Re: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Wolf]

OMG! I KNOW that guy! I used to work with him.  He writes like that because
the people he tries to help are your worse (L)user nightmare ... PHd's!


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Free, Bob  wrote:

> > So there is an ISC Dig.exe for windows? Cool, I'll grab that for sure!
>
> http://members.shaw.ca/nicholas.fong/dig/
>
> The instructions are a hoot
>
> /excerpt
> "Click Start.. Run ... type CMD  (a black screen pops up)
> cd   c:\dig
> sha1   *
>
> You should see some SHA1 hashes (in here, SHA1 hash is used as an
> integrity check, similar to checksums).
> Compare your hashes with the following table.
> 
>
> If your hashes are the same as the above table, then your files pass the
> integrity check. Type exit to close the black screen."
>
> I always wondered where those pesky black screens came from...lol
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:17 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue
>
> Should have thought of that :)
> I have many Linux servers here and use dig on them, I could have just
> checked that way, sigh...
>
> So there is an ISC Dig.exe for windows? Cool, I'll grab that for sure!
>
> Thanks for the tip!
> jlc
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:11 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Joseph L. Casale
>  wrote:
> > Cripe sakes, I just recreated it and it worked?
> > I did delete and recreate it the first time with no luck...
>
>  You may want to grab a copy of ISC BIND.  ISC provides official
> Windows builds these days.  The "dig" tool that comes with it is much
> more useful than NSLOOKUP.  NSLOOKUP has always been a little flaky,
> frequently gives wrong/misleading/no diagnostics, doesn't use a
> consistent output format, doesn't provide all information by default,
> etc., etc.  I'm wondering if the DNS answer actually had more
> information, but NSLOOKUP didn't give it for some reason.
>
>https://www.isc.org/
>
> -- Ben
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Free, Bob  wrote:
>> So there is an ISC Dig.exe for windows? Cool, I'll grab that for sure!
>
> http://members.shaw.ca/nicholas.fong/dig/

  That's somebody's third-party site.  It links to some older versions
of BIND, so it's prolly not the best resource to obtain files from.
ISC has included MS-Windows in their BIND development efforts for some
time now.   You can actually run named on MS-Windows, or just get it
for the diagnostic tools.  Official source and binaries for the latest
releases are available at .

  (For those wondering what this is all about: ISC is the Internet
Systems Consortium.  Among other things, they maintain the reference
implementations of DNS and DHCP.  The DNS suite is called BIND -- from
Berkley Internet Name Domain.  "named" (name daemon) is the DNS server
itself.  "dig" is a diagnostic tool, similar to "nslookup", but
better.)

> The instructions are a hoot

  If you like that, check out the "Feature List" for the *nix pppd (PPP daemon):

http://ppp.samba.org/ppp/features.html

  ;-)

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Ken Schaefer]

Enterprise is available from the TAP portal if you are in the TAP

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 1:20 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

The DVD .iso I downloaded has Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and
Ultimate on it.

I've only tried to install Ultimate, but there's no reason why the other
3 editions won't install just as easily.

Tim Vander Kooi wrote:
> I would love to know why Microsoft has the consumer version of Windows 7
> on MSDN and TechNet instead of Business or Enterprise. Do that many
> Microsoft partners really make living supporting home users?



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Phil Brutsche]

The DVD .iso I downloaded has Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, and
Ultimate on it.

I've only tried to install Ultimate, but there's no reason why the other
3 editions won't install just as easily.

Tim Vander Kooi wrote:
> I would love to know why Microsoft has the consumer version of Windows 7
> on MSDN and TechNet instead of Business or Enterprise. Do that many
> Microsoft partners really make living supporting home users?

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Free, Bob]

> So there is an ISC Dig.exe for windows? Cool, I'll grab that for sure!

http://members.shaw.ca/nicholas.fong/dig/

The instructions are a hoot

/excerpt
"Click Start.. Run ... type CMD  (a black screen pops up)
cd   c:\dig
sha1   *

You should see some SHA1 hashes (in here, SHA1 hash is used as an
integrity check, similar to checksums). 
Compare your hashes with the following table.


If your hashes are the same as the above table, then your files pass the
integrity check. Type exit to close the black screen."

I always wondered where those pesky black screens came from...lol


-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:17 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

Should have thought of that :)
I have many Linux servers here and use dig on them, I could have just
checked that way, sigh...

So there is an ISC Dig.exe for windows? Cool, I'll grab that for sure!

Thanks for the tip!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:11 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Cripe sakes, I just recreated it and it worked?
> I did delete and recreate it the first time with no luck...

  You may want to grab a copy of ISC BIND.  ISC provides official
Windows builds these days.  The "dig" tool that comes with it is much
more useful than NSLOOKUP.  NSLOOKUP has always been a little flaky,
frequently gives wrong/misleading/no diagnostics, doesn't use a
consistent output format, doesn't provide all information by default,
etc., etc.  I'm wondering if the DNS answer actually had more
information, but NSLOOKUP didn't give it for some reason.

https://www.isc.org/

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Jason Gauthier]

jlc,

 A simple "echo N | gpupdate /force /target:whatever" will allow it to
process what it can and forces a "N".
But, if you do a "gpupdate /force " without a target you will get two
prompts, and the simple "echo N |" isn't going to cut it.

Doing the /force and then a single reboot seems to work every time.  
Sometimes people would complain the "applying"  process would take time,
but not always. Now it always seems to take some time.  Personally, I
feel that the trade off of a guaranteed applied policy is worth it.

Also, some settings *are* immediate. Some are 3 reboots away.. some are
a reboot after a /force.

I would *love* to see a detailed document of the policy settings and
under what circumstance it would decide to apply it.

Jason


-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:19 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Priceless,
I just got off the phone with someone regarding increased boot and
loading times with the computers displaying 'Applying Computer
Settings...' :)

I noticed the /force target:computer got the sttings in immediately but
never
waited a full 3 reboots to see.

Did you *only* notice the lengthy times once you applied the script
changes?
How does that work as a /force has an interactive prompt for a "y/n"? Is
that
the reason for the timeout? I don't have any of that in my login/startup
scripts.
Yet I still have these delays now...

jlc


-Original Message-
From: Joe Tinney [mailto:jtin...@lastar.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

We use WPAD, also. We've found that it takes at least 3 reboots for the
GPO to take over in IE7. See thread gpupdate/GPO from Jason Gauthier
(jgauth...@lastar.com) regarding the issues we were seeing with that.

We had found that when we manually changed our proxy settings that it
was not resetting itself in a timely fashion. After some testing it was
found that it was taking (for us) at least 3 reboots for them to kick
in. There were many possible reasons given as to why. 

We ended up putting a "gpupdate /force /target:computer" in an hourly
script that runs on all of our workstations and "gpupdate /force
/target:user" in the login script. The changes to the proxy settings
required a reboot to take effect, but only one this time and not 3.

The downside, we've discovered, is increased boot and loading times with
the computers displaying 'Applying Computer Settings...' for several
minutes on every boot now.

HTH.

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Ok,
Theoretically I have covered both since my dns has the cname "wpad"
redirecting to my webserver which dishes out wpad.dat from its root and
my dhcp server has option 252 referencing that complete url.:)
My wpad file looks similar to yours as well.

I see some issues searching the net on ie7 though, I just found that the
GPO setting for it is rather flaky, sigh...

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
> I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.
>
> How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

  We haven't deployed MSIE 7 here yet.  I'll see if I can get a
sandbox VM running with it to test.  MSIE 6 and Firefox 3.x on Win XP
Pro SP2 both work fine.

  Here's what we did:

  We implemented the DNS method of WPAD.  We didn't even bother with
DHCP; the DNS method has worked fine for us for everything.  I seem to
recall reading that the DHCP method isn't as widely implemented in
clients, but I could be wrong on that.

  We created a CNAME record named , where
 is our Active Directory domain name, and the
default DNS suffix for our LAN.  Thus, clients attempting to do WPAD
via DNS end up requesting .
The right-hand-side of the CNAME record specifies
, where  is our proxy server.

  Our proxy server also runs an Apache web server, which is configured
with an alias such that  redirects to .  That's
our proxy auto-config script.  Apache also knows that a *.pac file is
of MIME type .  To do that, the
following was added to the Apache config file:

AddType application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig .pac
Redirect /wpad.dat http://foo/proxy.pac

  Our proxy auto-config script looks like this:

function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
if (isPlainHostName(host)
|| dnsDomainIs(host, ".corp.example.com")
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://10.*";)
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://1

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Jason Gauthier]

I don't prefer the DHCP method.  Visitors also receive this setting, and
if you use any kind of authentication it just causes pain and additional
support.

We moved strictly to GPO configuration with some issues, that we've
pretty much worked out.
I will admit, I have a few system where IE just completely ignores the
settings even when entered manually.

Also, for those visitors, we implemented a transparent proxy using
squid, wccp, and a cisco ASA.
I'll be honest, it was actually a very tricky networking situation
(because it's used for ALL networks, not just visitors).
After ironing out issues with it, it seems pretty solid.  It's used
mostly to protect, not cache, though.

The ASA has several known WCCP issues, and it did not actually work
until I moved to 7.2.3 some time ago.

Jason

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:45 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.

How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:38 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Anyone here doing wpad in their org for configuring a proxy for
borwsers?

  Yes.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Mike Gill]

It did this to my C:\ on the root. It acted like it was a music folder. The
problem is, the Customize tab isn't available when you right click a drive
letter.

-- 
Mike Gill

-Original Message-
From: Greg Mulholland [mailto:g...@krystaltek.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties   THANK YOU!!! This gives me the.. grrr

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:27 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas. 

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far. 

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be. 

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.  

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.  

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly. 


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Joe Tinney]

We were looking for a more permanent solution so we didn't test just
running it one time and rebooting again and again to see if it stuck.

The only Y/N I've seen with gpupdate /force is the reboot and in a
script it defaults to no. Otherwise, we'd have a lot of unhappy people
around here once an hour. It just catches whatever changes it
synchronized on the next reboot, as you saw.

I'm not sure what's up with your delays without the gpupdate /force
being something that is ran constantly. I don't have an environment to
help you validate those right now or I certainly would!

I'd reboot a lot more and see how far it sticks. It seems that the
systems synchronize and apply computer settings on their own schedule
and if you did a force prior to the reboot that would have updated them
anyway then maybe you are a victim of happenstance.

Good luck and good night.

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:19 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Priceless,
I just got off the phone with someone regarding increased boot and
loading times with the computers displaying 'Applying Computer
Settings...' :)

I noticed the /force target:computer got the settings in immediately but
never
waited a full 3 reboots to see.

Did you *only* notice the lengthy times once you applied the script
changes?
How does that work as a /force has an interactive prompt for a "y/n"? Is
that
the reason for the timeout? I don't have any of that in my login/startup
scripts.
Yet I still have these delays now...

jlc


-Original Message-
From: Joe Tinney [mailto:jtin...@lastar.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

We use WPAD, also. We've found that it takes at least 3 reboots for the
GPO to take over in IE7. See thread gpupdate/GPO from Jason Gauthier
(jgauth...@lastar.com) regarding the issues we were seeing with that.

We had found that when we manually changed our proxy settings that it
was not resetting itself in a timely fashion. After some testing it was
found that it was taking (for us) at least 3 reboots for them to kick
in. There were many possible reasons given as to why. 

We ended up putting a "gpupdate /force /target:computer" in an hourly
script that runs on all of our workstations and "gpupdate /force
/target:user" in the login script. The changes to the proxy settings
required a reboot to take effect, but only one this time and not 3.

The downside, we've discovered, is increased boot and loading times with
the computers displaying 'Applying Computer Settings...' for several
minutes on every boot now.

HTH.

