|
Thanks Ants posted:Relying on AT&T will gently caress up your life to be fair two of those issues are entirely internal. AT&T hasn't even had the chance to gently caress everything up yet.
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:29 |
|
|
5:37 AT&T hasn't called back Calling the repair line to just have them forward the loving line
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:5:37 Good luck I spent probably half of last week trying to figure out why our bill with Cox went up. Finally got an answer on Thursday that made no sense and it was echoed on Friday, there are no services on our account so we shouldn't have a bill at all! (we had zero service issues everything was running) Monday the CFO came back from vacation and had upgraded to a higher package without notifying anyone in purchasing or IT just before leaving. How the gently caress do you lose track of all services during a simple download upgrade? At this point I'm half expecting everything to shut off on the 1st and we get a modem in the mail on the second with a new IP. All telecommunication companies are terrible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
They said hey did a forward but it doesn’t work gently caress em. They can wait until the morning. Phone system works perfectly though. Incoming, outgoing, DID’s, caller ID shows up by division, fax lines....
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
On Friday a hobbyist coder got sacked Pissed me off - I knew he was doing vb spreadsheets to “help” people but also password protecting the vb Thing not pissing me off Upon receiving the delightful news he was sacked, I reminded management of the email trail we have saying we ought to move away from his stupid spreadsheets especially as our main software has modules for the things he is done therefore we already pay for support etc etc you know the score First spreadsheet gets nerfed next week, hurrah
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
The VMware 6.7 HTML5 client basically fixes all the problems and is quite good, FYI. There may still be something you need the Flash webclient for, probably Update Manager, but I haven't had to deal with it yet. But the HTML5 remote console web view works fine, and the actual Remote Console program is nice too. Also the Enhanced Auth plugin finally works, so you can load up the HTML5 client in Chrome, check the box to use your Windows creds and off you go, assuming you added your domain to vCenter and added a group or two. Funny story, one of my good friends works at VMware and he says the HTML5 client was done by this one brilliant UX guy who was so annoyed with how things worked that he wrote the HTML5 client almost by himself, and then everyone else went "oh....yeah that's much better." My friend also showed me the related HTML5 ESXi host client 2 or 3 years ago back when that was in alpha or beta, at which point I stared at him and informed him that had VMware not been such gigantic morons by not creating and including that client in version 5.0, all of our clients wouldn't now be on HyperV. Don't update to 6.5 U2 though, that breaks everything because it's actually newer than 6.7. Veeam 9.5 update 3a only has prelim support for it, for example (edit: and there's currently no upgrade path from 6.5 U2 to 6.7). Also yes the display device driver thing was definitely *a thing* way back with Server 2008 R2 and possibly 2012, and there was some really arcane process when installing the driver about which dialogs to close when and in what order (I swear it only worked if you closed things in a certain order), such that the console mouse would move smoothly. Really loving glad to not have that annoyance. Oh and VCSA 6.5 / 6.7 solve a whole lot of the pain and anguish that was setting up vCenter 5.5 or 6.0 (with their multi-tentacled three hour install processes for all the various stupid components). SyNack Sassimov fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Aug 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
Was the “redirecting everything to the DNS name so that if you’re having DNS issues then your ability to manage VMware is hosed” just a phase around v6, or is that still pretty much a hard requirement?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
HP Laserjet was dead on arrival. Spend 20 minutes in chat with HP only for them to tell to go to the retailer  .Then why not just tell me that from the jump?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
Easy first level resolution on their part and 20 minutes of not having to take other calls.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:Was the “redirecting everything to the DNS name so that if you’re having DNS issues then your ability to manage VMware is hosed” just a phase around v6, or is that still pretty much a hard requirement? Still a hard req as far as I know. That said, now that the host client exists, emergency management of VMs (unless it's vMotioning them) is a piece of cake by going direct to code:Of course, vMotioning them is probably exactly what you would want to loving do in an emergency, so that doesn't really help. Gonna guess someone will be along in a sec to proudly proclaim "and THAT'S why you always have at least one physical DC kids!"  Frankly while I just wrote a long post saying essentially "VMware's better now guys no really it's not dumb anymore", I still prefer HyperV for single host environments, or rather I prefer having an entire OSE to muck around in for managing VMs, rather than a hypervisor. And yeah, I know, attack surface, hardware resources, all the reasons that thin hypervisors make sense, but still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 01:24
|
|
|
