|
Sounds like a great opportunity but I would also push for a junior guy to help blunt low-end tickets, answer phones, deal with walk-ups. Plus when you're the only IT guy, good luck ever taking a day off let alone a week.
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:is it still poo poo? It's still poo poo. And yeah, I extend that logic to any special snowflakes. If you are one of one or two people who use a special piece of hardware or software, congrats, you're the expert. Especially in a small shop. And well, this is the small shop thread.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't really see any reason not to turn down people who want to use Macs in a Windows shop unless you use published apps or VDIs. That's basically unsupportable.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:I'm trying to look at this from a policy perspective. Is our policy going to be "users can remote into their machine if they have specialized software"? I don't know if I want to set that precedent. Or someone might just say "oh I save all my stuff on the desktop so why can't I do this too". But I think you're right in this instance I don't really have a way around it. Weren't you the one just hemming and hawing that not allowing something isn't good customer service or something? LOL Just let him have full admin rights so he can install TeamViewer / LogMeIn and Dropbox and then he can use his Mac to make his beautiful Adobe files! Practice what you preach!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
SneakyFrog posted:its like someone just walked over my grave...eeerie I actually just had a software vendor tell me they needed full admin rights in TYOL2015. I almost laughed them out of the building.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
LabTech, Kaseya are two other popular ones.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Mimecast. Not worth having a device on site. Has other neat features like archiving and email continuity as well.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Zakutambah posted:Worse. Finance sector. Non-profits at least understand why they -should- upgrade, even if they can't afford. Finance should understand you need to spend money to make money. Sounds like a terrible place, financial sector excluded.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Maneki Neko posted:Has anyone actually found a PC with this on it in a business environment? We touch a multitude of Dells and so far no one has actually been able to find a PC with it. We had a couple of laptops with one cert or the other. We're a VDI shop and just keep a handful of laptops on hand to loan out if needed. Since we have VDIs we are lazy on reimaging, but it's on the list of things to fix. Swink posted:VDI tech is cool but given the expense it's gotta be pretty rare that it's the most cost effective solution. I work for a small company (under 100 users) and we are a VDI only shop. I can't say it is the most cost effective solution when only looking at hard costs, but when you look at soft costs it starts to make more sense. Some Pros: -Remote work -DR is a lot easier -Apps that don't do well across a WAN from their data -Consistent master image -Easy to maintain once it is up and running -BYOD I definitely qualify as a generalist, but I have been a Citrix admin for most of my career. I prefer this type of setup to alternatives. Even as we look to more cloud products, VDI / published apps / published desktops are just an easy way to ensure a consistent experience for end users. Internet Explorer fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Nov 25, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Yes, it definitely requires an internet connection. Working on a plane is mostly limited to doing word processing or whatever on the local machine and then uploading the file when you get back to the office. This is probably one of the biggest drawbacks of VDI in my mind, but most workplaces can get over this limitation. YouTube works fine these days. Our users have non-Windows thin clients, so minimizing to a local desktop is not a choice. Most of the environments I have worked at are the very definition of office workers. If you have developers or CAD users things get much more complicated, to the point where VDI may very well not make sense.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
I don't mind at all. People don't really seem to talk VDI too much here, even in the virtualization thread. Like I said, I consider myself more of a generalist so I don't comment about stuff too often. Our VDIs run off a 3 host VMware cluster, nothing special. Dual-processor Xeon's with 4 cores each from 2-3 years ago. Shared infrastructure with our other 3 VMware hosts that host our servers: Some lovely Dell PowerConnects from probably 5 years ago and some equally lovely Cisco Catalyst 2960s. All backed by a NL-SAS filled Equallogic PS6100E. All of this is due for an upgrade, which is waiting on our upcoming DR project. I have only been with my current company for a year and it was a disaster, so I am playing catch up. And by now I'm sure you are wondering how any of that translates to a decent user experience. The secret sauce is Citrix Provisioning Services, which serves up the actual master image. When VDIs boot they stream the disk down from one of our Provisioning Services servers, there