THE OFFICIAL BLOG OF THE SBS "DIVA" : Rants

You gotta love patch management in an airport, don't cha?

bradley — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:40:00 GMT

You can't see it well but that message in the middle of the airport screen is "you must restart your computer for updates to complete".... or something along those lines. The other icon on the bottom right is a message about unused icons. Which, correct me if I'm wrong, don't you only get that if you are a local admin on the box?

You gotta love patch management in an airport, don't cha?

The reality of patching

bradley — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 07:49:00 GMT

Remember that skit with Lily Tomlin where she represented the phone company?

"We are omnipotent". There are times I think people think that Microsoft's patching department thinks like this.

There are folks out there that think there are divisions in Redmond that are tasked with spyware better known as Windows Genuine Advantage and Office Genuine Advantage.

There are folks out there that think there are engineers in Redmond that have remote control buttons that remotely reboot computers at night for patching just at the opportune time to have the person lose data.

The reality is vastly different.

Fact 1: Windows update settings never spontaneously change. Ever. If you think your settings changed, look in the windowsupdate.log file in the c:\windows directory. You will probably find that either something got installed that changed the settings, or that you forgot that you set them that way.

Fact 2: Periodically the AU engine underneath Windows updates gets updated. This engine update occurs even if you have it set to 'notify only'. This is updating the under plumbing of the AU engine. It's happened several times in the past. And it always silently updates just fine in the past. They do blog and warn people it's coming (see the http://blogs.technet.com/mu blog for details)

Fact 3: Security patches get deployed on the second Tuesday of the month. Then there are non security updates that get released at the end of the month on the 4th Tuesday. You can track these releases by looking at this http://support.microsoft.com/kb/894199 . There is a set release intended.

Fact 4: Not all patches are security patches. Thus there are times you don't NEED to get patches on asap. Conversely there are times you want to push up the deployment of a service pack that you'd otherwise hold back on. Windows 2008 sp2 is one of these "you want it on the box" service pacsk.

Fact 5: The people who code up Windows genuine advantage and Office genuine advantage do not secretly work for Apple, nor do they code spyware into the software. While some argue that the WGA and now OGA should only do the test for validation once, the argument from the Redmond camp is that you need to protect yourself and retest the validity of software to ensure that you didn't get ripped off from a repair person. I say they need to make the replacement media easier to get. I'm still not sure if I should be more mad at OEMs or more mad at Microsoft for how hard it is to get repair media but that's another rant blog post for another day.

Fact 6: Microsoft documents what each patch does and what the known issues are in each security bulletin at the top of each section. You think I magically know the side effects? I read the bulletins. I also look at the patches being installed and unlike some vendors and journalists that were taken to task by Ed Bott, the goal for each Tuesday patching is to first step back and ask yourself if it makes any sense that the patch is doing what you think it's doing. Prevx's claims that the updates were hardening registry keys didn't make sense. Microsoft would have documented these changes. They don't randomly throw out code. And for all of the pain of patch Tuesday you think you see, there are gazillions of folks that get through Patch Tuesday just fine.

Fact 7: Microsoft never blocks your Windows update settings. If they are blocked you are either in a domain and the group policy on the server is controlling it, you have had a malware infection and the malware mangled the registry keys, or you've installed some lovely security software that decided that their security center was so vastly better than Microsoft's that they've taken it over.

Fact 8: That warning the system gives you in the beginning of the install that they warn you to choose to install updates during the installation because if you don't the install could fail and you could be insecure is false. At the present time, there are no installer only patches that fix things during the install. Furthermore installing security updates during the intial install is placing the system more at risk as I guarantee that the Server teams and the Win7 teams are not testing build installs every time a patch comes out. When the system is built, the firewall is enabled on the nic anyway, so exactly how do they think you are more at risk from attack is beyond me as well. Not to mention most of us build servers and workstations behind firewalls anyway.