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Ok,
Theoretically I have covered both since my dns has the cname "wpad"
redirecting to my webserver which dishes out wpad.dat from its root and
my dhcp server has option 252 referencing that complete url.:)
My wpad file looks similar to yours as well.

I see some issues searching the net on ie7 though, I just found that the
GPO setting for it is rather flaky, sigh...

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
> I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.
>
> How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

  We haven't deployed MSIE 7 here yet.  I'll see if I can get a
sandbox VM running with it to test.  MSIE 6 and Firefox 3.x on Win XP
Pro SP2 both work fine.

  Here's what we did:

  We implemented the DNS method of WPAD.  We didn't even bother with
DHCP; the DNS method has worked fine for us for everything.  I seem to
recall reading that the DHCP method isn't as widely implemented in
clients, but I could be wrong on that.

  We created a CNAME record named , where
 is our Active Directory domain name, and the
default DNS suffix for our LAN.  Thus, clients attempting to do WPAD
via DNS end up requesting .
The right-hand-side of the CNAME record specifies
, where  is our proxy server.

  Our proxy server also runs an Apache web server, which is configured
with an alias such that  redirects to .  That's
our proxy auto-config script.  Apache also knows that a *.pac file is
of MIME type .  To do that, the
following was added to the Apache config file:

AddType application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig .pac
Redirect /wpad.dat http://foo/proxy.pac

  Our proxy auto-config script looks like this:

function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
if (isPlainHostName(host)
|| dnsDomainIs(host, ".corp.example.

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Sam Cayze]

I noticed anything with a progress bar in Vista takes longer.  File
moves, and even deleting files.  I am convinced there is a memory leak
in progress bar :)   Makes organizing cleaning my hard drive on vista
annoying.  That and the slow folder browsing thing...



From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:13 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now



I don't see any different in file transfer - vista sp2 to win 2008 vs.
win7 to win2008 r2. As long as smb v2 is in use, you should be
golden

 

I boot so rarely that I don't even count that as relevant.

 

Vista since sp1 has been rock solid for me.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

 

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

I've been running Vista SP2 in beta for a while now. From the day that I
have been running Win7, it is quite a bit better when it comes to
performance. Boot, file transfer, etc. YMMV

TVK

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

We should wait for Vista SP2 to compare to W7 before drawing any
conclusions about how much better W7 might be.  It's already been
reported that some W7 improvements will be back-ported to Vista.

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on
to logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone
 wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista.
But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the
buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write
home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be
willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was
the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user
perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, 

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

Because they are testing upgrade paths. Have you looked at WAU yet?

 

This beta is primarily a "consumer product preview" - CPP. Didn't Steve say
that last night?

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

 

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:10 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

I would love to know why Microsoft has the consumer version of Windows 7 on
MSDN and TechNet instead of Business or Enterprise. Do that many Microsoft
partners really make living supporting home users?

Tim

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that i

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Joseph L. Casale]

Priceless,
I just got off the phone with someone regarding increased boot and
loading times with the computers displaying 'Applying Computer Settings...' :)

I noticed the /force target:computer got the settings in immediately but never
waited a full 3 reboots to see.

Did you *only* notice the lengthy times once you applied the script changes?
How does that work as a /force has an interactive prompt for a "y/n"? Is that
the reason for the timeout? I don't have any of that in my login/startup 
scripts.
Yet I still have these delays now...

jlc


-Original Message-
From: Joe Tinney [mailto:jtin...@lastar.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

We use WPAD, also. We've found that it takes at least 3 reboots for the
GPO to take over in IE7. See thread gpupdate/GPO from Jason Gauthier
(jgauth...@lastar.com) regarding the issues we were seeing with that.

We had found that when we manually changed our proxy settings that it
was not resetting itself in a timely fashion. After some testing it was
found that it was taking (for us) at least 3 reboots for them to kick
in. There were many possible reasons given as to why. 

We ended up putting a "gpupdate /force /target:computer" in an hourly
script that runs on all of our workstations and "gpupdate /force
/target:user" in the login script. The changes to the proxy settings
required a reboot to take effect, but only one this time and not 3.

The downside, we've discovered, is increased boot and loading times with
the computers displaying 'Applying Computer Settings...' for several
minutes on every boot now.

HTH.

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Ok,
Theoretically I have covered both since my dns has the cname "wpad"
redirecting to my webserver which dishes out wpad.dat from its root and
my dhcp server has option 252 referencing that complete url.:)
My wpad file looks similar to yours as well.

I see some issues searching the net on ie7 though, I just found that the
GPO setting for it is rather flaky, sigh...

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
> I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.
>
> How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

  We haven't deployed MSIE 7 here yet.  I'll see if I can get a
sandbox VM running with it to test.  MSIE 6 and Firefox 3.x on Win XP
Pro SP2 both work fine.

  Here's what we did:

  We implemented the DNS method of WPAD.  We didn't even bother with
DHCP; the DNS method has worked fine for us for everything.  I seem to
recall reading that the DHCP method isn't as widely implemented in
clients, but I could be wrong on that.

  We created a CNAME record named , where
 is our Active Directory domain name, and the
default DNS suffix for our LAN.  Thus, clients attempting to do WPAD
via DNS end up requesting .
The right-hand-side of the CNAME record specifies
, where  is our proxy server.

  Our proxy server also runs an Apache web server, which is configured
with an alias such that  redirects to .  That's
our proxy auto-config script.  Apache also knows that a *.pac file is
of MIME type .  To do that, the
following was added to the Apache config file:

AddType application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig .pac
Redirect /wpad.dat http://foo/proxy.pac

  Our proxy auto-config script looks like this:

function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
if (isPlainHostName(host)
|| dnsDomainIs(host, ".corp.example.com")
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://10.*";)
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://127.*";)
)
return "DIRECT";
else
return "PROXY proxy:8080";
}

  We also have a CNAME  that yields our proxy
server.  (I'm big on using generic aliases for specific hosts, so when
things change you don't have to reconfigure a bunch of things, just
the alias.)  The script causes browsers to bypass our proxy for
internal systems, and use our proxy for everything else.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ 

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Sam Cayze]

:)  Yep.  It actually works.  Sounds scary though. 



From: Rod Trent [mailto:rodtr...@myitforum.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now



You're plain loco.

 

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:12 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Never seen that.  I noticed the GUI was so fast after login, I even put
firefox, outlook, and rss reader in the startup folder.  (by-passable
with a confirmation prompt of course)...

 



From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still
unusable for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on
to logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone
 wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista.
But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the
buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write
home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be
willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was
the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user
perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At i

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[John Cook]

Found it, they moved it to the main page..

John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
315 SE 2nd Ave
Gainesville, Fl 32601
Office (352) 393-2741 x320
Cell (352) 215-6944
Fax (352) 393-2746
MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+


-Original Message-
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Apparently not as I just logged in to my Technet plus account and no download 
available.

John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
315 SE 2nd Ave
Gainesville, Fl 32601
Office (352) 393-2741 x320
Cell (352) 215-6944
Fax (352) 393-2746
MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+

-Original Message-
From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It is available now on MSDN & Technet.

It is available to the public 12:00am your time Friday.

S

-Original Message-
From: Jon D [mailto:rekcahp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:25 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more
like 4:00pm in the afternoon?




On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Public beta tomorrow.
>
> I'll have to wait as I don't have MSDN.
>
>
>
> Christopher J. Bosak
>
> Vector Company
>
> c. 847.603.4673
>
> cbo...@vector-co.com
>
>
>
> "You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
>
> - B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me
>
>
>
> From: Michael Hoffman [mailto:m...@drumbrae.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 08:17 hrs
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
>
>
> Enjoy
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Hoffman
>
> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or 
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), 
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, 
dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this 
information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without 
the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may 
be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 
(HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or 
disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
 Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really 
need to.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or 
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), 
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, 
dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this 
information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without 
the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may 
be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 
(HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or 
disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
 Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really 
need to.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

Msconfig has been our friend for a long long time.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

 

From: Rod Trent [mailto:rodtr...@myitforum.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:12 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

.or longer, depending on what crapware has installed itself on your computer
(Adobe, iTunes, Googleupdate.exe come to mind).

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

Yes, some have been. Wireless in Vista sp2 beta is much better than in sp1,
for example. (Can I say that? I should prolly shut-up now.)

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

We should wait for Vista SP2 to compare to W7 before drawing any conclusions
about how much better W7 might be.  It's already been reported that some W7
improvements will be back-ported to Vista.

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll 

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Rod Trent]

You're plain loco.

 

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:12 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Never seen that.  I noticed the GUI was so fast after login, I even put
firefox, outlook, and rss reader in the startup folder.  (by-passable with a
confirmation prompt of course)...

 

  _  

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smit

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

I don't see any different in file transfer - vista sp2 to win 2008 vs. win7
to win2008 r2. As long as smb v2 is in use, you should be golden..

 

I boot so rarely that I don't even count that as relevant.

 

Vista since sp1 has been rock solid for me.

 

Regards,

 

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP

My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael

I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

 

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

I've been running Vista SP2 in beta for a while now. From the day that I
have been running Win7, it is quite a bit better when it comes to
performance. Boot, file transfer, etc. YMMV

TVK

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

We should wait for Vista SP2 to compare to W7 before drawing any conclusions
about how much better W7 might be.  It's already been reported that some W7
improvements will be back-ported to Vista.

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Rod Trent]

Probably just easier to move home users to upgrade than business for a
while.

 

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:10 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

I would love to know why Microsoft has the consumer version of Windows 7 on
MSDN and TechNet instead of Business or Enterprise. Do that many Microsoft
partners really make living supporting home users?

Tim

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty ob

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Rod Trent]

.or longer, depending on what crapware has installed itself on your computer
(Adobe, iTunes, Googleupdate.exe come to mind).

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 6:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, Janu

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Sam Cayze]

Never seen that.  I noticed the GUI was so fast after login, I even put
firefox, outlook, and rss reader in the startup folder.  (by-passable
with a confirmation prompt of course)...



From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now



What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still
unusable for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

 

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on
to logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone
 wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista.
But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the
buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write
home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be
willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was
the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user
perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message--

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Tim Vander Kooi]

I would love to know why Microsoft has the consumer version of Windows 7 on 
MSDN and TechNet instead of Business or Enterprise. Do that many Microsoft 
partners really make living supporting home users?
Tim

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:07 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable 
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

Cheers
Ken

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to 
logon screen.


From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Faster than Vista or XP?
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith 
[mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blo

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Tim Vander Kooi]

I've been running Vista SP2 in beta for a while now. From the day that I have 
been running Win7, it is quite a bit better when it comes to performance. Boot, 
file transfer, etc. YMMV
TVK

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

We should wait for Vista SP2 to compare to W7 before drawing any conclusions 
about how much better W7 might be.  It's already been reported that some W7 
improvements will be back-ported to Vista.

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to 
logon screen.


From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Faster than Vista or XP?
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith 
[mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http:/

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Ken Schaefer]

What sh*ts me about Vista is that after you logon, the GUI is still unusable 
for the next 20-30 seconds whilst all types of stuff loads.

W7 is substantially better. GUI is usable within about half that time

Cheers
Ken

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to 
logon screen.


From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Faster than Vista or XP?
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith 
[mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle 
[mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing t

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Carl Houseman]

We should wait for Vista SP2 to compare to W7 before drawing any conclusions
about how much better W7 might be.  It's already been reported that some W7
improvements will be back-ported to Vista.

 

From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: M

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Joe Tinney]

We use WPAD, also. We've found that it takes at least 3 reboots for the
GPO to take over in IE7. See thread gpupdate/GPO from Jason Gauthier
(jgauth...@lastar.com) regarding the issues we were seeing with that.

We had found that when we manually changed our proxy settings that it
was not resetting itself in a timely fashion. After some testing it was
found that it was taking (for us) at least 3 reboots for them to kick
in. There were many possible reasons given as to why. 

