Windows 10 Education

[Michael]

The problem in the UK is that WAN connections are just not quick enough to cope with everyone accessing their data in the cloud and the same goes for server management/administration.

 

As for moving away from a domain model altogether - I doubt it. Some scenarios will still require you to be connected to a domain and others standalone, but then if everything was standalone, how would you deploy applications for example? You'd still have to be enrolled into some form of central management system or database, which is essentially what Active Directory is.

 

When I explain to a lot of schools in Birmingham, your internal communications are 1Gbps and your internet connection is 10Mbps, reality kicks in and it starts getting expensive.

[Gibson335]

The problem in the UK is that WAN connections are just not quick enough to cope with everyone accessing their data in the cloud and the same goes for server management/administration.

 

As for moving away from a domain model altogether - I doubt it. Some scenarios will still require you to be connected to a domain and others standalone, but then if everything was standalone, how would you deploy applications for example? You'd still have to be enrolled into some form of central management system or database, which is essentially what Active Directory is.

 

When I explain to a lot of schools in Birmingham, your internal communications are 1Gbps and your internet connection is 10Mbps, reality kicks in and it starts getting expensive.

 

Regards application deployment, again MS would like us to manage all of that from within the cloud/Azure, etc. I'm not saying we'll move away from domains altogether, only that things will become more domain neutral.

[Arthur]

Some scenarios will still require you to be connected to a domain and others standalone

An MDM solves that issue. It works with both.

 

http://blogs.windows.com/business/2014/11/07/windows-10-manageability-choices

 

I think a lot of businesses will go the MDM route since it enables you to manage iOS, OS X, Android and Windows devices all in one place.

 

if everything was standalone, how would you deploy applications for example?

Windows Store for Business, InTune etc.

[Michael]

Everything you've suggested is correct, but it still doesn't solve the slow connectivity in the UK, so in reality these solutions just won't take off. The WAN infrastructure whether you're working on site or remotely is key and it still isn't quite there as yet.

[gshaw]

Interestingly enough I've wanted to put our Windows 10 tablets on Azure AD pretty much in the manner being discussed here. Seems a bit flaky at the moment but would be easier for roaming devices.

 

Shame MS are being so stubborn on the Azure AD side of the EMS bundle licensing or I'd have it by now along with InTune

[sted]

Some scenarios will still require you to be connected to a domain and others standalone, but then if everything was standalone, how would you deploy applications for example?

sign into windows with an office 365 or azure account and it goes oh [email protected] has word assigned to them and it installs from windows store

[Michael]

sign into windows with an office 365 or azure account and it goes oh [email protected] has word assigned to them and it installs from windows store

 

I agree it makes sense, but how long would it take to pull down Word? Even using the online version is going to eat away at bandwidth. The other problem is many schools use traditional applications over store applications - The Windows Store is pretty behind compared to the likes of Apple and Android's Stores.

 

To be honest, so long as data is still being stored on site instead of the cloud, then this means you're still going to need a physical server of some kind. In this scenario it doesn't make sense to manage from Azure, yet store data locally. The limiting factor is still the infrastructure in the UK rather than the tools available to us.

 

In the short term, it'll no doubt be very much a hybrid situation - some data stored locally and some cloud. It's not realistic to put everything in the cloud, bearing in mind (for example), many Primaries I support in Birmingham use 10Mbps PTP lines from the LA. The next increment is 100Mbps which schools simply cannot budget for.

[sted]

I agree it makes sense, but how long would it take to pull down Word? Even using the online version is going to eat away at bandwidth. The other problem is many schools use traditional applications over store applications - The Windows Store is pretty behind compared to the likes of Apple and Android's Stores.

 

To be honest, so long as data is still being stored on site instead of the cloud, then this means you're still going to need a physical server of some kind. In this scenario it doesn't make sense to manage from Azure, yet store data locally. The limiting factor is still the infrastructure in the UK rather than the tools available to us.

 

In the short term, it'll no doubt be very much a hybrid situation - some data stored locally and some cloud. It's not realistic to put everything in the cloud, bearing in mind (for example), many Primaries I support in Birmingham use 10Mbps PTP lines from the LA. The next increment is 100Mbps which schools simply cannot budget for.

 

i agree we arnt there yet but that is the direction I think things are going in, also you could cache store apps on site (in theory) so downloading at wifi not internet speed (like wsus for apps?)

