|
Licensing? Sure, you can audit our 15 workstations with 15 copies of office and 1 server running Windows. The other 100 workstations/servers/VM's? All Linux. 
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
skipdogg posted:Why is Microsoft vilified for making sure that companies are compliant with their software licensing rules? They're vilified for making their licensing schemes unnecessarily complex and then changing all of their policies and language every few years. There are people in certain organizations whose entire role is managing the Microsoft licensing because it's such a pain in the rear end. People dread Microsoft audits even when they've done nothing wrong because it's like facing an audit from your country's revenue agency, there are no winners.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
"We just completed our Microsoft audit and Microsoft owes us thousands of dollars" said nobody ever
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Even Microsoft's licensing team doesn't understand their licensing at times; if that helps you put it in perspective a bit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
that there is an actual licensing cert should tell you that the entire process is a pain in the loving rear end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
ChubbyThePhat posted:Even Microsoft's licensing team doesn't understand their licensing at times; if that helps you put it in perspective a bit. This can't be quoted enough. I can only imagine how many people are getting hosed by the various changes to SQL licensing, among other things. A few years ago we got nailed for having too many Office Standard installs in the environment. Because of our EA agreement we can have as many Office Pro installs as we want, but not Standard. This meant we had to go through and convert all of those existing installs (hundreds of them) to Pro. It's exactly as stupid as it sounds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
If you are speaking with a rep or even someone from Microsoft about licenses make sure to triple check what they quote you, because 90% of the time they're wrong. gently caress Microsoft licensing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Our Microsoft licensing is way easier now than it was 6 or 7 years ago. It went from 13 pages of unidentifiable SKU's to 1 page. O365 E3 licenses - per user and covers O365 services and Office Pro Plus Project Online - covers Project client software and provides cloud server stuff CALS - Enterprise CAL Suite Bridge for Office 365 covers all on premise CALs not already covered Server OS - 1 Datacenter license per VMWare host, 1 Std license per physical server Desktop OS - Windows Software Assurance per User The only thing left we have to true up is the number of Visio licenses we have and our SQL servers the rest of it is simply based off our current user or server count.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
My life would be a lot easier if user CALs could be bolted onto O365 subscriptions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Server OS - 1 Datacenter license per VMWare host
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Erwin posted:Per processor you mean? 1 covers 2 sockets in 2012R2, 2016 is going to be so fun! 1 License covers 16 cores. This makes it "easier" or something I don't know. Seems more complicated and money grabbing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
pixaal posted:1 covers 2 sockets in 2012R2, 2016 is going to be so fun! 1 License covers 16 cores. This makes it "easier" or something I don't know. Seems more complicated and money grabbing. Oh right. This made me double-check our licenses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Director of Finance just ran into the IT office. "Oh my god this new system is going to save us so much time. Probably 40 hours a week keying things in. Freight, journal entries...Ryan just uploaded the FedEx file and it worked! Oh this is going to be so wonderful!" AS/400 guy sulked over to his desk, slammed his briefcase shut, and walked out the door 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
It'll work great until there's a few dozen "hey can we add this little feature" or "can you tweak this setting?" or "jimbob over in this group needs to run this report every 5 minutes, will that be a problem?" type requests piled on to it and the whole thing turns into the same pile of crap it used to be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:AS/400 guy sulked over to his desk, slammed his briefcase shut, and walked out the door Yeah but you guys are gonna be hosed when the new system is affected by chip creep
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
pixaal posted:1 covers 2 sockets in 2012R2, 2016 is going to be so fun! 1 License covers 16 cores. This makes it "easier" or something I don't know. Seems more complicated and money grabbing. Yeah, that's gonna suck. Our newest hosts have 18 cores per CPU. Not sure how that's going to work. Others have 12 or 16 cores. edit: Just looked it up. A minimum of 8 core licenses is required for each physical processor for servers with multiple processors. Single processor servers need to have 16 core licenses assigned. Looks like you can buy extra 2 core packs for servers as needed. Our 2012R2 licenses under SA will transition to 8 2core pack licenses (16 cores) That means: 12 core/2proc hosts we still have to license for 16 cores even though we only have 12 16 core/2proc hosts will license for 16 cores or 8 2packs - even steven 36 core/2proc hosts will need 18 2core pack licenses, or 10 additional after SA, which will more than double licensing costs for that server. skipdogg fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Mar 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Director of Finance just ran into the IT office. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:I kinda understand this attitude, but my company makes and sells software and we want to make sure our customers are properly licensed and pay the proper amounts. Why is Microsoft vilified for making sure that companies are compliant with their software licensing rules? It's more like, we didn't do what we were supposed to do, and we hosed ourselves. I'm not really vilifying Microsoft for wanting to make sure we are paying for their software, its their right. I just think that they are incredibly terrible at making that an easy process and are terrible to work with. When you essentially have to have someone who's sole job is figuring what the gently caress to do with licenses, there is something awry. Admittedly, our problem is the person who is in charge isn't even trying. Instead he bounces between bad ideas trying to find the right tool to fix our problems instead of figuring out why we have those problems. Oh people are busy and stressed all the time? Well they aren't managing their time, they should spend time putting what they are doing into an online project tracking site!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:16
