date:20061215

Easy enough to check - it'll be labeled on the back/bottom of the
battery what type it is...

 

---
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

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 12:00 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

 

Whatever they give me must not be Lithium then. 

 

Thanks,

Brian Desmond

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

c - 312.731.3132

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 11:36 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

 

Lithium batteries are resilient to the charge/discharge issues
associated with earlier batteries. Generally, you want to replace
batteries after about 18 months, because that's when depreciation sets
in.

 


Sincerely, 
   _
  (, /  |  /)   /) /)   
/---| (/_  __   ___// _   //  _ 
 ) /|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)  
   (/   
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com x-excid://3277/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: Brian Desmond
Sent: Tue 12/12/2006 7:49 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

I have this model too. Kill the Wifi and Bluetooth for starters. Wifi is
Fn+F2 I think. 

 

Next, get a media bay battery from Dell - it can give you several (up to
4) more hours in my experience.

 

I go through batteries pretty quickly - I think I killed the media bay
battery (or at met its half life) in about 6 months. A combination of
desk work and being mobile does this because of the uneven
discharge/charge cycles. You can either be real meticulous about taking
care of the batteries or start hitting your IT department up for new
ones. 

 

Thanks,

Brian Desmond

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

c - 312.731.3132

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Noah Eiger
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:33 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

 

Hi -

 

When I travel with my standard issue Dell D600 (1.5GB RAM), I get maybe
two hours out of a fully charged battery while doing standard Word,
Excel, Outlook stuff. Throw in Visio or (ugh) Quickbooks and cut that
time in half. Sometimes, I try to disable services that I know I will
not need on the plane (does antivirus really need to autoprotect on the
plane?), but I can't tell you that this actually gives me any more
battery.

 

Any recommendations for battery-life extending tricks, tools, services
to disable, etc? Greatly appreciated as I head across the country for
the late December boogie. 

 

Thanks.

 

-- nme

 

 

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.16/582 - Release Date:
12/11/2006


---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.

RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

Originally you posted that Visio and Quickbooks cut your battery life in half.  
With Quickbooks it's probably constantly recalculating whenever you do things, 
and Visio is pretty CPU-intensive if you have drawings that are extensive at 
all.  By contrast, other Office programs are practically idle while using them 
(unless you're doing major linking, charting, or large document reformatting 
with graphics).  It's a guess, but I imagine the processing involved is the 
difference in battery life.  

Leaving a CD/DVD in the drive can be a drain if you keep spinning it up from 
looking in My Computer (Windows kindly spins it up to read it again each time), 
and PCMCIA cards are a big drain too, from what I've read.

As far as letting it sleep and then waking it up... XP seemed to drain faster 
than usual when it did a lot of sleeping/waking - maybe processing involved on 
this too?  Vista doesn't seem to have the same effect on it though - but the 
laptop I was using with Vista was a pretty new one so... (Latitude D620)

---
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 Steve Egan (Temp)
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 12:29 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

The IBM T-series laptops that we use here have a battery mode that slows down 
the processor speed, resulting in less power consumption by the processor and 
less heat generated (resulting in the cooling fan cycling on and off less).  
Noah, if I am reading your question correctly, you are asking if spinning the 
disk up to speed draws significant current, and if you are constantly stopping 
and then re-starting the spin on the disk platter constantly does this negate 
the power savings of having the disk power down in the first place?

As an engineer, the answer is: it depends.  If the power-down/power-up cycle is 
sufficiently short (you're always waking the unit back up) then the answer is 
YES.  If there are significant periods of time between sleeping and waking the 
machine, the answer is NO.  I'd actually have to measure current draw from the 
platter motor to tell you what the cycle time would be.  Having said that, I 
can tell you from experience with other dynamic systems that sometimes just 
leaving it run is the most advantageous/economical!

Anybody else have the same conclusion?  I am NOT a hard drive designer...

Everybody, all of your suggestions are spot on.  Especially the Network adapter 
and the WiFi...

Steve Egan (temp)
Systems/Network engineer
Purcell Systems

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Noah Eiger
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:09 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

So your last part about disk. Does waking up from those screen and hdd settings 
have a negative impact on battery? That is, if you are continually giggling the 
track pad to wake it up, is that worse than just leaving it run for a bit? 
Similarly, does coming out of Sleep hit the battery?