Got a "you seem disinterested" talk from my boss earlier and it finally pushed me to call this job a wash. So far its been either overflow desktop support or junior admin stuff (handle tickets, "proactively learn the environment" (like they have anything special beyond the normal vmware/veaam/AD/citrix setup with SAP), document some existing stuff) when the description was for a higher level system administrator role. I held out since it was a net new position and I understand it'll take time to fit in to a team that's been working together for 10+ years but all I get is the scraps they don't want to deal with while my boss is pushing me to be disruptive and holy heck I wanted less stress from this job, not more than my last one. They even knew I was looking for something more low key when I interviewed so I have no idea where the disconnect happened. Really looking forward to doing the job search thing again! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
I am so done with spoiled end users. We are upgrading our MDM and the new solution walls company calender and email behind an app on their company phone (that we give them full allowance to install whatever they want on). So many of them are throwing fits about how much harder it is to now use the phone because it doesn't use the built in email and calender apps. Get over it. It's a company device, it's a privilege to have it. Be thankful we aren't still trying to get you to use Windows Phones (I still have a pile of Lumia's in my cupboard to issue to serial phone breakers, pay for it or suffer the consequances). Even though we deal with issues related to it everyday, nobody takes security seriously and any policy remotely related to security is treated like it soley exists to waste peoples time. ARgghghg Edit: I do all staff inductions now and I always show them this to try and break it into their heads why we do these things:  It's especially the new graduates and junior level new starts who don't take anything seriously and cause issues. Phrosphor fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Aug 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 02:05
|
|
|
duffmensch posted:Easy first level resolution on their part and 20 minutes of not having to take other calls. Considering there's no survey in the ticket close I can see why they don't give a poo poo. Might try to hit up the business level support as well as the vendor. Oh and while we're at it my shop pissed off the vendor is starting to do ghetto poo poo like blowing off invoices again. This means we can't order fusers, while they still expect us to have 100% printer uptime. This after an angel investor bought us up last year. He's made some more high profile moves this year, so I guess he forgot about us. Figures... that's exactly what people on glassdoor from his original compan says, he has good ideas and intentions but he doesn't stick with any one project.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 07:15
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:I am so done with spoiled end users. We are upgrading our MDM and the new solution walls company calender and email behind an app on their company phone (that we give them full allowance to install whatever they want on). So many of them are throwing fits about how much harder it is to now use the phone because it doesn't use the built in email and calender apps. From the other side of the fence: I am so done with our despotic IT security team and their constantly changing phone security policies. After finally dumping our unusable Lumias, we were finally equipped with Samsung Androids that actually worked. All have been great for about for about 8 months. Then, they started fiddling with things: 1- With no warning, disabled google location services: most of us use these phones for navigation. No explanation as to how google knowing where I am is a security risk 2- 1 week later, again no warning - deleted Chrome. 'use the company browser' - part of our job is reviewing how websites perfom on standard browsers. 3- Same update: deleted some 3rd party apps without warning (great for my colleagues who were using apps to record mileage, etc. all data gone) and locked down the ability to install anything not on the approved list. Except, for most apps, they didn't delete the existing install, just new ones *and updates*. Thus, we have phones full of old versions of apps that cannot be updated to newer, bug-fixed, security-hole patched versions. and as a bonus, the automatic updates will stall if *any* individual update is security policy blocked. So, the older the phone, the more unpatched version of said company-approved apps exist on it. 4-Reset Screen Timeout to '1 minute' - we have 16 digit, mixed case and symbol screen unlock passwords. Try to use a phone that locks the screen every minute, it's impossible 5- Final turd in the swimming pool: disabled syncing between company Outlook address book and the native Contact app. Now callerID doesn't work any more and I have no idea who is calling me. The contact section in Outlook app is barely usable - try scrolling down your entire list of contacts to get to 'Zachary' as it doesn't even have 'ABC' sections. Or he ability to create a new contact
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 09:00
|
|
|
Your idiotic overlords need to be sacked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 10:32
|
|
|
Seems like the type of policies that C-levels have an exclusion from and so the complaints never get to them. Those are crazy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 10:39
|
|
|
Yeah, security for security's sake is loving poison. Our MDM policy is pretty sane. You want to connect to mail/calendar/contacts? Then you accept a policy of a complex passphrase, too many failures auto-wipe, and remote wipe capability for a lost phone. Want to use other corp apps/services? You need to have a user profile installed with certificate and VPN. Know your risk and secure appropriately.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 10:44
