|
KoRMaK posted:Just tell them to use chrome and change all IE shortcuts to launch Chrome. "Why does my internet look different?"
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
Renegret posted:"Why does my internet look different?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:It's IE 11.1 I'm used to IE 5 can't you just make it work?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:Have you tried to run the website in IE Compatibility Mode? nexxai posted:It's an HTTPS site - have you checked the time/timezone? Can you see if the certificate is missing one of the certs in the chain? KoRMaK posted:Just tell them to use chrome and change all IE shortcuts to launch Chrome.  Great Beer posted:Is it just that site or is it all HTTPS sites? I had a machine that couldn't access HTTPS sites a while back and it ended up being due to a DLL file that hadn't registered properly. TBH I don't know if we've tried other HTTPS sites. This looks promising, doing it after I get some lunch. CommanderApaul fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
Is it just that site or is it all HTTPS sites? I had a machine that couldn't access HTTPS sites a while back and it ended up being due to a DLL file that hadn't registered properly. I ended up copying all of the files listed at http://www.techsupportall.com/solved-cannot-access-secure-sites-https-websites-not-opening-view/ into a batch file and running that and it worked.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
wa27 posted:CEO decided that our cell phone bill was too high and wants to replace almost everyone's work-provided smartphones with a $30 stipend. I managed to talk her into exempting me as well, but this isn't going to go over well with everyone else. Well, this became official this morning. Going from 44 lines to 4. $30 stipend for smartphones, $20 for dumbphones. What's worse is I work in mental health, so all our phones are for therapists and foster care workers. I'm sure they'll be thrilled with having to give their personal numbers to clients. Oh, but we let them take their number, so they're free to pay for a whole second line if they want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Wow, gently caress that. Awesome way to make everyone hate the company. I bet she will get millions for a bonus for "saving money".
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
wa27 posted:Well, this became official this morning. Going from 44 lines to 4. $30 stipend for smartphones, $20 for dumbphones. Wait, this is healthcare? Won't that cause legal issues when people are taking healthcare-related calls with possibly confidential information on their personal phones?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:Wow, gently caress that. Awesome way to make everyone hate the company. I presented an option to cut the bill by about 1/4 that involved an optional stipend where only a handful of people would need to take it, but this plan will cut the costs by 1/2 so of course we'll do that! Luckily it will be a very slow rollout (as people's contracts expire to avoid paying ETFs), so maybe they'll realize what a bad idea it is sooner rather than later. President Ark posted:Wait, this is healthcare? Won't that cause legal issues when people are taking healthcare-related calls with possibly confidential information on their personal phones?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
.. not to mention putting the phone purchasing decisions in the hands of users will force you to start supporting every piece of poo poo phone you've never dreamed of having to deal with. What do you mean this Nokia Lumia 510 doesn't support BBM? welp, I'm stuck with it for two years now! Edit : Disclaimer : I just pulled 2 products out of my rear end. I don't know if the Lumia 510 supports BBM or not. Nerdrock fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Also what do you do if someone leaves? Customers keep calling them? Gonna take their personal number back?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
President Ark posted:Wait, this is healthcare? Won't that cause legal issues when people are taking healthcare-related calls with possibly confidential information on their personal phones? Not to mention the obvious great idea it is to give your phone number to people who need mental health work. I don't know what kind of therapy your folks do, but this seems like a recipe for instant lawsuits when someone gets harassed by phone by some guy with paranoid schizophrenia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Jedi425 posted:Not to mention the obvious great idea it is to give your phone number to people who need mental health work. I don't know what kind of therapy your folks do, but this seems like a recipe for instant lawsuits when someone gets harassed by phone by some guy with paranoid schizophrenia. I mean it shouldn't even get to that point, why would people allow their personal number to be given to clients period? And even if you're so goddamn spineless that you'd let this happen, at least get a drat Google Voice number and give them that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:"Internet Explorer Cannot Display the Webpage" error for only a single site, only in IE, and only on this one computer, for all user accounts on that computer. I'm kindof at a loss on what else to do and am looking for suggestions. This is a new deployment of our Windows 7 base image and this is the only one having issues. I can tell you what the problem most likely is. Any time that you cannot get to a secure website, and ONLY a secure website, you need to follow Method 4 from this http://support.microsoft.com/kb/813444
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
FireSight posted:I can tell you what the problem most likely is. Did this after lunch, still nothing. And it's only this specific website, I pulled up a dozen other https sites just fine. I'm just going to give him the option of keeping on using Chrome for this website and IE for everything else, or me kidnapping his machine the next time he's off during the week and reimaging it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
So a phone call came in, nobody at the site that the Sr resubnetted can get onto the wireless After finding the IP for the WAP which he didn't document, it took me a while to log in. From what I can tell, he logged in to change the management password and the password to connect to the wireless, but didn't update any DNS information on the switch itself. So if someone could connect, it wouldn't work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:Did this after lunch, still nothing. And it's only this specific website, I pulled up a dozen other https sites just fine. I'm just going to give him the option of keeping on using Chrome for this website and IE for everything else, or me kidnapping his machine the next time he's off during the week and reimaging it. Just a specific secure website, and it's only him? Ok, I'm stumped then. Usually when the secure website dll bug kicks in, people only NOTICE it on one page (because most people rarely visit secure websites).
