AngryTechnician

Does it need to be off all the time while this student is using it, or perhaps only while typing? This might help if it's just while typing: Touchpad Blocker - software to automatically lock/disable touch pad while typing on notebook keyboard (credit to DaveP on this thread)

The quickest way I could think of doing this would be a custom screen saver that loaded a web page with iPlayer embedded, in much the same way as the OP here wanted. Not sure if a tool to create such a thing exists though. In short, not impossible, but I suspect not straightforward. If you do crack it let us know!

The documentation I have for the final migration is basically just my internal checklist of things to do... some of it has links to documentation, but a lot of it is stuff that I already knew by heart so didn't write down how to do it (maybe lazy practice but how many of us document all of our one-time processes?) If I have time (hah!) to clean it up at some point I will get back to you. It's also not a complete checklist as I'd been making gradual changes in advance for about a year with the eventual migration in mind...

This screen is annoying my users, and I can appreciate why: Anyone know how I can suppress this automatically via Group Policy? I can't find a GPO setting for it in the Office 2010 ADMX templates, or even find where the value for that 'Do not ask again' box is saved to roll it out as a registry preference!

This is what ADUC looks like now at the top level: OUs in red are ones I added. Clients contains all the Windows 7 computer accounts Groups contains all the non-CC3 groups I created People now houses all my user accounts Robots contains accounts used by automated tasks or devices that require an AD auth Servers contains all my non-CC3 member servers Obviously you'll only have the Exchange one if you have onsite Exchange. Each of the OUs that contains accounts of some kind has Block Inheritance ticked in GPMC. Most of the CC3 stuff is actually still sitting dormant inside Establishments... just haven't gotten around to clearing anything out yet except the Computer and User accounts. The OUs I use only have links to GPOs that I have created at this point. Dealing with the user accounts is an interesting (but easily solved) problem since until you migrate everything away from CC3, you still need all the user accounts sitting under Establishments with all the RM GPOs applying. To get around trying to deal with RM user policies applying on a Windows 7 workstation, I attached my own user GPOs to the OUs with the computer accounts in, and used Loopback processing with replace. This means it will basically ignore the RM user policies whenever that user logged onto a Windows 7 machine, and use the settings I had defined instead.

This summer I completed a transition from CC3 to a vanilla network. My approach was different: I kept the existing domain. Having done it I can say it is absolutely feasible, and actually much less hassle in my opinion. The first step was simply to create new OUs with inheritance disabled in GPMC and then linked/created only the group policies I wanted that were not RM specific. In this way you can essentially set up a 'fresh' subsection of AD that isn't affected by any RM policies. I chose this having done a domain migration once in the past, and knowing that moving user accounts and other AD objects from one AD to another is not a trivial process. File share permissions are also a hassle; if you are planning a slow transition, you have to allow for both domains to have access to the same set of user files at the same time as there is no guarantee a student wouldn't log on to a Windows 7 machine one lesson and then a CC3 machine the next. As well as eliminating these hassles, my method also meant I could introduce Windows 7 clients without having a separate DC. I actually moved an entire quarter of our clients to Windows 7 while still running on the RM DCs. Only once it came to the 'big push' in the summer did I introduce new DCs and phase out the RM ones.

I'm strongly considering a SMART Board 6052i interactive display (below) for a classroom in our lower school. Has anyone used one and can compare to a 'regular' SMART Board? http://www.smarttech.com/Home%20Page/Solutions/Business%20Solutions/Products%20for%20business/Interactive%20whiteboards%20and%20displays/SMART%20Board%20interactive%20displays/%7E/media/3140F5A5880C4F8CBFD62F635B53184E.ashx?imageLang=en-GB Some background info: they currently have a Promethean board but have problems both with the pens coming apart (stupid removeable nibs) and the children being unable to cope with avoiding their own shadow. They would also very much like the touch sensitivity. Due to severe space constraints, I can't fit a regular SMART Board with a short throw projector.

#1 reason that I sodding hate HP laptops, having done this myself once too. The number of different screws those things have makes me want to scream.

Still waiting for 2.2 on my Streak... or even something later than 1.6. Dell/O2 ballsed up the 2.1 upgrade once already so I'm not holding my breath. Hopefully they are learning from their first foray into Android, because I love the form factor of the Streak and it would be a pity if it does so badly Dell give up on it..

He's right, Office 2007 was perfectly feasible to deploy via GPO - I did it too. Microsoft even wrote a technical article about it, albeit a few months AFTER Office 2007 was released: Use Group Policy Software Installation to deploy the 2007 Office system Office 2010 didn't work for me using the same method, however.

The older Barclays business banking software communicates over a dedicated dial-up connection. They have an pretty good Internet-based alternative now, but some places (including our Bursary) have not yet had the time or inclination to retrain and make the switch.

Did you set up the S: drive through RMMC or via some other method?