Dell put out a document about battery life. The single biggest factor was 
screen. Next (I think) was network adapters. 

What about services? Are there services to disable to improve battery run time?

-- nme

-Original Message-
From: Williams, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 6:08 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

The Dell D600 and D610 have a network adaptor power setting where you can tell 
it to disable a network adaptor if it is not live when on battery, this may 
help extend your battery life a bit more.  

We use both these models and even using the internal wireless card we still get 
3.5 to 4 hours out of a battery.

Our power settings are wound right down so for example the screen powers off 
after 1min, HDD after 5min etc.

Regards 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Parris
Sent: 13 December 2006 08:32
To: ActiveDir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Way OT: Laptop Battery Life

I also read a blog this week that Vista's default Wifi configuration is set in 
such a way that if the wifi hotspots don't support this Vista mode - it will 
drain the battery pretty quick. 

This leads me to ask do you have any power draining features turned on or 
inserted? Powersave set on Disk,  screen, do you have an external mouse or 
PCMCIA/Express cards?



Regards,

Mark Parris

Base IT Ltd
Active Directory Consultancy
Tel +44(0)7801

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

2006-12-15 Thread Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]

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/

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

2006-12-15 Thread Brian Desmond

There was a hotfix for that - they lengthened some string or something
in the adm file format if I remember right. 

Thanks,
Brian Desmond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

c - 312.731.3132

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:ActiveDir-
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
 Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:49 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:

Re: [ActiveDir] SMB Problems

SMB signing enabled?

If it's not a newer one, they can't communicate over SMB with the
require SMB signing on.

In August of this year there was a patch that came down that adjusted
the default SMB signing behavior and it was in the optional section and
on WSUS. Was that installed perhaps?

http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesper/archive/2006/08/24/SMB-Message-Signing-Troubles_3F00_.aspx

Bob Anderson wrote:

Good Morning,
I'm not sure I should be asking this here but here goes.

We have a full Windows 2003 domain and almost all XP Professional
workstations. I have a Ricoh Printer, Copier, Scanner on the Network
that we use to Scan documents to each users system. During the last
Month or so all but about 4 workstations have failed to allow scans to
be created, the scanner does not give me any error messages. Each user
is in the scanner address book with their Windows User ID and Password
to access the own PC Directory.

Does any on have a clue as to why some work and some do not.

Thanks for any thoughts you may have.

Bob Anderson
IT Guy
Kent Sporting Goods
433 Park Ave. S
New London OH 44851
419-929-7021 x315
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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/

Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

2006-12-15 Thread Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]


Yup.  I think it finally WU'd down didn't it?

Brian Desmond wrote:

There was a hotfix for that - they lengthened some string or something
in the adm file format if I remember right. 


Thanks,
Brian Desmond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

c - 312.731.3132

  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:ActiveDir-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:49 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:

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

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:

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

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: [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

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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Come on Deji-its exactly the same, else why in the world do we upgrade
perfectly good IT systems? J

 

Folks can manage their GP from DCs when Longhorn ships. Until then, its
Vista. Also, it would fairly trivial, if not time-consuming, to convert all
those ADMXs in Vista back to ADMs. There is nothing technically preventing
that. But, it is not trivial to back-port the other new Vista functionality,
like published printers, wired policy, the new IPSec and Firewall stuff,
back to older versions. You wouldn't need to back-port all of it-just enough
to support GP Editing, but still, it's a lot of work and MS, like most other
software companies, probably needs to make the hard call about where to put
dev and testing resources. 

 

I agree that its not ideal, but I don't think having to manage GP from Vista
for the intervening space of time until Longhorn ships is a terrible thing.
It will probably take most orgs that much time to decide when to go to Vista
anyway. And for the aggressive ones, Vista is not a bad choice for a
management platform. I think the benefits of the central store and other
improvements outweigh the medium term inconvenience. 

 

I am curious, however, what others think. 

 

Darren

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:39 AM
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://3277/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

[ActiveDir] Can't validate trust

2006-12-15 Thread Kamlesh Parmar


In a small R  D setup of one group, having two domains and two way trust
between them.
xyz (win2k3) and abc.com (win2k)

While verifying a trust from xyz PDC, we got error that, domain controller
can't make a RPC call to PDC of domain abc.com.
And in network trace of it, it gives a SMB errors as
STATUS_CANNOT_IMPERSONATE

Has anyone seen this error?