[CyberNerd]

The problem in the UK is that WAN connections are just not quick enough to cope with everyone accessing their data in the cloud and the same goes for server management/administration.

 

Working in the cloud uses LESS bandwidth than transferring large documents to and from servers. It's not really comparable.

[localzuk]

Working in the cloud uses LESS bandwidth than transferring large documents to and from servers. It's not really comparable.

 

Servers are internal where we can provision 1Gbit contractions with ease and cheaply. An internet connection, even with the different way data is used, costs a considerable amount more for a single 1Gbit connection.

[mthomas08]

Working in the cloud uses LESS bandwidth than transferring large documents to and from servers. It's not really comparable.

 

Although you are right working online is less bandwidth but when having everyone doing it, that’s the game changer. We currently have close to 1500 devices all using the network/internet.

 

As a bit more for the whole discussion in general:

 

Again although won't use much bandwidth if "Working Online" the current best connection we have available to us is 200MB Bandwidth. Whereas 98% of our Internal Networking is capable of 1GB > 10GB with some balance offloading through different servers/connections. Can I imaging the whole system potentially going through our Internet Broadband, even if “Online Based”. Even 60% of what we have going through that route is worrying especially at the current infrastructure is not good enough (externally).

 

We've recently had to up our Bandwidth from 50MB to 100MB due to the 50MB hitting cap all day every day and that’s with Internet Browsing mainly. Now we are consistently hitting 75% with that 100MB. We are also reviewing our future Broadband options elsewhere to possibly get 200MB for the same price of 100MB. Still, our current system is based where nearly all data is stored internally: Exchange, Network Drives, Software deployments.

 

This whole “Cloud” idea is one of many things where people jump through hoops for the fancy idea instead of slowing down and thinking more “rationally”. Like many “new tech” ideas, great on paper but practically not ready and ludicrous to think of.

 

I am a full supporter of “All Online”, but one thing I keep hearing is “This is the way forward” well… at the moment it doesn’t seem that way does it. So many times I’ve heard that term and so many times I’ve seen huge U-Turns. Technology is not predictable and the “Way forward” certainly is not easy to predict.

 

One thing I will say though, it’s nice to have options. I personally see us having options for many many years to come.

[CyberNerd]

Although you are right working online is less bandwidth but when having everyone doing it, that’s the game changer. We currently have close to 1500 devices all using the network/internet.

 

As a bit more for the whole discussion in general:

 

Again although won't use much bandwidth if "Working Online" the current best connection we have available to us is 200MB Bandwidth. Whereas 98% of our Internal Networking is capable of 1GB > 10GB with some balance offloading through different servers/connections. Can I imaging the whole system potentially going through our Internet Broadband, even if “Online Based”. Even 60% of what we have going through that route is worrying especially at the current infrastructure is not good enough (externally).

 

We've recently had to up our Bandwidth from 50MB to 100MB due to the 50MB hitting cap all day every day and that’s with Internet Browsing mainly. Now we are consistently hitting 75% with that 100MB. We are also reviewing our future Broadband options elsewhere to possibly get 200MB for the same price of 100MB. Still, our current system is based where nearly all data is stored internally: Exchange, Network Drives, Software deployments.

 

This whole “Cloud” idea is one of many things where people jump through hoops for the fancy idea instead of slowing down and thinking more “rationally”. Like many “new tech” ideas, great on paper but practically not ready and ludicrous to think of.

 

I am a full supporter of “All Online”, but one thing I keep hearing is “This is the way forward” well… at the moment it doesn’t seem that way does it. So many times I’ve heard that term and so many times I’ve seen huge U-Turns. Technology is not predictable and the “Way forward” certainly is not easy to predict.

 

One thing I will say though, it’s nice to have options. I personally see us having options for many many years to come.

 

 

We have 1200 KS3 and KS4 devices and another 400 for KS5. We've not rolled out 1:1 across the school for year 11 yet so we'll expect another 270 next year.

ALL of our documents are online and all students (except yr 11) use laptops (chromebooks) every day in most lessons. We don't have MSOffice in school, all our spreadsheets, presentations and email are cloud based (GAFE) yet we are using fractionally more bandwidth than you. We peak at 120Mb/s for about 10 minutes per day, the rest of it is in the 75-90mb/s bracket. Running in the cloud is LESS bandwidth than most would expect.

