean Za? I'm not familiar with any GPO plug-in for Win2K3,
> unless you mean the LDIF files that are in sources\adprep on the Vista
> CD?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Za Vue
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 9:57 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Anyone know what and where the GPO plugin for Win2003 on the Vista DVD
> is called and located?
>
> -Z.V.
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client
privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named
addressee.
If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized
forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you
should
kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this
message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal
law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review
the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages
sent
to
or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's
International,
Inc.
e-mail system.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client
privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named addressee.
If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you
should
kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this
message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal
law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages sent
to
or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's International,
Inc.
e-mail system.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| listmail
Posts:454
| | 12/16/2006 6:15 AM |
| I have been swamped lately and just watching the unread
message count for my adorg folder growing by leaps and bounds... Good to see
Iwasn't missing anything important. :)
If its grating on you... just drop it and ignore it. Life
is too short and no one wants grated Deji. If I want grated anything it would be
grated cabbage made into coleslaw. Or grated cheese over a nice wet burrito.
Yum!
joe
--
O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition - http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe,
DejiSent: Friday, December 15, 2006 8:39 PMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
It's amusing that you were
the one that first raised the "security hole" straw man in defense of your
argument against backporting ADMX administration. Several conversations later,
you now turn around and want to accuse me of abusing my MVP privilege? For the
record, (and if you go backand read my responses dispassionately, you will
be able to see this), I am not privileged to any non-public information that may
indicate any security issue with any functionality in any MS OS. You floated
that kite. My response was meant to shoot it down.
If it helps, here's what you
wrote:
>>>And
it's the clueful customers who (rightly) become angry when something in a
product that exists purely for backward compatibility opens a security hole.....
Please go back and read it.
You confound me, Laura. It's just as well
that you are done with this conversation, because it's starting to grate my
tolerance.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / |
/)
/) /) /---| (/_
______ ___// _ // _ )
/ |_/(__(_) //
(_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_(_/
/)
(/ Microsoft MVP - Directory
Serviceswww.akomolafe.com- we know IT-5.75, -3.23Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you
were worried about Yesterday?
-anon
From: Laura A. RobinsonSent: Fri
12/15/2006 3:19 PMTo: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject:
RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Deji,
One of
my other posts on this subject is working its way through the server as I write
this one, but let me give you a bit of my perspective, if I
may.
I am
in a customer-facingtechnical role. Everyday, I interact with some
of the largest companies in the world. I am responsible for serving 300
exclusively enterprise-level accounts. With those customers, I have discussions
about every aspect of their technical decision-making, including but not limited
to business drivers, business hurdles, pain points, budgetary concerns,
licensing decisions, design and implementation guidance, rollout schedules,
political infighting, technical bias, refresh cycles, rack space, disaster
recovery plans, OEM relationships, cross-vendor interoperability, you name it. I
speak with my "colleagues in the trenches" for a living. And here are some of my
*personal* observations that result directly from those conversations, as well
as the conversations I had in the years that I dealt with or worked for those
very same companies before I took the position in which I am now
employed:
1. I
have not heard a single of my customers complain that it is unreasonable for
them to have a Vista machine in their environment from which to edit Vista GPOs.
Not one. Have I heard them express concern about having to have a Vista machine
as an activation server? Yes, and that's probably why Microsoft is releasing an
update for Win2K3 to allow it to be a KMS host. Again, however, NOT ONE customer
has said to me that being asked to use a Vista machine to edit Vista GPOs is an
unreasonable requirement or something that they see as a "mandate" from
Microsoft. If Microsoft has enough customers requesting that Vista GPOs be
editable from a Windows Server 2003 machine, and if it is technologically
feasible, then I would guess that Microsoft will almost certainly pull
developers off of other tasks to make that happen. Perhaps those other tasks
could be things such as reviewing Longhorn code or writing new code and
features, which means more delay in those things, but I know from experience
that if customers really can't function without Microsoft making some kind of
backporting decision happen, then Microsoft makes it happen.
2. Not
only do customers use the prescriptive guidance (which are not "mandates", or
they'd be called "mandatory"), but customers *request* those guides, sometimes
even withholding from rolling out a product until a prescriptive guide has been
released. It is all we can do to keep up with customer requests for prescriptive
guidance for Microsoft's product offerings. So while you personally may find
Microsoft's prescriptive guidance unwelcome, unnecessary or somehow draconian,
that opinion is the polar opposite of what I hear from customers every day.
3. The
subject of best practices comes up in nearly every discussion I have with
customers, and it is always in the context of the customer requesting that we
tell them what we consider best practices. Every day, I am awed by some of our
customers' IT infrastructures and the tremendous amount of planning, regulation,
and yes,adherence to best practicethat is part of what they mandate
for their companies. Not us. Them. The SEC. The EU. HIPAA regulations. But not
Microsoft. To the best of my knowledge, Microsoft is not in the business of
mandating. However, I cannot name a single customer with which I deal that does
not attempt to implement and comply with best practices whenever and wherever
possible.
Now, I
don't know if you and I are meeting different types of Microsoft customers, but
given that you referred to "clueless customers" and I have yet to characterize
one of my customers in that fashion either privately or publicly, I'm going to
assume that perhaps we deal in different markets. I will certainly accede to the
possibility that your customers might not be as large or as technologically
sophisticated as the ones with which I interact, and perhaps for them it is an
onerous proposition that they be asked to use a Vista machine to edit Vista
policies, or that they consider undertaking best practices in their
infrastructures. If that is the case, then I encourage you to encourage your
customers to speak to their Microsoft representatives about these concerns,
because I do know that Redmond listens to feedback they receive from their
customers- more than most people realize, I'd wager.
