There has been a recent discussion in one of the mailing lists about Microsoft's new callback support model for SBS. This model went into effect on August 1, and was announced on the Official SBS Blog on July 2, 2008. Over the weekend, I had an opportunity to make use of the new callback model, and wanted to share my experiences with it here.
Caveat: as you may or may not know, I used to work in PSS (now CSS) on the SBS team in Las Colinas, and still keep in touch with several of the folks there. I was present on the lines when the switch to have first-level calls get routed to India went into play. While I have my own thoughts about the process, I have to admit that I get a bit frustrated when calling in and dealing with a first-level tech (no matter where they are located) who doesn't have the experience and background that I do. When I do call in, I have to be patient with the process and let it work, because trying to get around the process, in my experience, has just caused more problems. That said...
Over the weekend, I went into a customer's server to install the August security updates. As per our normal practice, I did a full restart of the server before installing any of the updates. Only the server did not come back up. I'm in Texas, the server is not. Once my client got on site, we saw the dreaded "Cannot load operating system" message on the screen. While I had him track down the install media to boot into Recovery Console, I placed a call to the Partner Business Down support line.
I placed the call at 12:15pm. Within 5 minutes, I was speaking with a call router. Even though the core problem was an OS load issue and I knew I'd get the best support by talking to someone in the Setup team, I could not bring myself to outright lie about the OS, and agreed to the callback plan for SBS support. We went through the severity assessment at length and she eventually agreed that this was a business down case. I provided my partner ID for the case, and even though I renewed my partner status on 8/21, that update did not reflect in their system. I spent 5 minutes on hold while she tracked down my partner status, and eventually came back indicating that she had updated my partner status in their system (even though my expiration date of 2009 shows on the partner web site), and she gave me the case number at 12:36pm. Longer than I would have liked to get to that point, but I can't really complain. She then advised that I could expect a callback in the next one to two hours, and I got ready to work on issues while waiting on the callback.
To my surprise, an SBS engineer called at 12:40pm, just 4 minutes later. I hadn't even had time to get my client through the next part of the Recovery Console troubleshooting. I was fairly impressed, no, let me be honest, I was completely surprised at how quickly I received the call back. I have to say that the call router did a good job of setting expectations, but I never expected to get the call back so quickly. I was very, very impressed at that point.
And that's where the good impression stopped. Over the next few hours, I got pretty much what I expected from first level support. Without going into detail on the problem or the troubleshooting or the resolution, I can only say that the MS tech provided exactly one valid suggestion towards an identification of the problem. He offered several red herrings that I refused to follow, because I knew they would go nowhere. I have to acknowledge that he did at least consult with someone on the Setup team (which is where I really wanted to go in the first place) to make some recommendations that I already had documented on my own to-do list.
As it turned out, I ended up not really needing the support from MS after all, as the problem didn't end up outside of my area of expertise, but when dealing with a non-booting system, especially one that I cannot get my hands on, I know what my limits are and when I will need the assistance of someone from MS. I don't know if I would have had trouble escalating that call to a higher level or how long it would have taken to do so, and fortunately I did not have to find out.
So my first foray into SBS callback support was a mixed bag. I ended up not having to call in as early as I did, because I got a callback immediately. But I still ended up with the same caliber of front-line support that I've unfortunately come to expect from Microsoft. I'm quite glad I didn't just turn my customer over to the MS support tech and walk away, which was an option, because the MS tech would have had him perform tasks that would have put the server in more jeopardy, not less.
Anyway, for those of you who have been complaining about the length of time it can take to get a callback from MS for SBS support, here's an example of when it can take very little time at all to get a callback. I'm not expecting that should I have to call in again any time soon that I'll get anything resembling that kind of turnaround, but it is nice to know that it's at least possible.
Folks, in case you haven't heard by now (and if this is the first place you've seen/heard this, then I probably have a few other blog suggestions for you to follow), the SBS Development Team released SBS 2008 to Manufacturing today. This means that the product will be in the channel in some form in the next 6-8 weeks. This marks the end of several years of development by Microsoft, and nearly two years of testing that I've been involved with, along with a lot of other people.
I think the development group has done an amazing job with the product given the circumstances. Is the product solid? Based on what I've seen, I think so. Does it have some holes? Without a doubt. But given that the team was essentially developing against a deadline and not against a feature set, this is understandable.
What does this release mean to you? If you're a small business IT consultant (or at least play one on TV), it's time for you to get off your duff and work with the product so you get to know it and, therefore, develop your ability to support it for your clients. If you are a business owner, it's time to start thinking about if the upgrade makes good business sense to you.
I've already been seeing the arguments pro and con for the product out in the community, and for those that have asked about my take on it, my standard reply still stands - whether it makes sense to upgrade now or later depends entirely on the specifics of the client. Some people will need/want to move as soon as they can get their hands on the product. Others will wait until they have a clearer need for it. In my general conservative approach, I'm going to be taking a "wait and see" attitude for most of my clients. However, I have one that will be migrated pretty much as soon as we can get our hands on the software. It just depends.
Through this process, I've made some good friends on the Dev team, and I've been privileged to be involved in parts of the process that many people never get to see. I know they're all relieved to have finished this product, and they deserve whatever celebration is in store for them. The folks that have worked countless hours to bring you SBS 2008 definitely deserve major kudos - this was not an easy product to produce, and those of us on the testing team were not the easiest people to work with. But in the end, I think we're getting the best product that could be released at this time.
Over the next few weeks, I'll be talking more about my observations about SBS 2008 both here and on eOnCall. I'm also in the last stages of working on SBS 2008 Unleashed for Sams, due for release in November of 2008. But if you really want to know what the product is about, you have no choice but to get your hands on it and start working with it. No amount of reading blogs or sitting through web seminars or watching demonstration videos will give you the experience you need to run or support this product. Get out there and get after it!
In the last few weeks, I've had an opportunity to give a presentation about the Migration options with SBS 2008 to a couple of different groups, one in Dallas and one in Detroit. As I went through the presentations, it became clear that the majority of folks in both rooms had not looked at the SBS 2008 migration document that's been produced by Microsoft, mostly because they didn't even know it was out there. So even though I will be giving the presentation at a few more groups over the next few months, I wanted to get my key point about Migration and SBS 2008 out there for those people who won't be able to hear about it from one of these presentations.
My talk focused on the MS Migration story for a variety of reasons. One, I know Jeff Middleton isn't ready with the Swing Migration process for SBS 2008 (but I also know he's working on it), and I really can't speak to a process I haven't seen. Plus, I'm not trying to take the thunder from Jeff about Swing when he does release the SBS 2008 edition. But I have gone through the MS migration process several times as part of the research for the SBS 2008 Unleashed book and the beta testing for the product, and doing the migrations uncovered for me what I believe is the most important thing you can do as a consultant to get ready for SBS 2008:
Learn the migration process. Period.
Whether you use the MS process or Jeff's Swing Migration, you will benefit greatly from starting to work with the migration process now. Don't wait until you get in front of your first migration for a client and try to review the white paper the night before. Don't download the Swing docs on the way to the client site. In fact, don't even schedule time with a client for migration until you've spent time learning how to do a migration.
There will be benefits and drawbacks to both migration processes. Learn what those are and understand why you are choosing one migration process over another. There will be times that a Swing will be the best migration method. There will be times when the MS process will be the best migration method. If you don't know both processes inside and out, you will not be able to make the correct decision for your client, which could end up being very costly for both of you.
We have what is supposed to be the final version of the Microsoft white paper on migration (in both web form and CHM (compiled help file) form) already available, so there is no reason you cannot start reading up on migration right now. You should, in fact. Then when Jeff releases the SBS 2008 version of the Swing Migration process, you can read through that and get familiar with it as well. Then you'll be well-versed in how to get your existing SBS 2003 customers onto SBS 2008 in the best way possible.