[JRowley]

We have 1200 KS3 and KS4 devices and another 400 for KS5. We've not rolled out 1:1 across the school for year 11 yet so we'll expect another 270 next year.

ALL of our documents are online and all students (except yr 11) use laptops (chromebooks) every day in most lessons. We don't have MSOffice in school, all our spreadsheets, presentations and email are cloud based (GAFE) yet we are using fractionally more bandwidth than you. We peak at 120Mb/s for about 10 minutes per day, the rest of it is in the 75-90mb/s bracket. Running in the cloud is LESS bandwidth than most would expect.

 

The problem however is not how much bandwidth it takes, but the cost of that bandwidth when compared to housing the data internally.

[Michael]

100Mbps WAN is approx. £10K if you factor in filtering too. 1000Mbps WAN is approx. £23K. I agree with others, it's a combination of factors including the cost of bandwidth and the availability.

 

A lot of the cloud services to schools are free or cheap, but connecting everyone to that resource is still a problem. If it were readily available and cost effective, we'd all be doing it, but it really isn't at the current time.

[CyberNerd]

The problem however is not how much bandwidth it takes, but the cost of that bandwidth when compared to housing the data internally.

 

True, if you're not planning on having an internet connection. The reality is that the bandwidth/cost for online documents is negligible.

 

100Mbps WAN is approx. £10K if you factor in filtering too. 1000Mbps WAN is approx. £23K. I agree with others, it's a combination of factors including the cost of bandwidth and the availability.

 

A lot of the cloud services to schools are free or cheap, but connecting everyone to that resource is still a problem. If it were readily available and cost effective, we'd all be doing it, but it really isn't at the current time.

 

When you calculate the TCO it's best to factor in the infrastructure. A 20k/year investment for an internet line capable of allowing online documents is a fraction of the cost of half a million pound investment in 1500 computers !

[JRowley]

True, if you're not planning on having an internet connection. The reality is that the bandwidth/cost for online documents is negligible.

 

 

 

When you calculate the TCO it's best to factor in the infrastructure. A 20k/year investment for an internet line capable of allowing online documents is a fraction of the cost of half a million pound investment in 1500 computers !

 

Now you are mixing up the discussion, you can get cheap desktops and laptops which aren't online only, so really comparing 20k/year for online file storage vs half a million for 1500 computers isn't fair or relevant.

 

It's fairer to compare 20k/year vs the cost of running and maintaining file servers internally. What clients access it shouldn't impact that cost.

[CyberNerd]

Now you are mixing up the discussion, you can get cheap desktops and laptops which aren't online only, so really comparing 20k/year for online file storage vs half a million for 1500 computers isn't fair or relevant.

 

It's fairer to compare 20k/year vs the cost of running and maintaining file servers internally. What clients access it shouldn't impact that cost.

 

Not at all, my point was comparing internet usage with creating and storing documents online. It is a tiny amount of bandwidth we didn't even notice the increase over the 'normal' increase of double every 3 yrs - which, given a half decent TCO strategy, you would be budgeting for anyway.

 

I think people are really overestimating the costs of storage online, it does work well and at minimum cost.

[JRowley]

Not at all, my point was comparing internet usage with creating and storing documents online. It is a tiny amount of bandwidth we didn't even notice the increase over the 'normal' increase of double every 3 yrs - which, given a half decent TCO strategy, you would be budgeting for anyway.

 

I think people are really overestimating the costs of storage online, it does work well and at minimum cost.

 

Sorry yes, I just reread your post and noticed it wasn't a comparison, still only on my second cup of coffee!

 

Still, I don't really think it's an overestimation, for us we would need to increase the speed of our line at additional cost, and bring a second line up to the same speed for redundancy, more additional cost. While as you say a fraction of the overall value of the IT in the school, it's a large increase to our rolling budget and brings about no cost saving vs what we are doing currently.

 

It certainly has advantages, but none that I can think of outweigh the cost at this stage, maybe in a few years when the cost of high bandwidth lines has come down, but not before then. Perhaps in some areas it's already cheap enough, but not where we are.