Additionally, I want to make something very clear- I did not at any time
state that "making ADMX administration available on non-Vista/LH" was "because
of security issues", and I do not care for the implication that I did. As an
MVP, you well know that sometimes, for various reasons, people cannot make
public statements regarding futures in technology. It is not my place to state
here why or why not ADMX editing is/will be/won't be available from pre-Vista
platforms, and when I am not sure whether or not something has become public
knowledge about our products, I try to err on the side of caution and assume
that it hasn't. Don't take that statement as anything resembling ahint as
to what Microsoft will or won't do around ADMXediting. I really don't know
and couldn't say if I did.I'm simply observing that as an MVP, you are
covered by NDAs just as Microsoft employees, vendors, contractors, etc. are, and
you therefore know that sometimes idle speculation or theoretical
discussionis just that. For you to take an abstract statement I made
regarding historical issues around backward compatibility and imply that I was
stating that ADMX editing from pre-Vista platforms opens a security hole is, in
my opinion, inappropriate. I prefer to assume that it was a simple mistake
rather than an intentional misstatement designed to imply that I had made such a
proclaimation.
Last,
I feel that I should reiterate that all of the above is purely my own personal
opinion and is in no way intended to represent the opinions of my coworkers, my
customers, my employer, my cat, my imaginary friend or my favorite Martian.
Please forgive my Bob Dole-ish use of the third-party referencing in much of the
above, but I'd really like to make it clear that I'm expressing my own opinions
here, and they are the same opinions I held when I worked for various other
employers. :-)
Laura
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe,
DejiSent: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:54 PMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
Know your audience. Know
your customers. Know your consumers.
I can't speak to whether or not you pi$$
off your employer, but I can name a few of your colleagues in the trenches
(because I run into them every now and then) who will be more than glad to
tell youthat there are more that go into a client's administrative
decision making, technology adoption, PO approval, etc, than "best
practices".
I will not speak to the "security hole"
boogey-man that you are floating because I don't think you want us veering
into that arena. Imagine what it would sound like if we start saying that MS
is not making AMDX administration available on non-Vista/LH platform because
of "security issues".
No, you don't want that. So, what you are
left with is nothing but "Best Practices". You want to draw a line because it
is the "sensible" thing to do. Well, my logic is that a lot of things make
sense in my head and in my labs. They just don't translate well in the real
"brick and mortar" life out there. People are going to administer their GPOs
from their servers for any number of reasons. These same people will NOT
install LH until RTM+x number of years. These people are the ones paying my
bills. They are the ones paying yours.
Unless you are actually making the case
that MS is aware of some technical inhibitions to making ADMX administrable
from legacy OSes, there is no compelling reason why MS should not factor in
HOW its customers uses its products/technologies when decisions as to whether
or not to make something available. It is this unwillingness/reluctance to
relate to the real-word and to insist on a set of "prescriptive" mandates that
continue to hurt MS in many places.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / |
/)
/) /) /---|
(/_ ______ ___// _ // _ )
/ |_/(__(_) //
(_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_(_/
/)
(/ Microsoft MVP - Directory
Serviceswww.akomolafe.com- we know IT-5.75, -3.23Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you
were worried about Yesterday?
-anon
From: Laura A. RobinsonSent: Fri
12/15/2006 11:26 AMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
And
it's the clueful customers who (rightly) become angry when something in a
product that exists purely for backward compatibility opens a security hole.
Now, I'm not saying that all security holes are due to backward compatibility,
and I'm not saying that every bit of code that comes out of Redmond is
perfect. However, I have said for years that many of the things that people
don't like about Microsoft's products are the result of backward
compatibility, not bad coding or a lack of consideration on the part of
Microsoft's programmers. As somebody else (Darren? Richard?) said, there is a
point where a line has to be drawn in the sand. I personally don't see
anything dictatorial about requiring a Vista+ machine to edit *VISTA*
policies. I mean, seriously, if you're writing Vista GPOs, that would imply
that you're using Vista machines, and if you're using Vista machines, what is
the issue with using one of those Vista machines as your editing workstation?
I think that that *IS* a very pragmatic, realistic
approach.
Sorry, I just don't follow your logic on this one.
That
said, my opinions are purely my own, do not represent those of my employer,
are not intended to represent those ofmy employer and for all I know,
may even pi$$ off my employer. :-)
Laura
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe,
DejiSent: Friday, December 15, 2006 1:42 PMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
I wouldn't put it in
those words. But, yeah, I would expect Microsoft to be... shall we
say...pragmatic, realistic. Something like, "enable" its customers to run
their businesses. I mean,refrain from "dictating" its wishes. You
know? Because at the end of the day, it is the "clueless customers" that
actually write the checks that add up to those billions in the
vault.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / |
/)
/) /) /---|
(/_ ______ ___// _ // _ )
/ |_/(__(_) //
(_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_(_/
/)
(/ Microsoft MVP - Directory
Serviceswww.akomolafe.com- we know
IT-5.75, -3.23Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
From: Laura A. RobinsonSent: Fri
12/15/2006 10:19 AMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
So
Microsoft should encourage their bad practices?
Laura
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Akomolafe,
DejiSent: Friday, December 15, 2006 12:39 PMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
>>> People
don't seem to have a problem with that concept when it comes to game
consoles :)
Bad analogy. Go stand in the corner,
no wii for you :)
When people start running their
businesses on game consoles, then you can come back and compare. For now,
it's just plain incomprehensible that you can't manage ADMX from anything
but Vista. Yeah, ideally we would want to encourage clients to NOT manage
things directly from servers, and to ensure that IF they are going to
introduce Vista, the IT folks' machines should be doing the dog-fooding,
but realistically, the "ideal" is always the exception in this field.
Microsoft should know that. People will insist on managing GPO directly
from the DCs, best practices be damned.
