mrbios

Arcserve UDP D2D2T. .....tapes stored in a fireproof safe.

How much ram did the toshiba have? I've found that so long as the CPU is better than an old celeron and you have 4GB ram in everything an SSD shows massive gains. If you have celerons or less than 4GB ram though then an SSD is a bit like polishing a turd.

Under Apply Operating System > Use unattended or sysprep file i have a package with an xml file containing the following: en-GB en-GB en-GB en-GB en-GB If you load the windows 10 ISO into "Windows System Image Manager" you should be able to find all the above settings with its associated component name (I imagine that'll be the bit that will have changed for windows 10) EDIT: Just checked, windows 10 is exactly the same code. The only exception might be the need to put "amd64" instead of "x64" for architecture. No idea if it matters, but it was the only thing that came out different when i ran it.

I have a box of 70 or so sat on my desk at the moment ready to be deployed in to two IT suites another 45 to buy in the new budget, then the school will be 100% SSD

I can't work out why the file name: \~$.1 work experience.docx was picked up by the FSRM rule in the OP. It's the first false positive i've had appear surprisingly, but i don't understand why in this instance. Suggestions? I'm not using the script yet (i was struggling to get it to work when i looked at it last, haven't revisited it in a while though)

Whats the point in adfs at all though if you're not using SSO? Not sure if I'm missing something but without proper SSO isn't adfs just a waste of space?

Just FYI @DamianG1121 you might find this useful: Implementing ADFS V3.0 Forms Authentication in Mixed Environments | Kloud Blog as you may find that if you have added in the settings for chrome to SSO, that external users get a windows security box rather than the forms auth.

I've been playing around with this some more this morning, does anyone know if Azure Application proxy is essentially a replacement for ADFS Proxy?

The issue is with chrome. You need to disable extendedprotection via powershell (Not recommended though) and also run a command that'll enable chrome as a valid NTLM user agent. To disableExtended protection: Set-ADFSProperties –ExtendedProtectionTokenCheck None To enable Chome as a valid user agent (bare in mind you can't do this without doing the above, or you'll get errors rather than a login screen): Set-ADFSProperties -WIASupportedUserAgents @("MSAuthHost/1.0/In-Domain", "MSIE 6.0", "MSIE 7.0", "MSIE 8.0", "MSIE 9.0", "MSIE 10.0", "Trident/7.0", "MSIPC", "Windows Rights Management Client", "Mozilla/5.0") I'm not entirely sure how much of a risk it is disabling extended protection though. EDIT: Saying that, have you set forms authentication as your intranet auth? It'd need to be set to windows to SSO internal users, but the combination of the above powershell commands to neable chrome SSO will cause external users to get a windows credentials box rather than the forms auth screen.....i haven't worked out why that is yet, but presumably by enabling chrome to be detected as a valid browser, it's forcing it for external and internal users rather than jsut internal users. I'm sure someone on this wide web must have solved this though..

Did you ever solve this issue or find a workaround that didn't involve removing the impero client? I've just had one user come to me that true is printing on to all her pages, she's the only one and we do have impero 5112 on there.

Same switch, same hardware, same vlan. No different to any of the other PCs in the room. Then next door, a different IT suite, on different hardware and a different switch, but on the same vlan, wakes fine. Same model of switch and identical settings though. Both switches for the two rooms on that vlan feed back to the same central switch for that building, so no differences in connectivity either.

This one is driving me crazy, this is the scenario: One IT suite out of 5 won't wake on lan via imperos automated method ONE PC in that room turns on every day, yet the rest of the room doesn't If you connect to a PC on the same vlan and send the WOL signal via impero from it, they all turn on. They don't wake up if you manually send the WOL signal from impero from a different vlan. If i run wake on lan via the right click tools in SCCM, they all turn on (SCCM is on the same vlan as the impero server - although sccm stats port 12287 o_O) Another IT suite is on the same vlan and all turns on fine. The whole suite is the same spec, and matches the spec of one other IT sutie on another vlan that turns on fine I can't work this one out, it annoys me that every morning that room has to be manually told to power up, even though one lonely PC in there turns on every day. I've got the following enabled on the router: ip udp-bcast-forward ip directed broadcast Then the following enabled on the vlan the impero server is on: ip forward-protocol udp 172.18.xx.255 7 ip forward-protocol udp 172.18.xx.255 9 where xx is the vlan the WOL signal is directed at. This is correct isn't it? (granted it must be working as literally everything else in the school turns on fine!) I've also restarted the switch they're connected to. Any suggestions? The only thing i haven't checked is the bios version in that suite compared to the bios version in the suite that works fine., but I'm pretty sure this was working at some point with this hardware about 6-8 months ago.

One of the MBAM employees confirmed it would be rolled into the main program the same way anti root kit was on the reddit /r/sysadmin page about this recently. I hope it goes that way anyway.

Once that's out of beta and built into the main product (as is often there way, test it separate, then couple it together) I think I'll be quite tempted to do what southhamster has done. On the same track, has anyone found a comprehensive list of all the potential cryptolocker protection techniques? There's quite a few now, some only apply to older versions of crypto and some only to newer, it's hard to keep track of all the different protections that need to be in place to protect ourselves against this.