At the end of the day if you really think the operating system you use is that out to get you, maybe you need to find another operating system. Because there is an element of trust that must be made with all software vendors.

To the folks at Prevx who just damaged the trust of patching just a little bit more due to the "black screen of death" story fiasco ....way to go guys and thanks for the help in destroying it more.

Microsoft opens up Windows 7 to advertisers via downloadable themes

bradley — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:13:00 GMT

Microsoft opens up Windows 7 to advertisers via downloadable themes | All about Microsoft | ZDNet.com:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=4538
Personalization Gallery - Windows themes, backgrounds and gadgets - Microsoft Windows:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/downloads/personalize

What?!!! No Mini Cooper Theme? Call Ballmer! Call SteveS! Get Gates out of retirement immediately!

I'll have to see if I can hack something up because this is not acceptable.

I've lost the faith

bradley — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:37:00 GMT

...in Antivirus.

So for anyone running Trend, go look in your c:\Program Files\Trend Micro folder as you probably have a huge growing mass of a program that is sucking up more and more of your C:\. Meanwhile name an antivirus vendor that doesn't miss a rogue a/v and why are we paying for these antivirus solutions again?

It's gotten so bad for me that I've actualy totally removed Trend and am now doing a full scale test with Forefront client security. My only complaint right now is that the a/v is only sold under a 3 year open value license. So far it's like Microsoft Security Essentials but with an obvious business eula.

It's quiet. It doesn't make me question why I'm buying it.

At what point in time did the technet content pages turn into "the lost souls of support" pages?

bradley — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 02:42:00 GMT

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd335033(WS.10).aspx

At what point in time did the technet content pages turn into "the lost souls of support" pages?

The sections at the bottom are for clarifications of content, not to be posting "help me, something broke".

With Microsoft having forums and newsgroups and Partner support forums, isn't it bad enough that I see Twitter being used as a support channel as well as Facebook, and now the content pages of Technet that no support personnel looks at and it's only PowerShell MVP Thomas Lee who must have carpel tunnel syndrome from posting "this isn't really the place to be for help" in nearly all of the PowerShell Technet content and various security/firewall content I've seen?

Take for example this lovely Technet content on Windows Firewall - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc722062(WS.10).aspx where we have Skype problems, Limewire problems, virus problems, msn games problems, msn doesn't want to connect, yahoo messenger, msn issues [apparenly MSN and Microsoft firewalls have lots of issues, I see a trend], email issues, xbox 360, wireless issues, games, start up problems, freezing windows, viruses, paltalk issues, system turning off, can't print, can't play cd's, Norton security issues, Firewall issues, Live messenger issues, internet downloading issues, Frostwire issues,

And tirelessly Thomas posts back:
[tfl - 22 02 09] You should post questions like this to the Technet Forums at http://forums.microsoft.com/technet or the MS Newsgroups at http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/. You are much more likely get a quick response using the forums than through the Community Content.
For specific help about:
Exchange : http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?sel=usenet%3Dmicrosoft.public.exchange%2C&
SQL Server : http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?sel=usenet%3Dmicrosoft.public.sqlserver%2C&
Windows : http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?sel=usenet%3Dmicrosoft.public.windows%2C&
Windows Server : http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?sel=usenet%3Dmicrosoft.public.windows.server%2C&
Virtual Server : http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.virtualserver/topics?lnk
Full Public : http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?sel=usenet%3Dmicrosoft.public%2C&

It's a wiki type of landing page, it's NOT a support forum. Google is not doing you any favors here in dumping you into a place that NO ONE LOOKS at. And some of these posts are recent and they just joined.

Folks, the technet wiki pages are to add to content, not to ask questions in a forum. If people can't find their way either because the page where they end up isn't clear where to go, then search that brings you to the wrong spot, isn't helping the issue here.

We have a failure in content, a failure in search, a failure in support if people aren't finding the right place to go.