Sincerely,
_____
(, / |
/)
/) /) /---|
(/_ ______ ___// _ // _ )
/ |_/(__(_) //
(_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_(_/
/)
(/ Microsoft MVP -
Directory Serviceswww.akomolafe.com- we know
IT-5.75, -3.23Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried
about Yesterday? -anon
From: Darren Mar-EliaSent: Fri
12/15/2006 9:18 AMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista
GPO
I hear you Rich. I had a long discussion with someone on the GP newsgroups
who thought that the fact that XP and 2003 couldn't read Vista GP settings
was an abomination and a scandal of the highest order and that MS should be
beaten for their insolence (I'm paraphrasing :-)). But, yes, we should all
be used to the fact that sometimes, you have to adopt the new stuff to get
the new toys. People don't seem to have a problem with that concept when it
comes to game consoles :)
Darren
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:04 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Sorry, I understand it's different, what I meant was merely that we had
some growing pains like this when XP first came out. Our practice then
became to use only XP desktops for GP management. I think there's a
tendency to think this is such a terrible thing, this
backwards-incompatibility, and we might forget that Vista is not new
with this, we had similar issues before. And who remembers the
teeth-pulling to get people to move to Active Directory??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" - anonymous
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 10:05 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
This is actually a little different because if you view a GPO that was
created with Vista, using XP or 2003, none of the ADMX settings can
actually
be read at all, because they are a completely new format that GPEditor
or
GPMC on those older platforms don't understand. In fact, those XP or
2003
will happily copy up the ADMs into the Vista GPO like they used to do,
and
you're back to each GPO storing ADMs in SYSVOL. What I've been
recommending
to folks is that once you introduce Vista desktops into your
environment,
use Vista for all your ongoing GP management. The Vista ADMXs are a
superset
of the latest and greatest ADMs (i.e. they include 2003, XP and Vista
settings) so you can happily manage Vista and non-Vista targeted GP
settings
from a Vista machine.
Darren
Darren Mar-Elia
CTO & Founder
www.sdmsoftware.com
darren@sdmsoftware.com
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 6:49 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
You may recall, there was a similar case when XP came out too - if
memory serves, you had to manage XP GPO settings from an XP box - if you
opened them on Win2K, there were problems (I can't recall now exactly
what those problems were... it would corrupt the policy? Lose the
settings?) anyway so there are tons more settings (+ side) and you have
to use Vista for now (- side, sorta). I wouldn't be too surprised if
they fix that with the next server and XP SP... but I haven't actually
heard that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" - anonymous
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:13 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Vista introduces a new Admin Template format called ADMX. These are
found on Vista in C:\windows\policydefinitions and, unfortuately cannot
be consumed by earlier versions of Windows. That is you must manage
Vista GP from Vista.
Darren
-----Original Message-----
From: "Za Vue"
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Sent: 12/14/2006 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
Sorry. Exactly what Ben wrote.
Thanks..
-Z.V.
WATSON, BEN wrote:
> Maybe he may be referring to the location of any possible new ADM
files
> included with Vista.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Darren
Mar-Elia
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 10:34 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> What do you mean Za? I'm not familiar with any GPO plug-in for Win2K3,
> unless you mean the LDIF files that are in sources\adprep on the Vista
> CD?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Za Vue
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 9:57 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Anyone know what and where the GPO plugin for Win2003 on the Vista DVD
> is called and located?
>
> -Z.V.
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
>
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client
privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named
addressee.
If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized
forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you
should
kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this
message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal
law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review
the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages
sent
to
or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's
International,
Inc.
e-mail system.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client
privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named addressee.
If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you
should
kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this
message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal
law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages sent
to
or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's International,
Inc.
e-mail system.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
--No virus found in this incoming message.Checked
by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
--No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by
AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
--No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by
AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
--No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by
AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
--No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by
AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
--No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG
Free Edition.Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM | | | |
| listmail
Posts:454
| | 12/16/2006 6:24 AM |
| I don't know of anyone officially moving to Vista any time soon. Folks are
playing with it, usually IT folks are just looking to get the latest and
greatest to feel cool, they don't generally really and truly need any of the
features. Several places I have heard with any kind of plans are talking
2008 soonest for Vista and Office 2007.
I was chatting with some other folks about this recently and I expect a lot
of companies will find the migration to Vista to be even more difficult than
their migration from Win9x to NT based technology. At least with NT
Technology you usually had a bunch of people that had a lot of NT knowledge
already and could leverage it or could go out into the newsgroups and find
folks who have been running NT stuff in production for years and years. You
don't really have that with Vista (and LongHorn) and the changes are
sufficient enough that it will break quite a few things. I am not saying
that is bad necessarily, that is what everyone started screaming for when
they said MSFT wasn't secure enough. Now people will get to find out what
that really means... I know quite a few developers who are hopping mad over
a lot of the changes and some are even more concerned over where code
signing is going, etc. Especially folks with low priced or free software
that they may available because if code signing becomes absolutely required,
you have to pay for that as a developer/company.
Anyway, my thoughts are that there will be quite a few companies with custom
mechanisms for managing things that they have developed over the years that
will all completely fail or nearly completely fail with Vista and will have
to be reworked or outright replaced which could take a lot of time. This
doesn't even start to get into the realm of just plain old line of business
apps.
Don't get me wrong, some leading edge people will move fast and take the
black eyes and bloodied noses in stride, most folks though I expect to
follow the old wait for SP1 rule and then wait even longer as they realize
it isn't a simple forklift of the binaries. I wouldn't be surprised to see
most large companies deploying Longhorn heavily into production before Vista
even.
joe
--
O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition -
http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley, CPA
aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 8:32 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
(as a bystander here .. I personally like the point/counterpoints.. just
sometimes we need to realize that we lose ...what? About 60% of
communication via email? And adjust accordingly okay? Can we hug and
make up?)
Pogue's Posts - Technology - New York Times Blog:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/14pogue-email-2/
Granted I'm little... but are you guys really and truly rolling out
Vista in other than Lab settings anyway? I'm getting hit over the head
on a daily basis by vendors are are saying "Wait".
My two benchmarks of when I can say I'm somewhat "business ready" on
Vista is when the ISA firewall client that supports Vista ships (it did
earlier this week) and when Trend isn't offering up beta versions as the
only ones that will run on Vista.
Are you guys really and truly rolling these suckers out on production boxes?