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
President Ark posted:Wait, this is healthcare? Won't that cause legal issues when people are taking healthcare-related calls with possibly confidential information on their personal phones? Note that this isn't actually a HIPAA violation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Note that this isn't actually a HIPAA violation. But does the HR person know that? Probably
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
FireSight posted:Just a specific secure website, and it's only him? Ok, I'm stumped then. Usually when the secure website dll bug kicks in, people only NOTICE it on one page (because most people rarely visit secure websites). Yeah, it's weird as hell. And it's not just him, it's any user account on his workstation, so I can't just blow away his profile either. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:Yeah, it's weird as hell. And it's not just him, it's any user account on his workstation, so I can't just blow away his profile either. does he have a hosts file that breaks that domain only? Malware infestation?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Note that this isn't actually a HIPAA violation. Wouldn't it be if someone left you a voicemail? Also, emails probably would be; even if the email service itself is encrypted, you could probably get dinged if your phone is unlocked and not able to be remotely wiped if it's stolen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Yeah, it could easily become a HIPAA violation if you can't control what kinds of phones are used and what features are on the phone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Oh, man, today has been serendipitous pain in the rear end. We've been waiting for a few months for our chance at jumping on a recently offered fiber internet connection. A few weeks ago, the techs finally go around to running our fiber lines and installing all our equipment, and the only thing preventing us from moving from 50/2.5 to a sweet 100/100 connection has been waiting on their business department to issue us an IP address. Earlier today, our cable internet connection died when a building caught fire and partially collapsed on the lines a few blocks down the road. No time frame on when it will be back up and operational ("could be a few hours or a few days, depending on what's wrong"). Our entire operation, meanwhile, is now riding on a single lovely backup DSL connection. We are hobbling along and barely functioning. Lo and behold, I get an email from the fiber people saying that they will be contacting me in about an hour with our IP information for the new connection 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Ursine Asylum posted:Wouldn't it be if someone left you a voicemail? Also, emails probably would be; even if the email service itself is encrypted, you could probably get dinged if your phone is unlocked and not able to be remotely wiped if it's stolen. A voicemail probably isn't a violation (patients are free to share their information with whoever). Providers are generally not stupid enough to leave voicemails with identifying information even on business phones. Email security is just as much a violation on their company-issued cellphones, basically. You're free to say "enroll in our MDM if you want work email, otherwise we'll give you a soft token and you can log into OWA".
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:Yeah, it's weird as hell. And it's not just him, it's any user account on his workstation, so I can't just blow away his profile either. Check that SSL 3.0 and TLS 1.0 is checked in advanced options. Also that protected mode is turned off the zone the website is in. There's an issue with IE and sites that use TLS where protected mode rejects the cert if certain options aren't set in Apache. I really wish IE would give some indicator it did this rather than just doing it silently so the server throws 403.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
"I think there's something wrong with my dev environment." code:
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
wa27 posted:I presented an option to cut the bill by about 1/4 that involved an optional stipend where only a handful of people would need to take it, but this plan will cut the costs by 1/2 so of course we'll do that! Luckily it will be a very slow rollout (as people's contracts expire to avoid paying ETFs), so maybe they'll realize what a bad idea it is sooner rather than later. "I don't have a phone. No, no cell phone. No land line. Sorry."