[CyberNerd]

 

Still, I don't really think it's an overestimation, for us we would need to increase the speed of our line at additional cost, and bring a second line up to the same speed for redundancy, more additional cost. While as you say a fraction of the overall value of the IT in the school, it's a large increase to our rolling budget and brings about no cost saving vs what we are doing currently.

 

 

You probably won't need to increase your line speed, because the bandwidth is tiny - unless you are on the absolute brink already when you'd already be looking for the next upgrade anyway. And if redundancy for internet/comms was at all important you would have a backup line already. If you can't get to this point then you are not putting enough money into the infrastructure vs the number of clients. You should really be arguing for either LESS clients or MORE money because it sounds like it's running on a knife edge.

[Gibson335]

With respect, CyberNerd, whilst I understand what you're saying, from what I've read on here many of us work in environments where SLT expect us to be able to do absolutely everything possible with the least investment possible - certainly that's true of my place...here SLT do what they want, irrespective of my recommendations and pleading at times. The knife edge is where a lot of us work, I think.

[JRowley]

You probably won't need to increase your line speed, because the bandwidth is tiny - unless you are on the absolute brink already when you'd already be looking for the next upgrade anyway. And if redundancy for internet/comms was at all important you would have a backup line already. If you can't get to this point then you are not putting enough money into the infrastructure vs the number of clients. You should really be arguing for either LESS clients or MORE money because it sounds like it's running on a knife edge.

 

Sorry perhaps what I said wasn't clear, we aren't on a knife edge for bandwidth by any means, but I wouldn't be comfortable moving because the bandwidth demands would almost certainly go up. You said yourself you peak at 120Mbps with a consistent 75-95Mbps, that's quite a wide range so obviously we need to cover a similar range and to do that would mean a bigger line. Also I said we would need to bring a second line up to the same speed for redundancy, we already have a second line but it doesn't match our current line because we don't have online storage. We have a need to keep the school running on the rare occasions that our main line goes down, not provide access to every single file available on our cloud storage.

 

Also, I'm not sure why what I'm saying sounds like we are on a knife edge in terms of budgeting, to do what you are suggesting is costly, that's not to say it's unaffordable. It would be a completely different way of doing things, and for what benefits that would justify that cost and change? That's what it comes down to, value for money, and currently cloud storage solutions with two expensive dedicated lines does not offer value for money vs onsite storage, not around here anyway.

[CyberNerd]

Sorry perhaps what I said wasn't clear, we aren't on a knife edge for bandwidth by any means, but I wouldn't be comfortable moving because the bandwidth demands would almost certainly go up. You said yourself you peak at 120Mbps with a consistent 75-95Mbps, that's quite a wide range so obviously we need to cover a similar range and to do that would mean a bigger line. Also I said we would need to bring a second line up to the same speed for redundancy, we already have a second line but it doesn't match our current line because we don't have online storage. We have a need to keep the school running on the rare occasions that our main line goes down, not provide access to every single file available on our cloud storage.

 

Also, I'm not sure why what I'm saying sounds like we are on a knife edge in terms of budgeting, to do what you are suggesting is costly, that's not to say it's unaffordable. It would be a completely different way of doing things, and for what benefits that would justify that cost and change? That's what it comes down to, value for money, and currently cloud storage solutions with two expensive dedicated lines does not offer value for money vs onsite storage, not around here anyway.

 

Yes I see it is a very different situation. You should probably not do it. I can see that it clearly wouldn't work for you.

It does work for some people though, with minimal expenditure.

[sparkeh]

So now a little bit of time has past since the debate about Win 10 version has passed, I was wondering if peoples' attitudes have changed about whether to use Enterprise LTSB or Education?

 

On balance, as you can delay upgrades for 12 months with SCCM, I think I will go with the Education version but welcome comments on that

[MalekoUK]

Well the Education version has vanished from VLSC, so not sure what MS are doing with it now!

[Blue_Cookeh]

So now a little bit of time has past since the debate about Win 10 version has passed, I was wondering if peoples' attitudes have changed about whether to use Enterprise LTSB or Education?

 

On balance, as you can delay upgrades for 12 months with SCCM, I think I will go with the Education version but welcome comments on that

 

We've been running Win10 Education on our devices since August without any issue.

 

Microsoft's stance on LTSB seems to be that it's for "sensitive" devices that don't need regular updates, and the feature set of Education is almost exactly that of Enterprise anyway.