[sims] SIMS & MSI

[localzuk]

Last post was well over a year ago, can anybody tell me if there is finally a Group Policy deployable MSI available from Capita?

 

No. There is no MSI as yet.

[matt40k]

You won't be worrying about deploying it via Group policy when SOLUS3 phase 2 comes out.

[joe90bass]

You won't be worrying about deploying it via Group policy when SOLUS3 phase 2 comes out.

 

Do tell us more!?

[Quackers]

You won't be worrying about deploying it via Group policy when SOLUS3 phase 2 comes out.

 

How else will i want software to be installed when a PC is rebuilt? Is SIMS going to just run from a mapped drive? For the obscene amount of money Capita take for SIMS i find the fact they do not offer an MSI for deploying SIMS to workstations shocking.

[matt40k]

SOLUS 3 phase 2 (will refer to as P2) is included as part of your normal license cost (shocking as it may seem that Capita isn't charging for it). P2 will be able to use AD to discover your machines. Once you've got a nice list of computers you can then deploy the agent out, which in turns installs SIMS (and FMS etc), sound like MSI over AD? Well once you've got the agent out you can report on basic info (CPU, RAM, HDD space), so you can print it off, go to SLT and go, hey I need x new machines because there rubbish and won't run SIMS well. Come upgrade day, the server pushs the update out to the client, because the agent is running as a service it doesn't use the users permissions, nor if they've tried to open SIMS or indeed logged on!

Say you have 5 SLT fixed workstation, you could have it set to roll back should those 5 machines fail to upgrade successfully. It should be able to WOL as well, but we'll see. They are talking about using it more, so when they mess up a release rather then making us re-download the same release, minus the one file they had to change, we could just download that one file.

 

That's all assuming they do what they say, still looks promising, field trial soon. So fingers cross, SIMS upgrades will be breese - we'll be showing off how quick we now do upgrades

[mavhc]

so they've recreated microsoft's deployment system because they couldn't make an msi?

[Quackers]

SOLUS 3 phase 2 (will refer to as P2) is included as part of your normal license cost (shocking as it may seem that Capita isn't charging for it). P2 will be able to use AD to discover your machines. Once you've got a nice list of computers you can then deploy the agent out, which in turns installs SIMS (and FMS etc), sound like MSI over AD? Well once you've got the agent out you can report on basic info (CPU, RAM, HDD space), so you can print it off, go to SLT and go, hey I need x new machines because there rubbish and won't run SIMS well. Come upgrade day, the server pushs the update out to the client, because the agent is running as a service it doesn't use the users permissions, nor if they've tried to open SIMS or indeed logged on!

Say you have 5 SLT fixed workstation, you could have it set to roll back should those 5 machines fail to upgrade successfully. It should be able to WOL as well, but we'll see. They are talking about using it more, so when they mess up a release rather then making us re-download the same release, minus the one file they had to change, we could just download that one file.

 

That's all assuming they do what they say, still looks promising, field trial soon. So fingers cross, SIMS upgrades will be breese - we'll be showing off how quick we now do upgrades

 

Thanks for the info. I think its still awful, why go to all that effort to create somthing which is still not what people in this thread seem to want, a simple MSI!

 

Because again, it goes back to the orginal issue, i have just rebuilt a workstation, when will SIMS get installed? When will this Solous 3 V2 "agent" get installed? Straght away? After 2 days? When it feels like it? or am i going to have to manually install SIMS. Why do Capita "just not get it"

[CyberDrac]

That's a real shame, my hopes for proper .MSI are dashed, hopefully RM will continue to provide a blue print so that we can deploy SIMS.net through the industry standard method we all know, love, and respect.

 

edit:

so they've recreated microsoft's deployment system because they couldn't make an msi?

 

Bizarre behaviour, having the option to use a globally recognised and supported deployment method and deciding to rewrite the whole thing from scratch ... talk about reinventing the wheel

 

localzuk - I typed my comments at exactly the same time as you ... I guess it shows that great minds think alike

Edited July 7, 2010 by CyberDrac

[localzuk]

Most of that structure already exists via BITS, using MSI, MST and MSP files, using GPOs and other pre-existing tools. Why are they reinventing the wheel?

[Sarconia]

I think its still awful, why go to all that effort to create somthing which is still not what people in this thread seem to want, a simple MSI!

 

I have to agree.

 

Hopefully SOLUS 3 P2 will work well... as I know for a fact that P1 doesn't quite work as intended. There are still some issues with it not seeing all of the machines on the network and it sometimes fails to push out upgrades and installations. Still, it's in the testing phase so hopefully all of that will be ironed out once it does get released.

[glensc]

Unfortunately this scenario seems all too farmiliar

 

10 Ask user what they want

20 Get wrong answer from user

30 Promise them what they asked for but will take time

40 Do something else

[tmcd35]

Unfortunately this scenario seems all too farmiliar

 

10 Ask user what they want

20 Get wrong answer from user

30 Promise them what they asked for but will take time

40 Do something else

 

Amature programming hour! You forgot

 

50 Goto 10

 

[webman]

I don't see why this is such a huge problem. Just run the EXEs silently. It's worked for us perfectly for the past five years.

