RM Network

[zag]

I don't see why anyone needs extra software over active directory these days, let alone pay that amount of money for it

 

All you need is google and a group policy set-up for each OU and you have an educational network.

 

Printing locations, Imaging, Remote access are all easily done in a few minutes with 2003 or free software. User management can be done with a few scripts.

[enjay]

I don't see why anyone needs extra software over active directory these days ...

Printing locations, Imaging, Remote access are all easily done in a few minutes with 2003 or free software

It's partly a question of time management, ITTech. Printing locations may only take a few minutes in a straight AD set-up, but they take seconds in a CC3 set-up. This may not be the most high-tech/geekiest/most technically satisfying way to do it, but it does free me up to go and do the myriad of other things which build up every day.

 

The way that the Management Console can be accessed from a student's login is quite handy too.

[webman]

ittech: That's all good and well if you have a million IT support team members (ala GrumbleDook) and/or enough time in the world

[localzuk]

ittech: That's all good and well if you have a million IT support team members (ala GrumbleDook) and/or enough time in the world

 

Huh? Or if you have a single NM as well. We manage just fine with a vanilla set up.

 

Also, when people say 'vanilla setups aren't a standard, each one is different', what do you mean?

 

I am pretty sure that all vanilla setups use the MMC, use GPO's, use either roaming profiles, mandatory profiles etc... The only place where I can see where there could be differences would be assigning printers - which could be via GPO, via scripts or manually deployed.

 

Thats the thing with vanilla setups - they are vanilla, so they are all the same basically. Sure, people may have augmented bits with their own scripts - but this isn't necessary, and a new network manager would either have their own way of doing it anyway or would adopt those scripts.

[GrumbleDook]

Oh deity ... Vanilla setups the same? Perish the thought.

 

Do you allow contextual menus for staff on the desktop or start menu? Do you use .bat files for login scripts or do you use .vbs?

 

Do you make use of startup and shut down scripts?

 

How do you add printers? By machine on startup or by user on login based on the name of the machine they log into?

 

Do you have mandatory or roaming profiles? Folder redirection for home areas? For start menus?

 

Do you deploy machines with all applications installed or do you have a base OS and push the apps out by GPOs? Do you use transform files or reg scripts after install?

 

And this is just touching the tip of the iceberg without going into using MOM or SMS, building your own bits to make use of WMI, etc ...

 

I suppose it is semantics again ... just like 'imaging' being used instead of 'deploying' ... We tend to use Vanilla to describe a system without any commercial middleware ... how they are configured is to varied to describe. The technology and concepts are the same but the same way you could say and athlete 'trains' this means so many different things it is astounding.

[localzuk]

But nearly all of those options will also be available via CC3 - things like what type of profile, what options are available to accounts etc... They should be standard across the board - if they aren't available in CC3 (which I haven't used, I have read up on and watched a collection of promotional videos for) then that is a major problem and would be a reason not to use it all on its own. And as I said, most NM's will either quickly adopt what has been done extra or will change to something they are familiar with.

 

Yes there are lots of ways of doing scripts - but then you can also use scripts in CC3, and once again have the myriad of choices.

 

Once you take those similar items away, you are left with a minimal selection of options - nearly all of which are 'standard' in some way.

 

I have yet to be shown in any way, by anyone who uses CC3 or is trying to sell it to me that it will actually make things easier.

[webman]

localzuk: Come to our school and we will show you

 

And CC3 only does one type of profiles - roaming. The base CC3 install is pretty standard with certain files in certain locations and all shared folders following the same naming conventions and drive letters.

[localzuk]

You can't have mandatory/enforced profiles in CC3?? That would make it almost completely useless for schools as far as I can see then. How does that work?

[bossman]

@localzuk:

 

So what is your argument?

you use vanilla while other people use CC3 so what! i bet i drive a different car to you but that doesn't make me any less of a person does it!

 

I wish this "better than you" sh*te would cease as i think many people on this forum are sick to death of this old chestnut and I don't mean you localzuk so don't go getting your nose all bent out of shape.

 

Grumbledook: please would you end this nonsense and close the post

[webman]

localzuk: We have roaming profiles and GPOs to lock users down, it works fine. What is your problem with roaming profiles? I fail to see how they are completely useless...

 

I find these threads quite interesting

[bossman]

@webman:

 

you would find these threads interesting

[PiqueABoo]

But nearly all of those options will also be available via CC3

 

Yes, because it's still Windows and you can do almost everything anyone can on Vanilla. But in practice you don't need to because the off-the-shelf config of the desktops, accounts, GPOs, server(s) file-system organisation and permissions et al do the job. There's very rarely any need for a script, but they still made a GPO for that just in case. You might need to change the odd setting in a GPO e.g. screen lock time, or stuff you're supposed to config e.g. proxy settings.. but that amounts to relatively minor tuning.

 

I have yet to be shown in... that it will actually make things easier.

 

Well if you're reasonably clueful, organised your systems in a sensible way, already fixed the inevitable oversights in initial design, have obtained tools or written thoroughly debugged scripts for this that and t'other.. then it probably won't. In fact it could make things harder: RMs output is imperfect and you might not have made their mistakes.

[GrumbleDook]

Ok folks ... I am officially declaring this a vampire thread.

 

Love it or loathe it people use CC3 and are happy with it. Some are damned fine NMs and techies, and should not be knocked just because they use it.

 

Thread locked until further notice.