At the risk of getting flamed, I'd like to say that this whole exchange is a good thing (even if way OT). Marcus expressed his idea, Deji objected, and Joe objected to Deji's objection. No blood - no foul. It's a beautiful thing. :-)
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 3:22 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Deji, I don't know where to start with most of your email. So I won't. My hope is simply that someone doesn't follow this chain and is afraid to say some person or software or company sucks when it does because someone might interpret it wrong. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 9:24 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Joe, I had a mind to ignore you - because I'm SERIOUSLY trying to stay in my <not paying attention> mode due to some pressing commitments right now. Also, like I said before, I had an issue with the statement, the OP clarified it and now I know how to relate to that OP henceforth. Are you trying to say that I should have kept quite and formed a totally incorrect opinion, based on a totally incorrect set of information about the OP? Would that have been more preferable to you, more preferable than me appearing to be stuck on some "Political Correctness"? You have a right to be as "insensitive" as you want to be. I have an equal right to call you out whenever your "right" starts crossing over. You do not sit in judgment of MY interpretation of anything. I know you. I know you are rude [1]. But we are not talking rude here - and, NO, you don't get to decide what *I* consider rude. If you decide to take a huge brush and paint a closed set of humanity with tar (say, because a subset of that closed set like to wear tar), and you think you have the "right" to decide when the rest of the set can "complain", THAT is NOT rudeness. It is something else beyond rude. OK, Joe, you know where to find me. I will debate you to infinity on this, keystroke for keystroke - and this time, you are not going to win. Now, REALLY back in <not paying attention> mode. [1] Did I remember to say you are RUDE? Well, there ..... in case I didn't say it before. <this is where the smiley would be - IF I weren't too busy to insert it> Sincerely, Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.readymaids.com - we know IT www.akomolafe.com Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of joe Sent: Tue 10/11/2005 4:55 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Too much "professionalism" and "political correctness" can so water down the content of the message or the crux of the problem that any conversation simply becomes a waste of time as it becomes an experiment in how to not hurt or, even worse in this context, how to elevate the feelings of others. There are times that you really need to point out that someone or something is really stupid or sucks, personally I think those times are every time something is stupid or sucks. There is too much confusion and cloudiness already to purposely cloud things up more on purpose for fear of being attacked by the fashio^H^H^H^H^H^H politically correct police. If people who want to post here feel that they can not honestly express their opinion because they think they will be attacked or questioned for not being "sensitive" I think we have impacted the forum in a negative fashion. If someone is bothered by the verbiage or "feel" of a given post or poster, ignore it, go on, do something else with your life[1]. Others can do the same. I certainly ignore lots of people and what they say because quite frankly they annoy the crap out of me or I feel the cost vs value equation wasn't good enough for me to do otherwise. You saw me do it in person when we worked together. You tell me, if back then I had dealt with every person equally who felt they deserved my time how much real work would I have gotten done? Call it rude, call it politically incorrect, I call it being able to actually get things done. I am not saying people should go out of their way to be rude and attack each other, just that they shouldn't be so worried about the specific words they use when voicing a problem or a solution that they consider the words more than the issue they are trying describe or help with itself. The point that occurs, things are all down hill. I think I understood what Marcus was saying. I doubt most people on the list had a problem understanding as well. It isn't a secret that many support positions are going to India and that communicating with folks on those help desks can be troublesome at best because you have to fight your way both through a language barrier as well as a script barrier. Hell I have a good friend who grew up in India, speaks Hindi perfectly, and still lives in India 3 months out of the year and *he* doesn't have good things to say about those help desks. He even comments that it isn't a language barrier issue... I have no direct feel or involvement for the functions that have been moved there for the company I currently work for so I have to assume that they are doing it "right", but I have quite a bit of feel for the last company I worked for that did it and it was rough at best. It wasn't a racial thing at all as I have many friends from all over that part of the world who are top notch. Those same people aren't working the cost-saver help desks over there, just like the brilliant Genius+ level folks you talk to on the product teams in Redmond aren't the folks answering the phone when you dial 1-800-help-me-MS. Companies are NOT moving help desks to that region for top notch support. They are doing it for reduced costs. At least that is my perception, I have yet to have heard a company executive say we are moving help desk operations to India because it is substandard where we have it now wherever else in the world. The comments to move support or development to India has always started with... "In order to defray/reduce/mitigate our support/development costs....". Marcus seemed, to me, to be saying that despite those well known issues, he would still rather deal with those issues than deal with Cisco. The translation that occurred between my ears was that the Cisco support he received really sucked. Amazingly so. > regardless of how pejorative some people would like to make "Political Correctness" sound YUP! joe [1] Actually recently on a perl list there was an all out whine-fest about top versus bottom posting. Some guy helped someone with a problem but then proceeded to whine that they top posted. All I wanted to do was shake the guy and say, WTF did you help the person in the first place if this was so important to you? I can only assume what that person's life is like... -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 6:03 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates It helps to know the make-up of your audience in any forum. That helps ensure a modicum of professionalism. The OP already clarifies his position, and it helps to clear things up in my mind. Nothing "politically correct" about that. Not that I have any problem with asking for political correctness, mind you - regardless of how pejorative some people would like to make "Political Correctness" sound. Sincerely, Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.readymaids.com - we know IT www.akomolafe.com Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of joe Sent: Tue 10/11/2005 2:08 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Oh no, please don't let this list become a politically correct patrolled zone. I will just walk right away. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:23 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates >>>I think I'd rather talk miis to some dude in India before engaging a >>>Cisco support rep again Marcus, I can't resist the urge to turn off my lurking mode and ask you to please explain the relevance of the statement above to the scope of this conversation, especially in this public forum. I am holding back the irresistible urge to jump to conclusions, considering the fact that a significant portion of the SMS (where you got your MVP) knowledge out there are contributed by people from that part of the world. Sincerely, Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.readymaids.com - we know IT www.akomolafe.com Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue 10/11/2005 7:45 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Exactly. My beef too. Let me tell you... there support is less than stellar. I think I'd rather talk miis to some dude in India before engaging a Cisco support rep again. :m:dsm:cci:mvp marcusoh.blogspot.com <http://marcusoh.blogspot.com> ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ayers, Diane Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:21 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates >You ever find that often times the products are already bought before >your input is requested? The better question is when do they ever check with you before they buy a product? Nope... They usually ask someone that has no clue of the impact to the production systems then they bring it to us to "implement" We have Unity and it has had a major impact to our AD environment although I can say that the users (including me) love it's functionality. What irks me more though is the version that we implemented initially had major schema changes and then the subsequent version decide to move a lot of the data from AD to a separate SQL DB. Why didn't they tell me that BEFORE we irrevocably altered the schema. Another good example is Cisco ICM. The version prior to the new 7.x version required a separate domain, required domain admin level privileges to operate and schema changes to forest as well as a litany of other "issues". At least version 7.x will integrate into an existing corporate domain although requires a dedicated OU. I really get nervous with applications that want to create user objects wily-nily in order to operate. Diane ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:52 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Our movement for Cisco Unity was based strictly on a wholesale move to Cisco VoIP solutions all the way around. Apparently there's some cost savings there somewhere. I dunno... regarding the comment joe made about not ever being in your ad environment. Concur 100%. You ever find that often times the products are already bought before your input is requested? I dunno if I have bigger problems with cisco being in the software space or their horrible turnout of applications after they've acquired them. Unity, call manager, etc... one uses ad... one uses dirsync in a proprietary ldap server... odd stuff like that. Not to mention, it took a nda and massive levels of coercion to get cisco to fess up to what the exact permissions were that are required in order for unity to work successfully. That was a good month long ordeal. Unfortunately nda - so I can't really speak or blog on the exact stuff to correct it. Their reasoning? Most admins have no idea how to configure the ACLs properly to support their application. I digress. :m:dsm:cci:mvp marcusoh.blogspot.com <http://marcusoh.blogspot.com/> ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 7:57 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates The price tag will definitely drop as soon as Microsoft releases Exchange 12 with UM built in. But, it's not THAT expensive today, and there are some great business pluses to it. We had no problems showing ROI on VOIP or UM. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:14 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates It's a feature with lots of "gee whiz!" appeal, but once people see the price tag, the response is usually "ouch!" We are still waiting for the "year of UM". I'm betting on 2007. :-) ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley [MVP] Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 6:49 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates I think this is definitely a case where Moore's Law hasn't been applicable. It's funny how little this story has changed since I saw the first unified messaging demos (then by Octel) about ten years ago. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!(tm) ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:49 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Entirely your option. :) Windows 3.11 and Windows NT are really not the same product. Note I am not saying I won't use cisco routers because they sucked 12 years ago. As someone else pointed out, software isn't cisco's ball of wax. There is obviously a little bit of a scary point there when you consider though that the IOS is software... Also as you mentioned, it wasn't created or even modified much by cisco. So I don't expect it is much different now than what I saw. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:37 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates And I will never run Windows because 3.11 just wasn't that great at networking. ;-) ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:42 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Being the best available doesn't make something good and doesn't need a lot of work. :o) It just means it is better than the other sucky alternatives. I haven't seen unity in years but when I last saw it, it had me swearing about how bad it was. I seem to recall saying something along the lines of that will never be in any AD I ever manage. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:04 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Not sure why you don't like Unity, it's the best unified messaging app there is right now. Actually has been for over 5 years. I believe that the reason it;s as good as it is, is that it was not created or even modified much by Cisco, they simply bought a really good product and left it be for the most part. As for the schema updates, it didn't work. We made the registry change and it did work. I don't see how that would be tied to the app as no changes were made there. But who knows. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 7:27 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Hmmm. I need to think about that again. I think I only saw this behavior in the lab where all the servers were upgraded instead of wipe and replace. In production, we upgraded initially then did a replacement effort later. More to the point, UGH Cisco Unity... I wish to Christ they'd stick to hardware and stop venturing into software... :m:dsm:cci:mvp marcusoh.blogspot.com <http://marcusoh.blogspot.com/> ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:03 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Was it maybe the app itself disallowing the update? Did you try to just modify the schema to see if it would work? Say change the rangeupper of cn or something like that and then change it back. Something innocuous. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 5:17 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Yep, same here. I think upgraded scenarios have this. :m:dsm:cci:mvp marcusoh.blogspot.com <http://marcusoh.blogspot.com/> ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 10:57 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Upgraded. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:38 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Upgraded to 2003 or fresh install? :m:dsm:cci:mvp marcusoh.blogspot.com <http://marcusoh.blogspot.com/> ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 10:12 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates I just did this last week to install Cisco Unity and I still had to enable schema updates in Windows 2003 even though the user was in Schema Admins. I was under the same impression as Travis, but after enabling updating in the registry it worked fine. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:03 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Did you work this out Travis? If not, I would recommend pulling up the sysinternal registry and file monitors as well as tracing the AD calls. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 2:59 PM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: [ActiveDir] Schema Updates Hi, I am having some problems updating the schema for Avaya Unified Messaging. It is my thinking that in Windows 2003 the schema is already enabled for updates as long as you are in the Schema Admins group. In Windows 2000 you had to enable the Schema to be updated. Am I correct or misguided? Thanks! Travis Abrams blackcomb longhorn dnt phantom List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.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%40mail.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%40mail.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%40mail.activedir.org/
