sparkeh

I posted the exact wording in another thread but basically a DPO can’t have any input into the nature or purpose of the processing and also must have the required expertise to do the job. I doubt that any school has someone with the kind of knowledge and expertise to be a DPO just hanging around on the staff doing a different job?

Can anyone please explain to me (or point me in the right direction to information on) how licencing for Office 365 works We have the following licences: Office 365 A1 for faculty Office 365 A1 for students Office 365 ProPlus for faculty All I want to do is deploy Office 365 via SCCM but have no idea what licences we need and trying to get any sense out of MS just makes it worse. For instance, how come some people have 1 million of the 365 education student (faculty) licences, when I tried to use the self sign up page, users just get assigned the Office 365 A1 licence (I keep reading that they should get the newer licence). Some people get the A1 Plus licence (!?). Help because I am about to (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻)

Does this Count?

This would concern me for two reasons: 1) Possible conflict on interests? 2) Based on the brief outline above, it doesn't sound like the person has the expertise to fulfill the requirements of the role

Yep. When we were on 1511 I tested 1607 and it wasn't good, so left it, tested 1703 and that was great so deployed that.

I am really interested in how people considering/using LTSB will address the hardware support. So what do you do if you find yourself in the following position: you have deployed LTSB to end user devices and a while later you need to buy new devices. You find that the current generation of processors are not supported by your version of LTSB (and never will be). Do you try to source old hardware? Wait for the next version of LTSB or move to CB?

It counts four nothing

Welcome @IC_Hall and @WellVersedChap

Just wondering, do those who are running LTSB realise the implications of MS's clarification on processor support from May 17? So, a LTSB version will not support any hardware released after its own release. Once again, MS has clarified that LTSB is only designed for specific use cases and not general deployment. An article about this here: https://www.computerworld.com/article/3174225/microsoft-windows/microsofts-support-rules-for-windows-10-ltsb-void-allure-to-enterprise-customers.html

Interesting debate. It seems to be clear that those advocating LTSB still want to follow the old model and those going with CB or CBB are embracing the new methodology. However, LTSB isn’t really the old method, from my point of view it’s a worse position to be in. I went with CB for a number of reasons including: * new security features (providing a secure environment is part of our remit) * there are bug fixes that will make in into current branch but not LTSB * latest hardware being supported (I don’t really want to be In a position where my choice of os means it isn’t supported on a device) *lack of apps that people already use Personally I don’t find the upgrades that onerous. As above, it’s about changing your processes. Dropping a new wim into your deployment and testing is straight forward if you have a system in place. I think if you try and manage win 10using the old mindset you might struggle, but adapt your method and you won’t.

Interestingly we did have the same problem when we had RM broadband... weird.

Welcome all those I've missed

Yeah we did that, no it didn't work!

Just to note, the OP asked for what branch people are on, not the version

Extended highlights of the reveal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31xvmvAq8ms

+1 “Monkey bottoms!” [emoji6]

I would probably look at extending the warranty and upping the RAM. Take a look at 3rd party warranties as well to save some cash. We moved our old server over to 3rd party warranty when the manufacturer got too expensive.

You don't have Current Branch for Business (CBB) in the poll

We use netsupport DNA to monitor energy use and shut down machines at the end of the day. The stats are used to demonstrate how much energy wasted/saved

I ended up doing it manually as I couldn’t find a reliable way to do automatically. The DP group idea is genius though [emoji3]

55 mins to wait to access restored data due a failed disk is, in my opinion, 55 mins too long. Remember, under GDPR, availability will be a factor. Prolonged unavailability will be classed as a breach.

Just an update - I emailed the noreply@ address and got an auto response telling me to use the website contained in the email. Therefore I can safely class this as not being a valid request.

Awesome, thanks! The LA seem pretty adamant but I can't find any evidence of it.

Thanks, but that's the same as above, this is not what was being discussed. So, as far as our LA understands, a recommendation has been made that schools should be exempt from the requirement to employ a DPO. This is separate to the discussion about the amendment that was raised and dropped.

I agree with @3s-gtech on this one. In 15 years of managing servers I have never fully lost a server. I've lost plenty of disks but never a full server. I tend to use RAID with a hot spare, if a disk goes the spare kicks in and rebuilds and I swap out the duff one, no drama. As stated above you are protecting against a major disaster (which is good) but not against a more likely minor fault (loss of disk) which completely takes your server out. If funds are short I would be looking at protecting against the most likely issues first.