We verified that,
1) DNS is working for both domains.
2) SMB signing parameters are matching.
3) Lmcompatibilitylevel registry key is matching.
4) restrictanonymous is set to 0 (just as a precaution)

--
Kamlesh
~
You teach best what you most need to learn.
~

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

2006-12-15 Thread Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]

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: [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 - 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

Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Bad for whom?  Down here where the bar is low for best practices in the 
first place the var/vap comes in and has to kick the owner off of 
his shiny new OEM Vista box and borrow it to set up the group policy 
firewall settings for it, or other settings that the managed services 
partner may want to do.


When I'm doing group policy stuff... I'm up on that GPMC that is 
automagically installed on that SBS box and I'm in a group policy frame 
of mind.


I could manage GPOs from my desktop but I just don't... I RDP into the 
server.


What you guys should think of is burning in a VCD (virtual) Vista image 
that is pre-staged to be nothing but a Group policy management tool?  
(stupid idea?)




Laura A. Robinson wrote:

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://3277/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.

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

They won't do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN'T do it. I feel
Microsoft should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs
correctly for a change, instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed
amongst us.

Just my opinion,

Tim

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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://3277/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

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

I'm sure that you are aware that LH is still many years away from significant 
adoption. We will see several intervening years between LH release and its 
reaching the mainstream. In the meantime, Vista would have become the de-facto 
desktop OS in place of XP (yes, I can dream). So, between now, then and 
when-ever, people will be needlessly handicapped in their ADM/ADMX decision 
making. I foresee a lot of gnashing of the teeth, more gripping, beaucoup evil 
M$ rants, and other heart-burn-inducing misunderstandings.

Nobody said it would be non-trivial. If it were, people like me will not need 
people like you.


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 10:21 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO


Come on Deji-its exactly the same, else why in the world do we upgrade 
perfectly good IT systems? J
 
Folks can manage their GP from DCs when Longhorn ships. Until then, its Vista. 
Also, it would fairly trivial, if not time-consuming, to convert all those 
ADMXs in Vista back to ADMs. There is nothing technically preventing that. But, 
it is not trivial to back-port the other new Vista functionality, like 
published printers, wired policy, the new IPSec and Firewall stuff, back to 
older versions. You wouldn't need to back-port all of it-just enough to support 
GP Editing, but still, it's a lot of work and MS, like most other software 
companies, probably needs to make the hard call about where to put dev and 
testing resources. 
 
I agree that its not ideal, but I don't think having to manage GP from Vista 
for the intervening space of time until Longhorn ships is a terrible thing. It 
will probably take most orgs that much time to decide when to go to Vista 
anyway. And for the aggressive ones, Vista is not a bad choice for a management 
platform. I think the benefits of the central store and other improvements 
outweigh the medium term inconvenience. 
 
I am curious, however, what others think. 
 
Darren
 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:39 AM
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: [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

RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Replicating Print Queues To Multiple (40+) Servers via Script or Software?

2006-12-15 Thread activedir

Yes, it workes in some cases.  One of the issues that it has is some of the 
servers are setup with a c:\ as the root, and the citrix are setup with M:\ as 
the root.  When Print Migrator creates it's cab file, it is hardcoded with the 
root drive letter.   For the most part the print drivers don't change all that 
often, the new LPR printer ports and the queues change fairly often.  I would 
think that some kind of scheduled/realtime  registry replicator might solve a 
lot of the issue.It would really help if the developers could fix the 
printing issue so that all we would need is a single print server instead of 
the rediculous number of print servers that I have now.  (Somewhere in the 
neighborhood of 600 with some as high as 400 queues on each)  

I really hate printers,

Andy

- Original Message -
From: Blair, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thursday, December 14, 2006 6:29 pm
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Replicating Print Queues To Multiple (40+) Servers 
via Script or Software?

 
 Andrew,
 
 Have you had a look at Print Migrator 3 from Microsoft? This utility
 backs up the printers, drivers, ports etc. and restores them to
 alternate server/s: 
 
 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=D6915F13-
 EDE4-4
 708-83C1-0091EEADE293displaylang=en
 
 James
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, 15 December 2006 9:21 AM
 To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
 Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Replicating Print Queues To Multiple (40+)
 Servers via Script or Software?
 