We ended up putting a "gpupdate /force /target:computer" in an hourly
script that runs on all of our workstations and "gpupdate /force
/target:user" in the login script. The changes to the proxy settings
required a reboot to take effect, but only one this time and not 3.

The downside, we've discovered, is increased boot and loading times with
the computers displaying 'Applying Computer Settings...' for several
minutes on every boot now.

HTH.

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: WPAD Proxy Config

Ok,
Theoretically I have covered both since my dns has the cname "wpad"
redirecting to my webserver which dishes out wpad.dat from its root and
my dhcp server has option 252 referencing that complete url.:)
My wpad file looks similar to yours as well.

I see some issues searching the net on ie7 though, I just found that the
GPO setting for it is rather flaky, sigh...

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
> I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.
>
> How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

  We haven't deployed MSIE 7 here yet.  I'll see if I can get a
sandbox VM running with it to test.  MSIE 6 and Firefox 3.x on Win XP
Pro SP2 both work fine.

  Here's what we did:

  We implemented the DNS method of WPAD.  We didn't even bother with
DHCP; the DNS method has worked fine for us for everything.  I seem to
recall reading that the DHCP method isn't as widely implemented in
clients, but I could be wrong on that.

  We created a CNAME record named , where
 is our Active Directory domain name, and the
default DNS suffix for our LAN.  Thus, clients attempting to do WPAD
via DNS end up requesting .
The right-hand-side of the CNAME record specifies
, where  is our proxy server.

  Our proxy server also runs an Apache web server, which is configured
with an alias such that  redirects to .  That's
our proxy auto-config script.  Apache also knows that a *.pac file is
of MIME type .  To do that, the
following was added to the Apache config file:

AddType application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig .pac
Redirect /wpad.dat http://foo/proxy.pac

  Our proxy auto-config script looks like this:

function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
if (isPlainHostName(host)
|| dnsDomainIs(host, ".corp.example.com")
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://10.*";)
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://127.*";)
)
return "DIRECT";
else
return "PROXY proxy:8080";
}

  We also have a CNAME  that yields our proxy
server.  (I'm big on using generic aliases for specific hosts, so when
things change you don't have to reconfigure a bunch of things, just
the alias.)  The script causes browsers to bypass our proxy for
internal systems, and use our proxy for everything else.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out (UNCLASSIFIED)

[Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM]

Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED 
Caveats: NONE
 
Andy:
 
Until you can figure out what is going on this query for ADU&C is easier
than having someone search for locked out accounts...
 

 

http://www.windowsnetworking.com/kbase/WindowsTips/Windows2003/AdminTips
/ActiveDirectory/FindAllLocked-OutAccounts.html

As for determining the source of the lockout  (someone sorta already
mentioned this)

 
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc738772.aspx

Larry


  _  

From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org] 
Sent: 2009-01-08 11:29
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out



OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not
get re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now,
this stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on
the network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't
find _anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also
had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and
managed well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms
are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available,
or e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org



 


 


 

Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this
message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability.
If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the
sender and delete it immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee,
registered in England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186
(England & Wales) and no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75.
Registered office: 66 South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.

 
Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED 
Caveats: NONE

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[David Lum]

+1 on the Vista comments. I have it on my main machine at home and I don't mind 
it, but it's not worth it to upgrade any XP systems to Vista. For what I do 
(95% business stuff) it's XP with another interface and a million additional 
pieces to manage via GPO.

And cuss because a file search seems to give inconsistent results, but that's 
probably because I haven't RTFM'd for Vista yet.

David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764



-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:36 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday,

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Greg Mulholland]

a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be displaying 
for file properties   THANK YOU!!! This gives me the.. grrr

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:27 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective. 
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be displaying 
for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas. 

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7 works 
fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far. 

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be. 

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.  

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.  

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly. 


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Martin Blackstone]

Right now I'm comparing to Vista.

 

Vista takes about 55 seconds to boot. W7 about 41. That's from power on to
logon screen.

 

 

From: Lee Douglas [mailto:lee.doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Faster than Vista or XP?



On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone 
wrote:

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be.

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly.


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Stefan Jafs]

Key not available yet, asks to check back in a few days.

SJ

-Original Message-
From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:sj...@amico.com] 
Sent: January-08-09 5:47 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I just checked, it's there, downloading now

SJ

-Original Message-
From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org] 
Sent: January-08-09 5:45 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

That's why I asked. I guess I'll try tomorrow! 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Apparently not as I just logged in to my Technet plus account and no
download available.

John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
315 SE 2nd Ave
Gainesville, Fl 32601
Office (352) 393-2741 x320
Cell (352) 215-6944
Fax (352) 393-2746
MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+

-Original Message-
From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It is available now on MSDN & Technet.

It is available to the public 12:00am your time Friday.

S

-Original Message-
From: Jon D [mailto:rekcahp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:25 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more
like 4:00pm in the afternoon?




On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Public beta tomorrow.
>
> I'll have to wait as I don't have MSDN.
>
>
>
> Christopher J. Bosak
>
> Vector Company
>
> c. 847.603.4673
>
> cbo...@vector-co.com
>
>
>
> "You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
>
> - B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me
>
>
>
> From: Michael Hoffman [mailto:m...@drumbrae.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 08:17 hrs
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
>
>
> Enjoy
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Hoffman
>
> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health
Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review,
transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are
prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal
and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this
information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
 Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you
really need to.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely
for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you
should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or
opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not
represent those of the Amico Corpoartion company. Warning: Although
precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this
email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage
that arise from the use of this email or attachments.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Joseph L. Casale]

Ok,
Theoretically I have covered both since my dns has the cname "wpad" redirecting 
to my webserver which dishes out wpad.dat from its root and my dhcp server has 
option 252 referencing that complete url.:)
My wpad file looks similar to yours as well.

I see some issues searching the net on ie7 though, I just found that the GPO 
setting for it is rather flaky, sigh...

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
> I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.
>
> How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

  We haven't deployed MSIE 7 here yet.  I'll see if I can get a
sandbox VM running with it to test.  MSIE 6 and Firefox 3.x on Win XP
Pro SP2 both work fine.

  Here's what we did:

  We implemented the DNS method of WPAD.  We didn't even bother with
DHCP; the DNS method has worked fine for us for everything.  I seem to
recall reading that the DHCP method isn't as widely implemented in
clients, but I could be wrong on that.

  We created a CNAME record named , where
 is our Active Directory domain name, and the
default DNS suffix for our LAN.  Thus, clients attempting to do WPAD
via DNS end up requesting .
The right-hand-side of the CNAME record specifies
, where  is our proxy server.

  Our proxy server also runs an Apache web server, which is configured
with an alias such that  redirects to .  That's
our proxy auto-config script.  Apache also knows that a *.pac file is
of MIME type .  To do that, the
following was added to the Apache config file:

AddType application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig .pac
Redirect /wpad.dat http://foo/proxy.pac

  Our proxy auto-config script looks like this:

function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
if (isPlainHostName(host)
|| dnsDomainIs(host, ".corp.example.com")
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://10.*";)
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://127.*";)
)
return "DIRECT";
else
return "PROXY proxy:8080";
}

  We also have a CNAME  that yields our proxy
server.  (I'm big on using generic aliases for specific hosts, so when
things change you don't have to reconfigure a bunch of things, just
the alias.)  The script causes browsers to bypass our proxy for
internal systems, and use our proxy for everything else.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Lee Douglas]

Faster than Vista or XP?


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Martin Blackstone wrote:

> Indeed.
>
> I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
> don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the
> buck
> as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
> about.
> I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
> to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
> I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
> it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.
>
> I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
> performance. I'm stoked.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> I like Vista.
>
> But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
> Stuff like:
> a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
> displaying for file properties
> b) booting is way to slow
>
> Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas.
>
> There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
> works fine. That's good IMHO
>
> Cheers
> Ken
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
> Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> Ok, since we are on the subject...
>
> This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!
>
> I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far.
>
> There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
> blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
> terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
> actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
> Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
> be.
>
> Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
> etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
> is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
> a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
> slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.
>
> All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
> reviews of 7.
>
> It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
> show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
> up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
> market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
> throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
> other new features introduced to talk about.
>
> I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
> on Friday, and buy a copy on release.
>
> I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
> quickly.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> Since the other beta's are out...
>
> I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.
>
> Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.
>
> Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
> MB.
> At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.
>
> Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
> pretty fast machines already.
>
> I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
> production-ready.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
> http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
> I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
> it a look.
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
> product!?
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
>   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resourc

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Stefan Jafs]

I just checked, it's there, downloading now

SJ

-Original Message-
From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org] 
Sent: January-08-09 5:45 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

That's why I asked. I guess I'll try tomorrow! 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Apparently not as I just logged in to my Technet plus account and no
download available.

John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
315 SE 2nd Ave
Gainesville, Fl 32601
Office (352) 393-2741 x320
Cell (352) 215-6944
Fax (352) 393-2746
MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+

-Original Message-
From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It is available now on MSDN & Technet.

It is available to the public 12:00am your time Friday.

S

-Original Message-
From: Jon D [mailto:rekcahp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:25 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more
like 4:00pm in the afternoon?




On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Public beta tomorrow.
>
> I'll have to wait as I don't have MSDN.
>
>
>
> Christopher J. Bosak
>
> Vector Company
>
> c. 847.603.4673
>
> cbo...@vector-co.com
>
>
>
> "You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
>
> - B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me
>
>
>
> From: Michael Hoffman [mailto:m...@drumbrae.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 08:17 hrs
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
>
>
> Enjoy
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Hoffman
>
> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health
Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review,
transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are
prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal
and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this
information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
 Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you
really need to.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Steve Ens]

I used technet plus this morning...works fine...

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:37 PM, John Cook  wrote:

> Apparently not as I just logged in to my Technet plus account and no
> download available.
>
> John W. Cook
> Systems Administrator
> Partnership For Strong Families
> 315 SE 2nd Ave
> Gainesville, Fl 32601
> Office (352) 393-2741 x320
> Cell (352) 215-6944
> Fax (352) 393-2746
> MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Murray Freeman]

That's why I asked. I guess I'll try tomorrow! 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Cook [mailto:john.c...@pfsf.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:37 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Apparently not as I just logged in to my Technet plus account and no
download available.

John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
315 SE 2nd Ave
Gainesville, Fl 32601
Office (352) 393-2741 x320
Cell (352) 215-6944
Fax (352) 393-2746
MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+

-Original Message-
From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It is available now on MSDN & Technet.

It is available to the public 12:00am your time Friday.

S

-Original Message-
From: Jon D [mailto:rekcahp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:25 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more
like 4:00pm in the afternoon?




On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Public beta tomorrow.
>
> I'll have to wait as I don't have MSDN.
>
>
>
> Christopher J. Bosak
>
> Vector Company
>
> c. 847.603.4673
>
> cbo...@vector-co.com
>
>
>
> "You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
>
> - B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me
>
>
>
> From: Michael Hoffman [mailto:m...@drumbrae.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 08:17 hrs
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
>
>
> Enjoy
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Hoffman
>
> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health
Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review,
transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are
prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal
and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this
information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
 Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you
really need to.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[John Cook]

Apparently not as I just logged in to my Technet plus account and no download 
available.

John W. Cook
Systems Administrator
Partnership For Strong Families
315 SE 2nd Ave
Gainesville, Fl 32601
Office (352) 393-2741 x320
Cell (352) 215-6944
Fax (352) 393-2746
MCSE, MCTS, MCP+I,CompTIA A+, N+

-Original Message-
From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of NTSysAdmin
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It is available now on MSDN & Technet.

It is available to the public 12:00am your time Friday.

S

-Original Message-
From: Jon D [mailto:rekcahp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:25 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more
like 4:00pm in the afternoon?