Don't geeks adapt anyway? (We may not read... but we adapt right?)
This is slightly incorrect...but the fact is SQL 2005 express officially
needs sp2 to run on Vista
http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/14/magazines/business2/microsoft_vista.biz2/ind
ex.htm?cnn=yes
*Wait Until after Tax Time? *Note that Intuit's tax software divisions
are recommending that their users wait until after tax season to make
any move to Windows Vista. These notices are posted for both Lacerte
Professional Tax Software
and ProSeries Professional Tax Software
.
*Prudence Suggested for QuickBooks Users Too.* Windows Vista holds much
promise for significant improvements in security and functionality.
However, Intuit suggests the decision to upgrade to Windows Vista be
approached carefully, for two reasons:
* Potential reliability issues often associated with the initial
release of operating systems.
* Intuit will not be able to support QuickBooks 2006 and earlier on
Windows Vista.
Laura A. Robinson wrote:
> Deji, I've had enough of you attributing statements to me that I have
> not made, and therefore I am finished with this conversation.
>
> Laura
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Akomolafe, Deji
> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 4:44 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Did I actually say that clueless folks are writing you checks? Or
> are you projecting? That those who write you checks but
> don't/can't/won't do things "the right way" (according to you) are
> clueless, and you don't like their checks?
>
>
> Sincerely,
> _____
> (, / | /) /) /)
> /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> (_/ /)
> (/
> Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> www.akomolafe.com
> - we know IT
> *-5.75, -3.23*
> Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried
> about Yesterday? -anon
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Laura A. Robinson
> *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 12:50 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> BTW, I would disagree with your assessment of Microsoft's customer
> base. I work in Microsoft's largest district, with our largest
> customers, and I find them far from clueless. I also find very few
> clueless folks writing us checks that "add up to those billions in
> the vault".
>
> Do I run into misinformed people? Absolutely. Clueless? Not
> really. Well, not among my customers, anyway. :-)
>
> Laura
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Laura A. Robinson
> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 2:26 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> And it's the clueful customers who (rightly) become angry when
> something in a product that exists purely for backward
> compatibility opens a security hole. Now, I'm not saying that
> all security holes are due to backward compatibility, and I'm
> not saying that every bit of code that comes out of Redmond is
> perfect. However, I have said for years that many of the
> things that people don't like about Microsoft's products are
> the result of backward compatibility, not bad coding or a lack
> of consideration on the part of Microsoft's programmers. As
> somebody else (Darren? Richard?) said, there is a point where
> a line has to be drawn in the sand. I personally don't see
> anything dictatorial about requiring a Vista+ machine to edit
> *VISTA* policies. I mean, seriously, if you're writing Vista
> GPOs, that would imply that you're using Vista machines, and
> if you're using Vista machines, what is the issue with using
> one of those Vista machines as your editing workstation? I
> think that that *IS* a very pragmatic, realistic approach.
>
> Sorry, I just don't follow your logic on this one.
>
> That said, my opinions are purely my own, do not represent
> those of my employer, are not intended to represent those
> of my employer and for all I know, may even pi$$ off my
> employer. :-)
>
> Laura
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Akomolafe, Deji
> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 1:42 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> I wouldn't put it in those words. But, yeah, I would
> expect Microsoft to be... shall we say...pragmatic,
> realistic. Something like, "enable" its customers to run
> their businesses. I mean, refrain from "dictating" its
> wishes. You know? Because at the end of the day, it is the
> "clueless customers" that actually write the checks that
> add up to those billions in the vault.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> _____
> (, / | /) /) /)
> /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> (_/ /)
> (/
> Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> www.akomolafe.com
> - we know IT
> *-5.75, -3.23*
> Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were
> worried about Yesterday? -anon
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Laura A. Robinson
> *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 10:19 AM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> So Microsoft should encourage their bad practices?
>
> Laura
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Akomolafe, Deji
> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 12:39 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> >>> People don't seem to have a problem with that
> concept when it comes to game consoles :)
>
> Bad analogy. Go stand in the corner, no wii for you :)
>
> When people start running their businesses on game
> consoles, then you can come back and compare. For now,
> it's just plain incomprehensible that you can't manage
> ADMX from anything but Vista. Yeah, ideally we would
> want to encourage clients to NOT manage things
> directly from servers, and to ensure that IF they are
> going to introduce Vista, the IT folks' machines
> should be doing the dog-fooding, but realistically,
> the "ideal" is always the exception in this field.
> Microsoft should know that. People will insist on
> managing GPO directly from the DCs, best practices be
> damned.
>
> Sincerely,
> _____
> (, / | /) /) /)
> /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> (_/ /)
> (/
> Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> www.akomolafe.com
> - we
> know IT
> *-5.75, -3.23*
> Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were
> worried about Yesterday? -anon
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Darren Mar-Elia
> *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 9:18 AM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> I hear you Rich. I had a long discussion with someone on
the GP newsgroups
> who thought that the fact that XP and 2003 couldn't read
Vista GP settings
> was an abomination and a scandal of the highest order and
that MS should be
> beaten for their insolence (I'm paraphrasing :-)). But,
yes, we should all
> be used to the fact that sometimes, you have to adopt the
new stuff to get
> the new toys. People don't seem to have a problem with
that concept when it
> comes to game consoles :)
>
> Darren
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of
Rich Milburn
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:04 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Sorry, I understand it's different, what I meant was
merely that we had
> some growing pains like this when XP first came out. Our
practice then
> became to use only XP desktops for GP management. I think
there's a
> tendency to think this is such a terrible thing, this
> backwards-incompatibility, and we might forget that Vista
is not new
> with this, we had similar issues before. And who
remembers the
> teeth-pulling to get people to move to Active Directory??
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rich Milburn
> MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
> Applebee's International, Inc.