The moral of this HyperV story is ....

bradley — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:16:00 GMT

Why am I so blonde when it comes to virtual networking in HyperV?

I have 4 nics, only one in use.

I have the virtual network with the "external" selected and connected to that nic. I've compared the settings I have to my HyperV box at home where I have a similar setup and yet the internal SBS will not get Internet connectivity. I can't figure out why it's not connecting.

Anyone have the once again blonde instructions for Virtual networks in HyperV?

Why is HP so blonde when it comes to HyperV? I realized that inside the network card properties that there was an HP teaming software. HP teaming software is starting to be up there with my hatred of broadcoms. First off do not team nics on SBS 2008. Secondly I could not figure out WHY I could not get my HyperV/Parent/child networking talking to the Internet. The parent could, the child would not.

I disabled all nic cards except for the one I was using. I turned off everything that said “offload” or “receive side scaling”. Still nothing. I compared my working HyperV to my non working one at the office.

I googled and bingled and hit Ben’s blog http://blogs.msdn.com/virtual_pc_guy/archive/2008/01/08/understanding-networking-with-hyper-v.aspx and then when I was looking at his nic card images it hit me. There was a HP networking helper protocol that came in with the driver update and the check box was greyed out and you couldn’t uncheck it. Dang. So I go looking for something in add/remove Programs and features. Nothing. Dang again. Hang on, I CAN uninstall it from the networking properties [note to self in anticipation of later blogging/ranting I should have gotten a screen shot here] and I told the item to be uninstalled. It needed a reboot of the box. The minute the box came back up, voila. SBS 2008 now has Internet connection like it should.

The moral of this story is MAKE SURE the nic card doesn’t have ANYTHING ELSE but bog standard stuff. Get rid of anything HP driver ish in the nic setting properties. And don’t do nic teaming on SBS.

Windows Vista Ultimate customers

bradley — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 06:27:00 GMT

While I applaud what Microsoft is doing in the retail space (decrapifying the PCs to start with, offering deals on Home Premium and Professional - http://www.microsoft.com/windows/offers/ms-store-bundle.aspx, there's one other group of users that need a bit more TLC.

Those that believed in the Vista ultimate experience. While their Home Premium and Professional brethern get discounts, those who are running Vista Ultimate get no discount whatsoever

http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vistawu/thread/5bad261b-4103-4f38-b76d-da2d632e2ef2

Many are in the "Windows Update" forum asking where their update to Windows 7 is since they suffered through Vista.

Ultimate users were promised extra "stuff' and it never was delivered. Oh sure if you want to count the few crumbs that were thrown out, and the 47 million language packs that were marketed as an "ultimate extra" but now when it's their turn to look for upgrade offers, there are none to be found.

So? Microsoft? How about coming out with some peace offering for your Windows Vista Ultimate customers, huh?

Now I REALLY HATE broadcom nics

bradley — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 05:14:00 GMT

Did you know that Dell doesn't recommend that you update the broadcom drivers from the inplace driver update (control panel, device manager)? If you do you run the risk of corrupting the driver?

"A quick recap:

Enable both nics (write down the IP addresses). Uninstall the previous ver. Of Bcom suite. Reboot install the new Bcom suite you downloaded. Reboot put in the static IP and disable 2nd nic. Reboot have a cleint reboot and log in.

Before the client system reboots make sure the server is up.

(if you have layer 3 or 4 switches or routers it takes 90 sec each for the arp cache to renew)"

And just a reminder if you go to remove a driver -- http://blogs.technet.com/sbs/archive/2009/09/01/device-manager-may-seem-to-hang-while-uninstalling-a-nic.aspx

"iTunes has stopped working"

bradley — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 03:34:00 GMT

Apple - Support - Discussions - "iTunes has stopped working" on ...:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=10194773
A Solution to the "iTunes has stopped working" Problem on Vista « Avoiding the Chasm:
http://vextasy.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/a-solution-to-the-itunes-has-stopped-working-problem-on-vista/

Neither of those worked btw.... fortunately my Zune player still works....