On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Public beta tomorrow.
>
> I'll have to wait as I don't have MSDN.
>
>
>
> Christopher J. Bosak
>
> Vector Company
>
> c. 847.603.4673
>
> cbo...@vector-co.com
>
>
>
> "You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
>
> - B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me
>
>
>
> From: Michael Hoffman [mailto:m...@drumbrae.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 08:17 hrs
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
>
>
> Enjoy
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Hoffman
>
> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or 
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), 
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, 
dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this 
information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without 
the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may 
be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 
(HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or 
disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
 Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really 
need to.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: WPAD Proxy Config

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
> I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.
>
> How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

  We haven't deployed MSIE 7 here yet.  I'll see if I can get a
sandbox VM running with it to test.  MSIE 6 and Firefox 3.x on Win XP
Pro SP2 both work fine.

  Here's what we did:

  We implemented the DNS method of WPAD.  We didn't even bother with
DHCP; the DNS method has worked fine for us for everything.  I seem to
recall reading that the DHCP method isn't as widely implemented in
clients, but I could be wrong on that.

  We created a CNAME record named , where
 is our Active Directory domain name, and the
default DNS suffix for our LAN.  Thus, clients attempting to do WPAD
via DNS end up requesting .
The right-hand-side of the CNAME record specifies
, where  is our proxy server.

  Our proxy server also runs an Apache web server, which is configured
with an alias such that  redirects to .  That's
our proxy auto-config script.  Apache also knows that a *.pac file is
of MIME type .  To do that, the
following was added to the Apache config file:

AddType application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig .pac
Redirect /wpad.dat http://foo/proxy.pac

  Our proxy auto-config script looks like this:

function FindProxyForURL(url, host) {
if (isPlainHostName(host)
|| dnsDomainIs(host, ".corp.example.com")
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://10.*";)
|| shExpMatch(url, "http://127.*";)
)
return "DIRECT";
else
return "PROXY proxy:8080";
}

  We also have a CNAME  that yields our proxy
server.  (I'm big on using generic aliases for specific hosts, so when
things change you don't have to reconfigure a bunch of things, just
the alias.)  The script causes browsers to bypass our proxy for
internal systems, and use our proxy for everything else.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Martin Blackstone]

Indeed.

I personally don't think there is much of anything GREAT about Vista. But I
don't think it's bad either. To me it's just not that much bang for the buck
as far as upgrade costs go. Performance really isn't anything to write home
about.
I would take a new PC with it on there today. I wouldn't really be willing
to spend any money to upgrade anything with it though.
I've always found the whole thing to be very "eh, I can take it or leave
it". Which to me isn't good enough for upgrading.

I've been playing with 7 a little bit and the first thing I noticed was the
performance. I'm stoked.

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective.
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas. 

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far. 

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be. 

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.  

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.  

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly. 


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ 

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Sam Cayze]

Trust me, I like Vista too.  A lot.

How is the folder browsing on 7?  (non network)

Like opening a folder with 100 or so pictures?  That was the main slow
down I noticed on Vista compared to XP.  Take forever now...  Might have
to actually use a photo manager to manage my My Pictures folder.

As for a), thought I was the only one.  I always find myself adding the
'Modified Date' back to the column list! And I really don't care who the
Composer and what Genre my word docs are in :)   Ha!

B)  Vista boots my laptop much faster than XP ever did.  Desktop... Not
so sure.  Slower hardware.


-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user
perspective. Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be
displaying for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas. 

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7
works fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far. 

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be. 

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.  

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.  

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly. 


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ 

RE: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Ken Schaefer]

I like Vista.

But there are some things that continue to irk me from a user perspective. 
Stuff like:
a) explorer windows keep "forgetting" which columns they should be displaying 
for file properties
b) booting is way to slow

Both of the above two appear to be "fixed" in Win 7 betas. 

There is no way I could run Vista usably on a 1.6GHz netbook, but Win 7 works 
fine. That's good IMHO

Cheers
Ken

-Original Message-
From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 9:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far. 

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be. 

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.  

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.  

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly. 


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Gone way OT: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Sam Cayze]

Ok, since we are on the subject...

This has been irking me lately, I need to get it off my chest!

I have been highly skeptical of all the rave reviews of 7 so far. 

There seems to be this wonderful wave of hope around 7 in the
blogosphere, touting 7 is better than Vista.  But Vista kinda of had
terrible press, and everyone was convinced it was the next ME.  In
actually, it wasn't.  Vista is great.  It had it SP0 bumps for sure, but
Vista in general was much better that I think the press made it out to
be. 

Everyone is jumping in joy that 7 boots faster than Vista, more stable,
etc, etc.  Big Whoop.  IMO, IT BETTER be faster and more stable!  This
is not a feature, this is a EXPECTATION.  Better stability?  Again, not
a bonus feature, it's an expectation.  New versions should NEVER be
slower, especially with the crazy pace of hardware advancements.  

All in all, I think Vista's bad rep is just paving the way for good
reviews of 7.

It's like when Steve Jobs put the 'improved' Audio Jack in his slide
show for the Gen 2 iPhone.  No, Steve, you can't do that.  You &*^&cked
up with Gen1 with the audio port, and you fixed it in Gen2.  You cannot
market it as a new feature.  The fact that he had to market that and
throw it in his slid show, just goes to show that there weren't enough
other new features introduced to talk about.

I don't no much about 7, I haven't tried it, I'm sure I will download it
on Friday, and buy a copy on release.  

I just hope MS knows what they are doing forcing an OS out the door so
quickly. 


-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850
MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got
pretty fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog:
http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Joseph L. Casale]

Should have thought of that :)
I have many Linux servers here and use dig on them, I could have just checked 
that way, sigh...

So there is an ISC Dig.exe for windows? Cool, I'll grab that for sure!

Thanks for the tip!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:11 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Cripe sakes, I just recreated it and it worked?
> I did delete and recreate it the first time with no luck...

  You may want to grab a copy of ISC BIND.  ISC provides official
Windows builds these days.  The "dig" tool that comes with it is much
more useful than NSLOOKUP.  NSLOOKUP has always been a little flaky,
frequently gives wrong/misleading/no diagnostics, doesn't use a
consistent output format, doesn't provide all information by default,
etc., etc.  I'm wondering if the DNS answer actually had more
information, but NSLOOKUP didn't give it for some reason.

https://www.isc.org/

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Ken Schaefer]

I've tried several builds on a Dell Mini 9 netbook, and it's entirely usable. 
Even Aero works.

Cheers
Ken

From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Friday, 9 January 2009 7:17 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

I've got it on an older ThinkPad that wasn't even designed for Vista, much less 
Win7. So far so good.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:40 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Well I downloaded this morning, and installed it on an older Dell Precision.  
Works like a champ so far.  I notice that recommended system specs are actually 
decreased for this version...which must be a first.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hoffman 
mailto:m...@drumbrae.net>> wrote:

Enjoy



Mike



Mike Hoffman



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Cripe sakes, I just recreated it and it worked?
> I did delete and recreate it the first time with no luck...

  You may want to grab a copy of ISC BIND.  ISC provides official
Windows builds these days.  The "dig" tool that comes with it is much
more useful than NSLOOKUP.  NSLOOKUP has always been a little flaky,
frequently gives wrong/misleading/no diagnostics, doesn't use a
consistent output format, doesn't provide all information by default,
etc., etc.  I'm wondering if the DNS answer actually had more
information, but NSLOOKUP didn't give it for some reason.

https://www.isc.org/

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: WPAD Proxy Config

[Joseph L. Casale]

Well, my firefox clients pick up the settings but not ie7.
I am using the dns (cname) / dhcp option 252 method.

How are you doing it, and do you have it working with ie7?

Thanks!
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:38 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: WPAD Proxy Config

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Anyone here doing wpad in their org for configuring a proxy for borwsers?

  Yes.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: WPAD Proxy Config

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> Anyone here doing wpad in their org for configuring a proxy for borwsers?

  Yes.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Joseph L. Casale]

Carl,
What's up with your replies, they are rather hard to read?
Is that an OL way of formatting a reply? Someone should shoot that dev at MS :)

jlc

From: Webster [mailto:carlwebs...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

From: Fred Sawyer [mailto:fr...@sunbelt-software.com]
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Found Windows 7 loads on ESX like a champ.  Has any one experienced issue's 
trying to load either the x32 or x64 version of Windows 7 on VMware Workstation 
6.0.4.  So far both disk's error out at the same point for me on different 
systems.

Workstation 6.5 is what supports Vista and Server 2008.  I'm downloading both 
x86 and x64 now to load.

Webster






~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Thomas Gonzalez]

Thank you all.

 

 

Thomas

 

From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:22 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Beta...

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Thomas Gonzalez
 wrote:

Which one are you all downloading? The Checked Build or Beta?


Thomas




-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:36 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It's on Technet, MSDN, and Connect.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

So, is it available or not and what is the url?


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely
for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you
should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or
opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not
represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas company. Warning:
Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present
in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or
damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

 

 

 



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of 
Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make 
sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept 
responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or 
attachments.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Webster]

From: Fred Sawyer [mailto:fr...@sunbelt-software.com] 
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

 

Found Windows 7 loads on ESX like a champ.  Has any one experienced issue's
trying to load either the x32 or x64 version of Windows 7 on VMware
Workstation 6.0.4.  So far both disk's error out at the same point for me on
different systems.

 

Workstation 6.5 is what supports Vista and Server 2008.  I'm downloading
both x86 and x64 now to load.

 

Webster


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Steve Ens]

Beta...

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Thomas Gonzalez <
tgonza...@girlscouts-swtx.org> wrote:

> Which one are you all downloading? The Checked Build or Beta?
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:36 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> It's on Technet, MSDN, and Connect.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
> My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
> I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:30 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> So, is it available or not and what is the url?
>
>
> MMF
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
> it a look.
>
>
>
>
>
> John Hornbuckle
> MIS Department
> Taylor County School District
> 318 North Clark Street
> Perry, FL 32347
>
> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
> product!?
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
>   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
> This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for
> the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not
> read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed
> in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl
> Scouts of Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been
> taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot
> accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this
> email or attachments.
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

Unless you know how to use a debugger, then the checked build does you no
good whatsoever (or if you are going to submit dumps to MSFT).

Just do the beta build.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php


-Original Message-
From: Thomas Gonzalez [mailto:tgonza...@girlscouts-swtx.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:16 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Which one are you all downloading? The Checked Build or Beta? 


Thomas



-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:36 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It's on Technet, MSDN, and Connect.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

So, is it available or not and what is the url? 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for
the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not
read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed
in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl
Scouts of Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been
taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot
accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this
email or attachments.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Thomas Gonzalez]

Which one are you all downloading? The Checked Build or Beta? 


Thomas



-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:36 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It's on Technet, MSDN, and Connect.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

So, is it available or not and what is the url? 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of 
Southwest Texas company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make 
sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept 
responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or 
attachments.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Joseph L. Casale]

Cripe sakes, I just recreated it and it worked?
I did delete and recreate it the first time with no luck...

Gotta love it...
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Troy Meyer [mailto:troy.me...@monacocoach.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:08 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

Sounds like you have dns suffixes set in your NIC properties.

See if this command fixes it in nslookup

Set srchlist=

That should eliminate adding on the suffixes.

-troy

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:06 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

Existing CNames in my dns work, but when I add a new one I get this w/ nslookup:

 

> existing

Server:  localhost

Address:  127.0.0.1

 

Name:foo.domain.local

Address:  192.168.0.15

Aliases:  existing.domain.local

 

> bar

Server:  localhost

Address:  127.0.0.1

 

Name:bar.domain.local

 

Anyone know WTH is going on?

Thanks!
jlc


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Troy Meyer]

Sounds like you have dns suffixes set in your NIC properties.