How would i go about deploying skype for business 2015, when Microsoft Office 2013 already exists on every PC but was originally installed without including Microsoft Lync? Does Skype for business have its own client? (I can find it on the office 365 website but it's an exe and i can't find any install flags to go with it) or should i just Modify my Office 2013 automated install file to include lync then let windows updates to its thing to force that up to skype for business? It's frustrating how easy office is to deploy, but to modify it seems like a right pain....wish i'd just deployed the whole thing originally now

I'm curious, what can "Show My Homework" and "Firefly" do, that most homework management within VLEs cannot? or better yet, what can it do that the its learning vle can't? I've recently looked at ruler as an office 365 link too, what can it do that the homework management within that cannot?

What sort of costs are you paying for firefly, if you don't mind me asking? Do you see similar issues to steve with that? (Many of the issues he mentions sounds inherent of any online homework management i guess)

Well...there's two polar opposite opinions! That doesn't help me at all! (well it does, but you cancel each other out somewhat!)

Anyone used this? Is it worth the cost? Is there a better alternative? Our head of IT just returned from BETT and it was requested of him to look at this. I don't actually know the ins and outs of it but i wonder if anyone who does can list alternatives as from what he's told us on cost it seems like a waste of money for something that the VLE should be able to do (but apparently can't)

I want to create an SCCM task sequence condition whereby it'll skip a certain package if a certain previous package had applied earlier in the task sequence. For example i want a package to install based on a WMI query, if the task sequence runs through without matching the previous packages to those WMI queries i want this last one to run. However if the previous package did apply then i want this last package to skip to the next step. Is there any way to do that? I'm thinking I might have to make a really long WMI query with the reverse, so where I'm doing: SELECT * FROM Win32_BaseBoard WHERE Product = 'H81I-PLUS' I'm guessing i'd need a query with: SELECT * FROM Win32_BaseBoard WHERE NOT Product = 'H81I-PLUS' but given the amount of motherboard models I'm pointing to in previous ones, and how much of a pain it'll be to maintain (whereas the other ones are really simple) it would be much easier if i could point to a previous part of the task sequence.........if that's possible? Anyone know? EDIT: To think i haven't even finished and a NOT wmi query would look like this: SELECT * FROM Win32_BaseBoard WHERE NOT (Product = 'G41M-ES2L' OR Product = 'G31MV/G31MV-K' OR Product = 'G31M-ES2L' OR Product = 'G31MX' OR Product = 'P8H61-I' OR Product = 'H61M-ITX' OR Product = 'H61M-S2PV' OR Product = 'H61M-DGS R2.0' OR Product = 'P8H61-I LX' OR Product = 'P8H61-I LX R2.0' OR Product = 'DH61CR' OR Product = 'H81I-PLUS' OR Product = 'H81M-DS2V' OR Product = 'H81M-P33 (MS-7817)' OR Product = 'H81M-S2PV' OR Product = 'H81T') Eurgh, what a mess. Overall goal of this is to make a single task sequence for every PC in the school regardless of hardware because I've found the "Auto Apply Drivers" to be somewhat inconsistent on some motherboards/some drivers, so I'm using driver packages primarily as these always work perfectly. I've got a driver package for each chipset type (H61 package, H81 package etc) each chipset package is then setup to WMI query to see if that package should apply or not. The goal of this part here is to run the "Auto Apply Drivers" only for those i haven't created a specific driver package for.

10 years ago we used a spreadsheet Then we used wasp asset - that was naff We then trialed school asset manager - good but still lacking in some areas Now using Parago, highly recommend it. Costs us about £800pa but the school dictated to us a lot of requirements that we couldn't fulfil with the old free/cheap methods. What system you go for depends on what you really need, parago isn't designed to be used just by your IT department, it's got functionality in there for finance, site team and science techs to all use it too. It becomes far more cost effective the more you use it for.

I'm not overly concerned. I imagine it'll be lazily implemented. Once some smart people get involved, as they usually do, there will no doubt be workarounds for everything to continue as normal for windows 7 users. I actually agree with the idea though, i just think their time scales are all wrong. People should be given at least another year on top of that.

Yep using the 2012 route via ADAC. Domain is 2012R2 functional level too. That's frustrating, i've changed minimum length to 8, and to require complexity, but no maximum age. I was hoping any staff members password that didn't comply with those settings would just need changing. Seems i may have been too presumptuous! I've managed to persuade our SLT that this must be done, after a long time of one individual fighting back against this. I plan on changing this for all staff on the 12th of Feb. So i guess I'm going to have to annoy everyone who's passwords already comply by forcing them to change too

Ok then, what's the trick to this? I've made a policy, which i've assigned to a security group that myself and the other two IT guys are in. However if i log off and back on it doesn't ask me to reset my password even though i know that it doesn't comply with the policy. Do you have to manually tell users to change password on next logon? I was under the impression from responses i've had in the past that any password that doesn't comply will automatically prompt for change?

As per title, is this possible? I'd like to have another booking sheet in the same system. The current booking sheet is used for IT suites, projectors in various areas, and various equipment such as shared learnpads and ipads. I've been asked to find an online way of booking meeting rooms...something our head has been very against in the past, only now that someone has finally persuaded him to try it are we finally moving away from pen and paper. Thing is if i add them to the existing sheet the times will be too restrictive and i've got so many things on there now that everything is going to get very squashed.