> 4551 W. 107th St
> Overland Park, KS 66207
> 913-967-2819
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" -
anonymous
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of
Darren Mar-Elia
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 10:05 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> This is actually a little different because if you view a
GPO that was
> created with Vista, using XP or 2003, none of the ADMX
settings can
> actually
> be read at all, because they are a completely new format
that GPEditor
> or
> GPMC on those older platforms don't understand. In fact,
those XP or
> 2003
> will happily copy up the ADMs into the Vista GPO like they
used to do,
> and
> you're back to each GPO storing ADMs in SYSVOL. What I've
been
> recommending
> to folks is that once you introduce Vista desktops into
your
> environment,
> use Vista for all your ongoing GP management. The Vista
ADMXs are a
> superset
> of the latest and greatest ADMs (i.e. they include 2003,
XP and Vista
> settings) so you can happily manage Vista and non-Vista
targeted GP
> settings
> from a Vista machine.
>
> Darren
>
> Darren Mar-Elia
> CTO & Founder
> www.sdmsoftware.com
> darren@sdmsoftware.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of
Rich Milburn
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 6:49 AM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> You may recall, there was a similar case when XP came out
too - if
> memory serves, you had to manage XP GPO settings from an
XP box - if you
> opened them on Win2K, there were problems (I can't recall
now exactly
> what those problems were... it would corrupt the policy?
Lose the
> settings?) anyway so there are tons more settings (+ side)
and you have
> to use Vista for now (- side, sorta). I wouldn't be too
surprised if
> they fix that with the next server and XP SP... but I
haven't actually
> heard that.
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rich Milburn
> MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
> Applebee's International, Inc.
> 4551 W. 107th St
> Overland Park, KS 66207
> 913-967-2819
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" -
anonymous
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of
Darren Mar-Elia
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:13 PM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Vista introduces a new Admin Template format called ADMX.
These are
> found on Vista in C:\windows\policydefinitions and,
unfortuately cannot
> be consumed by earlier versions of Windows. That is you
must manage
> Vista GP from Vista.
>
> Darren
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Za Vue"
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Sent: 12/14/2006 1:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Sorry. Exactly what Ben wrote.
>
> Thanks..
>
> -Z.V.
>
> WATSON, BEN wrote:
> > Maybe he may be referring to the location of any
possible new ADM
> files
> > included with Vista.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of
Darren
> Mar-Elia
> > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 10:34 AM
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > What do you mean Za? I'm not familiar with any GPO
plug-in for Win2K3,
> > unless you mean the LDIF files that are in
sources\adprep on the Vista
> > CD?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of
Za Vue
> > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 9:57 AM
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Subject: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > Anyone know what and where the GPO plugin for Win2003 on
the Vista DVD
>
> > is called and located?
> >
> > -Z.V.
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> >
> >
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> -------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY
NOTICE-------
> PRIVILEGED /
> CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message
or any
> attachments.
> This information is strictly confidential and may be
subject to
> attorney-client
> privilege. This message is intended only for the use of
the named
> addressee.
> If
> you are not the intended recipient of this message,
unauthorized
> forwarding,
>
> printing, copying, distribution, or using such information
is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
in error, you
> should
> kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately
destroy this
> message.
> Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of
federal
> criminal
> law.
> Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to
monitor and review
> the
> content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail
address. Messages
> sent
> to
> or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
Applebee's
> International,
> Inc.
> e-mail system.
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> -------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY
NOTICE-------
> PRIVILEGED /
> CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message
or any
> attachments.
> This information is strictly confidential and may be
subject to
> attorney-client
> privilege. This message is intended only for the use of
the named addressee.
> If
> you are not the intended recipient of this message,
unauthorized forwarding,
>
> printing, copying, distribution, or using such information
is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
in error, you
> should
> kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately
destroy this
> message.
> Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of
federal criminal
> law.
> Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to
monitor and review the
> content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail
address. Messages sent
> to
> or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
Applebee's International,
> Inc.
> e-mail system.
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
> Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
> Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
> Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
> Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
> Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release Date:
> 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release Date:
> 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release Date:
> 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
>
--
Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
http://www.threatcode.com
If you are a SBSer and you don't subscribe to the SBS Blog... man ... I will
hunt you down...
http://blogs.technet.com/sbs
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| bdesmond
Posts:366
| | 12/16/2006 6:48 AM |
| Oddly enough I was on a concall with MS the other day and one of the
accounts mentioned he was rolling out a 3K seat Vista upgrade in March.
Sad they already had vendor commitments for application fixes and
everything. I was pretty surprised.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
brian@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org [mailto:ActiveDir-
> owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of joe
> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 6:24 PM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> I don't know of anyone officially moving to Vista any time soon. Folks
> are
> playing with it, usually IT folks are just looking to get the latest
> and
> greatest to feel cool, they don't generally really and truly need any
> of the
> features. Several places I have heard with any kind of plans are
> talking
> 2008 soonest for Vista and Office 2007.
>
> I was chatting with some other folks about this recently and I expect
a
> lot
> of companies will find the migration to Vista to be even more
difficult
> than
> their migration from Win9x to NT based technology. At least with NT
> Technology you usually had a bunch of people that had a lot of NT
> knowledge
> already and could leverage it or could go out into the newsgroups and
> find
> folks who have been running NT stuff in production for years and
years.
> You
> don't really have that with Vista (and LongHorn) and the changes are
> sufficient enough that it will break quite a few things. I am not
> saying
> that is bad necessarily, that is what everyone started screaming for
> when
> they said MSFT wasn't secure enough. Now people will get to find out
> what
> that really means... I know quite a few developers who are hopping mad
> over
> a lot of the changes and some are even more concerned over where code
> signing is going, etc. Especially folks with low priced or free
> software
> that they may available because if code signing becomes absolutely
> required,
> you have to pay for that as a developer/company.
>
> Anyway, my thoughts are that there will be quite a few companies with
> custom
> mechanisms for managing things that they have developed over the years
> that
> will all completely fail or nearly completely fail with Vista and will
> have
> to be reworked or outright replaced which could take a lot of time.
> This
> doesn't even start to get into the realm of just plain old line of
> business
> apps.
