PiqueABoo

::blink & you'll miss a few versions:: Have just grabbed the latest rel., new web.config etc. and hit a few glitches: - I managed to upset the Silverlight new folder functionality. In a hurry I haven't managed to figured out a consistent set of steps for any of this, but when making a new folder and changing the offered name (e.g. "New Folder") I've had a) It work. b) An exception (from System.IO.[whatever].MoveTo). c) A message saying " sorry... can not be moved..". d) It appear to let me create and rename a folder to the same name as one at the same level e.g. at one point I had two folders called "x" displaying in the right hand pane, although after an F5 refresh there was only one. - I can't get the Basic Version HTML Uploader to upload files. The very same files do upload OK via drag & drop. I then tried building the source which worked fine but rounding up the refs again there are two (harmless) redundant ones in HAP.Web. Didn't note them properly before nuking, but IIRC it was ms office core and the old silverlight.

Can anyone explain that? IIRC that was introduced with 2K3 if not before, so why is (and it definitely is sometimes..) it hurting with 2K8R2?

..not to mention the similar to WU 'just checking for updates [to some XML definitions for something or other] ' in MSBA, and increasing in all the big MS apps somewhere or other. I think there's a bit too much emphasis on bolting stable doors these days i.e. stopping stuff getting out after it's compromised your system! as opposed to stopping your system being compromised. Sadly I think it will take something that simply runs round deleting data files again, or PK encrypting them or something, to set that right.

[Missed this - being an MS partner apparently means that - Ed.] But it doesn't - I made a company I once worked for one of those and it didn't guarantee anything much, besides the company being in a certain line of business having a couple of folk with some MS qualifications. We basically went for that status because out in the real-world MS licences cost significant money and they gave you lots of those you could use to kit out training rooms, a set of developers and so on - IIRC it added up to around £40K's worth of which £30Ks worth we could actually use in the permitted manner. Possibly.. cost is usually inversely proportional to the volume you can sell, so it's the more specialised, custom type stuff that tends to be expensive (and also gets less exposure to people who might finds bugs, protest at security idiocies, insist on conventional deployment methods etc.).

No you're not - I've installed E2K7 SP3 on Server 2008, have no reason whatsoever to believe it won't work on a 2003 x64 E2K7.

Trouble is that "can be" isn't "will be" i.e. I really don't think secular morality is doing much to fill the "vacuum" created by the decline in Christian morality. I have no faith whatsoever, but I'd rather keep the genuine Christians than have one of those "consistent" worlds, where in practice I suspect the only consistent thing would be the high levels of what you might call moral entropy.

Even more entertaining, well relatively, is that Sagan bloke mentioned in the thread subject (remember that?) is apparently famously known for "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

Way I see it with a bit of perspective science often seems indistinguishable from religion: there are large doses of faith in both .. and entertainingly one of the bits that still bugs me in that regard, Big bang theory (so who left that [primeval atom|singularity|whatever] lying around in the first place then?), was first proposed by a Catholic priest.

Could be wrong, but my impression was that people didn't expect the HT grants to continue next financial year, and that was the case way well before the Age of Austerity[tm] started i.e. you were probably always going to have to cope with that money "vanishing" from April 2011.

Re. that legacy switch MS say: "If you have any computers in your organization running Exchange Server 2003 or Exchange 2000 Server " I don't have any of those, there's just the Exchange 2007 box, so I'm ignoring it unless 2007 Setup (which tends to know what it wants) tells me I have to do it.

Feeling a teensy bit guilty now - some overhead was predictable and it wasn't an absolutely essential feature for me, but I do think MS's idea of showing that you don't have access to a sub-folder is an improvement over finding out the "hard way" (when you've clicked on it) and I can see this reducing some user-support hassle, especially in future when users eventually get, and start to get used to the concept in Win7 Explorer. Sounds good, but if that's too easy for them I think I'd like some "are you sure you want to move to prompt?" (optional via the web.config because some people hate that). I'm thinking of ye olde "::BIG urgent panic:: My plans for this term have disappeared!!!! Someone must have deleted them!!!! I need them back right now!!!!" - then of course you find it all tucked underneath some nearby folder and usually it was their account wotdunnit. This shouldn't be counted as a full vote because I probably won't be using this initially (I mostly deal with Primaries and they just slap a bit of paper up in the staff-room with timetables for this and that resource etc.) but I'd have thought booking would only be accessible/done by adult staff who being adult, ought to be able to cope with booking the right things and if not, can be left to fight with each other if someone books something they're not supposed to i.e. do you really need to start carving access up by department?

Absolutely - 2007 is like that too. So it is.. only on mine it's running and I'm 100% certain I didn't start it (maybe something else I installed did).

If it's standard AD and you haven't fiddled you don't need an LDAP port. Have you set the "aduser" and "adpassword" OK? Might be nothing/irrelevant, but is that a space between DC=cadcol and the subsequent comma?

Me too & can't think of anything better (it's from joeware.net amongst some other very good free utils)

Hmm.. in the targeting are you picking the "Administrator" with the native user browser/picker thingy ("from this location" = your *domain*) as opposed to just typing it in the box? Did you select match by SID?

Oh that does look good now - it's funny how having those folders makes the difference, but if it does that for me and I'm pretty sure it will make a critical difference some users (I'll likely be putting this on a few Primaries for the autumn term and see how they get on). I've only ever done that for AD, but it looks much the same for NTFS and sadly I don't think there is a very easy way... it's all trawling through DACLs looking at ACEs (their trustee SID, access flags & masks) and to make matters worse one trustee can feature in several ACEs. It's probably simpler to just try and do [something] in a sub-folder and see if you get some access denied exception (if I click on a sub-folder where I don't have access I get an Unauthorised Access page back now - is it possible or too expensive to do something like that when enumerating the parent folder's contents?). Thinking aloud: Would you actually bother to display sub-folders they can't do anything with? I think probably yes, because it's consistent with what they see when working on the domain... well unless someone has configured ABE on their domain.