is a lot of intelligent caching that goes on for reads and writes. Very little VDI IO hits the SAN. Here's a pretty interesting write-up on the whole caching thing, we use cache to RAM with overflow to device HD - https://www.citrix.com/blogs/2015/01/19/size-matters-pvs-ram-cache-overflow-sizing/ I will tell you that this stuff is not for the feint of heart. Citrix is a curseword to most end-users, and hell, most IT admins for a reason. I think you really need to know your stuff to get it right and Citrix is a terrible company. But if you know how to hold your tongue just right, it can be a well oiled machine. [Edit: Oh, and since you were asking about specs, I also wanted to say that in my current setup the Catalyst 2960s are definitely the weak link. Provisioning Services causes most VDI disk traffic to go over your LAN switches. These are definitely not up to the task and I regularly see buffer overruns and excessively high disk retries (through Provisioning Services) on our VDIs.] Internet Explorer fucked around with this message at 09:33 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
We have 100/100 right now, but we rarely use above 10 for Citrix traffic. RDP is fairly similar to ICA these days. They are working on a new release called "Framehawk" that will add a lot of improvements. More here - https://www.citrix.com/blogs/2015/06/30/our-first-release-of-framehawk-technologies/ Unless your users are streaming 1080p videos remotely all day, Citrix traffic is fairly minimal.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
I've never had to tackle that either but it's something that at least seems to be getting easier for your average sysadmin type. I know Synology actually makes their own cams that connect to their NASes. I would definitely look at the Ubiquiti ones too. I'd be interested to hear where you end up.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
PRTG is good. Stay the gently caress away from WhatsUpGold.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
Don't leave RDP open to the Internet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
People who use static IPs for printers are Hitler.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
This is the part where I go back a page or two and quote myself when I said do not allow RDP from the Internet. Administrator should have been disabled. I'm betting it was an easy password that never expires? Good times!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Zakutambah posted:Ah, that was a fun fact. I thought it was administrator at first glance, it was actually 'abministrator'. The domain administrator account actually was disabled, that's why I thought it odd when I saw a session active with it's name. You mentioned domain administrator. Are you sure the local administrator account was not used? Would not be the first time I've seen that. Although Windows 2003 with RDP open to the Internet? Ouch. Good luck with that network revamp. Sounds like you have your work cut out for you!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 01:10
|
|
Yay
|
aol keyword party posted:I always do static, because I don't trust any printers not to gently caress up getting an address via DHCP. I can't remember the last time I had a printer fail to get a DHCP address. And I have set up a lot of printers in a lot of different environments. If your printers (or really any devices) are having trouble getting addresses, you have DHCP problems.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Just replace the hardware and fix the actual problem, God drat. You should not be rebooting your firewall once a week.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
I have worked with plenty of small shops and that is bullshit. If you can't get a few hundred dollars to replace a vital piece of infrastructure, find a new job. Buy 2 of these. One to put in production, one to keep on the shelf - http://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Edge...ds=edgerouter+x Buy a handful of these, whatever you need for coverage, since only 1 user uses the wifi - http://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Networks-Enterprise-System-UAP-AC-LITE/dp/B015PR20GY If you have to, buy these instead - http://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-Networks-Enterprise-Unifi-UAP/dp/B00HXT8R2O If all of that is too expensive, get the gently caress out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Calidus posted:I have Veeam setup to backup to a Synology NAS nightly. Then that NAS backs up to aws glacier weekly. How do you handle the roll-up into the full? Wouldn't the backup to AWS need to do an entire full every week? Or is that not a problem for you? We use Veeam as well and I like it quite a bit. My biggest beef with it is how it handles GFS and "archive" backups. If you want to keep something like 5 weekly, 13 monthly, and 5 yearly backups they insist on a full for each one of those. No, I do not want to keep 23 full copies of my production data (plus my 'production' backup chain), thank you!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Morganus_Starr posted:Actually they kind of hide the "server" pricing, which is what you want if you build and host your own on-prem Confluence instance. Cloud pricing is if you have Atlassian host your Confluence instance. Setting up HTTPS was a huge pain in the rear end. I actually set up Duo as well to add 2-factor. It was really the only reason I didn't go with their cloud route, because as far as I know they still don't support 2-factor.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Haven't used it, but maybe something like this? https://mover.io/