One disappointment in Snow Leopard

bradley — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:02:00 GMT

..that I hoped that Mac would finally showcase that they'd grown up was the image of what the Windows desktops and servers look like on the network:

(image from http://twitter.com/mikkohypponen/statuses/3783709301)

Yup as I can attest to myself.. they still have a bsod as an image.

I rarely, if ever these days, have a bsod and when I do I rejoice... because it means there's probably a .dmp file on the box that I can debug -- http://blogs.technet.com/petergal/archive/2006/03/23/422993.aspx

But Apple, come on. Next version, take that out.

The balance of security and usability

bradley — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:23:00 GMT

Microsoft makes progress with the security of their products but will not put security first - Security Park news:
http://www.securitypark.co.uk/security_article263444.html
The problem is that Microsoft are not providing management around the XP mode virtual machine (VM). This creates the potential for a security disaster. XP mode is an independent Windows instance, that shares the odd folder and device with the host Windows 7 installation. What it doesn't share is processes and memory. So it doesn't share security settings, security software, patches etc. It does not inherit any security from the host. When you use XP mode, you need to patch the copy of XP as well as the host Windows 7. You need to manage settings separately, configure two personal firewalls and install and manage two copies of anti-malware software.

So surely the new security conscious Microsoft must have provided tools to help us manage all of this? Wrong! Microsoft's view is that this is your problem, unless you're prepared to invest in a full Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) system. You already know how to manage VMs on all your desktops, don't you? So you can manage this one too.

.......

5. Demand that Microsoft do better - We understand that they're not a security company, but XP mode, as it stands doesn't meet the bar. It is a barrier to Windows 7 migration, because it increases costs and complexity.

No doubt there are people at Microsoft who are passionate about security and extremely competent, but they can't slow the Windows 7 juggernaut. Sophos can't do that either, but maybe you can. XP mode is not a bad idea, but without built-in management, it's a security disaster. We all need to tell Microsoft that the current choices of no management, or major investment in VDI are not acceptable. Then we need to remember that, however well intentioned, Microsoft will not put security first.Opinion piece submitted by Richard Jacobs, Chief Technology Officer Sophos .

------

Dear Mr. Jacobs, before I do a show and tell as to why there is a XP Mode, a little bit of background you might want to read:

XP Mode vs. Med-V - Springboard Series Blog - The Windows Blog:
http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/springboard/archive/2009/08/08/xp-mode-vs-med-v.aspx

You see Microsoft has provided a management for virtualization. Yes you have to pay for it (hey, this is Microsoft we're talking here), but if you want to ensure that you can drag your line of business application vendors into at least the NT era, XP Mode isn't for the firm that needs a "managed" system. It's for me to ensure that the bosses have a nice Windows 7 experience and still be to use their ancient software so we can stop buying XP operating systems.

It's for me to prove a point by installing a 1980s era 16 bit accounting application on a 64bit platform and not have the application refuse to run on our lovely brand new 64bit hardware that has the DEP in the browser and the IE8 sandbox isolation and the jump lists and all the other stuff. XP is indeed a 9 year old platform built for when botnets were a gleam in someone's eye and antivirus truly worked and we weren't fighting Fake Antivirus as much as we are fighting the viruses.

Due to XP mode we can now take that vintage "Duran Duran era" accounting application and have it run on a modern system.

That's a 16bit application of One Write plus running in XPMode on top of a 64bit Windows 7.

(For the record we really don't run One Write Plus I just went to our closet of old accounting software and tried to find the oldest thing we had. Believe or not, I did have to install it the other day on a XP to open up a file we needed to investigate... so there are clients out there that still run old applications. And the boss is running Vista and liking it)

Microsoft is doing better. "I" need to do better by deploying my older applications more securely. And I will be managing that XP Mode. I can be joined to the domain, patched with WSUS, monitored with a Kasaya agent (for those in the MSP crowd) just like a real OS.