See if this command fixes it in nslookup

Set srchlist=

That should eliminate adding on the suffixes.

-troy

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:06 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

Existing CNames in my dns work, but when I add a new one I get this w/ nslookup:

 

> existing

Server:  localhost

Address:  127.0.0.1

 

Name:foo.domain.local

Address:  192.168.0.15

Aliases:  existing.domain.local

 

> bar

Server:  localhost

Address:  127.0.0.1

 

Name:bar.domain.local

 

Anyone know WTH is going on?

Thanks!
jlc


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

WPAD Proxy Config

[Joseph L. Casale]

Anyone here doing wpad in their org for configuring a proxy for borwsers?

jlc

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

It's on Technet, MSDN, and Connect.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: Murray Freeman [mailto:mfree...@alanet.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:30 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

So, is it available or not and what is the url? 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

Since the other beta's are out...

I really like the new task bar. I'm not sold on the new Start button.

Otherwise - it's very much like Vista sp2.

Except that it uses less memory. At idle, my Vista system uses about 850 MB.
At idle (pretty much the same startup applications), Win7 uses 500 MB.

Speed-wise - I don't detect any appreciable difference. But I've got pretty
fast machines already.

I have found a couple of pretty obvious bugs, so I don't consider it
production-ready.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give it
a look.

John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished
beta product!?

--
ME2


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Murray Freeman]

So, is it available or not and what is the url? 


MMF

-Original Message-
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:23 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give
it a look.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished beta
product!?

--
ME2




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[John Hornbuckle]

>From what I've heard, Win7 isn't too frustrating--so I'm willing to give it a 
>look.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished
beta product!?

--
ME2




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[John Hornbuckle]

I've got it on an older ThinkPad that wasn't even designed for Vista, much less 
Win7. So far so good.





John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:40 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Well I downloaded this morning, and installed it on an older Dell Precision.  
Works like a champ so far.  I notice that recommended system specs are actually 
decreased for this version...which must be a first.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hoffman 
mailto:m...@drumbrae.net>> wrote:

Enjoy



Mike



Mike Hoffman

Drum Brae Solutions Ltd













~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Fred Sawyer]

Found Windows 7 loads on ESX like a champ.  Has any one experienced issue's 
trying to load either the x32 or x64 version of Windows 7 on VMware Workstation 
6.0.4.  So far both disk's error out at the same point for me on different 
systems.

Thank you,

Fred Sawyer
Sunbelt Software



From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:55 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Vista...

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Gary Whitten 
mailto:li...@undiscoveredworlds.com>> wrote:
Decreased compared to which OS?


From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:40 PM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Well I downloaded this morning, and installed it on an older Dell Precision.  
Works like a champ so far.  I notice that recommended system specs are actually 
decreased for this version...which must be a first.

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hoffman 
mailto:m...@drumbrae.net>> wrote:

Enjoy



Mike



Mike Hoffman

Drum Brae Solutions Ltd













No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.3/1877 - Release Date: 1/8/2009 8:13 
AM











~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Win2003 DNS DNS CName issue

[Joseph L. Casale]

Existing CNames in my dns work, but when I add a new one I get this w/ nslookup:

> existing
Server:  localhost
Address:  127.0.0.1

Name:foo.domain.local
Address:  192.168.0.15
Aliases:  existing.domain.local

> bar
Server:  localhost
Address:  127.0.0.1

Name:bar.domain.local

Anyone know WTH is going on?
Thanks!
jlc

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Phil Brutsche]

My understanding is that they keys given out via MSDN are good for 10
activations. Dunno about TechNet.

And yes, you have a 30 day grace period before a product key - or
activation - is absolutely required...

Ben Scott wrote:
>   As far as activation goes, you don't need to activate right away.
> And I wouldn't even be surprised if Microsoft doesn't actually cap the
> license activations by count (it would be messy due to leaks like
> this).

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Steve Ens]

Vista...

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Gary Whitten
wrote:

>  Decreased compared to which OS?
>
>  --
> *From:* Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:40 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> Well I downloaded this morning, and installed it on an older Dell
> Precision.  Works like a champ so far.  I notice that recommended system
> specs are actually decreased for this version...which must be a first.
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hoffman  wrote:
>
>>  Enjoy
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike Hoffman
>>
>> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>  No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.3/1877 - Release Date: 1/8/2009
> 8:13 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Gary Whitten]

Decreased compared to which OS?

  _  

From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:40 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now


Well I downloaded this morning, and installed it on an older Dell Precision.
Works like a champ so far.  I notice that recommended system specs are
actually decreased for this version...which must be a first.


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hoffman  wrote:


Enjoy

 

Mike

 

Mike Hoffman

Drum Brae Solutions Ltd

 


 



 


 


 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.3/1877 - Release Date: 1/8/2009
8:13 AM



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Steve Ens]

Well I downloaded this morning, and installed it on an older Dell
Precision.  Works like a champ so far.  I notice that recommended system
specs are actually decreased for this version...which must be a first.

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hoffman  wrote:

>  Enjoy
>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Hoffman
>
> Drum Brae Solutions Ltd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Michael B. Smith]

Slmgr.vbs -rearm

I think you get at least 120 days.

Regards,

Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael
I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

My understanding is that they keys given out via MSDN are good for 10
activations. Dunno about TechNet.

And yes, you have a 30 day grace period before a product key - or
activation - is absolutely required...

Ben Scott wrote:
>   As far as activation goes, you don't need to activate right away.
> And I wouldn't even be surprised if Microsoft doesn't actually cap the
> license activations by count (it would be messy due to leaks like
> this).

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Yeah, then good luck activating it. I'd rather have a legit copy.

  Assuming it's an unmodified copy, then the bits are the same; as far
as the computer is concerned, it's as legit as one from Microsoft's
servers.  It's only illegitimate from standpoint of copyright law,
which the computer knows not of.

  As far as activation goes, you don't need to activate right away.
And I wouldn't even be surprised if Microsoft doesn't actually cap the
license activations by count (it would be messy due to leaks like
this).

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

oh dear!  Then how-ever will I frustrate myself with an unfinished
beta product!?

--
ME2



On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Christopher J. Bosak
 wrote:
> Actually, they are only letting 2.5 million downloads for this. Once it's
> gone, it's gone.
>
> Christopher J. Bosak
> Vector Company
> c. 847.603.4673
> cbo...@vector-co.com
>
> "You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
> - B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 09:03 hrs
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Jon D  wrote:
>> Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more
>> like 4:00pm in the afternoon?
>
>  Everybody lied, it'll be available the day after tomorrow.
>
>  (In other words: Sheesh, does it matter that much?  If you're that
> worried about the precise minute of release, wait another day and the
> question is moot.  :)   )
>
> -- Ben
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Phil Brutsche]

You can run it for 30 days without activation... or a product key.

Christopher J. Bosak wrote:
> Yeah, then good luck activating it. I'd rather have a legit copy. Eh, well,
> I guess I'll be up for a better part of the night then.

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: File names that are too long - Can they be stopped?

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

I'd write a script that would periodically find these files, and
automatically send an annoying email to rename it.

--
ME2



On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Eric Wittersheim
 wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback Ben.
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Ben Scott  wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Eric Wittersheim
>>  wrote:
>> > Is there anyway to enforce a limit (Windows Server 2000
>> > and 2003) on the length of file names?
>>
>>  Not that I know of.  If you find one, let me know, 'cause I got the
>> same problem in different ways.
>>
>>  Part of the problem is that not all parts of Windows have the same
>> path/file name length limits.  Reportedly NTFS itself and the innards
>> of the NT kernel can handle names on the order of thousands of
>> characters long, but that's mainly academic because the higher-level
>> stuff falls apart much earlier.  The Win32 subsystem (which
>> practically everything uses) is limited to 255 characters, I believe.
>> Vital system components -- like Windows Explorer and the shell
>> libraries -- seem to have even shorter limits.
>>
>>  One of my favorites is users creating files in their local profile
>> that work just fine, but then the roaming profile sync code pukes
>> trying to sync back to the server.  (Though I haven't seen that in a
>> while; it may have been fixed in XP SP2.)
>>
>>  Another part of the problem is that path name lengths can vary
>> depending on how the system is "seeing" a file.  For example, if I
>> have C:\Company\Shared\Quality\Public\QMSDocs on the server shared as
>> QMSDocs, and the workstations map that share as drive Q:, and then
>> there's
>> Q:\some\really\absurdly\ridiculously\ludicrously\long\path\name\to\a\file.doc,
>> then it may be okay for the mapped path on the workstation, but on the
>> server it will be
>>
>> C:\Company\Shared\Quality\Public\QMSDocs\some\really\absurdly\ridiculously\ludicrously\long\path\name\to\a\file.doc
>> which pushes Explorer over the limit.  Result?  You can access the
>> files from Explorer on a workstation, but not Explorer on the server.
>>
>>  The filesystems typically used on CDs and DVDs have their own limits
>> which are different from all of the above.  So one thing that may help
>> the CD archive scenario is to put all the files into an archive format
>> which handles really long file names, like 7-Zip's .7z format.
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Christopher J. Bosak]

Yeah, then good luck activating it. I'd rather have a legit copy. Eh, well,
I guess I'll be up for a better part of the night then.

Christopher J. Bosak
Vector Company
c. 847.603.4673
cbo...@vector-co.com

"You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
- B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me


-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:02 hrs
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Jon D  wrote:
> There's only 2.5 million downloads allowed is the only reason I'm asking.

  I'm sure it will be reposted on the usual third-party sites
approximately 42 seconds after release.  :)

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Christopher J. Bosak]

Shame I don't have TechNet or MSDN. :(

Christopher J. Bosak
Vector Company
c. 847.603.4673
cbo...@vector-co.com

"You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."
- B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me


-Original Message-
From: Ames Matthew B [mailto:mba...@qinetiq.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 09:38 hrs
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

Shame my internet access at work is so pants Guess I'll have to wait
till I get home to grab a copy. 

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com] 
Sent: 08 January 2009 15:31
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It was on MSDN last night.

Jon D wrote:
> Anyone have any inside info? Are we talking 12:01am tomorrow, or more 
> like 4:00pm in the afternoon?

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~
The information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent 
correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended 
recipient(s).  The information in this communication may be 
confidential and/or legally privileged.  Nothing in this e-mail is 
intended to conclude a contract on behalf of QinetiQ or make QinetiQ 
subject to any other legally binding commitments, unless the e-mail 
contains an express statement to the contrary or incorporates a formal
Purchase Order.

For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, 
distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance 
on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Emails and other electronic communication with QinetiQ may be 
monitored and recorded for business purposes including security, audit 
and archival purposes.  Any response to this email indicates consent 
to this.

Telephone calls to QinetiQ may be monitored or recorded for quality 
control, security and other business purposes.

QinetiQ Limited
Registered in England & Wales: Company Number:3796233
Registered office: 85 Buckingham Gate, London SW1E 6PD, United Kingdom
Trading address: Cody Technology Park, Cody Building, Ively Road,
Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 0LX, United Kingdom 
http://www.qinetiq.com/home/notices/legal.html

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

[Tim Vander Kooi]

It has to run on a 32-bit server, or client. I run it on my Vista workstation 
most of the time, since it adds additional capabilities, but I do like to have 
it loaded locally on at least one DC also, more a comfort thing than a 
requirement though.
TVK

From: Webb, Brian (Corp) [mailto:brian.w...@teldta.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:02 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

Thanks all.  I wasn't aware of the GPMC issues - to clarify - you just have to 
run GPMC on a 32 bit server, right?  (so we can still run it on our existing 
admin terminal server as we do now).

-Brian



From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:mille...@mukilteo.wednet.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit
We have two 64-bit 2003 DCs alongside our 32-bit DCs that have been humming 
along happily for at least a year now.  No WS08 DCs installed yet, but we just 
extended our schema for WS08 over the winter break and that went well-still 
ticking along.

