@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Hid Known Vulnerability According to Senator: @Dashrender said in Microsoft Hid Known Vulnerability According to Senator: you're saying that they can't ever be wrong in their releases? No, I'm saying that whether right or wrong is irrelevant. That it happened is what matters. Deciding if it happened accidentally or on purpose is a different discussion. Things that happen on accident doesn't make them not have happened. Like teen pregnancy....

@scottalanmiller said in MS RDS: How Do You Reset Device License Assignment: how do we reset it to allow for updated devices? Open "RD Licensing manager", browse for device who's license you want to "revoke", leftclick on it and choose "Revoke license" As said, up to 20% of total licenses can be revoked before expiry.

So piss off Microsoft.. I so do not want to remove and add a role to resolve a role not working right...... But I found no other solution yet.

Besides a comport setting difference (which isn't relevant) I can't see a difference. The right hand side is the one that works.

Checkout https://www.nomachine.com/ https://www.nomachine.com/terminal-server https://github.com/UPC/ravada

Oh-kay . Yes - you are right... and yet you are (slightly) wrong. In this case, while Libre Office is ''content flow'' as opposed to ''page based'' The project is page based - something I was doing, but didn't know exactly how to explain. thusly; https://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/91386/can-i-change-the-page-order-in-writer/ From your question, your document is "page-based". Go to the logical consequence of your choice and store your "pages" as independent documents. To guarantee a common look-and-feel, I'd recommend to design them from a common template. Then, you create your "synthesis" document (the one meant for printing) as a master document which references all your "page" documents. Read the LO User's guide if you aren't familiar with the concept. In the master document, the included "pages" can be reordered from the Navigator panel (F5) with "up" and "down" buttons after selecting the "page" you want to move. In essence, it is equivalent to @RGB-es copy-and-paste solution without the risk of incorrectly selecting page content or overwriting other text. This is basically what I had done in Word...

@Dashrender said in Force Microsoft Store apps to update: @Obsolesce said in Force Microsoft Store apps to update: @JaredBusch said in Force Microsoft Store apps to update: I've been hitting a bunch of machines lately that need updated and one thing I noted was that the Store apps were seeming to never update by themselves while I had the device. I could manually log in and open the Store app, and then click through to the updates and then tell it to update. But man that is a pain.. A little searching and I found this gem. Execute this, it takes a while to return, and then the Store apps begin to update in the background immediately. Get-CimInstance -Namespace "Root\cimv2\mdm\dmmap" -ClassName "MDM_EnterpriseModernAppManagement_AppManagement01" | Invoke-CimMethod -MethodName UpdateScanMethod Why don't you just turn on the update apps automatically option? There's also a policy setting. I thought that was ON by default? I assume it is. Because systems do eventually update. The key there is eventually....

@Dashrender said in Microsoft Licensing Verification Program: Is this a SAM Audit?: @scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Licensing Verification Program: Is this a SAM Audit?: Just got a customer with this Microsoft Licensing Verification Program / MLVP audit request. It sure looks like a SAM Audit. It comes from one of those "not really Microsoft" v- email addresses that are third party scammers traditionally paying MS for an email address. They never say that the audit is a SAM or voluntary, but the terms that they use and the email address don't match anything legit and look just like the scams that MS has been in on for years. Anyone seen this new terminology yet? Is this the new name now that MS customers have caught on to the SAM scam and now need a new name so that it isn't so obvious? Interesting - I don't recall seeing the word voluntary on any SAM letter I ever got. I used to see them, but looks like it's not required in the form.

Congrats!

@NetworkNerd Your quadratic formula is wrong and most of those aren't functions, but nice effort I suppose:)

@DustinB3403 said in Office 365 Suite - User Licensing T&C: And what I specifically was hoping someone had a link for was to MS's license or T&C saying that "no you can't share an account for multiple people". Obviously this doesn't exists since the way the software is procured is per user. Right, they won't repeat it because they have it in writing already. But you can always show that it is 1) assigned to a named user 2) at the time of procurement you have to agree to a single human. That's better than any T&C link.

@wrx7m said in Microsoft Windows Default Permissions for Fixed and External Drives: @black3dynamite said in Microsoft Windows Default Permissions for Fixed and External Drives: And I noticed that they are different on Servers and Desktops I had no idea they would be different. On the server one of the permissions that stands out for me is the CREATOR OWNER (full control / subfolders and files only. From what I can tell, when a user creates a folder on the root drive, that person will be given the permission of full control of that folder only and then CREATOR OWNER on that folder is also added with full control of subfolders and files only. But for the desktop, on the root drive you are not given any full control of that folder.