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:I am so done with spoiled end users. We are upgrading our MDM and the new solution walls company calender and email behind an app on their company phone (that we give them full allowance to install whatever they want on). So many of them are throwing fits about how much harder it is to now use the phone because it doesn't use the built in email and calender apps. There's a reason that Good went from the dominant MDM vendor to "who are they?" so fast. Are you actually using Good or has some other vendor come down with brain worms?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
Email/calendaring in the native apps is a pain in the arse to support, especially since the iPhone ActiveSync client seems to break every other release. Keeping email in the Outlook app gives you one thing to support, and you can stop other apps on the phone using your corporate mail servers to send whatever they want to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 13:21
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:Relying on AT&T will gently caress up your life Indeed. We acquired 2 branch locations from another company recently that had ATT... They where paying $700 a month per location for a handful of phone lines provided by a T1. (something ATT called "Business In A Box"). And another $100 per month for terrible "10Mbit" (more like 3) Uverse DSL. With the their infamous UVerse modems that randomly drop IPSec ESP packets. I just recently finished switching them away from that poo poo to a local fiber provider and now have better service for 1/5th the price. ATT made porting the numbers out as difficult as possible. They would not release them despite multiple attempts. And then when they finally did approve the port outs... they didn't actually release them. Our phones where down for an hour as the new provider fought with ATT to get the numbers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
AT&T is all loving morons
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
jfc, rebooting things that make up network infrastructure as the first troubleshooting step is definitely not OK
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:Get over it. It's a company device, it's a privilege to have it. Don't be this guy. This guy is an rear end in a top hat, even when he's right. Thanks Ants posted:Email/calendaring in the native apps is a pain in the arse to support, especially since the iPhone ActiveSync client seems to break every other release. Keeping email in the Outlook app gives you one thing to support, and you can stop other apps on the phone using your corporate mail servers to send whatever they want to. The trick is that the Outlook app(which is wonderful, and afaik, the only non-native email app worth a poo poo), pulls your company email and stores it on MS's servers so it can do push notifications, and that makes some people anxious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
Phrosphor posted:Get over it. It's a company device, it's a privilege to have it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
When I started my current job they said hey you can transfer your cell onto our corporate AT&T plan and we'll pay for it. I was already on AT&T so I thought it would be pretty painless (lol) A month after I called and made the change I got a paper bill at home for several hundred dollars for all the text messages I'd sent on my new voice only single line contract they had put me on 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
tactlessbastard posted:When I started my current job they said hey you can transfer your cell onto our corporate AT&T plan and we'll pay for it. I was already on AT&T so I thought it would be pretty painless (lol) My company did this, but now there's an "ironclad" policy that says people cannot port numbers out of our account. People mad. People real mad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:My company did this, but now there's an "ironclad" policy that says people cannot port numbers out of our account. People mad. People real mad. If that policy was put in place after people ported their numbers. People sue. People sue and win.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:If that policy was put in place after people ported their numbers. FTFY
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
My old company did that. You could either bring your number into the company plan and use your personal device, get a company device with its own number, or get a company device with your personal number. We were an all iPhone shop so we just gave everyone an iPhone 7. Anyone who wanted an 8 or an X could pony up the additional $$$, but it'd still be a company device. If you paid at least $300 you got to keep it when you left (and none of the device balance transfers over to you!), which essentially meant that I got an unlocked 256gb iPhone 8 for $380 CAD. poo poo pay though, but the benefits and giveaways and gifts alone were an extra 3-4K/yr, easily. The no port out policy is just asking for a lawsuit. I literally cannot think of a justification for it either. Phones are one thing, but phone numbers? I've had the same cell number since I was 12, like hell I'm giving that up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 17:18
|
|
Cat Army
|
What likely happened is someone ported the wrong number out, and instead of making it a process where someone else checks they just said no more porting out. That and telecommunication companies are all horrible and gently caress even the simplest things up all the time. It's a much better policy to just not allowing any porting in or out (and if you have any they can obviously port out).
