Michael

I bought one last year, made me feel young again Highly recommended and great fun if you have kids 'this is what we used to play, back in the day'

Normally approving a newer CU should decline the older CU, but you could always do it manually, or perform a Clean Up operation within WSUS.

If all you're installing are the Delta Updates, then that makes 100% logical sense, one after the other. To be honest, I'd always deploy the Full Updates to servers, rather than Delta as there have been reported 'issues' with some Delta releases. And secondly, I don't deploy every single CU that's released, so the Full Update comes in handy for this scenario.

It's not possible even if it were Windows Server 2003 R2 x64 directly, as Windows Server 2016 requires a Domain/Forest Functional Level of 2008 Server, so you'd have to upgrade from 2003 R2 > 2008 R2, and then 2012 R2 or 2016. Unless there's a specific reason though, I would look at upgrading to 2016, seeing as 2012 R2 is supported until 2023 and 2016 until 2026. 2016 is definitely more 'polished' than 2012 R2.

I've worked on numerous projects looking into this, but ultimately Schools, Academies and MATs should be tendering out such requirements to a short list of suppliers - - There are undoubtedly cost savings on licensing, support, as well as your physical/virtual servers. Licensing should also factor in the likes of SQL Server, CALs and Windows Server, not just the MIS license. - The cost of replacing a server every 3-5 years can be very costly, especially if a third party is required. - What's the level of support like, how responsive are they? - What does the development roadmap look like - more features could arguably be interpreted as better value for money over time. - What does the MIS offer out the box, be it standard or optional modules? How does this compare to the existing MIS provision? - Can the new provision offer the likes of SSO, or other integrated options (API) or natively included modules?

Most drivers should be available, given that the USB Flash boot files and the image file itself are both based on Windows 10 1607. - - - Updated - - - I wonder if it's the UEFI BIOS that's the issue, rather than anything I'm trying to do?

The image utility allows the creation of bootable 32/64Bit instances - either ISO or USB Flash - this bit works absolutely fine, I can boot the notebook and pull down the image file. The issue is after the image has completed and the volume resized, it automatically re-boots and halts at the BIOS screen. Normally Windows should boot and start Sysprep.

Correct

So hypothetically speaking, if I can get into Win PE, download the image, but then the device fails to boot why would this be? As I say, this image is tried and tested, so I know it works. The USB > LAN adapter would be useful to join the domain and/or pull the image optionally, but still doesn't explain why it doesn't boot at all.

Hi all, I'm having great difficulty imaging a Lenovo Ideapad, model: MIIX 310-10ICR. I can successfully boot using USB Flash to begin imaging, but can only pull the image down from USB Flash too - no LAN available and doesn't recognise USB hard disks either, whereas I've used the same process on literally thousands of different makes/models over the years. It eventually pulls down the image off USB Flash - a Sysprepped Windows 10 Edu x64 1607, again tried and tested on many, many devices and it simply states 'Cannot Boot' or words to that effect; it's probably the worst BIOS I've ever dealt with, as there are no real options, just Secure Boot on/off and I have tried both. Any suggestions would be welcome!

ProPlus will be Click-to-Run only to Joe Public, but they'll still release Office 2019 to volume customers is my understanding. As stated above, an MSI hasn't been available for the last few versions - 2013 and 2016 editions.

Finally Microsoft are listening, but still 2 years isn't long enough for your typical life cycle -

Presumably structural calculations were provided at the point of application to the council, (hence why they came out to inspect), but yes you can of course do the actual 'installing' bit yourself - this isn't the issue, but the inspector will want to see it's installed correctly and that it's the correct specification/size for the load above. This is what you're paying for. In my experience the structural surveyor (to do the calculations) didn't visit my property, but they have all the information required on a database, as well as knowledge of the area, the materials used and the size of timbers etc etc... so there's no real need. The building inspector will of course visit, as he/she will want to see the works and probably photograph it, then sign it off.

The Building Control costs in your case will probably cost a couple of hundred - a drop in the ocean given you're probably having a new kitchen once the space has been made larger.

I've gone through a similar process myself - As a general rule, if you're changing the external appearance to your property substantially, then you need Planning Permission, but some small extensions are possible under 'Permitted Rights' - the Planning Portal online does explain all with useful examples. Given that you're knocking walls down internally and inserting a structural support; the beam is there to support the load above, so yes it'll need to be checked by Building Control. At the end it means they'll sign everything off and it'll satisfy your insurance company that the work performed is to the correct/expected standard, but separately you know as the home owner that everything is correct and not to expect any unwanted surprises later on.

That's the one: app.sage200.co.uk this should resolve to any IP available for this address.

Depending on how old these installs are and what controls you have in place, it could be Windows 7 pulling down Windows 10 upgrades, but that shouldn't happen anymore, given that the free upgrade to Windows 10 has long expired.

Memory is a lot cheaper than it used to be, so 32GB/64GB+ isn't so ridiculous anymore, but the overall costs to host a local MIS are extremely expensive. Technically speaking, if you took a snapshot of your existing SIMS instance (if it isn't already virtualised), you wouldn't have to worry about re-purchasing CALs, it'd be more so the issue of licensing accordingly per core, but again in Hyper-V you could adjust the number of cores to suit.

When you've put exceptions in the firewall, did you specify a static IP or the URL? I know the likes of Sage have a group of IPs which can change (from past experience).

A 32Bit version of uBuntu Linux would fly on these!

Another doing the rounds is that data cannot be stored on USB flash drives; again complete nonsense.

Same as Chuckster for me too.

I think educating users to lock devices when they're definitely leaving the room, rather than inactivity in the middle of a lesson is the way to go. You simply cannot code this kind of behaviour. For this very reason, class teachers are set to 60 mins of inactivity and administrative users set to 5 mins. Staff have been told to lock their machine when leaving a room. Banks or big businesses typically use a smart card, so when leaving the machine, the card is ejected and the computer locked. This kind of scenario simply doesn't work in Education addressing a group of people.

In the context of Windows 7, it is very confusing and Microsoft haven't done a good job of it really. Windows 10 is very clear, as the latest update is generally the one you should deploy, but I don't deploy every update. Read the notes of what exactly it addresses, based on your environment.

In the context of Windows 10, yes you can skip a monthly update as they're all cumulative. In the context of Windows 7 however it's not as clear and I believe you do need each one. It's a rollup of that overall month, instead of 10 individual updates for that month for example.