 Due to a restriction from the application, every print queue must 
 resideon each Citrix server as an LPR print queue.  I have in some 
 cases 60
 replicas of the print queue across 60 servers.  
 
 Another question, is there a util that will create LPR printer 
 ports?  I
 can't seem to find one.
 
 Andrew
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Kevin Brunson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:49 pm
 Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Replicating Print Queues To Multiple 
 (40+)Servers via Script of Software?
 
  What about using the built-in Citrix printer tools?  Are you talking
  about copying the printer drivers, or actually publishing 
  printers?  
  If you are talking about printer drivers so that remote printing 
  works,then the Citrix Console can do all that.  Put the driver 
 on 
  one, and
  tell it that the rest of the servers need the driver too.
  
  If you are saying you want to set up 40 network printers on 40 
  servers,then I would say you need some servers specifically set 
 up 
  as print
  servers, and then you can set users to connect to the shared 
 printers automatically.
  
  Can you give us some more info on what exactly you are trying to do?
  
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 3:27 PM
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Replicating Print Queues To Multiple (40+)
  Servers via Script of Software?
  
  Does anyone know of any software or script that you would like 
 to 
  sharethat performs this?
  
  I have between 20 and 60 citrix servers per client, each printer is
  published on each server.  When a change or addition is made to one
  server, all of the others have to change as well.  Print 
 Migrator 
  is a
  way, but very much a pain to use.  
  
  Thanks in advance,
  
  Andrew
  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.aspxList FAQ: 
  http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspxList 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/
 Note: This email, including any attachments, is confidential. If 
 you have received this email in error, please advise the sender 
 and delete it and all copies of it from your system. If you are 
 not the intended recipient of this email, you must not use, print, 
 distribute, copy or disclose its content to anyone. 
 
 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/

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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

2006-12-15 Thread Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]

Tim,

it is the height of professional arrogance to think that anyone who 
don't/can't/won't do things the way you think they should be done (best 
practices) are lazy and uninformed.

I know you said that it is just your opinion, and, if I were like you, I would 
hazard that it is a misinformed opinion. But I won't.


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: Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Fri 12/15/2006 10:53 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO


They won't do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN'T do it. I feel Microsoft 
should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs correctly for a change, 
instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed amongst us.
Just my opinion,
Tim
 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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: [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

Re: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO





And SBS's version of "fill in the blank" always lags behind the big
guys (we let you bleed first so we don't have to :-)

We're 64bit only or bust in the Longhorn era. That means for us to
have a Longhorn GP'er... we're migratin' the Kitchen sink to run on
faster hardware (the water will run that much faster... just think of
it)

Akomolafe, Deji wrote:

  
  
  
  I'm sure
that you are aware that LH is still many years away from significant
adoption. We will see several intervening years between LH release and
its reaching the mainstream. In the meantime, Vista would have become
the de-facto desktop OS in place of XP (yes, I can dream). So, between
now, then and when-ever, people will be needlessly handicapped in their
ADM/ADMX decision making. I foresee a lot of gnashing of the teeth,
more gripping, beaucoup "evil M$" rants, and other heart-burn-inducing
misunderstandings.
  
  Nobody said it would be
non-trivial. If it were, people like me will not need people like you.
  
  
  
  
  
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 10:21 AM
  To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
  Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO
  
  
  
  
  Come
on Dejiits exactly the same, else why in the world do we upgrade
perfectly good IT systems? J
  
  Folks
can manage their GP from DCs when Longhorn ships. Until then, its
Vista. Also, it would fairly trivial, if not time-consuming, to convert
all those ADMXs in Vista back to ADMs. There is nothing technically
preventing that. But, it is not trivial to back-port the other new
Vista functionality, like published printers, wired policy, the new
IPSec and Firewall stuff, back to older versions. You wouldnt need to
back-port all of itjust enough to support GP Editing, but still, its
a lot of work and MS, like most other software companies, probably
needs to make the hard call about where to put dev and testing
resources. 
  