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 17:51
|
|
|
Mixing your personal and work phones into one is dumb for everyone: If you quit and keep the number, the company loses out: all the calls to the company are now being picked up by someone who doesn't work there anymore (possibly having left for a competitor or with a very vocal grudge) If you quit and the company keeps the number, now you have to inform every single friend and family member of your new number.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 17:59
|
|
|
spog posted:From the other side of the fence: I am so done with our despotic IT security team and their constantly changing phone security policies. Every time our infosec team overreacts to things or our encryption bricks a computer I think “...are we the malware?”
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
It's a top down problem because almost everyone ignores scope because it's too hard. Let's put data leak prevention software on everyone's computer and have it scan everything that happens. Sure 90% of users don't have jobs that touch anything that were worried about leaking, but we don't have sufficient enough internal partitioning of that data to prove it 100%, so we'll lock everything down. Scope should be the first question whenever security is brought up and it almost never is. The best way to keep stuff from being compromised is to limit the audience of that stuff, but that requires actually thinking about how your org is structured and how people exchange data. That costs time and effort, so it's easier to just apply the same policies and software to everything and treat everything on the network as if it's interacting with the most sensitive systems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
They did okay with it where I'm at, but not because of good planning, but because of limited budget. They went down the road of protecting access to critical data with a physical token, but didn't want to pay for every employee to get the required hardware (though the idea was floated). So they identified the people who actually need that kind of security and set them up with it. Good result, bad justification. I'll take it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
We have things locked down by application fairly well because they cost money and why pay for something someone isn't going to use. Our shares on the other hand are a massive loving mess. We have different department shares but there's a ton of people who have been around for decades and have been in most departments so they have wide access. They still help in their old departments, people put stuff in stupid locations, like a document that is updated by sales but is used by shipping. They keep it in sales, so everyone in shipping has access to the sales folder (this is really stupid, and it's stored in the root of the folder, which is also really stupid). I've made a few "fake" departments since our share root is "Departments". This is because management is well aware of this massive creep and every time I've tried to rein it in it goes nowhere. So off goes yet another share! Three people need access to it, and over the course of a year a few people get added suddenly there's hundreds of files and more people get added. Two years later half the company has access to this folder that still contains the sensitive information that was supposed to be kept out of general hands. The department manager signs off on adding other departments to their folder, the problem is we also allow them to just give permission to other people to authorize access. I've finally just given up and if the person that signed is on the authorized list I don't question it I approve the user being added to the folder. There's supposed to be a bunch of checks in play for this, but we've made a mockery of it and it's just begging for a crypto lockdown and a full restore from backup. On paper it's Other Department wants a user to have access to Department's Folder Other Department's manager fills out a form and Department manager signs it, this goes to IT, IT manager (me) verifies there wont be any issues with this and signs it. IT assigned folder permissions. What it actually is: Every department has authorized every other department to sign for them. Other Department wants access to a folder they request it with IT. I can either call the other department (who will then just reiterate that other manager has permission and not to bother them over stupid things). or I can just sign off on it. So basically everyone has access to everything. pixaal fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Aug 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:AT&T is all loving morons Having done openstack deployments for them on a contract basis I would have to agree. I'm not sure how they get anything done when a single patch deployment requires 10 people to be on a conference call, 8 of them being project managers or the like, and all simultaneously asking for status updates every 10 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:If that policy was put in place after people ported their numbers. Eh, the people who've taken control, HR & Legal, will graciously bestow exceptions for political purposes and so they can feel benevolent. No one has yet been able to explain to me what the risk is of allowing a number to be ported out as long as it's approved by the departing employee's manager, which has been our process for some time without incident or issue. AlternateAccount fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Aug 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
It gets to be a pain if the number being ported out is in some sort of contract period.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Holy poo poo is webex pissing me off right now. I can't find a download link for the productivity tools, perhaps it has been discontinued, despite what their KB says, and it's definitely turned on for our environment so that's not the issue. Extra fun is that I have no access at all to our webex, our VP assumes all control of it, I don't even have a loving log in. Does anyone use the webex desktop app? The loving thing just will not detect outlook at all, we use the O365 ProPlus installs and the loving application just does not either see that outlook is installed or that the user is logged in. Their support is loving worthless as well, 7 days since I've opened a case with them and they haven't given me jack poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:29 |
|
|
We use WebEx on the desktop, with the Outlook integration. Seems typically pretty trouble free. Our only issue is that they want to send updates to it once or twice a week, which not only require admin privileges to install, but the client refuses to join/host any meetings while an update is pending.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 21:15
|
|