But it's not a security boundary. It's a wake up call that for every application that I MUST use that mode for, that it's a drag on our systems. It's an answer to compatibility, and it should be a reminder to me, to us, of what vendors we need to ensure are coding more securely.

Start selling Home and Student Edition

bradley — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 04:25:00 GMT

Next time you sell a software license, just sign them up for Action pack. Seriously. This whole bit doing the right thing and buying proper licenses is just ridiculous. In fact, just grab all the software you want from Bittorrent. If you are getting your client to pay for software, and you aren't using Home and Student edition on multiple machines, if you are making them pay full price you really should have your head examined for being an ethical business person.

Truly. You are doing your client a disservice by making them do the right thing as far as buying the proper licenses. You really should tell them how to beat the system.

Think I've lost my mind? Read this article:

Microsoft apps--only suckers pay retail | Rafe's Radar - CNET News:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-19882_3-10302186-250.html

The integrity of journalism lately has me flabberghasted. And this is no exception.

This "journalist" is advocating unethical business behavior. And his justification is that everyone does it, so why shouldn't you? Meanwhile what he doesn't go into, is the fact that if you do these things you are putting that firm at risk for fines and penalties from the Business Software Association.

Furthermore his lack of reporting skills leaves something to be desired. He states that

You'll pay. I asked the Microsoft Volume Licensing Web page to give me a quote on 10 licenses of Microsoft Office Standard, and it quoted me $588 per user. I got the same price for 100 licenses. If you ever wondered why Microsoft is such a rich company, this explains it. So the smaller company might want to skip the official business versions of the apps and go with standard retail products. There is also, obviously, a big temptation for very small companies to push things a bit and try to qualify for Microsoft's special or home programs that yield huge discounts on the company's software.

What he totally FAILED to understand (granted trying to understand licensing is trying to understand the Win7 upgrade chart) is that $588 per person not only gets you Office 2007, but it will buy you Office 2010 as well as home use right.

A license for Office 2007 plus software assurance is in no way shape or form comparable to what you get as rights and benefits of a purchase of retail Office. Do all small businesses see the need for this? No. But is it in anyway comparable to what you get for retail Office? Heck no dude, and you totally MISSED the boat in reporting the FACTS of the matter.

I asked the Microsoft licensing chart and understood that I get different features and options from volume licensing versus retail.

Only suckers get sucked into reading that post and getting riled up enough to post a response back. I guess I'm a sucker for that.

Windows 7 and Line of Business

bradley — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:52:00 GMT

Windows 7 Compatibility with Lacerte products:
http://ptknova.intuit.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb1057761&sliceId=1

Windows 7 Compatibility with Lacerte products

Situation

As of July 28th, 2009 Windows 7's release date as stipulated on Microsoft's website is October 22nd, 2009.

Currently we are aware of some incompatibilities between the Lacerte program and Windows 7's Beta release.

Solution

However, similar incompatibilities have manifest themselves between Lacerte products and other Microsoft Beta releases and have not manifest themselves in the actual program release.

Additionally, we have work currently underway to support Windows Vista 64, that may resolve some of the outstanding concerns with the Windows 7 platform.

As our product launch date for Lacerte 2009 Tax is November 4th, 2009 there will not be adequate time to test the Windows 7 release in order for us to endorse it as a operating platform for the Lacerte suite of programs.

Be sure to check back for updates. As more information becomes available the information on this site will be updated.

Lacerte is a US based tax software vendor as a FYI. What concerns me more ... is not that they are saying that they only have from October 22 to November to test (I kinda suspect SOMEONE at Intuit has a MSDN subscription) but that they still do not fully support 64bit.

Windows 7 upgrades is the time to see if you can make the jump from 32 to 64 bit.

And regardless of what headlines that the latest pundits want to splash on the web -- http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2351198,00.asp -- the reality is that most businesses will not be hitting refresh on the Technet plus download site tonight waiting for the bits to be there. Rather they will be upgrading with the hardware which is as it should be.