>
> Don't get me wrong, some leading edge people will move fast and take
> the
> black eyes and bloodied noses in stride, most folks though I expect to
> follow the old wait for SP1 rule and then wait even longer as they
> realize
> it isn't a simple forklift of the binaries. I wouldn't be surprised to
> see
> most large companies deploying Longhorn heavily into production before
> Vista
> even.
>
> joe
>
> --
> O'Reilly Active Directory Third Edition -
> http://www.joeware.net/win/ad3e.htm
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Susan
Bradley,
> CPA
> aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 8:32 PM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> (as a bystander here .. I personally like the point/counterpoints..
> just
> sometimes we need to realize that we lose ...what? About 60% of
> communication via email? And adjust accordingly okay? Can we hug and
> make up?)
>
> Pogue's Posts - Technology - New York Times Blog:
> http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/14pogue-email-2/
>
> Granted I'm little... but are you guys really and truly rolling out
> Vista in other than Lab settings anyway? I'm getting hit over the
head
> on a daily basis by vendors are are saying "Wait".
>
> My two benchmarks of when I can say I'm somewhat "business ready" on
> Vista is when the ISA firewall client that supports Vista ships (it
did
> earlier this week) and when Trend isn't offering up beta versions as
> the
> only ones that will run on Vista.
>
> Are you guys really and truly rolling these suckers out on production
> boxes?
>
> Don't geeks adapt anyway? (We may not read... but we adapt right?)
>
> This is slightly incorrect...but the fact is SQL 2005 express
> officially
> needs sp2 to run on Vista
>
http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/14/magazines/business2/microsoft_vista.biz
> 2/ind
> ex.htm?cnn=yes
>
> *Wait Until after Tax Time? *Note that Intuit's tax software divisions
> are recommending that their users wait until after tax season to make
> any move to Windows Vista. These notices are posted for both Lacerte
> Professional Tax Software
>
S2&b=
> 0&j=NzQzNjgzNDcS1&mt=1>
> and ProSeries Professional Tax Software
>
S2&b=
> 0&j=NzQzNjgzNDcS1&mt=1>.
>
> *Prudence Suggested for QuickBooks Users Too.* Windows Vista holds
much
> promise for significant improvements in security and functionality.
> However, Intuit suggests the decision to upgrade to Windows Vista be
> approached carefully, for two reasons:
>
> * Potential reliability issues often associated with the initial
> release of operating systems.
> * Intuit will not be able to support QuickBooks 2006 and earlier
on
> Windows Vista.
>
>
>
>
>
> Laura A. Robinson wrote:
> > Deji, I've had enough of you attributing statements to me that I
have
> > not made, and therefore I am finished with this conversation.
> >
> > Laura
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> > *Akomolafe, Deji
> > *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 4:44 PM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > Did I actually say that clueless folks are writing you checks?
Or
> > are you projecting? That those who write you checks but
> > don't/can't/won't do things "the right way" (according to you)
> are
> > clueless, and you don't like their checks?
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > _____
> > (, / | /) /) /)
> > /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> > ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> > (_/ /)
> > (/
> > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> > www.akomolafe.com
> > - we know IT
> > *-5.75, -3.23*
> > Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried
> > about Yesterday? -anon
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* Laura A. Robinson
> > *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 12:50 PM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > BTW, I would disagree with your assessment of Microsoft's
> customer
> > base. I work in Microsoft's largest district, with our largest
> > customers, and I find them far from clueless. I also find very
> few
> > clueless folks writing us checks that "add up to those billions
> in
> > the vault".
> >
> > Do I run into misinformed people? Absolutely. Clueless? Not
> > really. Well, not among my customers, anyway. :-)
> >
> > Laura
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> > *Laura A. Robinson
> > *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 2:26 PM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > And it's the clueful customers who (rightly) become angry
> when
> > something in a product that exists purely for backward
> > compatibility opens a security hole. Now, I'm not saying
that
> > all security holes are due to backward compatibility, and
I'm
> > not saying that every bit of code that comes out of Redmond
> is
> > perfect. However, I have said for years that many of the
> > things that people don't like about Microsoft's products are
> > the result of backward compatibility, not bad coding or a
> lack
> > of consideration on the part of Microsoft's programmers. As
> > somebody else (Darren? Richard?) said, there is a point
where
> > a line has to be drawn in the sand. I personally don't see
> > anything dictatorial about requiring a Vista+ machine to
edit
> > *VISTA* policies. I mean, seriously, if you're writing Vista
> > GPOs, that would imply that you're using Vista machines, and
> > if you're using Vista machines, what is the issue with using
> > one of those Vista machines as your editing workstation? I
> > think that that *IS* a very pragmatic, realistic approach.
> >
> > Sorry, I just don't follow your logic on this one.
> >
> > That said, my opinions are purely my own, do not represent
> > those of my employer, are not intended to represent those
> > of my employer and for all I know, may even pi$$ off my
> > employer. :-)
> >
> > Laura
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf
Of
> > *Akomolafe, Deji
> > *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 1:42 PM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > I wouldn't put it in those words. But, yeah, I would
> > expect Microsoft to be... shall we say...pragmatic,
> > realistic. Something like, "enable" its customers to run
> > their businesses. I mean, refrain from "dictating" its
> > wishes. You know? Because at the end of the day, it is
> the
> > "clueless customers" that actually write the checks that
> > add up to those billions in the vault.
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > _____
> > (, / | /) /) /)
> > /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> > ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> > (_/ /)
> > (/
> > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> > www.akomolafe.com
> > - we
> know IT
> > *-5.75, -3.23*
> > Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were
> > worried about Yesterday? -anon
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* Laura A. Robinson
> > *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 10:19 AM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > So Microsoft should encourage their bad practices?