The other key reason I believe it's important to learn about migration is that it is the best way to learn about SBS 2008 in general. If you just join the beta and download and install the product, you'll get to see the surface of what's going on. But the migration process touches on every aspect of SBS 2008 - from Active Directory to Exchange to SharePoint to Group Policy and so on - so when you go through the migration process, you will learn about each of those apects of SBS 2008, and if you have not seen SBS 2008 yet, this will be a good way to get your hands dirty.
I will be up front, though. This will take time and effort on your part. The migration process is not easy, and not fast. If you try to skim through the docs or speed throgh a few trial runs,you WILL miss key aspects of the process and could run into problems down the road.
If you plan to be serious about supporting SBS 2008 as part of your business venture, start now to learn about migration so you'll be in a position to succeed when you are ready to move your clients, not in a position to fail miserably.
Last week, my eOnCall episode covered my first week with the iPhone. OK, yeah, I cheated a little bit because I recorded the episode on Wednesday, when I hadn't really used it for more than about 4 days, but who's counting. It made for interesting Internet Radio at least. So I thought it was time to do a little deeper analysis of my life with the iPhone thus far for the blog, for those who read this and don't listen to eOnCall.
When I decided in March that I was going to get the iPhone 3G (after Exchange support was announced for iPhone 2.0), I took a hard look at how I was using my existing Windows Mobile device and what features I could live without, if need be. Once I developed my list, and reviewed what should and might not be supported on the iPhone, I determined that the benefits still outweighed the odds, and since I had so many clients who were going to want me to support their iPhones, I knew I would be getting it shortly after the product released.
The fates were not in my favor on that last bit, however. A few weeks before the July 11 iPhone release date was announced, I booked a flight to Redmond for a work project at Microsoft, leaving on July 13. If I was going to have any semblance of support for my customers who were planning on getting the device that weekend, I knew I'd have to wait in line on Friday or Saturday, and given that there would likely be some problems that would need to be addressed the day after I got the unit, I decided it would have to be Friday.
I got up early Friday morning and made my way to my local AT&T store, a store that I had already checked with earlier in the week to ensure that they were on the list of stores that would be getting the iPhone. In my haste (and sleepless state) I neglected to eat breakfast before leaving, so I stopped at Sonic on the way to the store. When I arrived at the store, the line wasn't terribly long, but I got out my folding chair and parked myself at the end of the line. About 15 minutes after I arrived, and AT&T employee came through and was counting the customers in line. About 10 people in front of me, he stopped and started talking to them. Sure enough, they received 80 phones, and cut the line off at 75 people. I didn't make the cut. I only marginally wished that I hadn't stopped for breakfast at that point. Instead, I headed to the office, and started trying to reach the local Apple stores by phone to see if they were going to have enough stock for me to drive the hour to the store locations and wait in line.
I called the Willow Bend store, and not only did they assure me that they would have plenty of iPhones, they also said that the wait was about 2.5-3 hours. An hour drive time later, I found myself in line with the rest of the idiots.
Nine hours later, I made it into the store. That is where the 3 hour activation nightmare started. Yes, your math is correct. 12 hours in the Willow Bend mall to spend $300 on a phone. I left at 11pm to make my way home. I not only missed a bunch of billable work, but I also missed margarita night at Sweetwater. Five minutes after leaving the store, however, I had the phone configured to sync with my Exchange server, which was the #1 reason I wanted to get the phone, and seeing how easily that mission was accomplished, I was able to get some sleep that night, knowing that I'd be able to walk my clients through that setup easily.
What I didn't have was my old cell phone number active on the phone. That took a call to AT&T Saturday morning to get worked out, and even at the end of that call, it wasn't completely working. I was able to make outbound calls, and I could send and receive text messages, but I could not receive calls. All inbound calls continued to go to my Verizon voice mail. They did advise that it could take 24 hours to complete the switch, so I prayed for no emergency support calls on the weekend and went on my way to get ready for Redmond.
Sunday I still didn't have inbound calls, which made it difficult to take a call from a customer with a dead server, but fortunately my normal phone system, and my wife, took care of that while I was jetting over the western US. When I landed in Seattle, I attempted to call AT&T, but their service centers were closed on Sunday. Great.
Cutting to the chase, the phone got switched over on Monday and started working as expected. Now it was time to really put the device through its paces. In my spare time, however. And that basically brings us to today.
So what follows are the tasks I was using my Windows Mobile phone for and how I've adapted those tasks to the iPhone. And my take on how successful the transition has been.
E-mail
This is my #1 priority for a cell phone, besides making and receiving calls. Given that cell phone reliability and call quality really hasn't changed in 10+ years, I'm not even looking at that aspect of the iPhone, other than it works about like any other AT&T phone. It is what it is. But e-mail was key.
Windows Mobile: I had native Exchange ActiveSync on my device, and several folders that I read on the phone. I have dozens of mail folders in Exchange, but I only wanted to read a few of them on the phone. Sending e-mail was important, too, but my primary use was reading.
iPhone: Exchange sync just works. My Inbox (I almost typed iNbox, how silly) gets updated immediately when I get new mail, and I'm able to send e-mail easily. I have access to all of my mail folders, but the iPhone only syncs those when I open them, so if I want to read from some of my more voluminous mailing lists (which are automatically sorted into folders by Exchange), I can, and I don't have to worry about the phone syncing every time a message comes into one of those folders. That feature alone should save some battery (more on that later).
I don't like that I'm forced to read mail in the "newest on top" format, and there is no option for how to sort mail on the iPhone. I'm a "new messages on bottom" reader, and I'm really hoping that a future update will give me the option to read the way I'm used to. In the meantime, I'm adapting.
I also hate that the mail application shows EVERY folder in my mailbox, and there is no way to collapse folders and sub folders. There are only a few mail folders I really want to access on the iPhone, but they come at the bottom of the list, and it takes multiple pages scrolls to get to the parent folder where they're located. Again, hopefully an update will address some of this.
One thing I love about mail on the iPhone it that it's much easier to handle multiple e-mail accounts. I have several accounts that I can now follow on my phone, and I wasn't able to easily do that with my Windows mobile device.
But the last thing that drives me nuts about mail on the iPhone is that I have one, count it ONE, e-mail signature for outgoing messages, no matter how many accounts I am sending from. One signature, just not going to cut it.
Mileage tracking
Windows Mobile: The #2 task I used my Windows mobile phone for was keeping track of my car mileage in Pocket Excel for tax purposes. I had some nice formulas built into the spreadsheet to help calculate mileage, and at the end of the year, I'd sync that file to my PC, extract the data, and send it off to my accountant for processing. Easy, efficient.
iPhone: I have looked at a number of apps in the Apple Store, but have yet to find one that does what I want for mileage. Oh, there are several apps that help you track gas mileage, but nothing for travel mileage that gets as granular as I want. Right now I've reverted to pen and paper, but I'm hopeful that one of the developers I've contacted will add a module like what I've suggested. In the meantime, this is a big loss, but not a deal breaker.
Calendaring
Windows Mobile: In my business, it's key for me to have an accurate calendar with me at all times, and syncing my phone to Exchange is something I've grown really accustomed to. Windows Mobile handles this nicely, once you have all the DST patches in place everywhere.
iPhone: Ugh. Calendaring has a long way to go. Yes, the iPhone syncs all of my calendar appointments to the iPhone, but they all come over as REQUESTS, not as ACCEPTED appointments. So when the 15-minute reminder goes off, it's not a notification of a pending appointment, it's a "please confirm this request." If I click "Maybe" the appointment stays on the calendar and life goes on. This has become my default action. If I click "Accept," the appointment stays in my calendar, but whomever set the appointment gets ANOTHER "so and so accepted this appointment" e-mail in their box. 90% of the time, that's me, so when I accept an appointment I set for myself, I get an e-mail indicating that I accepted my own appointment.This has got to change in future releases.
I don't spend much time creating new appointments in my phone, much less for multiple people, but I do understand that there are issues with doing this on the iPhone. I don't want to belittle that fact, but it's not something I do regularly, so it's not been a major deal for me.