We've also had to keep a 32-bit DC for GPMC, but I'm hoping when we get to WS08 
I can get rid of that.

BTW, just to clarify, AFAIK, there is no direct upgrade path at the server 
level-the DCs I installed as x64 had to be rebuilt.

-Bonnie

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 7:44 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

I have been running a mix of 32 and 64-bit DCs for over a year with no ill 
effects at all. I prefer the performance gains I receive from running 64-bit, 
but not all MS management tools (GPMC in particular) would run on 64-bit prior 
to Server 2008's release, so I had to keep at least 1 32-bit server around for 
that purpose.
TVK


From: Webb, Brian (Corp) [mailto:brian.w...@teldta.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:37 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

Has anyone upgraded their 2003 domain from 32 bit DCs to 64 bit DCs?  Our 
security team wants to move to 64 bit to take advantage of the larger event 
logs - anyone done it?  Were there any issues running some DCs 32 bit and some 
64 bit?  Anyone run a mixed environment long term?  I'm planning on doing some 
testing, but wanted some advance scouting if available.

Brian Webb - MCSE
TDS Corporate IS, Windows Server Platform Team
Senior Systems Administrator

"When stuck on a problem as often can be, try to remember G.B.T.T.D. (Go Back 
To The Definition)". - Dave Seybold






















~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[David Lum]

I'm curious to see if that's what happened to Andy. My patch reporting actually 
shows 100% of my 300 systems as patched for that one :)
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
From: John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out


http://news.zdnet.com/2424-9595_22-257980.html?tag=nl.e539




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

OK, here's a teaser...

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy searching 
for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not get re-locked out) 
but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now, this stinks of a brute 
force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on the network (we allow 10 
attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't find _anything_ that looks like 
this. To compound matters, we have also had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD 
which has been contained and managed well, but I think this is a red herring as 
that worm's symptoms are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no 
correlation).

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to make a 
logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an account - 
bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is it possible to 
find out where the logon attempt that caused an account lock came from?

Cheers, and TIA,

Andy.


Andy Crellin
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at 
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available, or 
e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org











Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire 
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this message. Any 
views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not 
necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability. If you have 
received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and delete it 
immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee, registered in 
England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186 (England & Wales) and 
no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75. Registered office: 66 South 
Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.



This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information that is 
privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If 
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that 
any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or communication of this message 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please 
notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments. Thank you.






~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

DumpSEC-ish tool

[David Lum]

I need to dump security permissions for hundreds of folders. I have DumpSEC, 
but what I would like is something that shows me permissions differences from 
the directory directly above it, and if there is no difference (i.e, 
inheritance with no modifications) then show nothing, or no difference. DumpSEC 
can show me changes from the root, but if  a folder 3 levels down has the same 
perms as 2 levels down, but 2 levels down is different than the root, DumpSEC 
shows me the full perm set for both folder 3 and folder 2.

Example
\Root : Permission set A

\Root\RootPlus1 : list of permissions because they don't match Permission set A

\Root\RootPlus1\Plus2 : Blank because the perms are same as \Root\RootPlus1

Currently, for \Root\RootPlus1\Plus2 DumpSEC lists all permissions because they 
don't match Permission set A, I'm just looking for the "delta points" from each 
other, not necessarily each folder different than the root folder.

I hope that makes sense...
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[John Hornbuckle]

http://news.zdnet.com/2424-9595_22-257980.html?tag=nl.e539




John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
318 North Clark Street
Perry, FL 32347

www.taylor.k12.fl.us




From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

OK, here's a teaser...

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy searching 
for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not get re-locked out) 
but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now, this stinks of a brute 
force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on the network (we allow 10 
attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't find _anything_ that looks like 
this. To compound matters, we have also had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD 
which has been contained and managed well, but I think this is a red herring as 
that worm's symptoms are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no 
correlation).

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to make a 
logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an account - 
bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is it possible to 
find out where the logon attempt that caused an account lock came from?

Cheers, and TIA,

Andy.


Andy Crellin
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at 
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available, or 
e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org











Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire 
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this message. Any 
views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not 
necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability. If you have 
received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and delete it 
immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee, registered in 
England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186 (England & Wales) and 
no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75. Registered office: 66 South 
Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.



This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information that is 
privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If 
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that 
any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or communication of this message 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please 
notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the message and any 
attachments. Thank you.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Online Mail Test

[Joseph L. Casale]

I would owe you :)
I'll send details offlist!

Thanks,
jlc

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:01 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Online Mail Test

Can't think of online service, but I am sure one of us could help fire one off 
for you...


From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Online Mail Test
I am in a situation where any external access I have to remote systems under my 
control have port 25 outbound blocked by their isp. I need to do some mail 
testing where I telnet in and set my from email, compose a message and deliver 
it in to the mail server. Anyone know of an online mail tester that allows you 
to specifically set the "From" address and push out a test email?

Thanks!
jlc











~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Online Mail Test

[Joseph L. Casale]

Nah,
but funny as it has an invalid helo on the inbound test:)
jlc

From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:00 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Online Mail Test

Does this help?
https://www.testexchangeconnectivity.com/



From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Online Mail Test
I am in a situation where any external access I have to remote systems under my 
control have port 25 outbound blocked by their isp. I need to do some mail 
testing where I telnet in and set my from email, compose a message and deliver 
it in to the mail server. Anyone know of an online mail tester that allows you 
to specifically set the "From" address and push out a test email?

Thanks!
jlc











~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[Jake Gardner]

Here's some old ASP script I wrote years ago to help me with a DoS
lockout issue I was having.  
 
 
Sub Global_Unlock
'This sub was built to undo a DOS account lockout flood that I
encountered on a production server.
'Because Account Lockout policies were in place and over 1500 users in
AD tree I needed a quick
'way to unlock everyone once I resolved the DOS Flood. There is no
visible link to this Sub
'but it can still be called by calling
"display_usergroup.asp?action=globalunlock"
response.write "Unlocking..."
response.flush
Set BaseObj = GetObject("WinNT://" & Application("domain") & "/" &
Application("Server"))
%>

  
   < UserName >

   < Full
Name >
   < Description >
   < Active >
   < Locked >
   Manage
  
<%
  BaseObj.Filter = Array("User")
  For Each user in BaseObj
 Set objUser = GetObject("WinNT://" & Application("domain") & "/" &
Application("Server") & "/" & user.name & ",user")
 memstatus = "Enabled"
 If objUser.AccountDisabled = TRUE Then memstatus = "Disabled"
 acclockout = "Unlocked"
 If Len(Request.QueryString("rev")) Then
   If objUser.isaccountlocked = False and user.name <> "administrator"
Then
 objUser.IsAccountLocked = True
 objUser.Setinfo
   End If
  Else
   If objUser.isaccountlocked = True Then
 objUser.IsAccountLocked = False
 objUser.Setinfo
   End If
 End If
 If objUser.isaccountlocked = True Then acclockout = "Locked"
 Response.write ""
 Response.write "" & user.name & ""
 Response.write "" & objUser.FullName & ""
 Response.write "" & objUser.Description & ""
 Response.write "" & memstatus & ""
 Response.write "" & acclockout & ""
 Response.write "Manage"
 Response.write ""
 Response.Flush
  Next
  response.write ""
End Sub
 
Thanks,
 
Jake Gardner
TTC Network Administrator
Ext. 246
 



From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out



OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not
get re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now,
this stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on
the network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't
find _anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also
had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and
managed well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms
are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available,
or e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org



 


 

 

Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this
message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability.
If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the
sender and delete it immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee,
registered in England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186
(England & Wales) and no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75.
Registered office: 66 South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.


***Teletronics Technology Corporation*** 
This e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged.  If you are not the 
addressee or authorized by the addressee to receive this e-mail, you may not 
disclose, copy, distribute, or use this e-mail. If you have received this 
e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or by 
telephone at 267-352-2020 and destroy this message and any copies.  Thank you.

***



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Online Mail Test

[Joseph L. Casale]

Hey,
Yeah I meant use telnet to connect to port 25 and manually send an email as I 
would normally.
I just have a routing/firewall issue preventing me from doing this easily 
currently. So let's say my mail server, @companyX.com is set to block incoming 
mail from any recipient with a local domain, such as companyX.com since that 
scenario could never occur in reality unless a forged sender was used, I want 
to test this, it appears to be not working...

Anyone got a shell I can use :)

jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:47 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Online Mail Test

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> I am in a situation where any external access I have to remote systems under
> my control have port 25 outbound blocked by their isp.
> I need to do some mail testing where I telnet in and set my from email, 
> compose a message and

  By "telnet in" do you mean using Telnet-the-protocol as the remote
access protocol to access those remote systems, or using TELNET.EXE to
establish a raw TCP connection to an SMTP listener?  I'll assume the
later, as Telnet-the-protocol is increasingly rare these days.  If my
guess is wrong, say so.  So my next question is: What mail scenario
are you trying to test?

  Are you checking whether an SMTP server at the remote site can
receive mail?  If so, use your remote access method to get to a system
at the remote site, then open your raw TCP connection from there.

  Are you checking whether mail sent from that site can make it out in
general?  If so, most ISPs will provide an SMTP relay server.  So do
"TELNET smtp-relay-server.example.net 25" or whatever and relay
through that.  If ISP requires a password, I can explain how you
formulate the required LOGIN string (it's not too hard, and useful to
know these days).

  If you're desiring to probe third-party SMTP servers directly, while
physically visiting the remote site, do you have a remote access
solution (e.g., VPN, RDP) that will let you connect to a site with a
less-bad ISP and test that way?  Might be better that way.  Web-based
interfaces have their own set of issues, the biggest described below.

  If none of the above apply, describe the scenario better.  :)

> deliver it in to the mail server. Anyone know of an online mail tester that
> allows you to specifically set the "From" address and push out a test email?

  Gmail will let you set your "From" address, but only after verifying
that you can read mail sent to that address (by emailing it a
verification code you have to enter back in to the Gmail web UI).

  I'm guessing you probably won't be able to find a long-lived,
usable, completely unrestricted, general-purpose, third-party,
web-based mail sending service.  They're too tempting a target for
spammer abuse.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

[Webb, Brian (Corp)]

Thanks all.  I wasn't aware of the GPMC issues - to clarify - you just
have to run GPMC on a 32 bit server, right?  (so we can still run it on
our existing admin terminal server as we do now).
 
-Brian

 



From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:mille...@mukilteo.wednet.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit



We have two 64-bit 2003 DCs alongside our 32-bit DCs that have been
humming along happily for at least a year now.  No WS08 DCs installed
yet, but we just extended our schema for WS08 over the winter break and
that went well-still ticking along.

 

We've also had to keep a 32-bit DC for GPMC, but I'm hoping when we get
to WS08 I can get rid of that.

 

BTW, just to clarify, AFAIK, there is no direct upgrade path at the
server level-the DCs I installed as x64 had to be rebuilt.

 

-Bonnie

 

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 7:44 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

 

I have been running a mix of 32 and 64-bit DCs for over a year with no
ill effects at all. I prefer the performance gains I receive from
running 64-bit, but not all MS management tools (GPMC in particular)
would run on 64-bit prior to Server 2008's release, so I had to keep at
least 1 32-bit server around for that purpose.

TVK

 

 

From: Webb, Brian (Corp) [mailto:brian.w...@teldta.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:37 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Upgrading DCs to 64 bit

 

Has anyone upgraded their 2003 domain from 32 bit DCs to 64 bit DCs?
Our security team wants to move to 64 bit to take advantage of the
larger event logs - anyone done it?  Were there any issues running some
DCs 32 bit and some 64 bit?  Anyone run a mixed environment long term?
I'm planning on doing some testing, but wanted some advance scouting if
available.