> >
> > Laura
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On
> Behalf
> > Of *Akomolafe, Deji
> > *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 12:39 PM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > >>> People don't seem to have a problem with that
> > concept when it comes to game consoles :)
> >
> > Bad analogy. Go stand in the corner, no wii for you
> :)
> >
> > When people start running their businesses on game
> > consoles, then you can come back and compare. For
> now,
> > it's just plain incomprehensible that you can't
> manage
> > ADMX from anything but Vista. Yeah, ideally we would
> > want to encourage clients to NOT manage things
> > directly from servers, and to ensure that IF they
are
> > going to introduce Vista, the IT folks' machines
> > should be doing the dog-fooding, but realistically,
> > the "ideal" is always the exception in this field.
> > Microsoft should know that. People will insist on
> > managing GPO directly from the DCs, best practices
be
> > damned.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > _____
> > (, / | /) /) /)
> > /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> > ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> > (_/ /)
> > (/
> > Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> > www.akomolafe.com
> > -
> we
> > know IT
> > *-5.75, -3.23*
> > Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you
> were
> > worried about Yesterday? -anon
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > *From:* Darren Mar-Elia
> > *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 9:18 AM
> > *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > I hear you Rich. I had a long discussion with
someone
> on
> the GP newsgroups
> > who thought that the fact that XP and 2003 couldn't
> read
> Vista GP settings
> > was an abomination and a scandal of the highest
order
> and
> that MS should be
> > beaten for their insolence (I'm paraphrasing :-)).
> But,
> yes, we should all
> > be used to the fact that sometimes, you have to
adopt
> the
> new stuff to get
> > the new toys. People don't seem to have a problem
> with
> that concept when it
> > comes to game consoles :)
> >
> > Darren
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On
Behalf
> Of
> Rich Milburn
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:04 AM
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > Sorry, I understand it's different, what I meant was
> merely that we had
> > some growing pains like this when XP first came out.
> Our
> practice then
> > became to use only XP desktops for GP management. I
> think
> there's a
> > tendency to think this is such a terrible thing,
this
> > backwards-incompatibility, and we might forget that
> Vista
> is not new
> > with this, we had similar issues before. And who
> remembers the
> > teeth-pulling to get people to move to Active
> Directory??
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Rich Milburn
> > MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> > Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
> > Applebee's International, Inc.
> > 4551 W. 107th St
> > Overland Park, KS 66207
> > 913-967-2819
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" -
> anonymous
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On
Behalf
> Of
> Darren Mar-Elia
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 10:05 AM
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > This is actually a little different because if you
> view a
> GPO that was
> > created with Vista, using XP or 2003, none of the
> ADMX
> settings can
> > actually
> > be read at all, because they are a completely new
> format
> that GPEditor
> > or
> > GPMC on those older platforms don't understand. In
> fact,
> those XP or
> > 2003
> > will happily copy up the ADMs into the Vista GPO
like
> they
> used to do,
> > and
> > you're back to each GPO storing ADMs in SYSVOL. What
> I've
> been
> > recommending
> > to folks is that once you introduce Vista desktops
> into
> your
> > environment,
> > use Vista for all your ongoing GP management. The
> Vista
> ADMXs are a
> > superset
> > of the latest and greatest ADMs (i.e. they include
> 2003,
> XP and Vista
> > settings) so you can happily manage Vista and non-
> Vista
> targeted GP
> > settings
> > from a Vista machine.
> >
> > Darren
> >
> > Darren Mar-Elia
> > CTO & Founder
> > www.sdmsoftware.com
> > darren@sdmsoftware.com
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On
Behalf
> Of
> Rich Milburn
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 6:49 AM
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > You may recall, there was a similar case when XP
came
> out
> too - if
> > memory serves, you had to manage XP GPO settings
from
> an
> XP box - if you
> > opened them on Win2K, there were problems (I can't
> recall
> now exactly
> > what those problems were... it would corrupt the
> policy?
> Lose the
> > settings?) anyway so there are tons more settings (+
> side)
> and you have
> > to use Vista for now (- side, sorta). I wouldn't be
> too
> surprised if
> > they fix that with the next server and XP SP... but
I
> haven't actually
> > heard that.
> >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Rich Milburn
> > MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> > Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development
> > Applebee's International, Inc.
> > 4551 W. 107th St
> > Overland Park, KS 66207
> > 913-967-2819
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "I love the smell of red herrings in the morning" -
> anonymous
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On
Behalf
> Of
> Darren Mar-Elia
> > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:13 PM
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > Vista introduces a new Admin Template format called
> ADMX.
> These are
> > found on Vista in C:\windows\policydefinitions and,
> unfortuately cannot
> > be consumed by earlier versions of Windows. That is
> you
> must manage
> > Vista GP from Vista.
> >
> > Darren
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "Za Vue"
> > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > Sent: 12/14/2006 1:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> >
> > Sorry. Exactly what Ben wrote.
> >
> > Thanks..
> >
> > -Z.V.
> >
> > WATSON, BEN wrote:
> > > Maybe he may be referring to the location of any
> possible new ADM
> > files
> > > included with Vista.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On
> Behalf Of
> Darren
> > Mar-Elia
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 10:34 AM
> > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> > >
> > > What do you mean Za? I'm not familiar with any GPO
> plug-in for Win2K3,
> > > unless you mean the LDIF files that are in
> sources\adprep on the Vista
> > > CD?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> > > [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On
> Behalf Of
> Za Vue
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 9:57 AM
> > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> > > Subject: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
> > >
> > > Anyone know what and where the GPO plugin for
> Win2003 on
> the Vista DVD
> >
> > > is called and located?
> > >
> > > -Z.V.
> > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > > List FAQ :
http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-
> archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> > >
> > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > > List FAQ :
http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-
> archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > > List FAQ :
http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-
> archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > -------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONFIDENTIALITY
> NOTICE-------
> > PRIVILEGED /
> > CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this
> message
> or any
> > attachments.
> > This information is strictly confidential and may be
> subject to
> > attorney-client
> > privilege. This message is intended only for the use
> of
> the named
> > addressee.