|
|
|
mewse posted:Yeah but you guys are gonna be hosed when the new system is affected by chip creep Chip creep isn't just thermal, it's aggravated by distortion from an etherblast.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Why is Microsoft vilified for making sure that companies are compliant with their software licensing rules?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
Step 1 of the Dell Sonicwall troubleshooting play book is "have you reset the device to defaults and entered all the configuration again?". No, gently caress you, look at the logs and at least attempt to work out what is going on. It's not my fault your config files are some hideous binary things with no way of editing them so any gently caress ups caused by your abhorrent QA processes are going to stick around until you tip the piece of poo poo out the rack and throw it away.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Do you have CALs for all devices that pull an IP address from a Microsoft DHCP server? Because per their licensing rules, you need one. This would include printers, IP phones, network devices, mobile devices, and guests. Only if you don't have user CALs for everyone using the device. And if you have people with multiple devices then why would you not use user CALs? I don't disagree that the licensing poo poo is hosed up (see also vendors who use core licensing where 1 core does not equal 1 core), but this one gets posted every few months and it's way overblown.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 10:40
|
|
|
Scikar posted:Only if you don't have user CALs for everyone using the device. And if you have people with multiple devices then why would you not use user CALs? I don't disagree that the licensing poo poo is hosed up (see also vendors who use core licensing where 1 core does not equal 1 core), but this one gets posted every few months and it's way overblown. This is true, but it also means that your printers and other DHCP-devices better not use that MS DHCP server... yeah, it's retarded. Edit: I just spend the last two weeks trying to figure out our MS licensing, and - on top of that - fit it into EU public contracts. and I finally got the last bit settled. Now I have 11 months to get another sad fucker to take over this poo poo. Crowley fucked around with this message at 10:56 on Apr 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
Pissing me off: We're going ahead with a DNS cutover later tonight from our own FreeIPA servers to R53. All the zones were created and populated a few weeks ago so all that's left is to change the domain nameservers. Now, the other engineers were aware of this and were told to create new DNS records in both setups to ensure consistency. I checked the records this morning - 113 CNAME records were missing from R53. They've all been added now but given that they're supposedly senior engineers or team leads I'm going to be yelling at them in the daily meeting. Given that the old manager thought that running company infra out of a server closet was a good idea, perhaps I shouldn't be surprised. That's probably worth going into, what with tales of new cooling tripping breakers, stuff being hosted on 2nd hand hardware with no warranty, closet doors being left open for better ventilation... at least the new manager is actually doing something and getting poo poo done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 12:46
|
|
|
PIssing me off: Unnecessary meetings. Wait, scratch that. Unnecessary Friday afternoon meetings. We're in a holding pattern waiting for a customer input before we can proceed with solution design. We gave them three options we could work with. We had a meeting internally to discuss those three options. We then met with the customer to give them those three options. They committed to an answer on Monday. So, we're having another internal meeting about this for... discussing that we gave them the options? It'd be one thing if this was a design meeting and we were preparing plans based on which they choose to implement. But we've already done it. Every thing we can conceivably do without this input is done. This is an idiot PM calling this meeting to flex their "I'm an integral part of this process!". The only thing I'm looking forward to with this, is they may have made a tactical error. They invited senior management, most likely to show off. Since the "senior management" invited is my boss's boss, I interact with him a bit and he's not a fan of time wasters or people trying to blow smoke. So this may be fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Pissing me off: first thing Friday morning meetings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Scikar posted:Only if you don't have user CALs for everyone using the device. And if you have people with multiple devices then why would you not use user CALs? I don't disagree that the licensing poo poo is hosed up (see also vendors who use core licensing where 1 core does not equal 1 core), but this one gets posted every few months and it's way overblown. For user CALs is it per domain, or per server? Do I need 1 for my DHCP and one for my file server? If it better just to throw everything on 1 server to save on CALs? They make everything needlessly confusing and really easy to not be compliant. You are running MS stuff, how hard would it be for MS to include auditing inside their own software that you could just pull what licensees you need. "115 AD accounts have accessed this server in the last 30 days, you should have this many user CALs or you will need 378 Device CALs because that many devices have been reported this month". It's their own software make this poo poo easy. I like office 365 because you have to physically assign a license it's easy! Let me do that with AD, tie some user / device CALs to the objects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:Yeah, that's gonna suck. Our newest hosts have 18 cores per CPU. Not sure how that's going to work. Others have 12 or 16 cores. If you have SA for 2012R2, the conversion is 1 processor to 8 cores. However, if you have proof the processors have more cores when you convert, then you can get all 18 cores under 1 proc. You have to be proactive with Microsoft though. Have it ready at your next true up or renewal. This is part of my job which falls under IT Service Management at a Fortune 100. I just attended a 2 day boot camp on Microsoft Licensing and learned how much I truly don't know. My biggest takeaway is I need to get as far away from software licensing as possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Looks like the big April Fool's Day joke from my boss was "I updated things on the server without telling you, and now everything is broken!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
