Am I the only one who remembers the teeth-pulling necessary to get people to make the move to XP? Or to Win2K? Both of which were a fairly big leap. XP was seen as eye candy with very little benefit over Win2K (but with licensing and deployment and compatibility problems that could be avoided by staying "on a perfectly good platform"). I had to write up several papers on what was different and better in XP than in Win2K (not where I work now, just for the record...) I think in 2 years we're going to see a similar situation. The more IT types dig into Vista, and see solutions to problems that either have no solution in XP, or require workarounds and make-do's (is that a word?), the more people will start to see the point in upgrading. I think the same goes for Longhorn. So... this is just my opinion, but I think that one would be remiss in not digging into Vista now to see if there's more than just eye candy and extensive hardware requirements...
So far, in my experience, I've been pretty surprised at the things that will run on Vista. Conversely, there are a few things we have that still do not work on XP. We use Win2K VMs for those handful of things. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 <http://recp.proadvisors.intuit.com/ctt?kn=18&m=399604&r=MzE0NTkxNTExOQS 2&b=0&j=NzQzNjgzNDcS1&mt=1> and ProSeries Professional Tax Software <http://recp.proadvisors.intuit.com/ctt?kn=21&m=399604&r=MzE0NTkxNTExOQS 2&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:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *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 > <x-excid://32770000/uri:http://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:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *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:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *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 > <x-excid://32770000/uri:http://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:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *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 > <x-excid://32770000/uri:http://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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/ -------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/