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
sfwarlock posted:"I think there's something wrong with my dev environment." Sr developer? Possibly brought in on a work visa?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:"I don't have a phone. No, no cell phone. No land line. Sorry." "Welp, then I'll be reading email between 9 and 5 when I'm in the office, and I'll take a real phone thanks." e: We don't even have OWA. The only non-BB method to access email from outside the office is Outlook via citrix, which only works on company imaged laptops. Collateral Damage fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Mar 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
FireSight posted:Oh god, only now do I discover this thread exists. So... This matches up quite nicely with my vision of how Ubiquiti operated. Fix glaring issues with hardware? gently caress it, new shiny thing to focus on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Caged posted:This matches up quite nicely with my vision of how Ubiquiti operated. Fix glaring issues with hardware? gently caress it, new shiny thing to focus on. The real problem is that tech support, QA, RMA and sales have no say in anything. The company is "run by the engineers". We couldn't even make suggestions of things to add or of types of products that we see a lot of requests for. So when something is seriously broken, like the AirCam stuff? The engineers would rather scrap it entirely than fix it, because it would be easier and more interesting to build a new product than to fix the old one. It didn't help that the software guys were in San Jose while the hardware team were in Lithuania, and they not only didn't communicate well, they never ever LOOKED at existing security camera poo poo to see exactly what they needed it to do. The system worked on a small scale, even on large scale over a short period. The issues became apparent when we had customers emailing in with 10+ cameras connecting to one NVR, and had them running for more than a few weeks. They basically came out as really good on the network side of things, decent on the access point side of things (the poo poo worked, and worked well, but it had documentation issues and features that were announced that the engineers PLANNED to add and... never did...), and pretty terrible on anything else. And holy hell was the tech support/RMA team understaffed. The backlog of unanswered tickets was over 600 when I came onboard, and even answering 100-150 tickets a day, with one other dude doing email support and the third guy answering voicemails, we could NOT get the ticket queue under control, which meant that the RMA poo poo ended up being put into a massive pile that we would occasionally try to get rid of... but this meant that people could be waiting up to 2 months to get replacements shipped out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:Sr developer? Possibly brought in on a work visa? To be fair, if your dev environment is missing stdio.h, two things are pretty much guaranteed: 1. Your dev environment is hosed, and 2. Most devs aren't going to necessarily know how to deal with that, especially if you're in a company that doesn't give out local-admin access. If I hit something like that on a machine I was deving on, my typical debug steps would be: - Log onto a machine that has stdio.h, see where it's located by default - Check that directory on my machine, see if it exists, and if a bunch of poo poo is missing - Backup my homedir, wipe my machine, and find a better dev image to put on it And I have to do my own build engineering, so I'm probably more OS-minded than a lot of Visual Studio-trained developers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
NZAmoeba posted:Nope! Figure out the immigration process and start importing goons for a better life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
Ursine Asylum posted:To be fair, if your dev environment is missing stdio.h, two things are pretty much guaranteed: Better! Someone installed Linux on that machine, did a "which gcc", and called it good because gcc was already installed. Except that it didn't work out of the box. I recreated using a livecd: code:code:
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
apt-get install build-essential
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:apt-get install build-essential That works too. Probably because: code:
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
sfwarlock posted:That works too. Probably because: Yeah it's a meta-package which I always use when I need to build software on a fresh system.  Saves a bunch of typing. For Red Hat I use yum groupinstall "Development tools" but that one is more comprehensive, it includes things like bison, flex, m4 etc...
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
e: wrong thread. I need a nap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
nitrogen posted:e: wrong thread. I need a nap. I missed the original post so I'm assuming it was about Gwar. We're all sad about it, there's no wrong thread to express that. No tickets came in as I start week 13 of beating my head against the unemployment wall. I really must be doing something wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 23:41
|
|