The fact that 40% of businesses are considering an upgrade is a big thing. The fact that the preorders were a top selling item on Amazon is a big thing. The reality of the business world is that the XPMode virtualization platform will be a bit compatibility help is a big thing. And the reality that until we are all based on cloud apps, much of our lob stuff is still Windows based.

How about we all stop the hype and just see what pans out, eh?

I need your help

bradley — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 07:45:00 GMT

www.banthecheck.com

I need your help. If you see a workstation that gets an update to Sun Java and gets the offer to install Carbonate backup software, can you grab a screenshot in MSPaint, save it as a bitmap file and email it to me at susan-at-msmvps.com?

http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/blogs/mowgreen/index.php?s=5a29454c27afe407bdeab2dcfd546091&showentry=1569

Carbonate backup is the latest vendor to now be included in a security update. But I have yet to grab an image of it being offered on a machine, so if you spot one, grab a shot of the desktop and send it to me. I'll use it in an upcoming WindowsSecrets article and give you credit.

Like Steve says, enough is enough!

Beta testers prayer

bradley — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 02:57:00 GMT

Bill (or Steve or Ray), grant me the serentity to accept the things that cannot change due to change in technology; the courage to bug the things I can get changed; and the wisdom to know the difference.... oh and some patience to deal with Connect.

Mind you I'm probably in a mood tonight because the blog server is getting nailed with spam and short of sitting here deleting spam posts which makes me feel like picking out an infestation of ticks with tweezers, but I wish that the beta process could scale better sometimes. Sometimes you need a conversation, not a bug database, but conversely there needs to be accountability, thusly the need for bug database.

It's hard writing up bugs sometimes.. you know what you are talking about, but you can't explain it well. Pictures help. But if you know what you want better than what you can explain, you fail in communication.

Conversely (and what happened a lot in Windows 7) is that the bug would be closed as fixed as it was fixed in a later build, but not in the build that the buggee was looking at. And given the lack of releases, with no way for the buggee to ensure that what they bugged really and truly got fixed.

Even cloud has issues with feedback and beta testing. Intuit had to roll back some of the online bank reconcilations back to the way it was done in the 2008 era because it made more sense.

But for all those who complain "why wasnt' this caught in testing"... try being a beta tester sometimes... it's not easy.

Ban the Check

bradley — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:44:00 GMT

Dear Mr. Jobs,

Glad you are feeling better and back to work. Thanks for rushing out the iPhone patch for the Blackhat issue that was just announced this week. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1222 Kudos for getting a patch out that fast. Bet ol' Ballmer couldn't patch his phone platform that fast, huh?

But can you do me a huge favor? When you offer an update for iTunes CAN YOU STOP PRECHECKING SAFARI AND MOBILE ME? I'm getting a tad tired of you and every other vendor that sees updates as a mechanism for cramming your applications down our throats. We went down this road before and you had it unchecked. Now you are prechecking it again.

And don't think that I'm letting any other vendor off the hook, Flash with their google toolbar, Sun Java with their Microsoft MSN (now Bing) toolbar..... enough with the prechecked crud you guys keep doing.

You are violating the trust of updaters. It is no wonder that people are shutting off updates. This post is dedicated to Mow.. Steve Wechsler who found his mother's computer with every security patch installed toolbar known to mankind on it.

BleepingComputer.com -> Hey, Software "Vendors", Stop installing CRAP with your security updates !!!:
http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/blogs/mowgreen/index.php?showentry=1564

Join me in demanding from our vendors that Security updates do not offer up toolbars or any other non security related updates. No additional software should be prechecked when we are obtaining security updates.

That goes for Microsoft, Sun, Adobe, or any other vendor that prechecks a toolbar or other offering with a security update.