  I
agree that its not ideal, but I dont think having to manage GP from
Vista for the intervening space of time until Longhorn ships is a
terrible thing. It will probably take most orgs that much time to
decide when to go to Vista anyway. And for the aggressive ones, Vista
is not a bad choice for a management platform. I think the benefits of
the central store and other improvements outweigh the medium term
inconvenience. 
  
  I
am curious, however, what others think. 
  
  Darren
  
  
  
  From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Akomolafe,
Deji
  Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 9:39 AM
  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: [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

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Well said. But while you're at it, could you let someone know that I
very upset that I can't manage my Vista GPOs from my Windows ME PC.

Thanks much.  ;-)

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A.
Robinson
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 1:26 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://3277/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://3277/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

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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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

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 you that 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 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 11:26 AM
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 - 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 :)

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Since many of us are in the habit of expressing various opinions, perhaps we
should refrain from characterizing those with which we disagree as the
height of professional arrogance and misinformed. See, if we start doing
that, I might express the opinion that referring to Microsoft's customers as
clueless and insisting that Microsoft should accommodate cluelessness at
the expense of new product development, security and code review (which is
exactly what the expense is to devote resources to doing nothing but
backporting new features) is the height of professional inexperience, myopia
and lack of exposure to sophisticated IT environments.
 
But I won't.
 
:-)
 
Laura


   _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 2:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO


Tim,
 
it is the height of professional arrogance to think that anyone who
don't/can't/won't do things the way you think they should be done (best
practices) are lazy and uninformed.
 
I know you said that it is just your opinion, and, if I were like you, I
would hazard that it is a misinformed opinion. But I won't.
 


Sincerely, 
   _
  (, /  |  /)   /) /)   
/---| (/_  __   ___// _   //  _ 
 ) /|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)  
   (/   
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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: Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Fri 12/15/2006 10:53 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO



They won’t do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN’T do it. I feel Microsoft
should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs correctly for a
change, instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed amongst us.

Just my opinion,

Tim

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http:/www.akomolafe.com
\nwww.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

[ActiveDir] OT: help with running a scheduled job

2006-12-15 Thread Thommes, Michael M.

We are trying to get a particular account to run a scheduled backup job
on a server.  Our results are puzzling.  Here are the particulars:

2003 R2 standard server

Domain account, non privileged, doesn't belong to domain users

Added to local backup operators group

Trying to run a system state backup job through a scheduled batch (.bat)
file

File permissions appear to be ok in file system where batch file is
located.

 

 

Results:

When run from a remote scheduled tasks/run (without the user logged
into the server):

a scheduled job with the user's credentials specifying an ipconfig
command works.

a scheduled job with the user's credentials specifying notepad.exe
works.

a scheduled job with the user's credentials calling a batch file (.bat)
which runs ntbackup.exe FAILS with (from SchedLgU.txt):

test.job (simple.bat) 12/13/2006 5:50:08 PM ** ERROR **

Unable to start task.

The specific error is:

0x80070005: Access is denied.

Try using the Task page Browse button to locate the
application.

 

All the jobs run successfully from a remote scheduled tasks/run
environment if the user is in the local administrators group.

 

When the user is only in the local Backup Operators group, all the jobs
run successfully from a remote scheduled tasks/run environment when
this account is logged into the server/console!  They can also be run
successfully locally by the user.  Note this same user got an Access is
denied previously.

 

 

We checked through the local security policy thinking it could be
related to User Rights assignments or Security Options but did not
see anything there.  I think we're missing something really simple here,
but it's eluding us.   Any thoughts are appreciated.

 

Mike Thommes

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

2006-12-15 Thread AFidel

I would say you do server things on the server with your admin ID and do 
user stuff on your workstation with your workstation ID, so doing GP 
editing on the workstation isn't best practice, but that's my point of 
view =)

Thanks,
Andrew Fidel



Tim Vander Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12/15/2006 01:53 PM
Please respond to
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org


To
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
cc

Subject
RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO






They won?t do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN?T do it. I feel 
Microsoft should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs 
correctly for a change, instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed 
amongst us.
Just my opinion,
Tim
 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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: [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

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: [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 - 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, 
   _
  (, /  |  /)   /) /)   
/---| (/_  __   ___// _   //  _ 
 ) /|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Then we can agree to disagree. Personally I don't believe that it is
arrogant to say that there is a right way and wrong way in some
instances, if it is true. In this case I believe it is.