 

Brian Webb - MCSE
TDS Corporate IS, Windows Server Platform Team
Senior Systems Administrator

"When stuck on a problem as often can be, try to remember G.B.T.T.D. (Go
Back To The Definition)". - Dave Seybold

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[Andy Crellin]

Thanks for the comments guys - checking some of them out now.

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
E-mail: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

 

From: Andy Crellin 
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:29
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

 

OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not
get re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now,
this stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on
the network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't
find _anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also
had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and
managed well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms
are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available,
or e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org

 

 

 

 
Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this
message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability.
If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the
sender and delete it immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee,
registered in England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186
(England & Wales) and no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75.
Registered office: 66 South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.

 



Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire 
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this message. Any 
views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not 
necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability. If you have 
received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and delete it 
immediately.
 
Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee, registered in 
England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186 (England & Wales) and 
no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75. Registered office: 66 South 
Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Online Mail Test

[Sam Cayze]

Can't think of online service, but I am sure one of us could help fire
one off for you...



From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Online Mail Test



I am in a situation where any external access I have to remote systems
under my control have port 25 outbound blocked by their isp. I need to
do some mail testing where I telnet in and set my from email, compose a
message and deliver it in to the mail server. Anyone know of an online
mail tester that allows you to specifically set the "From" address and
push out a test email?

 

Thanks!
jlc


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Little password generator

[Oliver Marshall]

Heh. WE use keepass here. Didnt even think to look whether it had a generator 
option :)

ta

From: Garcia-Moran, Carlos [mailto:cgarciamo...@spragueenergy.com]
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:28
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Little password generator

I use this myself, has hotkey, master password, keeps passwords and sits on the 
systray, I use EXE on a USB key and move it anywhere, it's not exactly a 
password generator but it has that function

http://www.dobysoft.com/products/keypass/index.html

From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:18 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Little password generator

Doesn't have the ability to hide in the systray (not that i can see) or 
generate with a hotkey

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com]
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:15
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Little password generator

Quicky Password Generator
http://www.quickysoftware.com
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Oliver Marshall 
mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com>> wrote:
Hi chaps,

Can anyone recommend a small password generator? I'm after something that, 
ideally, sits in the systray or has a hotkey assigned to it and is able to 
generator passwords of predefined length and complexity.

Any suggestions? Xyzzy is ideal, but i really want something a bit more 
out-of-the-way.

Olly


--
G2 Support
Online Backups

Email:  oliver.marsh...@g2support.com
Web:http://www.g2support.com




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



--
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke










_
This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is
confidential and may be protected by attorney/client or other privileges.
This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not
an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use,
dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including
attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify me by e-mail reply and delete
the original message and any attachments from your system.
_






~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Online Mail Test

[David Mazzaccaro]

Does this help?
https://www.testexchangeconnectivity.com/
 




From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Online Mail Test



I am in a situation where any external access I have to remote systems
under my control have port 25 outbound blocked by their isp. I need to
do some mail testing where I telnet in and set my from email, compose a
message and deliver it in to the mail server. Anyone know of an online
mail tester that allows you to specifically set the "From" address and
push out a test email?

 

Thanks!
jlc


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Online Mail Test

[Ben Scott]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Joseph L. Casale
 wrote:
> I am in a situation where any external access I have to remote systems under
> my control have port 25 outbound blocked by their isp.
> I need to do some mail testing where I telnet in and set my from email, 
> compose a message and

  By "telnet in" do you mean using Telnet-the-protocol as the remote
access protocol to access those remote systems, or using TELNET.EXE to
establish a raw TCP connection to an SMTP listener?  I'll assume the
later, as Telnet-the-protocol is increasingly rare these days.  If my
guess is wrong, say so.  So my next question is: What mail scenario
are you trying to test?

  Are you checking whether an SMTP server at the remote site can
receive mail?  If so, use your remote access method to get to a system
at the remote site, then open your raw TCP connection from there.

  Are you checking whether mail sent from that site can make it out in
general?  If so, most ISPs will provide an SMTP relay server.  So do
"TELNET smtp-relay-server.example.net 25" or whatever and relay
through that.  If ISP requires a password, I can explain how you
formulate the required LOGIN string (it's not too hard, and useful to
know these days).

  If you're desiring to probe third-party SMTP servers directly, while
physically visiting the remote site, do you have a remote access
solution (e.g., VPN, RDP) that will let you connect to a site with a
less-bad ISP and test that way?  Might be better that way.  Web-based
interfaces have their own set of issues, the biggest described below.

  If none of the above apply, describe the scenario better.  :)

> deliver it in to the mail server. Anyone know of an online mail tester that
> allows you to specifically set the "From" address and push out a test email?

  Gmail will let you set your "From" address, but only after verifying
that you can read mail sent to that address (by emailing it a
verification code you have to enter back in to the Gmail web UI).

  I'm guessing you probably won't be able to find a long-lived,
usable, completely unrestricted, general-purpose, third-party,
web-based mail sending service.  They're too tempting a target for
spammer abuse.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

[Todd Lemmiksoo]

Yea, but I could find where to download it from.

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:18 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Windows 7 On TechNet Now

It was leaked a week ago :)

Ben Scott wrote:
>   I'm sure it will be reposted on the usual third-party sites 
> approximately 42 seconds after release.  :)

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[Christopher Bodnar]

I have a friend who is battling the same type of thing for the last 2
days. He thinks it is the Corn Flicker worm:

 

 http://forums.mcafeehelp.com/showthread.php?t=225901

 

http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2008-112203-24
08-99
 &tabid=2

 

 

But so far has been unable to verify this. From what he's saying Trend is
supposed to catch it (he has the latest definitions), but isn't. Then
again, most of his systems are very far out of patch status so that is
part of the issue. 

 

 

Are your systems patched for MS08-067 ?

 

 

 

Chris Bodnar, MCSE
Sr. Systems Engineer
Distributed Systems Service Delivery - Intel Services
Guardian Life Insurance Company of America
Email: christopher_bod...@glic.com
Phone: 610-807-6459
Fax: 610-807-6003

  _  

From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

 

OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not get
re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now, this
stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on the
network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't find
_anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also had a
small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and managed
well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms are
nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available, or
e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org

 

 

 

 
Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this message.
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability. If you have
received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and delete
it immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee, registered
in England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186 (England &
Wales) and no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75. Registered office:
66 South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.




-
This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information
that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
applicable law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination,
distribution, copying, or communication of this message is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please
notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the
message and any attachments.  Thank you.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[Ziots, Edward]

You looked into ALOINFO to see if there is a source of the lockouts. I
have found that expired credentials on PC trying to re-connect to shares
or resources have triggerwed account lockout. And accountlockout.dll

 

http://www.windowsecurity.com/articles/Implementing-Troubleshooting-Acco
unt-Lockout.html

 

Also Turn on Kerberos Debugging on the DC's. 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/837361

http://blogs.technet.com/ad/archive/2008/05/09/trusted-for-delegation-in
-services-for-user-s4u.aspx

 

Kerberos troubleshooting Whitepaper. 

http://www.microsoft.com/DOWNLOADS/details.aspx?FamilyID=7dfeb015-6043-4
7db-8238-dc7af89c93f1&displaylang=en

 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

Email: ezi...@lifespan.org

Phone: 401-639-3505

MCSE, MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +



From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

 

OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not
get re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now,
this stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on
the network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't
find _anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also
had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and
managed well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms
are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available,
or e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org

 

 

 

 
Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this
message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability.
If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the
sender and delete it immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee,
registered in England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186
(England & Wales) and no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75.
Registered office: 66 South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[Jason Morris]

I would assume you're correct in a brute force attack...here's where I
would start, by turning on logging for AD transactions...

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314980

I'll do a little more digging, but that looks like what you want to do
at least for your PDC, and probably for all of them.

Good luck.

Jason

 

From: Andy Crellin [mailto:andy.crel...@lcdisability.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

 

OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not
get re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now,
this stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on
the network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't
find _anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also
had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and
managed well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms
are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available,
or e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org

 

 

 

 
Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this
message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability.
If you have received this transmission in error, please contact the
sender and delete it immediately.

Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee,
registered in England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186
(England & Wales) and no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75.
Registered office: 66 South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.

 


--
The pages accompanying this email transmission contain information from MJMC, 
Inc., which
is confidential and/or privileged. The information is to be for the use of the 
individual
or entity named on this cover sheet. If you are not the intended recipient, you 
are
hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of 
this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in 
error, please
immediately notify us by telephone so that we can arrange for the retrieval of 
the original
document.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Little password generator

[Damien Solodow]

Keepass != keypass.

 

Two separate but similar products. ;)

 

From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:30 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Little password generator

 

Heh. WE use keepass here. Didnt even think to look whether it had a
generator option J

 

ta

 

From: Garcia-Moran, Carlos [mailto:cgarciamo...@spragueenergy.com] 
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:28
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Little password generator

 

I use this myself, has hotkey, master password, keeps passwords and sits
on the systray, I use EXE on a USB key and move it anywhere, it's not
exactly a password generator but it has that function

 

http://www.dobysoft.com/products/keypass/index.html

 

From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:18 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Little password generator

 

Doesn't have the ability to hide in the systray (not that i can see) or
generate with a hotkey

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:15
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Little password generator

 

Quicky Password Generator
http://www.quickysoftware.com

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Oliver Marshall
 wrote:

Hi chaps,

Can anyone recommend a small password generator? I'm after something
that, ideally, sits in the systray or has a hotkey assigned to it and is
able to generator passwords of predefined length and complexity.

Any suggestions? Xyzzy is ideal, but i really want something a bit more
out-of-the-way.

Olly


--
G2 Support
Online Backups

Email:  oliver.marsh...@g2support.com
Web:http://www.g2support.com




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke

 

 

 

 

 

_
This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is
confidential and may be protected by attorney/client or other
privileges.
This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are
not
an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized
use,
dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including
attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify me by e-mail reply and
delete
the original message and any attachments from your system.
_

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro

[Eric Brouwer]

Sorry everyone.  Long day so far.  I should never have responded to  
this again, and will let it go.


Thanks to all who suggested using robocopy to accomplish this goal (it  
will work nicely) and to all those who have helped in the past.  You  
guys rock!


On Jan 8, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Eric Brouwer wrote:

Dude, you have some issues.  I can build a mirrored volume just fine  
on a server.  I can establish RAID 5 as well if you're interested.   
This is the first time I've wanted to mirror a disk on a desktop.   
Started to, and realized I couldn't.  Started reading why I  
couldn't, and saw a reference to mirroring data to a remote disk,  
and it specifically called it a mirror, not a copy or a sync.   
Thought I'd ask the group here about it.


Learning something new, that's all, but thanks for your concern.

On Jan 8, 2009, at 10:57 AM, NTSysAdmin wrote:


It wasn't a comment, it was a question.

I'm damn sure I'd want to work for an IT manager with a beginners  
knowledge of systems...


S

-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:ezi...@lifespan.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Folks,

Lets not bash others on the list.. keep your personal comments to
yourself. He is asking for help, and we should give it to him, not
question his position and this and that..

Thanks
Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
Email: ezi...@lifespan.org
Phone: 401-639-3505
MCSE, MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +

-Original Message-
From: Ralph Smith [mailto:m...@gatewayindustries.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:53 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Somebody already mentioned robocopy that can accomplish this.   
Another

option is SyncBack.


-Original Message-
From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro

What's your problem?

On Jan 7, 2009, at 5:58 PM, NTSysAdmin wrote:


Dear dear dear...how did you become an IT manager???

S

-Original Message-
From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 6:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Good afternoon,

I thought you could set up a software mirror through XP Pro, but  
now

that I sat down to do it, I realize I can't.  In researching the
issue, I see that you can create a mirror on a remote system, but

only

see references to 200 Server.  Does anyone know if this can be done

to

a 2003 Server volume?