The issue that IS a major show-stopper for me, though I havent' had time to review it yet, is that calendar items are apparently not stored in GMT, but in local time. When I went to Redmond, a paltry two time zones away from my beloved Central, my 8AM CDT appointments showed up as 8am PDT appointments. The time on my phone synced with the local service providers, but apparently did not adjust for time zone. Fortunately, I had no appointments I was trying to keep while there, and I don't travel between time zones that often, but it was a major point of note and I will be looking into that as time permits.
Contacts
Windows Mobile: Syncing my contacts with exchange makes it very easy for me to have phone numbers for customers, family, and friends in my phone. And I can take pictures of those people with my phone and it gets updated to my Exchange server, so I can see their faces in e-mails in Outlook.
iPhone: the iPhone pulled my contacts down fine. I have heard there are issues with modifying contacts on the iPhone and those changes don't get sent back to the server. I have deleted contacts from my iPhone (former employees) only to have them NOT delete from Exchange, but actually get sent back down to my iPhone. Annoying? Yes. Cause for a revolt? No. Again, hopefully will get addressed in future updates.
Apparently the iPhone doesn't perform well with a large number of contacts, either. It takes a very, very long time to search through contacts in the Contacts app (which I never get into any more) or in the phone app.
Voice Dialing
Windows Mobile: I had to purchase a voice dialing software for my Windows Mobile phone a long time ago, and I got really used to using it, especially while driving. Made making calls a nice, simple process.
iPhone: No voice dial software. Sure, you can "voice dial" through AT&T's service, but you have to dial a number to get to where you can voice dial, and so what's the point? I've adapted to either not making outgoing calls while driving, or waiting until I'm stopped to find the contact and dial their number. Not happy about this, either.
GPS
Windows Mobile: I had purchased a bluetooth GPS receiver and Destinator software for my Windows Mobile device. It worked very well for tracking my current location and for turn-by-turn directions. I really needed to update my maps this year by purchasing the new version, but I held off on that given the GPS support built into the iPhone.
iPhone: yeah, it has GPS support, and it can do turn by turn directions, but it definitely works like a 1.0 product in that regard. Being able to search for local items in Google Maps is really nice, and much nicer than what I got with Destinator, because it's real-time querying the web. However, the maps always point North is Up on the iPhone, and that's taking some getting used to. Also, the GPS is prone to hanging up, and has been the main reason I've had to reboot the iPhone the few times I've had to reboot it. Some other apps make use of the GPS locator, and those get wonky, too, when the GPS drops off the planet. iPhone 2.0.1 supposedly has some GPS enhancements in it, so we'll see how well it works then.
Battery Life
Windows Mobile: Sucked. I was having to charge my battery every night. I know most of that was the constant syncing with Exchange, but it got old, quick. In some cases, I had to take a USB cable with me so I could charge the phone with my laptop, and a car charger was simply not an option.
iPhone: Yes, everyone hates that you can't change out the iPhone battery, including me. And I'm having to charge my iPhone every night, even after charging it during the day as well. And I'm not using a LOT of the iPhone features, either. I have WiFi and Bluetooth turned off, I've filtered more of my e-mail into sub folders out of the Inbox to keep Exchange sync to a minimum, and I don't listen to music on my iPhone at all. Car charger and secondary USB cables are an absolute must, and I have yet to get a car charger that actually works.
Internet Access
Windows Mobile: I hated Pocket IE on my Windows Mobile device. Access was slow, and the web was practically useless, so I hardly ever used it.
iPhone: Internet browsing ROCKS! Apple nailed the browser on this device. Granted, there are many web sites that use dynamic content that is not going to work on the iPhone, but I've already seen several sites redesign alternate pages specifically for the iPhone, and that's going to become more prevalent, I think. I look up lots of stuff on the web now that I never would on my WM device.
Applications
Windows Mobile: I had acquired several apps for my WM phone, including a couple of solitaire games. I tried several times to download apps directly to the phone from the Internet, but had very limited success. I resorted to primarily using only the native apps, save for GPS, voice dial, and games.
iPhone: I have yet to get through all of the apps in the Apple Store, not because I've not had time to look, but because there are so many. And more are added every day. I'll have a future post outlining my favorite iPhone apps at a later time, but the iPhone wins hands down in this category for me.
Twitter
Windows Mobile: I started updating my tweets via SMS messaging about 6 months ago, and it worked.
iPhone: I downloaded and started using Twitteriffic and won't look back. Not only can I easily update my tweets, I can see what's happening with the tweets of the people I'm following. Great app.
Touch Screen
Windows Mobile: I carried a HTC 6700 for the last six months and hated it. The touch screen was constantly going out of alignment to the point that I had to turn off my passcode to get into the phone because the screen just wouldn't respond in the correct locations. The 6700 was the worst implementation of touch screen in the HTC series of devices I've used for the last 4 years.
iPhone: Dude, it just rocks. The iPhone exemplifies what touch screen was meant to be, especially with the multi-touch capability. Other vendors can only attempt to copy what Apple has done here and hope to come close to the success of the interface.
So that pretty much covers what I had been doing with my old phone and how I've adapted to the iPhone. The stuff that's broken is way broken, but the stuff that works is solid. Overall, I'll say that I'm about even on productivity for what I was doing with my phone after switching. I'd love to say I'm more productive, but I can't. Maybe in a month or two, but not now. My productivity increase will likely come from updates to the iPhone software and new apps for the device. Time will tell, but that's where I am thus far.
If you stuck with me this far through the post, please note that I'm going to be trying out posting from a couple of different iPhone blogging apps in the next few weeks. Hopefully, that will allow me to blog more quickly those things I've been wanting to get out. And yes, I'll blog about that, too.
Be warned, this is a long post. But the payoff at the end may well be worth the read.
This past week, I had an opportunity to work on a project at Mothership Redmond. In addition to the fabulous weather (highs in the upper 70s compared to the 100s back home, yet sunny and clear skies, go figure), I had was able to catch up with some people who I don't get to see very often: Amy Babinchak, Steve Banks, Mark Crall, Chris Rue, and Oliver Sommer. And those were only the folks who were on the same work project. I was also able to spend some time with Terri Schmidt, documentation manager for WEBS, and Kevin Beares, a name that should be familiar to everyone in the community. and while I do not want to belittle the time I spent with these folks and the discussions we had, the highlight of the trip for me happened on Friday.
Dean Paron, Group Program Manager for SBS, invited me to sit in on a ship room meeting the team had Friday morning. Since I'm not an idiot, I accepted the invitation without batting an eye, even though I had no idea what a "ship room meeting" was. But after sitting in on the meeting, I have a much deeper understanding of the process the team goes through to develop the product and bring it to market. And after confirming the NDA line, I'm blogging about it to shed some light to others who may be interested.
Anyone who has worked on any type of software development project, whether large and formalized like what MS and other large companies use or smaller and independent, will understand some of the basics of the development cycle. In the case of SBS, the process is a little differnet than for other products, because what the SBS team is developing is the "glue" that will allow all the disparate MS component technologies to run seamlessly on the same box. Oh, and there's the management tools, too. But the development folks on SBS are not writing code for Windows Server 2008 or Exchange Server 2007, instead they are taking those products and writing integration code. In many ways, this is a more challenging process, because to meet your own design goals, you have to deal with the building blocks that have been handed to you. If the team found, for instance, that the User Management tools would work a whole lot better if there were a change made in Windows Server 2008, they're not going to be able to go in and modify code in that product. Sure, they could request accomodations from that team while the product is in development, but once Server 2008 shipped, that was what they have to use to build their code.
Once they get the product matured to the point that they're ready for other people to start using it, they make the code available to certain groups of external users. This comes in the form of CTP (community technology preview) releases and then the beta releases. Generally, these external releases start with a very small group of outsiders, then expands to a larger audience as the product gets closer to release. SBS just announced the release of the RC1 build late this week, and it will be available to beta participants early next week. Many more people will look at RC1 than looked at RC0, or Beta 2, or Beta 1, etc.
