There is no point in fixing computers around me when you can just buy another $300 walmart special (man we are so wasteful).
It may seem wasteful from a material point of view, but the economics dictate this. If it costs me 3 hours to repair a $300 device, I am already in the hole.
So looking at the entire picture, I buy a device for $300. If all of my stuff is sync'd through a sync service, then it is way fucking cheaper to buy a new $300 device and just reattach my accounts than it is to pay someone 2+ hours to fix whatever is wrong with my existing device.
The only time repair should come into play is if data is not properly recoverable, meaning there was a failure to use that original device correctly.
I'm not arguing with you one bit about this. I totally understand and agree with ya 100%.
I am just thinking of all of the electronic waste going to the landfills instead of being repurposed into something else, either by the consumer or a manufacturer.
@kyle do you mean you will publish the application to the desktop?
We currently have 4 2008 servers running XenApp 6. IE 11 doesn't support IE11 but 2008 R2 does.
I was looking at adding a 2008 R2 node to the 4 2008 servers and wondered if there is any issues or beat practices to mixing 2008 & 2008 R2 in a clustered XenApp farm to publish a newer app only supported on 1 server.
I remember, and this is a long time ago, issues with adding an R2 server to a 2008 RDSH farm and having temporary profile issues. It was common to see someone add an 2008 R2 RDHS server to a 2012 RDSH to provide IE11 support. I think the connection broker needs an update.
2016 RDSH is a big change. I have been testing Citrix vs 2016 RDSH and for full desktop Citrix doesnt add anything more than I have found with cheaper add-on products. I realize you are probably serving apps up though.
But I would google about temp profile issues before doing what you are doing. And again, not sure that would affect your XenApp situation.
This is litteraly a temp fix as prior to my joining the team they're moving away from Citrix to RDS.
The problem with the workaround that's in place is is It a thin client to connect to Citrix and launch IE11 tthrough a RDP into another server running IE11 which prevents the user from performing some tasks.
Just ordered an R510 from them with 32g ram, eight 3tb drives and a pair of 2.13ghz processors. This will replace my 2950 (still running!!) with 16g ram, six 1tb drives with a pair of processors that are dreadful.
They have challenges at large companies because managers don't want to have the hard conversation and cut someone's bonus who didn't perform so they can pay someone who DID perform.
Eh? That whole pool thing is just crap to me. That company I always relate back to - they have a yearly, I guess I'll call it raise pool. It's like 2-8% of the entire teams salary into a single pool.
Let's assume 2% was put in the pool. The top earner made $210K/y and the bottom guy made $120K/y. Let's also assume that the top guy just did a stellar job this year, and the boss wants to give him 5%. If he does this, he has to allocate many of the 2% from the $120K/yr guys to cover that one $210 guy, basically cutting the $120K guys completely off (or at least someone on the team is getting nothing or next to nothing). I'm sure someone here thinks this is OK, I don't. I know this isn't about bonuses, this is about annual raises. And even that is a crap thing! Raises should be tied to two separate things - cost of living adjustments (not really a raise, just keeping the status quo) and merit increases (raises).
Much like forced ranking.
Forced rankings are dumb, but never having any layoffs means large companies starts to accumulate bozos as better workers will go somewhere that will reward success and managers try to amass huge armies of reports to justify bigger titles. Layoff's force companies to re-evaluate projects and departments and enable them to hire and double down on growth area's.
I agree. Forced ranking was super terrible in a three person team where two people knew they would be kept and one knew they would be let go. The two would always want to hire someone TO BE FIRED each year to make sure that they were not the one to be let go. Forced ranking forces good people to avoid the company, bad people to cycle through and mediocre people to focus on keeping good people out.
You get an email, it says "hey some guy you know is sharing a google doc or whatever, you need to sign in"
Then you pick on the website whethere you use Office 365, Google Apps, etc
Next thing you know the doc says cannot be found, so you forget about it. Meanwhile all your information has been compromised and it starts sending out emails to your contacts list.
With 2FA there is no way to use your login information because the attacker cant get that second stage of info when logging in. From what I have seen those phishing attempts dont even attempt to collect it.
Of course, thats hardly the only type of socially engineered attack.
Good attacks definitely do get and pass that info through.
I don't understand what's going on with Dynamics. The transition from Dynamics CRM to the new Dynamics 365 seems to be more than just a re-branding exercise, it feels like an entirely new product. Or rather two products, as Microsoft has been its usual annoying self and decided "why offer one product when we can confuse users by offering two?". So there's Dynamics 365 for Enterprise and Dynamics 365 for Business. Where "Enterprise" is defined, somewhat arbitrarily, as a company with 250+ users.
Worst still, Dynamics 365 for Business isn't even available in Europe yet, and yet neither is the old Dynamics CRM, leaving SMBs seemingly in limbo.
If anyone understands what's going on and can explain it to me, I'd be very grateful, as the concept of Dynamics 365 is pretty appealing.
I don't disagree with you at all on that front. I'm just so used to over-zealous sales teams that I was a little annoyed when the rep. didn't reply before my trial had expired.
With anything Solarwinds (n-able), I've become used to thrice-daily calls asking if I want to purchase, if there were any questions, and promises that their application does X (even if it doesn't or, at least, not well). Not that I condone this behaviour, but a prompt reply to an inquiry is always nice.
Sorry @magroover, I haven't helped you at all; è colpa mia.
I think the question about how to do you find a good IT company and how do you find a good accountant are very closely related. There are a ton of parallels.
Take the onsite vs remote thing. In some companies they don't want to ever touch a plug, the same way they don't ever want to scan in a receipt. They want someone to show up and do the job. In other companies they have someone with enough IT knowledge to do the hands on stuff, the same way they have someone that does the daily accounting tasks, but needs help with the year end tasks.
In both lines of work when owners are searching for a service provider a recommendation from a friend will outweigh most everything else.