[matt40k]

so they've recreated microsoft's deployment system because they couldn't make an msi?

 

MSI isn't flexiable enought. You can report who's installed it without messing about with it. SMS isn't free. SOLUS3 p1 basically is a "My network place" scan, P2 uses AD.

 

I people would actually be happy that they are doing something positive. Not every school has SMS, not every school as a domain. SOLUS3 isn't costing the schools anything and will allow a single tool to pushing out SIMS to the desktops\servers across the school\LA.

 

It's going to far better than if they create MSI's.

 

(SOLUS3 agent is actually an MSI by the way, I believe they looked at creating MSI for all the apps, but it wasn't flexiable enought - couldn't cope with the multiple installs)

[pete]

@matt40k

The problem is all that functionality they've added just replicates what I already have in a way that won't integrate with my existing reporting / deployment.

 

Reporting and audit (GLPI/OCS) doesn't require SMS and many, many schools do have domains.

 

They've made SIMS easier to deploy if you don't already have anything in place, but if you do it's just another tool that won't get used and isn't really I'd been hoping for.

 

It drives me mad that every software company under the sun thinks it's a great idea to have their own auto-update app rather than tying into existing infrastructures*.

 

(*yes, this is partially a Windows problem).

[matt40k]

Problem is not everyone is the same. BSF was planning on "fixing" that. It's a problem of your damn if you do and your damn if you don't.

 

It's progress, lets get the most out of and hope they keep going and upgrade the rest of the older bits.

[mavhc]

MSI isn't flexiable enought. You can report who's installed it without messing about with it. SMS isn't free. SOLUS3 p1 basically is a "My network place" scan, P2 uses AD.

 

I people would actually be happy that they are doing something positive. Not every school has SMS, not every school as a domain. SOLUS3 isn't costing the schools anything and will allow a single tool to pushing out SIMS to the desktops\servers across the school\LA.

 

It's going to far better than if they create MSI's.

 

(SOLUS3 agent is actually an MSI by the way, I believe they looked at creating MSI for all the apps, but it wasn't flexiable enought - couldn't cope with the multiple installs)

 

So write the reporting tool. Noone's saying they can't wrap the MSIs in another tool for people who haven't got domains. So the only real question is: is it really impossible to make an MSI, or do they just not have a clue?

[p858snake]

@matt40k

The problem is all that functionality they've added just replicates what I already have in a way that won't integrate with my existing reporting / deployment.

 

Reporting and audit (GLPI/OCS) doesn't require SMS and many, many schools do have domains.

 

They've made SIMS easier to deploy if you don't already have anything in place, but if you do it's just another tool that won't get used and isn't really I'd been hoping for.

 

It drives me mad that every software company under the sun thinks it's a great idea to have their own auto-update app rather than tying into existing infrastructures*.

 

(*yes, this is partially a Windows problem).

You can install a MSI without a domain you know? And most schools already have a wider auditing system in place to manage it centrally than dependent based on what apps want to implement it.

[matt40k]

I seem to keep hitting this wall. People don't seem to fully understand what's SOLUS3 P2 will be able to do, are people ignorant of what Capita has achived, what they doing?

 

They've made an MSI, but MSI can't cope with multiple installations, so it won't be suitable for the all the current setups.

 

Accept that there are 22,000+ schools not all with domains etc and SOLUS3 will be a massive improvement.

 

Creating a MSI wrapper \ repacking is what, an hour's work? If this was truely the answer to everyones problem, why hasn't anyone published something (other then RM)?

[PiqueABoo]

Accept that there are 22,000+ schools not all with domains etc

 

How about accept that it's well over 10 years since MS made the guidelines for what nice Windows apps should do and that a significant proportion, probably the majority, of those schools do have domains and make in this order:

 

1) It work with standard Windows deployment, GPO config etc.

 

2) Your own exciting (probably buggy) deployment system for everyone else.

 

It *is* infuriating when vendors only do the second one... that something is better than something that's not brilliant now, doesn't make it inherently good.. and definitely not at that price.

[localzuk]

I seem to keep hitting this wall. People don't seem to fully understand what's SOLUS3 P2 will be able to do, are people ignorant of what Capita has achived, what they doing?

 

They've made an MSI, but MSI can't cope with multiple installations, so it won't be suitable for the all the current setups.

 

Accept that there are 22,000+ schools not all with domains etc and SOLUS3 will be a massive improvement.

 

Creating a MSI wrapper \ repacking is what, an hour's work? If this was truely the answer to everyones problem, why hasn't anyone published something (other then RM)?

 

Your argument is hitting a wall because it doesn't hold water!

 

MSI is the standard way of installing things on Windows, be it in a domain environment or not. Using the argument that some schools won't use domains is like me saying some schools don't use MS Office. Yes, some don't but they are a minority.

 

What do you mean by 'MSI can't cope with multiple installations'? I'd guess SQLExpress and its MSI installer would disagree with that. There's no reason why it can't work with multiple installations.