The goal, as I understand it, of these releases is twofold. Early in the process, the goal is to get feedback on the functionality of the product as well as identifying any problems (bugs) in the code so that those bugs can be fixed in later releases. Later in the process, the functionality aspects are pretty much set in stone and the team is more interested in finding and fixing the problems instead of adding or removing major elements. That's where we are in the process of SBS at this point - the feedback Microsoft is looking for in RC1 is "what doesn't work" and "how significant of an impact will it have if it's not fixed."
People who participate in the beta process access software and feedback through the Connect site that Microsoft has put together for this process. When someone finds a bug, they are expected to enter that bug into Connect, then it gets on the developers' radar and they can start addressing the issue identified in the bug. But just because you enter a bug does not mean it will get addressed by the team the way you want it to. There are several bugs (and suggestions) that I've entered into the system that have not and will not be addressed by development, at least not in this release of SBS. Am I frustrated about some of them? Sure. But I also know I've identified a couple of bugs that did get fixed, and fixed immediately.
OK, so that's what we see on the outside. When I sat in on the ship room meeting Friday, I got to see what happens on the inside. And I have a better understanding of how and why the process works the way it does.
After Dean introduced me to the team in the meeting (more to confirm that I was under NDA), Cassie Hicks opened the list of outstanding bugs and went through them with the team to determine which bugs would get addressed and have fixes entered into the system before the next build was done, which was scheduled for Friday night. As each bug was introduced, the owner of the bug identified the status of the bug, and if a fix was not imminent, there was a brief discussion about what the next steps of the bug would be. No, I can't discuss any of the bugs that were brought up in the meeting, but it was pretty cool to see the process in motion.
Following the ship room meeting, a pizza party ensued celebrating several teams that had releases that week, including the announcement of SBS 2008 RC1. I was invited to attend with the rest of the team, which was an honor, and got to listen to all of the thank yous to all of the related team members who helped with each of the releases. While everyone ate, I was able to talk a little with Boodhisatva Deb and Sean Daniel, as well as Cassie Hicks. But the icing on the cake, so to speak, was getting to witness Kevin Kean have his head dunked in a large bowl of whipped cream (and yes, you can just make out my face in the background of the video).
All in all, a great week in Redmond, but now it's time to return home and take care of important matters. After I deal with a 4 hour delayed flight, that is...
The first time you boot up the system from the SBS 2008 install DVD, you'll notice a significant difference between this installation process and previous SBS installs. There is no integrated setup.. This comes partially from the image-based setup routines of Windows Server 2008, and partially from design decisions by the development team. Gone are the days where you can "customize" your SBS install, save for a very few items. In reality, about the only things you can configure during setup are the layout of the hard drives, the name of the server, the name of the default administrator account, and the internal domain name, and even the latter is restricted to certain limitations for you by default.
In general, I'm not opposed to this move. By ensuring a consistent installation across all builds of SBS 2008, the development team has hopefully reduced some of the support calls that will come into Microsoft. One of the more frustrating things for me personally when I'm called in to provide support on an SBS box for a partner is seeing an SBS 2003 box installed without Exchange. Or without Sharepoint. Or without any of the tools that make the box an SBS box and not just another Windows Server 2003 box. Knowing that all the parts and pieces at least started out on the server (yes, you can go into Add/Remove Programs and pull out specific pieces after installation - more on that later) should reduce some of the support footprint moving forward.
So you want to install SBS so that user data, Exchange, and Sharepoint exist on a different volume or partition on the server? No problem. You just won't do that during installation. You'll get to use the Move Data wizards to relocate those features elsewhere on the server after installation completes. But during the installation process, everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, gets put on C:. Don't want Exchange on C:? Move it after installation. Don't want user shared folders on C:? Move it after install. Don't want the core OS on C:? Won't happen in this version. Everything goes on C:. Period.
That includes the trial editions of Windows Live OneCare and Forefront Security for Exchange, and this is where I take issue with the installation process, although I undestand it's really more an issue with marketing. The SBS 2008 propeganda includes anti-virus/anti-malware/anti-spam protection for the server as a feature. This "feature" is a pre-installed 120-day trial for these two products. Personally, I don't plan to install or use either of these products, because my operation already has products we use with our existing customer base that we will be putting on new installations. I will be going through the extra steps at the end of the installation to remove these two products from the server (through Add/Remove programs), and I really wish I didn't have to. I fully understand that Microsoft wants to get more into the subscription businss through these two products (both Windows Live OneCare and Forefront Security for Exchange are subscription products, not "package"products), but I hate that they're included in the install as "features" that don't work until you activate them, and I have no way to say "Hey, I don't want that stuff on my server to begin with." How many times have we gone through the uninstall process on a piece of software, only to have that software leave some trace of itself behinnd? I have not played enough wiht OneCare/Forefront to know how much of the products are left on the box after install, but it is something I will be looking into.
I would rather see Microsoft include the installers for OneCare and Forefront on the SBS installation DVD and give the installer the option to go back after the server is set up, but that would lead to fewer installs of the products, and therefore fewer subscriptions, so I don't see that going away. (Yes, even though the product is in public beta and is called "Release Candidate 0," there is still a possibility that some aspects of the software could change before the final build is released. So it's possible that this behavior could change, but I'm not holding my breath.) It's just that System Builders are given the option to not include OneCare and Forefront when they pre-load a server with SBS 2008, and I think the VARs should be given that option as well. I fully understand that Microsoft still wants to push SBS 2008 as a user-installable product, and for the DIY market, I'm OK with giving them some sort of protection right out of the box, knowing full well that many DIYers never got around to installing anti-virus/anti-malware on their SBS 2003 boxes. But let's not force it down the VAR's throat.
My last note on setup deals with the Answer File. The SBS development team put together a tool to create an Answer File that SBS setup will use to "customize" the installation process. And by "cusomize" I mean "pre-populate the answer file with data that would otherwise be collected in the GUI portion of the SBS setup." You can run teh Answer File Generator Tool and enter the name of the server, the name of the default administrator, even the location information for the company. The answer file is also the only place you'll be able to customize the internal domain name for the network. By default,all SBS 2008 installs prompt for an internal name, but the name entered is a NetBIOS formatted name, and .local will be added to the end of the name. So if you enter CONTOSO in the field, the internal domain name will be CONTOSO.local. If you want to use .lan or even the public DNS name (and no, I'm not getting into that religious debate here), you'll need to employ the answer file to get a non-.local internal domain name.
As a programming note, some of the "how to" steps for issues described in these posts will be available on the Lessons Learned site. And all of it will be covered in the SBS 2008 Unleashed book, tentatively scheduled for release at the same time as SBS 2008.
i've been waiting with baited breath for the opportunity to talk about the Public Preview of SBS 2008, and it went live yesterday. The SBS Blog carried the announcement from Dean Paron, and you can sign up to download and evaluate the software at the Evaluation Center. If you are going to take a serious look at the software, and by serious, I mean that you are going to run the software through its paces and provide feedback to the development team, make sure that the system you will be testing on meets the minimum system requirements as identified by Microsoft. Running on anything less will not get you the proper experience for the software.
There are a number of changes in SBS 2008 from SBS 2003 and earlier versions. One of the most significant is the change from being able to use the SBS server as an "edge device" by running it with two NICs. SBS 2008 only supports a single NIC (and by single NIC, that means you cannot route private to public traffic through the SBS server - some testers have installed SBS 2008 with two NICs on private networks for physical separation of internal networks) and that's actually a change in the core Windows Server 2008 operating system, not a design decision by the SBS development team. All deployments of SBS 2008 will be of the "single NIC behind a hardware firewall" vaiety, where the "hardware firewall" could be any number of solutions, including a separate server running ISA. The SBS setup wizards will attempt to configure this external firewall if it's a hardware device that supports and has enabled UPnP, but the setup wizards will not configure an external ISA server, so ISA integration has been completely removed from this product.