Bigass Moth posted:Pissing me off: first thing Friday morning meetings. Beats first thing Monday morning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
stubblyhead posted:Beats first thing Monday morning. Or Friday Afternoon
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Pissing me off: Sales engineers. My customer has done some silly stuff, partially because they are moving sites around and have had to put a bandaid on their network for the time being. This is causing all sorts of issues because they have a non-optimal network. Unfortunately, their reaction to this is to pound on the table and demand we make our stuff work with their not exactly working network. We have a long call, and they are starting to understand that as long as they remain in the state they are in they will have problems that cannot be prevented from our side, and that the most we can do is put a bandaid on a bandaid. Really they need to get the moves completed ASAP. Then the Sales Engineer joins, late, and without knowing anything about the previous conversations, takes over the meeting, bends over backwards trying to accommodate the customer, and makes all sorts of promises about what we will do, including special monitoring which is basically someone watching a tail -f on a log file looking for errors. Afterwards, when we confront him about making promises that require resources that aren't available or don't exist, he accuses the Service Manager and I, who sit and hold this customer's hand daily, of not caring about the customer or the upcoming contract negotiations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
My april 1st joke happened on the 31st, our HR person (an idiot) paid my brother (we both work for the same company) twice, instead of... you know.. paying me and him...
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Oh hey, the inevitable, completely predictable thing that anyone could've guessed was going to happen happened. Our NAS unit which isn't backed up "because it's too big" and "it's RAID so it's okay" is missing some files that someone probably deleted on accident. I'm on record saying the obvious, that hey, since this is important it should be backed up in case of any number of things that don't include drive failure happen, the most likely of which being exactly this or ransomware, but  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
What kind of NAS is it that it doesn't have snapshots? Or is it a home brewed box with a bunch of hard drives that someone threw on the network and called a NAS?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
For our software release we are developing for, project management wanted all the high and medium bugs fixed by Monday. We have all been working our rear end off this week getting stuff fixed, despite the handicap of not having access to most of the actual code for the software, as we build on top of third party software that isn't open source. We ended yesterday evening with only 5 issues open and all of today to work on them. Then last night the offshore testing team magically managed to come up with 10 more high priority bugs. There is no way our small team can fix that many with the handicap of not having access to the base code, so they want us to work the weekend to fix them with no overtime or comp time. Yeah, gently caress you, no.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
xzzy posted:What kind of NAS is it that it doesn't have snapshots? Or is it a home brewed box with a bunch of hard drives that someone threw on the network and called a NAS? It's a Poweredge R620 with a couple of 20TB storage arrays. I don't really know anything about its configuration. Our server admin (the guy responsible for it) isn't in, so he might know how to do snapshots. This is outside of my skillset so I'm just doing a few searches in case they got moved until he shows up, at which point it becomes his problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Well it may be worth checking the top level directory for a folder called .snapshot, that's the de-facto standard location. If there are no snapshots, someone needs flogged.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Well it may be worth checking the top level directory for a folder called .snapshot, that's the de-facto standard location. Seriously. This is madness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
xzzy posted:Well it may be worth checking the top level directory for a folder called .snapshot, that's the de-facto standard location. Don't see that folder.  I'm in this situation wherein I know that things are done poorly here, and I've improved what I can as far as what I'm responsible for (mostly support procedures, deployments, maintaining our images, documentation, and some basic GPO quality-of-life tweaks for end users), but I know there's still a lot of things (this being chief among them) that are bad, but I don't have the skills to improve them. When I mentioned like 2 months ago that it was a not-good thing that our most important central storage point wasn't backed up anywhere, he asked me what my proposed solution was. I have complained about things before on here and yeah, I'm trying to get out. Someone mentioned that I'd been "working on my CCNA" for like a year and that kinda jolted me into putting hours of studying in each day and moving my test date up to 3 weeks from now. And I still have no idea where he is. No calendar about him being late today. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 16:46
|
|