Instead of having two local drives configured as a mirrored volume,
I'd like to mirror a drive on the XP box to a drive on a 2003

server.

This would be done over a gigabit network, BTW.

Thanks,

Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Confidentiality Notice:

--



This communication, including any attachments, may contain  
confidential
information and is intended only for the individual or entity to  
whom it

is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this
communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original
message.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro

[Joseph L. Casale]

You can theoretically mirror a block device remotely over Ethernet using iSCSI 
for example, but I think the catch is that mirroring at the block level 
remotely is much more involved and requires some stable network topology, I am 
sure you would be better set mirroring at the file level. You can't create a r1 
array on a WinXP box anyway IIRC, and I think were you got confused was this:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314343
What that very poorly written article meant to say was you could remotely 
"manage" a server and create the array on the server *from* a winxp box. That 
is such a lame article...
jlc

-Original Message-
From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:21 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Dude, you have some issues.  I can build a mirrored volume just fine  
on a server.  I can establish RAID 5 as well if you're interested.   
This is the first time I've wanted to mirror a disk on a desktop.   
Started to, and realized I couldn't.  Started reading why I couldn't,  
and saw a reference to mirroring data to a remote disk, and it  
specifically called it a mirror, not a copy or a sync.  Thought I'd  
ask the group here about it.

Learning something new, that's all, but thanks for your concern.

On Jan 8, 2009, at 10:57 AM, NTSysAdmin wrote:

> It wasn't a comment, it was a question.
>
> I'm damn sure I'd want to work for an IT manager with a beginners  
> knowledge of systems...
>
> S
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:ezi...@lifespan.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:49 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro
>
> Folks,
>
> Lets not bash others on the list.. keep your personal comments to
> yourself. He is asking for help, and we should give it to him, not
> question his position and this and that..
>
> Thanks
> Z
>
> Edward E. Ziots
> Network Engineer
> Lifespan Organization
> Email: ezi...@lifespan.org
> Phone: 401-639-3505
> MCSE, MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph Smith [mailto:m...@gatewayindustries.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:53 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro
>
> Somebody already mentioned robocopy that can accomplish this.  Another
> option is SyncBack.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:19 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro
>>
>> What's your problem?
>>
>> On Jan 7, 2009, at 5:58 PM, NTSysAdmin wrote:
>>
>>> Dear dear dear...how did you become an IT manager???
>>>
>>> S
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 6:02 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Remote mirror with XP Pro
>>>
>>> Good afternoon,
>>>
>>> I thought you could set up a software mirror through XP Pro, but now
>>> that I sat down to do it, I realize I can't.  In researching the
>>> issue, I see that you can create a mirror on a remote system, but
> only
>>> see references to 200 Server.  Does anyone know if this can be done
> to
>>> a 2003 Server volume?
>>>
>>> Instead of having two local drives configured as a mirrored volume,
>>> I'd like to mirror a drive on the XP box to a drive on a 2003
> server.
>>> This would be done over a gigabit network, BTW.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Eric Brouwer
>>> IT Manager
>>> www.forestpost.com
>>> er...@forestpost.com
>>> 248.855.4333
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>> Eric Brouwer
>> IT Manager
>> www.forestpost.com
>> er...@forestpost.com
>> 248.855.4333
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
> Confidentiality Notice:
>
> --
>
>
>
> This communication, including any attachments, may contain  
> confidential
> information and is intended only for the individual or entity to  
> whom it
> is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this
> communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly
> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
> sender by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a res

All AD Accounts getting gradually locked out

[Andy Crellin]

OK, here's a teaser...

 

All of our AD accounts are gradually being locked out. I have one guy
searching for locked out accounts and unlocking them (and they do not
get re-locked out) but with 2500 accounts this is more than a PITA. Now,
this stinks of a brute force attack on an enumerated list of accounts on
the network (we allow 10 attempts then lockout for 30mins), but we can't
find _anything_ that looks like this. To compound matters, we have also
had a small outbreak of WORM_DOWNAD.AD which has been contained and
managed well, but I think this is a red herring as that worm's symptoms
are nothing like what we are seeing (and there is no correlation).

 

Does anyone know of a way to find out what processes are attempting to
make a logon attempt (we have about 10 DCs spread about the place) to an
account - bearing in mind it could be any one of 2500 accounts? Also, is
it possible to find out where the logon attempt that caused an account
lock came from?

 

Cheers, and TIA,

 

Andy.

 

 

Andy Crellin 
Technical Services Manager
Leonard Cheshire Disability
Telephone: 01904 479200
Email: andy.crel...@lcdisability.org

Change the way you see disability. Find out more at
www.CreatureDiscomforts.org  

Our London Marathon places are almost sold out!
Call 020 3242 0376 now to reserve one of the last few places available,
or e-mail eve...@lcdisability.org



 



Internet communications are not secure and therefore Leonard Cheshire 
Disability does not accept any liability for the content of this message. Any 
views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not 
necessarily represent those of Leonard Cheshire Disability. If you have 
received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and delete it 
immediately.
 
Leonard Cheshire Disability is a company limited by guarantee, registered in 
England no: 552847, and a registered charity no: 218186 (England & Wales) and 
no: SC005117 (Scotland) VAT no: 899 3223 75. Registered office: 66 South 
Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RL.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Little password generator

[Garcia-Moran, Carlos]

I use this myself, has hotkey, master password, keeps passwords and sits
on the systray, I use EXE on a USB key and move it anywhere, it's not
exactly a password generator but it has that function

 

http://www.dobysoft.com/products/keypass/index.html

 

From: Oliver Marshall [mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:18 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Little password generator

 

Doesn't have the ability to hide in the systray (not that i can see) or
generate with a hotkey

 

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:15
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Little password generator

 

Quicky Password Generator
http://www.quickysoftware.com



On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Oliver Marshall
 wrote:

Hi chaps,

Can anyone recommend a small password generator? I'm after something
that, ideally, sits in the systray or has a hotkey assigned to it and is
able to generator passwords of predefined length and complexity.

Any suggestions? Xyzzy is ideal, but i really want something a bit more
out-of-the-way.

Olly


--
G2 Support
Online Backups

Email:  oliver.marsh...@g2support.com
Web:http://www.g2support.com




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~




-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." 
Arthur C. Clarke

 

 

 

 

 

_
This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is
confidential and may be protected by attorney/client or other privileges.
This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not
an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use,
dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including
attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify me by e-mail reply and delete
the original message and any attachments from your system.
_

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro

[Eric Brouwer]

Dude, you have some issues.  I can build a mirrored volume just fine  
on a server.  I can establish RAID 5 as well if you're interested.   
This is the first time I've wanted to mirror a disk on a desktop.   
Started to, and realized I couldn't.  Started reading why I couldn't,  
and saw a reference to mirroring data to a remote disk, and it  
specifically called it a mirror, not a copy or a sync.  Thought I'd  
ask the group here about it.


Learning something new, that's all, but thanks for your concern.

On Jan 8, 2009, at 10:57 AM, NTSysAdmin wrote:


It wasn't a comment, it was a question.

I'm damn sure I'd want to work for an IT manager with a beginners  
knowledge of systems...


S

-Original Message-
From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:ezi...@lifespan.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Folks,

Lets not bash others on the list.. keep your personal comments to
yourself. He is asking for help, and we should give it to him, not
question his position and this and that..

Thanks
Z

Edward E. Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
Email: ezi...@lifespan.org
Phone: 401-639-3505
MCSE, MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +

-Original Message-
From: Ralph Smith [mailto:m...@gatewayindustries.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:53 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Somebody already mentioned robocopy that can accomplish this.  Another
option is SyncBack.


-Original Message-
From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:19 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro

What's your problem?

On Jan 7, 2009, at 5:58 PM, NTSysAdmin wrote:


Dear dear dear...how did you become an IT manager???

S

-Original Message-
From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 6:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Remote mirror with XP Pro

Good afternoon,

I thought you could set up a software mirror through XP Pro, but now
that I sat down to do it, I realize I can't.  In researching the
issue, I see that you can create a mirror on a remote system, but

only

see references to 200 Server.  Does anyone know if this can be done

to

a 2003 Server volume?

Instead of having two local drives configured as a mirrored volume,
I'd like to mirror a drive on the XP box to a drive on a 2003

server.

This would be done over a gigabit network, BTW.

Thanks,

Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Confidentiality Notice:

--



This communication, including any attachments, may contain  
confidential
information and is intended only for the individual or entity to  
whom it

is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this
communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original
message.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



Eric Brouwer
IT Manager
www.forestpost.com
er...@forestpost.com
248.855.4333





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro

[Jon Harris]

You may think that is a beginner but see it as maybe something you come to
expect of all systems if you work with servers for so long and you just
don't pay attention to those kinds of things on clients.

Jon

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:57 AM, NTSysAdmin  wrote:

> It wasn't a comment, it was a question.
>
> I'm damn sure I'd want to work for an IT manager with a beginners knowledge
> of systems...
>
> S
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:ezi...@lifespan.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:49 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro
>
> Folks,
>
> Lets not bash others on the list.. keep your personal comments to
> yourself. He is asking for help, and we should give it to him, not
> question his position and this and that..
>
> Thanks
> Z
>
> Edward E. Ziots
> Network Engineer
> Lifespan Organization
> Email: ezi...@lifespan.org
> Phone: 401-639-3505
> MCSE, MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph Smith [mailto:m...@gatewayindustries.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:53 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Remote mirror with XP Pro
>
> Somebody already mentioned robocopy that can accomplish this.  Another
> option is SyncBack.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:19 AM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: Re: Remote mirror with XP Pro
> >
> > What's your problem?
> >
> > On Jan 7, 2009, at 5:58 PM, NTSysAdmin wrote:
> >
> > > Dear dear dear...how did you become an IT manager???
> > >
> > > S
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 6:02 PM
> > > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > > Subject: Remote mirror with XP Pro
> > >
> > > Good afternoon,
> > >
> > > I thought you could set up a software mirror through XP Pro, but now
> > > that I sat down to do it, I realize I can't.  In researching the
> > > issue, I see that you can create a mirror on a remote system, but
> only
> > > see references to 200 Server.  Does anyone know if this can be done
> to
> > > a 2003 Server volume?
> > >
> > > Instead of having two local drives configured as a mirrored volume,
> > > I'd like to mirror a drive on the XP box to a drive on a 2003
> server.
> > > This would be done over a gigabit network, BTW.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Eric Brouwer
> > > IT Manager
> > > www.forestpost.com
> > > er...@forestpost.com
> > > 248.855.4333
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> > > ~   ~
> > >
> > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> > > ~   ~
> >
> >
> > Eric Brouwer
> > IT Manager
> > www.forestpost.com
> > er...@forestpost.com
> > 248.855.4333
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> > ~   ~
> Confidentiality Notice:
>
> --
>
>
>
> This communication, including any attachments, may contain confidential
> information and is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it
> is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this
> communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly
> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
> sender by reply email, delete and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Little password generator

[Oliver Marshall]

Doesn't have the ability to hide in the systray (not that i can see) or 
generate with a hotkey

From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com]
Sent: 08 January 2009 16:15
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Little password generator

Quicky Password Generator
http://www.quickysoftware.com


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Oliver Marshall 
mailto:oliver.marsh...@g2support.com>> wrote:
Hi chaps,

Can anyone recommend a small password generator? I'm after something that, 
ideally, sits in the systray or has a hotkey assigned to it and is able to 
generator passwords of predefined length and complexity.

Any suggestions? Xyzzy is ideal, but i really want something a bit more 
out-of-the-way.

Olly


--
G2 Support
Online Backups

Email:  oliver.marsh...@g2support.com
Web:http://www.g2support.com




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



--
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~