Over the next few days and weeks, I'll be posting my thoughts and opinions about the product, the successes and failures that I've seen in the time I've been working with the product. These posts will be focused on significant differences in the product from previous versions so that those who are starting to become familiar with the product can see up front some of the implications of those changes and how that might impact the way you deploy SBS 2008 into an existing environment. While some of these changes may not sit well with the community, if you know about them in advance and can plan for them before implementing the system, you may save yourself some headaches down the road. I liken this to the people who were very familiar with SBS 2000 and made assumptions about SBS 2003 when selling it as a solution to customers without knowing some of the significant changes made at that transition. Specifically, consultants who sold SBS 2003 to b used as a Terminal Serve, like SBS 2000 could do, when Terminal Server support was removed from the product. in this case, you won't be selling SBS 2008 with ISA - there is no bundled ISA story with SBS 2008, so if you've been thinkig about selling SBS 2008 Premium and pitchin ISA as one of the benefits of that sale, you need to make alternate plans NOW.
Hopefully you'll find the information coming in the next series of posts useful as you begin to think about how SBS 2008 will fit into your product offerings to your customers. Don't be surprised if you find that, in some cases, SBS 2008 is no longer a fit for customers where SBS 2003 made sense. Times change and tehnology changes, and so has the SBS product. Please make sure that you are familiar with the product and its benefits and limitations before you start deploying it for your customers.
Last week, I had the honor and privilege of attending Microsoft's sometimes-annual MVP Summit. This year, there were over 1700 Microsoft Most Valuable Professionals (MVPs) in attendance, which is only a portion of the thousands of individuals who have been recognized by Microsoft for their support and activity in the community. This event is hardly a love-fest, though, because in general, MVPs are not apologists for Microsoft. Benjamin Romano summed up the relationship well in his article covering Stave Ballmer's Keynote speech to the MVP crowd, referring to the MVP community as "friendly but also highly knowledgeable and unabashedly critical." In many of the hallway discussions I had with MVPs from other product groups, there was one theme that was echoed almost unilaterally - MVP interation with the product groups this year was wide open with feedback flowing fully in both directions. For some groups, this was the first time this type of interaction had occurred. Some MVPs finally had an opportunity to interact directly with the people (yes, people) responsible for planning, coding, and marketing the various Microsft products, and give those people their thoughts on product direction, functionality, problems, successes, etc. (I must admit, that as an MVP within the WESS product line, I've almost come to take this level of interaction with the SBS product team for granted, but even our group this year had, I believe, our most open interaction with the product team to date. And that's not something that i ever want to take for granted, because it could very easily be removed.
I have received the MVP award three times now, and I continue to be honored by the recognition. I have an opportunity to interact with some truly amazing people, and I continually wonder why I've been chosen to be a part of this group. These people have a passion forthe Small Business Server product and, if possible, an even stronger passion for working with other IT Pros and end-users who ply their craft while using the product. The wealth of knowledge, experience, and insight that this group collectively possesses is awe-inspiring, and Microsoft is fortunate to have collected this group together and sought their opinions and expertise to help improve the product and their relationships with the community. Not that they get it right all of the time, but that's not the point of this post.
The point of this post is that community exists with or without the presence of Microsoft. Whether I continue to be awarded MVP status or not, I will continue my activites in the community. I'm working harder to get more involved with my local SBS User Group, and after issues with my day job settle down a bit and I get further along with a certain book project, I'm looking forward to getting more involved in the newsgroups and the forums over at smallbizserver.net again. Right now my reality encompasses keeping my customers happy and keeping my publisher off my back for a little longer, not to mention keeping my home life in order, too. Working 70-80 hour weeks since the first of the year has put a strain on a lot of things, both in my personal and professional life. But while it would be easy to walk away from the community altogether, I simply cannot. Community has been an inspiration and resource for me for the last 20+ years, and I plan to continue working with and giving back to the community that has given me so much over time. If Microsoft chooses to continue to recognize that part of my life by awardin me with MVP status, great, but I'm not out to make a minimum number of newsgroup or forum posts, blog posts, user group meetings, conference appearances, etc., I see people who do, and that disappoints me, because I think theyre doing it for the wrong reasons. I'm not active in the community just to get an MVP award. I'm active in the community because I believe I have something to offer back, and that is what motivates me.
I will admit, though, that attending the Summit, despite the stress of travel, etc., was actually a bit of a break for me, and one that I needed to get myself re-energized to tackle the next 3-6 months. I have a book to finish, and when SBS 2008 gets released, I'll have a number of community members to help get adapted to the new product. That's going to take a lot of energy, and honestly I was reminded of the reason for it during my week at Summit last week.
For those who are interested, I've blogged about my week's activities on my personal blog, under the Summit2K8 category.
As a service provider (aka "vendor”) to my clients, I'm very cognizant of what constitutes good service and bad service. We strive to provide outstanding service, as I've been endeavoring to do in the 20+ years I've been in this line of work. Choosing to work in the SMB space has given me some new insight into the "service" we often put up with as small businesses or small business advisors. Some enterprise organizations who have entered the SMB space haven't yet figured out how to best provide service to the smaller customer, and it can get very frustrating to be stuck in the middle of the client who needs to have an issue resolved and a large vendor who doesn't pay as much attention to their smaller accounts.
So when I encounter notable service, either good or bad, I make the effort to provide feedback. When the service needs to be improved, I make an effort to reach out to the people behind the service process and share my experiences in a matter-of-fact way, trying to avoid a heated or angry discussion. When the service goes beyond expectations on the positive side, I try to provide feedback about that with the appropriate parties within the company, and sometimes share those positive experiences with the greater community.
Today I encountered service experiences on the extreme opposite ends of the service spectrum and I wanted to share a brief summary of each here.
A vendor I've been working with for almost two years has a great product that I continually recommend to the community, and is pretty much a required component for many of our customer's systems. However, my experience with their support department has not lived up to my expectations. This afternoon, I called my sales contact with this company and asked who was the appropriate person to share feedback with, and my contact gave me the contact information for another person within the organization. I left this person e-mail and voicemail explaining the crux of my concerns and why the level of response I've received was not acceptable. In the last year, I've had reason to contact their support organization three times. All three times I used the "support request" form on their web site, and all three times that request has effectively been ignored. The most recent was the request I put in this past Sunday. I received the auto-response immediately, and haven't heard a peep from them since. Fortunately, this particular issue isn't affecting performance, but four days without a response is simply not acceptable, especially since that's the only way they advertise to reach their support department. Tomorrow I will be calling the technical resources within the company that I've called on before when I had to escalate. I shouldn’t have to do that, and that's the message I'll be passing along to the individual who I attempted to contact earlier today.
On the other side of the coin is Scorpion Software, who provided a status update today on an issue that they've been working on with one of my clients who made a minimum purchase of their AuthAnvil system. This client has a single-purpose need for the AuthAnvil solution, and they've run into two major issues with the implementation. One issue was resolved by a modification to one of the components of the AuthAnvil suite, and that was turned around within a week. The other issue turned out to be a problem with the software they're trying to integrate AuthAnvil with, but Scorpion Software have taken it upon themselves to work directly with the other vendor to get a resolution. And even though it wasn't necessary, they've kept me in the loop through the entire process.
I've also encountered two issues with the AuthAnvil software in our deployment. In both cases, a quick contact with the company, and specifically with Dana, has turned into two very quick resolutions.
It's clear to me that some vendors "get" service while others do not. Dana and the rest of the staff at Scorpion Software get it. They have embraced the SMB market, and even though their product is head and shoulders above the competition, they've not developed an attitude about it. I’ve learned a few things in my interactions with Scorpion, and I'm going to try to incorporate a couple of elements of those experiences into the way we run our operation, so that we can continue to provide outstanding service to the clients we work with.
Last December, I worked out an arrangement to better protect our clients for whom we provide primary support. This involved finding ways to tighten access their severs via RDP (the infamous port 3389). There are a lot of different takes on controlling access to port 3389 out there, from simply not allowing it at all through the firewall (which works for SBS boxes running Remote Web Workplace, provided there's not a problem with IIS on the box at the time you want to access it) to configuring the firewal to allow inbound port 3389 connections only from specific IP addresses. For our purposes, neither of these options, nor the other similar variations, really worked for the way we conduct our business.