Grab your "Ban the check" logos from here: http://cid-c756c44362cd94ad.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/Ban%20the%20Check?uc=1&nl=1

I didn't want to add my opinion to the original announcement....

bradley — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:31:00 GMT

The Official SBS Blog : Microsoft Exchange 2007 SP2 installation is blocked on Windows SBS 2008:
http://blogs.technet.com/sbs/archive/2009/07/30/microsoft-exchange-2007-sp2-installation-is-blocked-on-windows-sbs-2008.aspx

Important update: Installing Microsoft Exchange 2007 SP2 on Windows Small Business Server 2008 currently causes problems in some web services of Windows SBS 2008 and requires manual steps to fix the problems. A prerequisite check is deployed in Microsoft Exchange 2007 SP2 setup program for Windows SBS 2008 so that Windows SBS users will be alerted and prompted before proceeding with installation.

-------------

I didn't want to add my opinion to the original announcement....

At first I was in the SBSer mode and was slightly freaking out about this. How DARE the Exchange team build a service pack that is blocked from installing via Microsoft update or WSUS? How dare they manage to build such a beast of a service pack that it needs a separate KB reading or an installer to fix back up the things they break?

But I then had to remind myself that Exchange's servicing history (or lack thereof) has always been like this. No Service pack has been able to be deployed via Microsoft update or WSUS. And in fact patches only got MU-able after Exchange 2003 sp2. I got lulled into a false sense of expectation of patching due to the fact that SBS 2008 jumped into Exchange 2007 sp1 and didn't have to deal with the service pack.

Granted as well, that I really don't want someone to blindly patch with this size and type of a Service pack without backing up the database first. But with all that justification in my brain of how crappy Exchange historically has deployed service packs, and this really isn't anything new, it is hard to justify the cost and potential for issues when there isn't much of value in this Service pack for the SMB space.

You Had Me At EHLO... : Exchange Server 2007 Service Pack 2 available in Q3 2009:
http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2009/05/11/451281.aspx

Enhanced Auditing . Okay maybe there's value there.
Exchange Volume Snapshot Backup Functionality . Already there in SBS and it's about TIME that you released this, SBS and EBS has had it since they shipped and it was promised to normal Exchange servers for months now.
Dynamic Active Directory Schema Update and Validation - Schema updates shouldn't be taken lightly and this is preparing the box for future ones
Public Folder Quota Management - hopefully they've thrown in more than just PowerShell commands as the GUI is lacking
Centralized Organizational Settings - again a PowerShell update
Named Properties cmdlets - Again this is another "I'll have to see it before making judgment"
New User Interface for Managing Diagnostic Logging - finally more GUI!

Microsoft mainstream support policy for Exchange Server 2007 remains unchanged. Microsoft will continue providing support and Update Rollups to customers running SP1 for 12 months after SP2 ships. Translation to me is that we have a full TWELVE MONTHS to get this sucker on our boxes, Thus even once we get the SBS team wrapper, there is no rush to install this on Servers.

Bottom line .... this is a service pack that I'm having a hard time justifying a value to the customer for. At least at first glance, this is one that I might apply to new clean servers, but existing SBS 2008 servers, I'm going to have to wait and see what value it has.

Other than 1 year from now I'll urge you to update to be on the update rollups for Exchange 2007 sp2... I can't see value it in ...and a lot of risk.

Authentication-as-a-Service

bradley — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 05:19:00 GMT

A new white paper commissioned by VeriSign and written by Forrester Research, Authentication-as-a-Service, combines input from hundreds of businesses and Forrester’s own industry expertise to help you understand the benefits of two factor authentication and the best ways to implement it.

You will learn:

• What two factor authentication is and how it builds customer trust
• What’s wrong with current authentication processes
• How Authentication-As-A-Service provides security in the cloud
• What to expect from Authentication-As-A-Service
• The fastest way to implement two factor authentication in your organization

Get the full survey results plus recommendations on evaluating, cost-justifying, and implementing two factor authentication as a service from Forrester’s industry-leading team of experts.