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 1:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

 

Tim,

 

it is the height of professional arrogance to think that anyone who
don't/can't/won't do things the way you think they should be done (best
practices) are lazy and uninformed.

 

I know you said that it is just your opinion, and, if I were like you, I
would hazard that it is a misinformed opinion. But I won't.

 


Sincerely, 
   _
  (, /  |  /)   /) /)   
/---| (/_  __   ___// _   //  _ 
 ) /|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)  
   (/   
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com x-excid://3277/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: Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Fri 12/15/2006 10:53 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

They won't do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN'T do it. I feel
Microsoft should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs
correctly for a change, instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed
amongst us.

Just my opinion,

Tim

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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://3277/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

RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Vista Resource Monitor blank

Are you referring to Performance Monitor? If so, that's normal. You have to
pick the objects and counters that you want to watch.

Laura 

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
 Matheesha Weerasinghe
 Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 5:34 AM
 To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
 Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Vista Resource Monitor blank
 
 Has anyone ever seen the resource monitor of Vista RTM blank 
 with no CPU/Mem/Disk etc... details at all? Last night I 
 noticed when I used resource monitor it didnt display 
 anything. Task Manager showed activity as expected but not 
 the resource monitor. I assumed it was possibly due to the 
 machine waking up from sleep but couldn't repro it.
 
 Cheers
 
 M@
 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: 268.15.18/586 - Release 
 Date: 12/13/2006 6:13 PM
  
 

-- 
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
 

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/

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

We're releasing the Vista management tools for Windows ME at the same time
that we release them for Microsoft Bob, IIRC. ;-)
 
Laura


   _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:49 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO



Well said. But while you’re at it, could you let someone know that I very
upset that I can’t manage my Vista GPOs from my Windows ME PC.

Thanks much.  ;-)

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A. Robinson
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 1:26 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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http:/www.akomolafe.com
\nwww.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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http:/www.akomolafe.com
\nwww.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

[ActiveDir] DesktopStandard

2006-12-15 Thread Nathan Casey

Does anyone have any new info on when MS will update the
Desktopstandard product to work with Windows Vista?
Thanks
Nathan
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/

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Again, you are projecting. I don't call MS customers clueless. Why? Because I 
don't believe they are.

Now, will I sometimes call some MS people arrogant? It depends. Will I take 
offence if someone thinks I lack exposure to sophisticated IT environments? 
No, Never. Why? Probably because I move around a lot in the real world, and 
sophisticated IT environments are very hard to come by. I've read and heard 
that there are plenty of them in silos. I just haven't seen enough of them to 
convince me that they come close to the number unevolved IT environments I deal 
with on regular basis.

Come to think of it, I have a bunch of MS technical and marketing materials 
that speak to how much technical, financial and marketing effort MS is going to 
expend this year and next getting a whopping 60% of its customer-base to the 
Rationalized stage of optimization. Mind you, they are not shooting for 
Dynamic. Certainly not Sophisticated. So, yeah, there are more of us than 
there are of you out there, so you better start factoring us in when you make 
decisions that affect how we do things.


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 1:12 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO


Since many of us are in the habit of expressing various opinions, perhaps we 
should refrain from characterizing those with which we disagree as the height 
of professional arrogance and misinformed. See, if we start doing that, I 
might express the opinion that referring to Microsoft's customers as clueless 
and insisting that Microsoft should accommodate cluelessness at the expense 
of new product development, security and code review (which is exactly what the 
expense is to devote resources to doing nothing but backporting new features) 
is the height of professional inexperience, myopia and lack of exposure to 
sophisticated IT environments.

But I won't.

:-)

Laura




From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 2:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO


Tim,

it is the height of professional arrogance to think that anyone who 
don't/can't/won't do things the way you think they should be done (best 
practices) are lazy and uninformed.

I know you said that it is just your opinion, and, if I were like you, I would 
hazard that it is a misinformed opinion. But I won't.


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: Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Fri 12/15/2006 10:53 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO


They won't do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN'T do it. I feel Microsoft 
should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs correctly for a change, 
instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed amongst us.
Just my opinion,
Tim
 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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:

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

I suspect this thread is creeping ever-so-close to the heralded
beaten-to-death status, but let me add a line of thought here that I
alluded to earlier.