Enter Dana Epp and Scorption Software. Dana is a Security MVP from Vancouver whose software development company has been developing security products designed fo the SMB market for a couple of years.
After working with two of his tools, AuthAnvil and RWW Guard, we finally developed an approach that mitigates the risks of opening port 3389 to the internet, yet still allowing our opration a reasonable level of access for support and maintenance. Here's the approach we're taking.
- Create a secondary administrative account with the same name across all of our supported servers.
- Change the password on the Administrator account to be a really, really secure password.
- Modify the local security policy to deny the Administrator account the ability to log in via terminal services, effectively limiting the Administrator account to a local console login only (which also does not affect any services running with that account).
- Install the WinLogon Agent component of AuthAnvil on each client system and point it back to the AuthAnvil system running on our servers.
- Configure AuthAnvil on our servers to have a grouped account, whose name matches the secondary administrative account we created on our supported servers, and add local users to that grouped account who are allowed to log in to the remote server.
- Add the Administrator account to the AuthAnvil Override security group on the local server so that the Administrator account does not require a token to log in to the server.
We have started rolling out this configuration this month, and so far it is working according to plan. The benefits of this arrangement include:
- Local access to the sever is still possible with the Administrator account and no security token.
- Remote access to the server is limited to the secondary administrative account, which also requires the use of a security token to successfully log in.
- The access logging in AuthAnvil gives me an accurate accounting of hich of my staff accessed one of our support servers and when.
- When staff turnover occurs, access to remote systems is denied in a single step by disabling the employees token in the main AuthAnvil system.
So for the cost of equipping my staff with the security tokens, we are able to increase the security of our supported systems with two-factor authentication, while blocking remote access to the Administrator account at the same time.
None of this would have been possible without Dana's efforts to bring quality security products to the SMB space at an affordable price. It's a very small price to pay for the enhanced security benefits our client base is receiving.
People who prefer to use Macs and people who prefer to use Windows PCs don't always get along (big surprise). As someone who interacts with both communities, I get to see the good and the bad on both sides. Yes, discussions between the two camps can get heated and polarized (I think "religious war" is a term that gets bandied about occasionally), and so long as the discussion remains good-natured, I don't mind participating in a discussion, as I'm in a position to speak to the benefits and drawbacks of each platform. But when the discussion resorts to name calling or absolutism, I walk away and distance myself from the other parties. There's no value in continuing to participate in a discussion when it gets to that level.
Recently, I observed an interchange in a public forum where someone made a comment about a web post relating to Apple technology. Two posts later in the "discussion," someone threw out an absolutism that Macs are not viable business machines. And the remainder of the thread was jumped on by the "me too" crowd. I get so frustrated by the zealots on both sides (yes, even though the term "zealot" is usually bandied about by Windows folks referring to the Mac community, it does go both ways) who can't settle for expressing their like or dislike for a program/product/platform and instead resort to absolutism.
Those of you who fall into one of the two extremist camps, stop reading now and go elsewhere on the net. You're not going to like what follows.
I run my business on a Mac. Yes, I have an SBS 2003 box in the server closet, and I'm running a Terminal Server with Windows 2003, and I have a test box running Windows 2003 R2 x64. But my main workstation, the tool I use every day, is a Mac. And doing so doesn't make me less productive, less capable, or less efficient than if I was running just a Windows XP or Vista PC. Yes, I am running Windows XP on the Mac using Parallels, and before you Windows zealots (yes, I think there are probably a couple of you that didn't heed the warning above) say "ah HA! You DO have to run Windows so therefore your Mac isn't a good machine for you," there are exactly two tools I use under Windows, and quite honestly, I could run those tools on my TS if that box weren't as underpowered as it is. One is Outlook, which in reality I could opt not to use since I have Entourage on my Mac, but there are some pieces of Outlook 2007 that are nicer to deal with than Entourage 2008. The other is Internet Explorer, but I only use that for two specific web tools that require an ActiveX control to perform correctly.
For everything else, I'm primarily using tools on the Mac. While I have both Office 2007 and Office 2008 available, I regularly use Office 2008 for Word, Excel, etc. 95% of my web browsing is done with Firefox on my Mac. Why? Office 2008 is fully file-compatible with Office 2007, and the interface is solid (not to mention there's no ribbon bar). And I do operate at significantly lower risk of web-based threats by surfing on my Mac than in IE.
Note that I said "lower risk" not "completely free from." No, the Mac platform is not inherently more secure than Windows, per se. But is is targeted far less than Windows, and Windows-specific attacks simply have no impact in my Mac apps. I'm not naive enough to run my Mac without Antivirus protection (Sophos) and hardened settings in the network firewall in OS X. But if there's a suspicious URL I need to investigate, I'm less apprehensive about approaching that site with Firefox on the Mac than I would be, even with Firefox under Windows (which, yes, I have loaded also).
This arrangement works for me. It doesn't work for my current staff, but if I do hire in someone who prefers to work on the Mac platform, we'll make allowances. It's not going to work for every IT pro out there, and I'm not suggesting that it would. Nor am I suggesting that anyone who is not already familiar with the Mac platform would be more productive after taking the time to learn how to navigate the system.
But what I am suggesting is that displays of absolutism don't come across the way that some of the absolutists think it does. In this industry, I don't think you can really take a totally absolutist approach. When I see consultants brag about how they talked a client out of getting a Mac simply because the consultant didn't want to support it, I'm disappointed. Both for the consultant and for the client. Just because the consultant isn't comfortable with the Mac platform doesn't mean that forcing the client to work on a Windows box is going to be the best scenario for the client. Case in point: I dislike the Blackberry devices. Loathe them, specifically. Yet I have several clients who are using Blackberry devices, and we support them. Why? Because after discussing the pros and cons and looking at all the alternatives, in these cases the Blackberry is really the best solution for these clients. Same with the iPhone. Those who choose to stereotype will probably be amazed that I actually work very hard to talk my customers out of getting iPhones (since I'm a Mac-lover, I must want to see the iPhone take over the world, right? Wrong.) But I have two clients who carry them. One who purchased the device before consulting with me, but now he has learned the lesson about discussing technology purchases BEFORE making them, so it wasn't a total loss. The other chose to go with the iPhone after discussing the options with me for several weeks. In his case, it has turned out to be a benefit to him, even with the shortcomings the current iPhone has in the area of Exchange connectivity.
The bottom line is that there is no absolutely right and absolutely wrong technology. When I see my peers in the industry take stands about certain technologies, I cringe. I see consultants who refuse to support Blackberry. I see consultants who refuse to support Apple technology. I see consultants who refuse to support Linux. I see missed opportunities. My potential customer base is larger because we support Apple, because we support Blackberry, because we can work our way through a Linux box. This is one thing that sets us apart from our local competition. When you draw a line in the sand with a customer, you force them to make a decision. While some see the outcome as the customer choosing to go along with the trusted advisor, there will be some who will choose to find another provider.
I choose to run my business on a Mac. I choose to support Blackberry even though I wish they'd all just disappear overnight. I choose to be flexible in what we support as a company, because I choose not to artificially limit my potential customer base.
Customers can choose, too. And often do.
It's official! Apple will support connections to Exchange server in the next version of the iPhone, according to Apple's web site. No date has been made publicly available for the release of the next version of the iPhone software, nor does Apple indicate if the company will make the iPhone available through carriers other than AT&T. But for those who have been asking about if Apple will support Exchange Active Sync, the answer is apparently yes.
And yes, I have applied to be in the Enterprise Beta for the iPhone 2.0 software. 
I've already seen several questions floating around following the announcement today about SBS 2008 and some of the product details. SBS 2008 will include a one year trial subscription for both the Forefront Security for Exchange (anti-virus, anti-spam protection for e-mail) and Windows Live One Care for Server. Does that mean you have to use these products to protect your SBS 2008 deployments?
The answer is NO. Just because they're included in a "trial" version does not mean that you're locked into using these products. You will be able to remove both Forefront and One Care if you choose and use your own preferred protection software. For businesses who will be "upgrading" from SBS 2003 to SBS 2008, this will likely be the case.