Haven't played with Exchange 2010 yet.. so it needs WinRM then? [i have played with WinRM re. getting remote powershell prompts etc.]

I'll assume you're serious and pitch it straight: I would consolidate what's there now, rather than add much new. You or other folk might have different ideas about the pros/cons, but things I would personally like to see: - A 'My Favourites' folder icon (the shell32 star) because I've put that inside a user's My Documents. - UI "semantics" #1: Ability to call it something other than "My Computer" in the various places where that's done. For some folk I suspect the name will need something to indicate it isn't their local 'My Computer" - dunno "My Computer @ School" or something. - UI "semantics" #2: In Web file browser change first level down "Back to My Computer" to the same ".." "Up a level" you get in any of the sub-folders. [Not sure that's the correct text]. - Silverlight (beta) & UI "semantics" #3: Finish that and for bonus points see if you can make treeview icons look like familiar Explorer open/closed folders. - If you're really bored, you could enumerate sub-folder permissions and use that folder+padlock icon to indicate sub-folders where the user doesn't have access.

Ooops - was definitely having an off-day - critical typo above now corrected. I did it all in a virtual machine where I installed bits of the Visual Studio Express 2010 "suite" which was just C# and Web Developer (*without* the SQL it offers to install by default for both of them). Don't think I'll be upgrading my normal dev environment for a while e.g. until there's a 2010 SP1 - I've had Web Dev 2010 Express just crash a couple of times.

Having done the private (R&D dev & security wiz)->public sector thing myself this is a persistently frustrating world where I want better, but experience says you don't get it and a few years in I just sigh a lot now. I assume vendors get away with it because Average School Tech[tm] doesn't seem to know much about development, or security beyond desktop lockdown issues and anti-malware .... they're not being challenged on these issues by enough of their customers ... they don't have to be any better to get their dosh. I was hoping the Age of Austerity might make things a bit more Darwinian and have at least some improving effect here, but I suspect that's wishful thinking. And that guarantees what?

The DLLs are in the stuff you throw in inetpub.. ::screams:: ::goes and bangs head on wall - again:: Course they are. That is just so very, very obvious (with hindsight) isn't it? Oh well - blame end of term burnout and all that... oh and that longstanding habit I've got of htmerging non-standard assemblies into dotNet things I make to uhh.. eliminate the risk of someone losing or not finding depedencies (I just like flinging code around in one "self-contained" file). PS: Just started again with fresh copy of source. All missing refs were sorted out from the release bin folder except for Microsoft.Office.Core which I just zapped. It all built.

I wish.. in both this and other circumstances.. but anyway since we mentioned "Primary" here's a quick step 1: Stop the patronising guesses and figure out the real [bleeping] requirements: It may or may not get more flexible now but recently we've had that rather rigid national curriculum, several vendors claim this or that suite of s/w gives "curriculum coverage" (RM Windows Box being just one example), LA advisors in lots of places likely have their own lists of a basic set of s/w for that. So FOSS-folk: Go figure out what those sets of apps are and do, why everyone seems to think they are needed, then put them in a simple spreadsheet or something and see how many equivalent OS apps you can line up alongside in the next column. And assuming you haven't given up then do some real numbers, with the time=money cost too. [Don't forget to compare and contrast with some of the site-licence-for-everything-we-make for ~£1K deals Primaries have had in the last couple of years] 1) See above. 2) They have room to store 30 PCs somewhere - so why is the server overheating in a titchy stationary cupboard? 3) Secondary cast-offs.. nooooo... not that again.... 4) I very definitely can't imagine a bunch of old boxes that probably only come with CRT if there's any kind of monitor as "supplementary" boxes where it doesn't kill a lesson when they break, and trust me I did once kick that limited purpose around very seriously indeed i.e. practical research into reusing old kit as net-booting *nix based web browsers with remote storage etc. Biggest obstacle: They usually only have the room (physical space, power & NIC cabling etc.) for one set of multi-purpose boxes that sometimes need to run some seriously demanding apps - h/w performance demanded by s/w is of course not proportional to the age it is aimed at.

Be warned that this isn't easy to use, but it has perfectly recovered stuff for me from someone's broken USB stick when none of the several obvious shiny GUI-based utils I tried managed to do anything. PhotoRec Note: It does read-only access to the target copying recovered stuff elsewhere, so you're not going to cause any more damage experimenting with it.

You can tell I like HAP+ coz I'm trying to build it so I have at least a faint hope if I ever need an emergency fix to anything when Nick finally takes a break from that relentless attention, has been abducted by Aliens, was assassinated by a S/W vendor or something. Can't risk tinkering with my current VS2008 environment so I'm using an XP VM & VSE2010 (just C#, Web Developer) + SilverLight 4 Toolkit April 2010 + Silverlight 4 Tools. Then in WebDev: 1) Threw away version control (Express doesn't cope and offered to do that) 2) Threw away empty HAP.Setup sub-project [edit - this is a deployment project & Express doesn't grok them) 3) Obtained & re-added a ref to AeroWizard 4) Obtained & re-added a ref to the ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib 5) Obtained & readded a ref to AjaxControlToolkit 6) Zapped (dropped from latest SDKs etc.) refs to system.web.[ajax|silverlight] Everything builds except HAP.Web which wants Office refs. I'm all out of steam now.. which MS Office version is it pointing at?

Checks if the third letter (2=you count from 0, 1 = length) is "7": set letter3=%computername:~2,1% if "%letter3%" equ "7" ( rem do all your installing in here )