 

Deji, as I mentioned, there is nothing technically hard in allowing 2003 or
XP systems to edit Administrative Template policy for Vista machines. The
ADMX is, in simplified terms, ADM in XML. So, if enough people wanted it, I
or someone could probably write a parser that would take all the ADMXs and
convert them back to ADM and Microsoft wouldn't have to do a thing about it,
because ADMs are just ADMs. However, let's say I did that. Vista doesn't
just add new Administrative Template settings. It also adds new Client Side
Extensions built on new OS capabilities. So, backporting ADMXs only now
suddenly makes administration of Group Policy more complex (regardless of
where you do it), because now you've got GPOs that are meant for XP and 2003
being administered from those platforms, you've got GPOs meant for Vista,
administered from Vista and showing all the new functionality and then GPOs
with some Vista functionality (i.e backported ADMXs) but not all
administered from downlevel platforms . I hope you would agree, that this
would be extremely confusing. Ok, so now lets take the next logical and say
to Microsoft, hey Microsoft, you need to backport all that new Vista GP
stuff to XP and 2003 because we want to manage it from there. Well, a lot
of that new functionality in GP is built on core OS components that don't
exist or are updated for Vista. So now, instead of just backporting a bunch
of XML files, you've also got to backport those Client Side Extensions and
the core OS functionality they are dependent upon. So now, instead of Vista
shipping in November of 2006, it gets pushed to 2010, because, hey, Group
Policy isn't the only area that wants the new stuff on the old platforms, so
does XYZ feature. And suddenly, we all get angry at MS for never shipping
their stuff they keep promising. 

 

I would submit that this is just a hard one to please everyone with, and
they are taking the best possible approach to be able to ship a new OS to
the umpteen-million people that use it. I am very cognizant of the fact
folks like Susan supports in the SBS world, or just regular customers
sometimes don't do things optimally. And, they will absolutely have to deal
with this issue and likely many others as Vista gets deployed. I think the
best thing we, as technology professionals in our various expertises, can do
is to help folks understand what the best practices are and explain to them
what happens when they don't follow those, so at least they know what to
expect. 

 

Darren

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A. Robinson
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 1:13 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

 

Since many of us are in the habit of expressing various opinions, perhaps we
should refrain from characterizing those with which we disagree as the
height of professional arrogance and misinformed. See, if we start doing
that, I might express the opinion that referring to Microsoft's customers as
clueless and insisting that Microsoft should accommodate cluelessness at
the expense of new product development, security and code review (which is
exactly what the expense is to devote resources to doing nothing but
backporting new features) is the height of professional inexperience, myopia
and lack of exposure to sophisticated IT environments.

 

But I won't.

 

:-)

 

Laura

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 2:46 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Tim,

 

it is the height of professional arrogance to think that anyone who
don't/can't/won't do things the way you think they should be done (best
practices) are lazy and uninformed.

 

I know you said that it is just your opinion, and, if I were like you, I
would hazard that it is a misinformed opinion. But I won't.

 


Sincerely, 
   _
  (, /  |  /)   /) /)   
/---| (/_  __   ___// _   //  _ 
 ) /|_/(__(_) // (_(_)(/_(_(_/(__(/_
(_/ /)  
   (/   
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.akomolafe.com x-excid://3277/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: Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Fri 12/15/2006 10:53 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

They won't do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN'T do it. I feel Microsoft
should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs correctly for a
change, instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed amongst us.

Just my opinion,

Tim

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of

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-facing technical role. Every day, 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 practice that 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

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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
HYPERLINK x-excid://3277/uri:http://www.akomolafe.com;
\nwww.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

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

With Vista I would argue that that practice changes. You would now do
all things from your workstation with admin privileges if necessary. But
I don't log directly onto the server for anything other than loading
updates. I must admit that I'm not at all happy that for the time being
you can't run the ESM from Vista, so that is no longer completely true.
But for things like running ADUC and GPMC which are usually done by
different people through delegation you don't want them being done
directly on the server, it would be a big security risk. Even if you are
a 1 man shop I would make the same argument, because it makes it much
easier for whoever replaces you someday to step in and take over. And
let's face it, we'll all be replaced someday.