But for new businesses, or businesses who are deploying SBS 2008 as their first server, the inclusion of both Forefront and One Care gives that business, or the consultant who deploys for that business, the opportunity to have protection right out of the box, either while making the decision about an appropriate product for the client, or while waiting for the preferred vendor to release a version of the protection suite that is compatible with SBS 2008, and those may not be ready at the time the product ships.
Bottom line, if you're not comfortable or familiar with Forefront or One Care and want to use your own protection tools, you will be able to.
50? or 75? Which is it?
In reviewing the product propeganda about SBS 2008 from the Essentials site at Microsoft, there's a pretty consistent theme in the way the SBS 2008 and EBS 2008 products are positioned - 50 users. Specifically, on the Choose Solutions page, SBS 2008 supports "up to 50 users or devices." Same message in the official press release from February 20, 2008: SBS 2008 is "ideal for organizations with up to 50 PCs." However, on the SBS Blog Post announcing the Essential family, the limit is 75 users. Specifically, SBS 2008 is "designed for organizations with up to 50 users, but will support organizations with up to 75 users."
So which is it? In SBS 2003, Microsoft increased the user/device license from 50 users in SBS 2000 to 75 users/devices. Is this a step backwards?
Not really. The likelihood of a 75 user/device organization realistically running everything to do with their operation on a single box with SBS 2003 was pretty slim, but it did depend on the type of activity in the organization. Microsoft marketing is clearly trying to make the differentiation that SBS 2008 is geared for 50 users and fewer, while EBS 2008 is geared for 50 users and greater. In practice, we know that there will be smaller organizations (15-20 users) where EBS will be a better fit than SBS, and there will be larger organizations (50-60 users) where SBS will be a better fit than EBS.
So if you're concerned that MS has reduced the licensing limit with SBS 2008, don't be. You still can have up to 75 users/devices connected to an SBS network. But the reality is that if you have more than 50 users/devices, you really probably should be looking at EBS and not SBS as a solution.
Yep, it's now official. Microsoft has released some additional information about the next version of the Small Business Server product line, and we can finally start sharing some infomation about it.
SBS 2008, what we had lovingly called Cougar up until now, is part of a larger family of products known as the Windows Essential Server Solutions, which includes Cougar (SBS 2008) and Centro (Essential Business Server 2008) as the first two members of the family. The Official SBS Blog has information about the product lines, and Microsoft has posted a page for the product family as well.
The most significant change in SBS 2008 from previous releases of SBS is the inclusion of a second server in the Premium edition, moving SBS from a single-server solution to a two-server solution. SQL 2008 is included in the Premium edition along with a license for Windows Server 2008 to put SQL on the second server.
There are still a number of questions that we don't have answers for yet. The release date has not been announced. Full details about the technologies that will be bundled with SBS have not been published yet. I'm sure some of this information will be made available from Microsoft through the remainder of the development cycle, but I'm also sure that there are a few things we won't know until we get actual shipping media in our hands.
In addition, I'm also glad to officially announce that I'm working with a team of authors to bring you Microsoft Small Business Server 2008 Unleashed, which is expected to hit the bookstores around the same time the product is actually available in the marketplace. The authoring team remains under strict NDA about the product, so we won't be able to share any NDA information until the product, and the book, are finally released.
I woke up to a bit of a surprise this morning. I had a voicemail from Nordstrom's on my business and cell phone. Now, I don't normally shop Nordstrom's, but it is in the area and I am familiar with them and their offerings. But their call was to let me know that they thought a charge on my American Express card was suspicious, and they wanted to confirm the order before they completed the order process.
What was the order? A $700 handbag. Metallic brass in color. To be shipped to an address in Redmond. Obviously not mine.
At this point, I have no problem endorsing Nordstrom's as a company I would gladly do business with. They alerted me to the fraudulent charge even before American Express did (and AMEX did contact me immediately after Nordstrom's did, and since I was able to contact AMEX back first, that's where I finalized the cancellation of the order) and put the order on hold waiting my confirmation. That's a level of customer care that I can identify with as a business owner, and as a consumer as well.
Thank you, Nordstrom's, for making this an amusing story instead of a billing nightmare.
I've had a few comments show up on the series of PERC 5/i posts I had early in 2007. There have been a few questions about the status of things, so rather than respond in the comments, I thought I'd summarize what I know at this point in a separate post.
Bottom line, the alarm status of the PERC 5/i has not changed, nor will it in all likelihood. In discussions with the engineering folks at Dell, apparently there were a number of people who complained about the alarm with such ferocity that the design team decided it was best to take it out altogether. Akin to driving in a nail with a sledgehammer, I think this was a misguided and completely incorrect overreaction to the problem. If Dell wanted to make the default setting on the controller to have the alarm OFF instead of ON, I would have been fine with it. Make me enable the audible alarm if I want it, but leave it off for those who don't. But to completely remove the functionality is just beyond me.
At this time, I cannot tell if the next series of the PERC controller will have this functionality restored. The engineering folks that I spoke with said that the feedback they're getting is still in favor of having the alarm removed. I said "you're talking with the wrong people, then." I invited them to have their researchers include me in their feedback request, and I'd be more than happy to add the logical reasons to have the ability to have an alarm present but quiet by default. If you're in the same boat as I am, please take a moment to contact Dell Support and voice your thoughts on the matter. Apparently (as I've been told), they listen to loud feedback.
Secondly, on the issue of proactive monitoring, Dell still does not have a tool that will generate an alert if the array goes into a degraded condition. We have been using HoundDog to provide proactive monitoring of the health of the array for my systems with the PERC 5 controllers, and it has worked very well for our operation. You do have to install the Server Administrator tools to generate the SNMP alerts that HoundDog picks up on, but cost of the HoundDog service and running Server Administrator on the box is far less than the cost of not knowing that an array is having trouble. There are, of course, a couple of quirks. One, the SMNP trap will alert on battery conditions on the controller as well, and not tell you it's a battery issue in the alert. If the server gets powered off for any reason, the battery on the controller starts "draining" to maintain the configuration information, and when the server is powered back on, the battery goes into "recharge" mode, which triggers an SNMP even in Server Administrator, and then by HoundDog. I haven't been able to find out how to modify that, but it's probably good to know about battery conditions, so I'm leaving it alone. Two, not all Dell servers run Server Administrator, specifically the SC-series servers. I have one SC server with a mute PERC controller, and I'm tring to figure out how to monitor that. SNMP doesn't work, as Server Administrator isn't present to generate the SNMP configuration that HoundDog is looking for. I downloaded and installed the LSI software, but it has no mechanism for generating alerts, so I'm still digging on that one.
So we're not fully there yet, but getting comfortable. I will not be purchasing an SC-class server from Dell in the future, but outside of that, HoundDog has given me what I need to keep my team alerted to any problems with array controllers at a very minimal cost. I would still prefer to have the option of dealing wiht an audible alarm, and I still mention my frustration with that every time I call Dell support (which really isn't that often, but I did speak with the original tech who took my call last February over the past week about another issue, and he rememberd who I was and brought up the subject himself).
Late this last week, I had a bit of a surprise when I came home and found a package from my publisher sitting on the doorstep. It looked like a box of books, and since I hadn't ordered any additional copies of the book, I really had no idea what it might be.
So imagine my complete surprise when I opened the box and found three hardback books with a black cover and a note letting me know that the SBS 2003 Unleashed book had been translated into Polish! That's correct, "Microsoft Small Business Server 2003. Księga eksperta" is now available at your favorite Polish book reseller. Or so I've been told.
The note that came with the shipment said "we hope you're pleased with the translation." Since I don't read Polish, that's going to be difficult. But I did skim through the book and noted that many of the screenshots were redone in the localized version of SBS. But not all. The Mac screenshots were left pretty much intact. As were many of the Exchange shots. But that's about all I can tell.
Anyone who reads Polish want to review the book and let me know if they did a good translation?