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
HP's website is the loving worst. What is everyone doing for phones these days? I'm loathe to do cloud-based phone service due to past experience, but I'm also looking to get rid of our Cisco UC system. It's way overkill for us and maintenance / upkeep costs are entirely too expensive for our size. I've used 3CX in the past and it wasn't fantastic. Worth looking into now? Any others?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
What are decent options for Hosted VOIP these days? I really have no intentions of rolling my own Asterix box as phones are critical infrastructure at my company.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:ThinkingPhones, 8x8, any number of BroadCloud partners. I think it massively depends on where you're located as latency is obviously a potential issue, and any on-site element that's required will vary by region as to how competent they are. It looks like ThinkingPhones was rebranded / merged with Fuze and seems fairly interesting, considering we also have a conferencing revamp project on our plates. Seems worth looking into. Thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Fourteen posted:Anyone have any experience with Logitech GROUP for small office video conferencing? I have some similar Logitech hardware set up, maybe a generation older, and it is great so far.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
The quality on the video and audio both seem great to me. Other than a camera that zooms in to the individual who is talking, I don't really see the need for anything more. And I have implemented very expensive Polycom systems from as recent as 3 years ago. I would say at this point the hardware you use matters less and less, the software that ties it all together is more important. I can't see any reason a small or medium business would do one of the traditional video conferencing systems these days. It's just not worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
... Why?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Yes, you should definitely keep touching the poop.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 13:10
|
|
|
Spectorsoft is pretty much the go-to for this type of stuff. It was renamed Veriato and is in your link - http://www.veriato.com/ Just make sure you run it past legal before you implement.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Make sure whatever route you go they are coming in over distinct copper/cable/fiber. Something in the same physical run to the building isn't super helpful against the ever-vigilant backhoe.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
"The ability to pronounce LibreOffice."
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
Speaking as a long time Citrix admin... If you are a small shop can you switch to cloud products to sidestep this issue? What you are talking about doing is total possible. But standing up a single terminal server and then having people VPN in isn't the most awesome or scalable thing in the world. If I was starting a new company I would look long and hard at cloud offerings before going to RDP/ICA route.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Yeah, XenDesktop is the same thing. My point is that if your company is small and growing quickly, unless you plan your remote work strategy smartly you can put yourself into a corner. Standing up a single RDS server is a quick fix that becomes a pain once you grow a bit. The AWS Workspaces suggestion is a good one. I still think if you are still small enough to make major changes, it is worth looking at what you can do with just cloud services these days.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Constant Contact is also worth looking at. Don't do this in house. This is one of those things that is easy and cheap enough to do the "right" way and never have to worry about it again.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Oh god, you've summoned a monster.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Well, isn't that fun. One of the latest Windows updates for Windows 7 just broke our printing GPOs. Just bog standard GPO printers via Policy (not Preference.) Thankfully we only have a couple of physical PCs left and I haven't applied updates to our VDIs yet.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
Maneki Neko posted:Just to clarify, this only appears to occur if you are using security filtering and authenticated users do not have read permissions to the GPO. Still, I'd expect Microsoft to pull/revise the update, as they haven't given consistent guidance on whether or not authenticated users should always have read permissions to GPOs. One of our users has a policy without read permissions, but the other all had GPOs with authenticated users. [Edit: I'm a dummy and forgot all of our printer policies use Security Filtering and posted without checking.] [Edit: Any idea what KB it was specifically? Have not had a chance to dig deeper into it.] Internet Explorer fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2016 19:33
|
|