Using GPMC from the workstation is best practice, just not the only
practice. The fact that Microsoft made sure to have GPMC running on
Vista before it was released points to that.

Tim

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:27 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

 


I would say you do server things on the server with your admin ID and do
user stuff on your workstation with your workstation ID, so doing GP
editing on the workstation isn't best practice, but that's my point of
view =) 

Thanks, 
Andrew Fidel 



Tim Vander Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

12/15/2006 01:53 PM 

Please respond to
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org

To

ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org 

cc


Subject

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

 






They won't do it if Microsoft makes it so they CAN'T do it. I feel
Microsoft should be applauded for forcing admins to do their jobs
correctly for a change, instead of giving in to the lazy or uninformed
amongst us. 
Just my opinion, 
Tim 
  
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akomolafe, Deji
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:39 AM
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://3277/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 -

RE: [ActiveDir] OT: help with running a scheduled job

2006-12-15 Thread Michael A. Barker

I think the default permissions of the CMD.exe file are getting you,
read the KB enclosed. As I recall permissions allow RX for the
interactive special group which is why it worked if you're signed in at
the console. On our servers where we have ordinary users executing
batch jobs I've setup a local group to grant read and execute.

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/867466

 

Mike

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thommes,
Michael M.
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 4:31 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: help with running a scheduled job

 

We are trying to get a particular account to run a scheduled backup job
on a server.  Our results are puzzling.  Here are the particulars:

2003 R2 standard server

Domain account, non privileged, doesn't belong to domain users

Added to local backup operators group

Trying to run a system state backup job through a scheduled batch (.bat)
file

File permissions appear to be ok in file system where batch file is
located.

 

 

Results:

When run from a remote scheduled tasks/run (without the user logged
into the server):

a scheduled job with the user's credentials specifying an ipconfig
command works.

a scheduled job with the user's credentials specifying notepad.exe
works.

a scheduled job with the user's credentials calling a batch file (.bat)
which runs ntbackup.exe FAILS with (from SchedLgU.txt):

test.job (simple.bat) 12/13/2006 5:50:08 PM ** ERROR **

Unable to start task.

The specific error is:

0x80070005: Access is denied.

Try using the Task page Browse button to locate the
application.

 

All the jobs run successfully from a remote scheduled tasks/run
environment if the user is in the local administrators group.

 

When the user is only in the local Backup Operators group, all the jobs
run successfully from a remote scheduled tasks/run environment when
this account is logged into the server/console!  They can also be run
successfully locally by the user.  Note this same user got an Access is
denied previously.

 

 

We checked through the local security policy thinking it could be
related to User Rights assignments or Security Options but did not
see anything there.  I think we're missing something really simple here,
but it's eluding us.   Any thoughts are appreciated.

 

Mike Thommes

RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Excellent. I can't wait.

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A.
Robinson
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 4:11 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

We're releasing the Vista management tools for Windows ME at the same
time that we release them for Microsoft Bob, IIRC. ;-)

Laura

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Vander Kooi
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:49 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Vista GPO

Well said. But while you're at it, could you let someone know
that I very upset that I can't manage my Vista GPOs from my Windows ME
PC.

Thanks much.  ;-)

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A.
Robinson
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 1:26 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://3277/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

[ActiveDir] AD admin tool for Vista

2006-12-15 Thread Lu, WeiMing

Does anyone know when Microsoft will release Adminpak for Vista? The
following link is the only solution now? I followed the instruction, and
was able to snap in to MMC, but all AD objects become not-recognizable
icon. Thanks. 
 
 
http://www.petri.co.il/running_win_2003_adminpak_on_vista_rtm.htm

RE: [ActiveDir] DesktopStandard

GPO Vault Enterprise (to be called Microsoft Advanced Group Policy
Management) will be part of the Microsoft Desktop Optimization Pack for SA
is slated for release in Spring/Summer of 2007. The Policy Maker Standard
Edition and Share Manager tools are targeted for a subsequent release.

Laura

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nathan Casey
 Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 5:38 PM
 To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
 Subject: [ActiveDir] DesktopStandard
 
 Does anyone have any new info on when MS will update the 
 Desktopstandard product to work with Windows Vista?
 Thanks
 Nathan
 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
 

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/

RE: [ActiveDir] DesktopStandard