Sometimes life throws you a curve ball. Sometimes it throws you a curve ball, followed by a sinker, a wicked change-up, then a knuckleball. Yeah, that's my story this week.
I was asked to come to Redmond to work on a training and certification project for Microsoft. I've made a number of trips to Seattle, so making arrangements was nothing new. The company bringing us out had us booked into a hotel that wasn't really close to the MS campus, and I didn't feel like dealing with a shuttle back and forth all week, so I decided to rent a car for this trip. Ooh! New and exciting! I'll finally get to drive around the area and begin to really get a feel for the layout of the Seattle area. I made arrangements for the car, had the flight booked, hotel was set, so last Sunday I started my travel adventure.
Please note, all names have been changed to protect the innocent. From me.
An associate of mine, I'll call him Bill since that's not his name, was coming for the same project and arrived a couple of hours before I did. I had let him know of my plans for the car rental, but had told him there was really no point in waiting 2.5 hours after his very long flight just to catch a ride with me. Well, as soon as I touched down, I got a text message from Bill with his cell phone number, then got a call from Bill. Turns out Bill's flight had been delayed in Salt Lake City because of snow, and he was still at the airport. I offered to take Bill to the hotel once I picked up the rental car, and plans were made.
So I picked up my bags from the carousel (after about a 25 minute delay) and headed over to the car rental stand. When I made my reservation with Steve's Auto Rental (again, not their name), I chose them not because they were the cheapest (they weren't) or the most expensive (they weren't) but becuase they were one of the lowest cost rental places with a gate at the airport, even though you had to take a shuttle to their actual site. I mention that specifically because when we got to the gate at the airport, it was closed and we were instructed to take the shuttle directly. Finding the shuttle was fun, but the shuttle driver finally found us (the lot told him the wrong pick up point) and we made our way to the lot to get the car.
Back in 2003, I had lasik laser vision correction performed so I no longer had to lug my glasses around. Second-best health thing I have done for myself, and I highly recommend it to anyone who wears glasses. Why do I mention this? Because I turned 40 the Friday before I left for Seattle. Still not seeing the connection? My driver's license expired when I turned 40. Still guessing? I never got around to removing my glasses restriction from my license when I had lasik done, so I went down to the DMV, on my birthday (why do anything in advance) to take the vision test in person and get the restriction removed. Which means I have a temporary license card until they send me the new one in 2-3 weeks.
I told you that to tell you this - when I went to get my license out to complete the rental of the car, the temporary card wasn't in my wallet. Gone. Must have fallen out at some point between Friday and Monday and just wasn't there. So I rummaged around trying to find it, hoping the counter clerk might take pity, but that's the one thing she absolutely stuck to was not renting to me with an expired license. Fortunately, Bill was there with me and he took the reservation and the car. Whew! Situation resolved.
It still took a long time to get through the process of getting the car, even with the proper documentation, so it was nearly 30 minutes later before Bill was able to go get the car. He pulled the car up to the front door of the lot, where our luggage was, and leaving it running to warm up the heater (did I mention it's cold in Seattle this time of year?) he got out and stepped around back to open the hatch on the back of the SUV import, but couldn't get it open. We both tried to get it to open, to no avail. The "handle" as it were was not terribly obvious, so Bill went back to the driver's seat to see if there was a secret latch needed to open the hatch when he realized that the driver's door was locked. With the car running. Well, at least we knew why the hatch wouldn't open.
Bill went back in to the rental agent and explained the dilemma. And we waited. Because they have no spare keys for the vehicles. And the rental agent wasn't really sure what to do. Shortly, Bill spoke with a manager who attempted to make a replacement key based on the keycode for the car. No dice. A short while later, the manager made another key, thinking the first key wasn't made properly. No dice. The guy who really knew about the keys was driving the shuttle, and we had to wait for him to return. He tried to make a key, same result. Eventually, he tried making a key using the keycode for the other vehicle of the same make/model, just in case, and it worked. We quickly loaded our luggage in the vehicle and headed towards the hotel. And arrived just a scan 3 hours after my flight landed.
Fast forward to my return trip on Thursday. I arrived at the airport shortly before 8am for a 10am flight back to DFW. Having plenty of time, I meandered through the bookstores to get something to read on the flight back, then waited for my regular food spot to open so I could get "lunch" before getting on the plane. I got to the terminal about 40 minutes before flight time, 10 minutes before boarding should have started. And noticed that my flight number was on a different gate. And was showing a delayed flight time. Noon instead of 10. So, i stood in line to see what the story was, and the gate agents start relaying a lot of information. First, we'll all have to go pick up our luggage from the baggage claim area and recheck at the ticket counter. Then those who are terminating their flight in Dallas won't have to pick up their luggage, but everyone else will. Then those who are connecting through to Cancun won't have to pick up their luggage, and they've already been moved to a different flight, but they were processed before the rest of us were. Then the gate agents (now plural instead of singular), started handing out cards with the American Airlines reservation number on them so we can call and make other arrangements, because now the flight has been bumped back to 3:15pm instead of noon. Only I didn't get a card, because I'm next in line, and apparently it will take less time for me to wait to talk with the gate agent than it will to call in.
The 11:30 flight to Dallas was already overbooked because of the adjustments they made to those with connecting flights, but they got me on standby. But they did go ahead and book me a confirmed seat on the 1:30 flight to Dallas. Good thing that Seattle to Dallas is a popular route, because some folks were booked onto later flights, but at least I think everyone got an alternate flight arranged with minimal difficulty.
While waiting for the standby line for the 11:30 flight, I received an automated noticiation that the flight originally scheduled for 9:50am, then 12:00, then 3:15, had just flat been cancelled. Suddenly I was really glad I didn't decide to just wait and stay on the original flight. As expected, I didn't make the 11:30 flight, which didn't actually leave until 12:00, so after they cleared the flight, I was called up to get my boarding pass for the 1:30 flight. Then I went back to my corner to wait.
While waiting for the 1:30 flight, the gate agents started making announcements about that fight being full and those who had not already checked in for standby but were wanting standby weren't going to get standby on that flight and to wait until the next flight at 2:50. 1:00 came and went, and the plane we were supposed to get on to fly out at 1:30 wasn't at the terminal yet, so no one had deplaned and the crew had not started cleaning the plane when we should have been boarding. Huge surprise given the way the day had gone thus far.
At about 1:15, the gate agent started asking for those with flexible travel plans to check in at the counter, as they were going to offer them $300 flight vouchers if they would take a seat on the 2:50 flight, which they pointed out *was* running on time. I was really, really tempted to volunteer my seat, but since that would have put me back in Dallas (if everything were actually on time) at 9pm and my wife isn't crazy about driving in the dark, I passed on the offer for basically a free round-trip back to Seattle and stuck with my booked 1:30 flight.
Which started boarding at 1:45.
Once I finally got on the plane, I realized that I was in a bulkhead seat, the first row immediately behind the first class section. While I initially rejoiced at the notion that I'd have all kinds of leg room, I also realized that I wouldn't be able to stash my carryon on the floor near me. And since that particular seat had no room in its overhead bin (that's where they store the "emergency" supplies), I had to stick my carryon items in the overhead compartment across the aisle. Fortunately, I had just bought a new (and fairly long) book, so I pulled that from my backpack and settled in with lots of legroom for a four hour flight with a good book.
As it turns out, the flight didn't have any issues once we took off (just after 2pm) and with the tailwinds helping push us west to east, the four hour flight only took about 3 hours. All in all, I arrived safely, although later than I would have liked. The flight didn't take off until well after I was originally scheduled to land, but again, it could have been much worse. I could have been with the group trying to get to Cancun who ultimatly missed their connecting flight. Or the group going to Ft. Lauderdale who opted to reroute to Miami and drive to Ft. Lauderdale from there. Or the couple trying to get to Panama City who ended up having to stay overnight in Dallas to catch the first flight the next day. I was able to sleep at home in my own bed and didnt' have to drive another 4 hours in a car following a landing.
Can't wait to see what transpires on my next flight back from Seattle. In February.