Get your copy here: http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/itwpcib/94/50525250/

Thank you,
ITwhitepapers.com

Can we stop with the "as a service" stuff and just call this a vendor providing a solution? In fact per my read of the white paper, www.authanvil.com is a provider of "Authentication as a Service" in his offerings but I never once called what the firm did a "as a service". Authanvil is just meeting the needs of the marketplace where some need an authentication service in a place where all of their clients can use the two factor process to many different servers.

Can we get off the "as a service" bandwagon and just call this stuff vendors offering solutions that are flexible to meet their customers needs?

The hidden costs of Microsoft

bradley — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 00:17:00 GMT

http://industry.bnet.com/technology/10002712/the-hidden-cost-of-microsofts-free-online-office-suite/

Dear Mr. Hinkins. When writing an article about Microsoft that includes licesning, it's a minefield. I don't know who you spoke to that quoted you that to stand up a SharePoint Server costs $4,400 plus cals, but they aren't quoting the SharePoint fees that I'm familar with.

But wait – there’s more! A Microsoft spokesperson told me that customers will need to buy a SharePoint server, which ranges from $4,400 plus CALs or $41,000, all CALs included if they want to share documents using the online version of Office 2010.

So let’s recap this notion of a free online Office suite for business:

You need a SharePoint server and license in order to collaborate, and either:
- You need to pay license fees for an on-premise version of Office 2010 or
- You need to pay an as-yet-unspecified subscription fee.
'

You need to be aware that there are TWO SharePoints out there.. one is the SharePoint Server 2007 that probably does cost a farm in Texas and is about the price tag you state, but I'll bet you that's not what is being referred to here. There is another version of SharePoint that is a free download. As long as you use SQL express and are small, you stick it on a box and it's free. In my office my Windows cals cover my licensing.

I'll bet you the SharePoint they are referring to is the hosted BPOS variety of which there are two.... one they call the "deskless" version that is read only, the other is an interactive one that you can save to. None of them cost $44,000 unless you stand up your own SharePoint Server 2007. https://mocp.microsoftonline.com/Site/Default.aspx BPOS suite which includes SharePoint is $15 a seat.

The hidden costs of Microsoft is the headache that you get trying to figure out their licensing. But I SERIOUSLY DOUBT that I will need to write a check to MIcrosoft for $44,000 to "rent" a SharePoint.

Windows SharePoint Servers is the OTHER SharePoint. The one that small businesses use now.

The Offce LIve that is a modified SharePoint is of similar cheap price tag. So Mr. Hinkins, get that calculator back out again. Because you don't need to spend $4,400 to stand up a SharePoint http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsserver/sharepoint/default.aspx

So we just want "a" phone

bradley — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:09:00 GMT

Coding Horror: The iPhone Software Revolution:
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001280.html

So someone at my office wants a phone. Not a iPhone. Not a PalmPre. Not a Windows mobile. A phone. One that will just take a cable and sync with her calendar on those occasions she wants that. But she doesn't want a data plan. She doesn't want activesync capabilitles. She doesn't need to send text messages. Nor tweet. Nor blog. Or take pictures. Or video movies. Oh and it has to be Verizon as it will get coverage on the coast.

And I cannot tell from the Verizon page which phones are JUST a phone with a little bit of software to support a calender information transfer.

She doesn't want a mobile computing platform that you can "get an app for that". Or one that has a slide out keyboard. She wants "a phone". One that has a battery life of a week or two. You know... just a phone.

Why is it that you cannot tell from the web sites what EXACTLY these phones do? And when you do want a phone that supports activeSync, sometimes it's even hard to tell that. You have to give Apple credit with their you get one size, one capability model. You know exactly what it does. And it will sync with Exchange as well as support pop-ing out to personal email. But to all other phones offered up by all of the other cell plan providers... boy is it hard to figure out which one is just "a phone".