So you still need the packages on all of the remote DPs?

It would be cool if you could just have it download the drivers directly from 
the vendor's website.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Marable, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:38 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions?

Actually, it works fairly well for non-conforming models.  That's exactly the 
situation we are in.  The hospital I work for has a very controlled process for 
acquiring hardware.  All the models are known, limited and configured 
identically.  We're absorbing the medical school where they have been allowed 
to purchase freely what-ever they please.

What I've done is to create packages of drivers for known models just like the 
article says.  For the "dummy" package I use a package that contains just those 
network and MSD drivers that I need to get WinPE (v 10) to function (to be able 
to access the network and the hard drive).  If a driver package specific for 
that model cannot be found, it falls back on the same set of drivers that 
allowed WinPE to function.  That generally gets any non-conformist machine 
through the build.  The tech building the machine may have to download and 
manually add drivers for video and other components post-build.  We have a 
process for them to provide feedback so that I can continue to create model 
specific packages of drivers when needed.

Mike

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Miller, Todd
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:54 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions?

Is it unclear to me what you do about non-conforming computer models in this 
method.  With no drivers loaded into Configmgr directly, there is no "chaos 
theory" for unsupported models to fall back to.
This seems like it would work perfectly for a perfectly managed organization, 
but my reality is a bit more dystopian.  We have 20,000 computers and 90% of 
them fall into less than 20 models but the remaining 2000 computers cover over 
200 more models.  And that is after trying very hard  and being very resistant 
to folks purchasing non-conforming models.  I see you are also at an EDU - so I 
imagine your make/model list has similarly long tail.

How could this method be enhanced to support the unsupported?


BIOS updating is mentioned in the comments of that blog post and that seems 
pretty intriguing.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Murray, Mike
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 4:59 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions?

Biggety Bump

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Murray, Mike
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 4:22 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] Driver management - opinions?

We're thinking of testing the tool linked below. Anyone have experience with 
it? Are there any other tools you prefer that can accomplish similar?

http://www.scconfigmgr.com/2017/03/29/modern-driver-management-using-web-services-during-osd-with-configmgr/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scconfigmgr.com%2F2017%2F03%2F29%2Fmodern-driver-management-using-web-services-during-osd-with-configmgr%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C01ed4988cf5445a8046f08d4873ae959%7C62af9ccc42164ae2a1d306614c59c315%7C0%7C0%7C636282134469207820&sdata=ejGvuGlCuuFr8CKJFAPTAN4YSQSpTk0wZb0QbwePgDE%3D&reserved=0>


Best Regards,

Mike Murray
Desktop Engineer/IT Consultant - IT Support Services
California State University, Chico
530.898.4357
mmur...@csuchico.edu<mailto:mmur...@csuchico.edu>

Remember, Chico State will NEVER ask you for your password via email!
For more information about recognizing phishing scam emails go to: 
http://www.csuchico.edu/isec/basics/spam-and-phishing.shtml<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.csuchico.edu%2Fisec%2Fbasics%2Fspam-and-phishing.shtml&data=02%7C01%7C%7C01ed4988cf5445a8046f08d4873ae959%7C62af9ccc42164ae2a1d306614c59c315%7C0%7C0%7C636282134469207820&sdata=xgMO1FlY8feurYtWDN5As7STaDsZbAZVB5enpyBujXE%3D&reserved=0>




________________________________
Notice: This UI Health Care e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is intended only 
for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may 
contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete or destroy all copies of the original message and 
attachments thereto. Email sent to or from UI Health Care may be retained as 
required by law or regulation. Thank you.
________________________________


**********************************************************
Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not be 
used for urgent or sensitive issues




Reply via email to