Asgard

Hi All We have a number of Android tablets (v15) which we have set up using both Kiosk Mode and a Managed home screen. We seem to be hitting a roadblock that we cannot seem to navigate. Edge Launching Edge attempts to sign in then gives an error code just after 'signing you in and syncing' - Sign in failed (2285) We have set a few policies including what we thinks is the right ones; BrowserSignin = Enabled SyncDisabled = False But it still just point blank refuses to go pass this. I dont want them to be able to sign into Edge, nor sync any settings as they are going to be used for quick devices to login, do some unifrog work and put them back. We have ruled out a firewall issue by temporarily creating an exception for this group of devices. We deployed Chrome, but from looking it up it wont pass the same token to allow SSO. So normally we would expect it to open up the browser (which bounces to our captive portal), they click Single Sign On and because our firewall is entra joined it passes them though with Edge, but not via Chrome. Any tips gratefully welcome!

Hi Does anyone have an example unattend.xml for Win11 24H2 that I could have nose at. Currently have a Win10 one running on our SCCM/MEM build, but just wondering about a specific Win11 one. Cheers

We have just received this, after requesting an early termination. Its been back/forth with them for a few weeks. here's hoping......

CE assessor will have a hard time accepting that

The extra wrinkle you know have is Microsoft have said that come October 25, Office365 becomes unsupported on Win10 https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/15/24344209/microsoft-365-office-apps-windows-10-end-of-support I had a pretty frank conversation with our reseller and an MS rep and the kick back from them was —— we are releasing our M365 Link box (thin client) and azure virtual desktops are heavily subsidised for education. We have a small number of PCs we had planned to throw on Extended Support and change in Jan but I’m possibly thinking of applying the bodge to sccm to allow them to update and sort them come Sept in new budget land I asked about CE and he went we don’t care. And I said ok so are you saying it’s a conditional access policy to disable Win10 from connecting into your estate “Pretty much! “ Oh ok what about heavily deprived areas where moving to Win11 isn’t an option “Buy a cheap tablet and web apps” Slow clap Microsoft , slow clap

This https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/enterprise/using/uninstall-creative-cloud-products.html

What in the wizzarding world of Harry Potter are them extend / duplicate icons. Would you be willing to provide enlightenment [emoji23]

When you use the Adobe enterprise console I build a package with all the apps I want installing and it creates a bundle with a setup/msi - Adobe advice was use the exe for mass deployment. Uninstall takes 2 minutes on a average but we send it out in our sccm maintenance window The installer we set in our maintenance window and let it install - via task sequence it’s sub 5 mins Put it this way, we had 3000 devices uninstalled and installed to the latest version just side two nights - kicked it off Friday and on Monday we only had less than 5 machines that needed attention

Hi We have sites that have either shared device or user based the process is identical sir It’s the package that you download determines that in our case then we just tell sccm to install as machine

Hi So here is our Uninstaller, we use this each year to remove the current deployed version , in this case Adobe CC 2023, but we brute force this uninstaller by telling it to remove absolutley everything related to Adobe With a detection method to say only if run if it finds Adobe Photoshop CC 2023 (which is on all machines). This is our Installer thats mirrored as a task sequence step; and runs across a couple of institutions fine. You will note from the screenshot we are using setup.exe --silent , instead of the MSI within the same folder, for us it just works exactly how we need it to. With a detection method of asking if Photoshop 2024 is installed. Let me konw if you need anymore info and I can grab you some more screenshots etc.

We deploy it as a step in our SCCM/MCEM/MCM task sequence so it’s part of the freshly imaged machine. We handle major updates via Software Center First step is we run the Adobe uninstaller as an application package Then we use this as a dependency to install the latest major version. Give me a day or so and I’ll grab you some screenshots of how it all works, it works flawlessly on about 4000 windows devices and has done for a few years now - we’re on our 3 pass of the upgrade

I think your opinion mirrors mine. As ours is still in a battle I won’t put my full comments public . However what I will say. 1. The initial program was far to rigid and the DfE tick box exercise couldn’t fathom that we didn’t want to replace our APs - because they are less than 8 months old - we lease them. This instantly failed our first submission dispite then agreeing to in the first instance. This is the big one for me. 2. A lot of manufacturers need to hang their heads in shame. Price gouging and saying it’s a supply issue, nah your seeing a pot of free money and taking advantage. I’ve got emails from a manufacturer telling me that CTC equipment is on a different SKU this is more expensive i sanity checked this by asking for some pricing for the same Kit from two different email addresses and the kit list was identical except the one I mentioned CtC the price was a good 25k more expensive. The reseller in question couldn’t explain it when I called the manufacturer out on it. Other comments I think the DFE had the best of intentions but the execution was poor. I know our networks and building better than them and I know the nuances of having a site under PFI. What they should of said is if we give you a pot of money to do X present a proper proposal on why/how. Which is what they seem like they are doing now, after the horse has bolted and Scrooge mcduck’s money pile is empty. I presented a viable option that would of sorted the school for 10 years and they said no and added £60k on - to replace the WiFi which wasn’t needed I said take it out, save the money and allocate it to another school I was slapped down saying I wasn’t saving them money …. Still can’t work that one out

Id hazard a guess its a combination of a few things; 1. The cross industry pay settlements will need to be funded from somewhere - and a luxury budget like CTC could easily be sliced - especially as they haven't really pushed CtC in the public domain. 2. The initial budget has been blow due to manufacturers seeing CtC as a cash cow. 3. The program is far far to rigid and can't be nuanced. For example, we were told that we had to end our Lease for our Trust Wide WiFi - and go and purchase them outright...... basically take out AP Model A and replace with AP Model A - ie the exact same AP. Because a leased WiFi system isnt in scope..... so our initial quote went up by 80K when we had to add the WiFi into it. And whilst they understand and agree with it, at the time it didnt 'fit in scope', now with the changes in the last few days we can keep our WiFi - basically 5 months worth of plans, revisions, meetings - into the recycling bin. 3. The DfE is also spending a shed load of money on RAAC surveys (Reinforced concrete) - we have told them that at least one of our sites has NONE, and they are still insisting on sending a commercial surveying company out. 4. The DfE is helping out with utility costs I suppose there just isn't an endless supply of pennies and some things need to be scaled back - but it will be interesting to see what happens with the project going forward. These are my personal opinions and by no means reflect that of my employer (as I konw the DfE are reading these!)

@localzuk from the email they sent out with the revised funding figure The official line; As market factors continue to impact technology prices and availability, we are writing to provide information on funding to support your engagement with suppliers.

I’m going to be careful what I post for now - I know that they are looking at these posts as it came up in a conversation I had with them. We have had a school in our trust slashed by 60% despite putting ours in April! And being verbally told it was accepted. Once we get our reduced one signed off I’ll happily post my entire experience with them, I’ll probably get into hot water but I’m at the point now I don’t care. Suppliers like Cisco massively ramping up their prices to take advantage hasn’t helped either and it’s not a supply and demand thing - it’s blatant taking advantage of the DfE and they know it too but there is little they can do. Anyone wants to PM / talk offline I’d happily rant !!!