Also it renders the device read-only on any non-Windows 7 machine.

Microsoft App-V whitepaper collection is here: Microsoft Application Virtualization Documentation The first article there, the Microsoft Application Virtualization Version 4.6 Trial Guide, is extremely useful as it basically walks through the entire server setup in its basic configuration, with screenshots, in pretty easy steps. Follow it and at the end you will have a working server you can then tinker with and secure at your leisure. I have frequently said that I wish Microsoft would produce the same thing for System Center products as the documentation for most of them is like banging your head against a brick wall.

Worth noting that the text of the Data Protection Act does not require any particular method of protecting data, including encryption - it just requires that you protect it using "appropriate technical and organisational measures". What those exact measures are is open to interpretation. As john has stated, BECTA's guiidance strongly advises encryption, as does pretty much anyone with their head screwed on, and LAs may require it... but to say that the DPA itself requires encryption is simply untrue.

If you get anything useful back from them, please do let us know. There are probably at least dozen threads about these things on these boards and none that got a successful result as far as I can remember.

We aren't boarding so no meals - it is just an alternate living arrangement for us. We pay electricity and council tax - everything is part of the (low) rent. I do go out if I hear the alarms, but I don't get notification of it as it's not an official duty. I have confronted trespassers once: it didn't end well.

I've been using App-V for about a year now to deploy the more tricky applications I deal with, generally with good results. I know I've heard of some schools that have gone the whole hog and deploy almost everything that way; personally I prefer a mixture of App-V with more traditional deployments, and some applications do pose unique problems for it (most recently, I found that Windows Live Essentials had a couple of problems as you may well have seen on my blog). Generally, anything I can easily deploy directly to the client, I do that way. Anything that causes problems, I turn to App-V. Although Microsoft's official stance is that it is not a tool for solving application compatibility problems, many such problems can be resolved this way, especially if they are permissions-based. It's also very useful for making software for which you have concurrent licensing arrangements available to more workstations than the number of concurrent users allowed for, since it keeps track of concurrent usage and will automatically block anyone from exceeding the licence limit. I'm happy to answer any questions you have about it here, otherwise PM me and I'll shoot you my email address.

About 6.45 - actually very close to when my alarm would normally go off anyway, but the shock of it made it feel a lot earlier :S We have flats on site to aid recruitment (it helps that we're an independent school). The idea is that we can recruit teachers from further afield by offering them somewhere to live while they find a house in the area. I got one on the basis that I asked nicely, they were almost all empty when I started, and that when they are empty the school is not only losing out on rent but also has to pay the council tax on them. Technically we are all only there temporarily, but I make myself useful around the site to try and encourage the bursar not to turf me out . The headmaster, deputy head, and caretaker have permanent residence on site as part of their contracts.

I generally regard myself as very lucky to be able to rent one of the staff flats available on our school site, but shortly before sunrise this morning we were reminded that the convenience of our living arrangements sometimes comes at a cost. The school decided to give all of our alarm clocks a free upgrade to 'fire alarm' due to a fault in the admin building, leading to all of the site residents huddling outside in our dressing gowns and slippers while the caretakers toured the site checking for any actual fire. Can I go back to bed now?

In my opinion, the principal problem with many lawyers is that they spend so long examining and working with the letter of the law that they lose sight of and forget the spirit of the law. Were ACS:Law's methods legal? Absolutely. Were they fair, proportionate, or ethical? I would say not, but I suspect many legal minds would be of the opposite opinion.

Bah, still waiting for 2.1 on my Streak after Dell ballsed up the upgrade that we were supposed to get last month

Our exchange is enabled and taking orders, we're on the waiting list with Zen and are expecting to formally place an order fairly soon. Line speed test suggests we are looking at around 20Mbps downstream / 8.5Mbps upstream.

Possibly a permissions issue and the software is giving you a dummy message about the file being locked. Worth checking the NTFS permissions on the file.

As usual the tabloids have extrapolated the provisions of the law to farcical proportions. My advice is to stop reading rags like the Daily Fail as most of what they print is utter tripe. On the example of the "SUE FOR ANYTHING!" rubbish, here are the conditions that have to be met for someone to potentially sue: the employee or job applicant is harassed on more than two occasions (not necessarily by the same person); and the employer knows that it has happened; and the employer fails to take steps that are reasonable in the circumstances to prevent such harassment happening to that person again. So it's not like someone can crack an off-colour joke and instantly be liable. It has to have been actual harassment, it has to raised internally, and it only becomes a liability of the employer has essentially ignored the problem. If the employer takes reasonable steps to prevent it, the victim wouldn't be able to sue, even if it happened again. Unfortunately the tabloids don't like explaining stuff like this because headlines like "YOU CAN SUE IF YOUR BOSS DOESN'T TAKE REASONABLE ACTION" don't sell newspapers.