 

Reinventing the wheel, with non-standard systems, in order to appease a minority of customers (lets face it, most schools will have a domain based network) is bizarre, plain and simple. MSI and its back-end infrastructure has been around for 10 years, so there is no excuse not to have migrated to it in that time.

[AyatollahPies]

I for one, am looking forward to seeing SOLUS 3 P2 in action.

 

The demos I've seen show it to be just what my LEA is looking for.

[sted]

Your argument is hitting a wall because it doesn't hold water!

 

MSI is the standard way of installing things on Windows, be it in a domain environment or not. Using the argument that some schools won't use domains is like me saying some schools don't use MS Office. Yes, some don't but they are a minority.

 

What do you mean by 'MSI can't cope with multiple installations'? I'd guess SQLExpress and its MSI installer would disagree with that. There's no reason why it can't work with multiple installations.

 

Reinventing the wheel, with non-standard systems, in order to appease a minority of customers (lets face it, most schools will have a domain based network) is bizarre, plain and simple. MSI and its back-end infrastructure has been around for 10 years, so there is no excuse not to have migrated to it in that time.

 

and you are forced to have ms office as well you cant use open office which for most people is more than enough and a free to boot.

I seem to keep hitting this wall. People don't seem to fully understand what's SOLUS3 P2 will be able to do, are people ignorant of what Capita has achived, what they doing?

 

They've made an MSI, but MSI can't cope with multiple installations, so it won't be suitable for the all the current setups.

 

Accept that there are 22,000+ schools not all with domains etc and SOLUS3 will be a massive improvement.

 

Creating a MSI wrapper \ repacking is what, an hour's work? If this was truely the answer to everyones problem, why hasn't anyone published something (other then RM)?

 

Its not like you cant run an msi by double clicking on it same as a .exe installer it just does things in a standard way so it can be removed properly. An msi on its own may not do it all BUT with an appropriate transforms creater (like say smartboard provide for their doftware or adobe provide a free one for theirs as well) means you can put any options required in (im assuming the problem is telling it to use %nameofserver% and wheter sims is mapped as s: or f: and creating / using a correct connect.ini file. But id be happier for the moment if they just got rid of the 16bit stuff (that looks like its still there from win 3.11) thats still in there so it would work 100% on 64 bit platforms as im trying to set up any new pc as win7x64 and sims is one of the few programs stopping me (and a lot of the others i want to get shut of anyway for being poor)

[ajbritton]

MSI isn't flexiable enough.

 

Like others on this thread, I too have worked with MSI files in the past, both repackaging existing apps and authoring my own and have never found MSI to be inflexible (indeed, I was constantly surprised, when creating custom transforms, at the creativity of MSI authors). It's something of a learning curve to begin with but that's because it is so flexible. MSI's have the ability to self heal, to install on first use, to accept patches, to be customised with transforms prior to installation or to run custom scripts or code at any point during the installation. (going out on a limb now..) I find it hard to imagine any scenario that an MSI could not be made to cope with.

 

Not every school has SMS

 

No, but larger schools will. Or they will have their own deployment tools and the last thing they need is another tool/method. I agree with other others here in that when I kick off a workstation build I want to know that everything else will be taken care of. Not have to think about lots of other deployment tools I need to use to finish the build. An MSI is not a pre-requisite for this, but some form of silent installer is. MSI can be used in this way as well as for GPO install.

 

not every school as a domain

 

This is the one are where having an automated deployment tool might help, but if they don't have a domain, how will the tool remote log on to all the PCs to install the agent? Without a common security authentication architecture, that's not always going to work. But even so, as others have said, why not deliver the MSI and the deployment tool as independent things to give us the option?

 

It's going to far better than if they create MSI's.

 

Have you actually read any of the posts on this thread??? (sorry). I no longer even work with SIMS installations in schools but have been closely involved in the past, I too find it extremely frustrating that Capita seem to think that they know better than most of the rest of the industry. I could be wrong about this but I had thought that for an application to get the Microsoft seal of approval ('designed for Windows' or whatever, it had to be delivered in Windows Installer format).

 

Perhaps Capita have researched this (presumably that's why Phil participated here in the pas) and found that (despite this thread), most customers do not want MSIs and prefer the automated tool and/or that MSIs really cannot provide the flexibility they require. If so, perhaps they would share their findings and hopefully shut us all up once and for all.

 

(sorry matt - rant over - nothing personal)

[matt40k]

How did we get on to how SIMS is based on a Microsoft technology and thus uses MS Office? Surely the arguement should be a Microsoft for not proving OpenOffice support?

 

SOLUS3 P2 is happening, love it, hate it, it's happening. Can we keep the negative comments (ie buggy deployment system) UNTIL we've got it. Then it'll be try and spot the bug before me lol

 

What do you mean by 'MSI can't cope with multiple installations'? I'd guess SQLExpress and its MSI installer would disagree with that. There's no reason why it can't work with multiple installations.

 

I think it's something to do with the fact MSI put entries into reg and SQLExpress has a transformation method, which adds extra steps that would over overcomplate the problem, I don't fancy running the setups installer before actually installing SIMS. I believe.