> > If
> > you are not the intended recipient of this message,
> unauthorized
> > forwarding,
> >
> > printing, copying, distribution, or using such
> information
> is strictly
> > prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received
> this
> in error, you
> > should
> > kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and
> immediately
> destroy this
> > message.
> > Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a
> violation of
> federal
> > criminal
> > law.
> > Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to
> monitor and review
> > the
> > content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail
> address. Messages
> > sent
> > to
> > or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
> Applebee's
> > International,
> > Inc.
> > e-mail system.
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > -------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONFIDENTIALITY
> NOTICE-------
> > PRIVILEGED /
> > CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this
> message
> or any
> > attachments.
> > This information is strictly confidential and may be
> subject to
> > attorney-client
> > privilege. This message is intended only for the use
> of
> the named addressee.
> > If
> > you are not the intended recipient of this message,
> unauthorized forwarding,
> >
> > printing, copying, distribution, or using such
> information
> is strictly
> > prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received
> this
> in error, you
> > should
> > kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and
> immediately
> destroy this
> > message.
> > Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a
> violation of
> federal criminal
> > law.
> > Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to
> monitor and review the
> > content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail
> address. Messages sent
> > to
> > or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
> Applebee's International,
> > Inc.
> > e-mail system.
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> > List archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
> > Release Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
> Release
> > Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 -
> Release
> > Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
> > Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release
> > Date: 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release Date:
> > 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release Date:
> > 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.20/588 - Release Date:
> > 12/15/2006 10:02 AM
> >
>
> --
> Letting your vendors set your risk analysis these days?
> http://www.threatcode.com
>
> If you are a SBSer and you don't subscribe to the SBS Blog... man ...
I
> will
> hunt you down...
> http://blogs.technet.com/sbs
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
>
> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
> List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ | | | |
| tvanderkooi
Posts:15
| | 12/18/2006 9:59 AM |
| I've got it out in production now. Not enterprise wide, but in
production on a decent number of machines. Granted, I don't run ISA and
I don't use Trend. I run NOD and they have a Vista ready version of
their AV product out. We rolled Vista to all of our tablet PCs almost
immediately upon release and we haven't has a single complaint yet
(knock on wood).
I'll admit that I tend to roll Microsoft's products faster than the
average, but I truly believe that the whole "wait for SP1" thing is no
longer true with Microsoft's newer products.
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
[mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] On Behalf Of Susan Bradley,
CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 7:32 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
(as a bystander here .. I personally like the point/counterpoints.. just
sometimes we need to realize that we lose ...what? About 60% of
communication via email? And adjust accordingly okay? Can we hug and
make up?)
Pogue's Posts - Technology - New York Times Blog:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/14pogue-email-2/
Granted I'm little... but are you guys really and truly rolling out
Vista in other than Lab settings anyway? I'm getting hit over the head
on a daily basis by vendors are are saying "Wait".
My two benchmarks of when I can say I'm somewhat "business ready" on
Vista is when the ISA firewall client that supports Vista ships (it did
earlier this week) and when Trend isn't offering up beta versions as the
only ones that will run on Vista.
Are you guys really and truly rolling these suckers out on production
boxes?
Don't geeks adapt anyway? (We may not read... but we adapt right?)
This is slightly incorrect...but the fact is SQL 2005 express officially
needs sp2 to run on Vista
http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/14/magazines/business2/microsoft_vista.biz2
/index.htm?cnn=yes
*Wait Until after Tax Time? *Note that Intuit's tax software divisions
are recommending that their users wait until after tax season to make
any move to Windows Vista. These notices are posted for both Lacerte
Professional Tax Software
and ProSeries Professional Tax Software
.
*Prudence Suggested for QuickBooks Users Too.* Windows Vista holds much
promise for significant improvements in security and functionality.
However, Intuit suggests the decision to upgrade to Windows Vista be
approached carefully, for two reasons:
* Potential reliability issues often associated with the initial
release of operating systems.
* Intuit will not be able to support QuickBooks 2006 and earlier on
Windows Vista.
Laura A. Robinson wrote:
> Deji, I've had enough of you attributing statements to me that I have
> not made, and therefore I am finished with this conversation.
>
> Laura
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Akomolafe, Deji
> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 4:44 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> Did I actually say that clueless folks are writing you checks? Or
> are you projecting? That those who write you checks but
> don't/can't/won't do things "the right way" (according to you) are
> clueless, and you don't like their checks?
>
>
> Sincerely,
> _____
> (, / | /) /) /)
> /---| (/_ ______ ___// _ // _
> ) / |_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
> (_/ /)
> (/
> Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
> www.akomolafe.com
> - we know IT
> *-5.75, -3.23*
> Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried
> about Yesterday? -anon
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Laura A. Robinson
> *Sent:* Fri 12/15/2006 12:50 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> BTW, I would disagree with your assessment of Microsoft's customer
> base. I work in Microsoft's largest district, with our largest
> customers, and I find them far from clueless. I also find very few
> clueless folks writing us checks that "add up to those billions in
> the vault".
>
> Do I run into misinformed people? Absolutely. Clueless? Not
> really. Well, not among my customers, anyway. :-)
>
> Laura
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org
> [mailto:ActiveDir-owner@mail.activedir.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Laura A. Robinson
> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2006 2:26 PM
> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
>
> And it's the clueful customers who (rightly) become angry when
> something in a product that exists purely for backward
> compatibility opens a security hole. Now, I'm not saying that
> all security holes are due to backward compatibility, and I'm
> not saying that every bit of code that comes out of Redmond is
> perfect. However, I have said for years that many of the
> things that people don't like about Microsoft's products are
> the result of backward compatibility, not bad coding or a lack
> of consideration on the part of Microsoft's programmers. As
> somebody else (Darren? Richard?) said, there is a point where
> a line has to be drawn in the sand. I personally don't see
> anything dictatorial about requiring a Vista+ machine to edit
> *VISTA* policies. I mean, seriously, if you're writing Vista
> GPOs, that would imply that you're using Vista machines, and
> if you're using Vista machines, what is the issue with |
|
|