AzureAD and shares
-
@Obsolesce said in AzureAD and shares:
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
"Cloud" access to them is being able to access files in the browser. They also want to access the same files and folders locally on the LAN. Trying to pick my battles.
What kind of files and purposes?
ODFB is rarely the needed or correct solution to ideas like that.
And what is? NC? or something totally different?
-
@IRJ said in AzureAD and shares:
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@coliver They tried OneDrive and had a ton of trouble. They were constantly calling MS support to recover folders and files that were deleted in the middle of the night, when nobody was at their office. Folders were moved into random places.
It is VERY possible that it was user error on each occasion but the logs did not reflect that. They lost a ton of files too that had to be recovered from a backup. I will say that I have read about other occasions with similar results.
If they are using a single OD account, the logs aren't very helpful.
Exactly - OD isn't the right tool - ODfB is the correct solution.
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@Obsolesce Scenario is this:
Field techs use analyzers that collect monitoring data. They "sync" the data back to the main office. Each folder is a different job. There is a piece of custom software that takes that data and generates a report. Think of it as a large number of .dat files or raw data files.
They also store the reports that are generated as .pdf documents and have a large number of MS Office documents. It is less than 2 Tb total but the management is a pain point.I added access points and configured a switch for them.... Now I'm getting pulled into a mess that has been pieced together over the years.
How did it it work before they got O365? Does anyone remember? How did those files from the field techs get back to the home office?
-
@Obsolesce said in AzureAD and shares:
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@Obsolesce They were using OneDrive for syncing. They 2-way syncs were consuming all of the bandwidth.
They can use an Azure DB with a web app attached to Azure storage. They can use the web app to track all the data and hold all the files, generate reports, etc. They don't know what they need at all, are trying to use the wrong tool for the wrong job. Plain and simple.
I'm betting that would take a total rewrite of whatever software they are using.
They probably have some type of analyzer that generates 'data' - that data is normally transferred to a network share once they are back in the office... then the in-house people can run reports on that data...
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@IRJ @Obsolesce They actually want a DB for this data but keep finding subpar developers and wasting money.
That should be a NEED not a want.
-
@Dashrender I only know if them using OD. I'd have to ask.
-
They probably have some type of analyzer that generates 'data' - that data is normally transferred to a network share once they are back in the office... then the in-house people can run reports on that data...
This is exactly what happens.
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
They probably have some type of analyzer that generates 'data' - that data is normally transferred to a network share once they are back in the office... then the in-house people can run reports on that data...
This is exactly what happens.
I wonder if the analyzer software is what was screwing with OD? The next time you launched the software, it might delete the old location in prep for the new scan?
-
@coliver said in AzureAD and shares:
Move everything to Sharepoint or OneDrive for Business. That would make the most sense in this case.
Yeah, Sharepoint is my guess.
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@IRJ @Obsolesce They actually want a DB for this data but keep finding subpar developers and wasting money.
I happen to know a company that does custom software solutions.
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@Dashrender I only know if them using OD. I'd have to ask.
OD or ODfB. they are different things.
-
@JaredBusch I am going there this eve and I will mention it. Is it Bundy?
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
@JaredBusch I am going there this eve and I will mention it. Is it Bundy?
Yes, it is something we have done since the 1980's.
But custom software is not cheap. Most likely your client could resolve their problem cheaper with better workflow. -
@JaredBusch They want it to be correct and more efficient. They don't mind spending the money if the end result is a working product. The guy that wrote their current application (in C++) was self-taught. It does what they need for the reporting, but he did not totally finish all the bells and whistles on it.
-
They were using ODfb with the Office 365 Business Premium. I am convinced that the root of the problem is that they had 20 employees syncing to the same "account" such as office.company.com They are trying to do the same thing now with Nextcloud. I can't get through to them that the "field" guys need to only do a file drop to the server and stop trying to sync everything.
-
This company 100% needs a web app with a database backend ASAP. It would alleviate the majority of their problems.
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
This company 100% needs a web app with a database backend ASAP. It would alleviate the majority of their problems.
Most do. It's a really common need.
-
I think my best plan of action is to scrap AzureAD as they will never have servers hosted on Azure. I can pretty much guarantee this. I realize there is a hybrid approach but that just adds more complexity. My best option IMO is to spin up 3 new VMs - 2 AD/DNS and 1 file server. I know AD doesn't make much sense with 20 employees but it seems managing users in a regular "workgroup" with local accounts would take more effort. Am I wrong?
I confirmed yesterday that they prefer to have files accessible on the LAN versus through a web client/webdav. It has to be fast and reliable. They are 100% a MS shop so I think a Linux server with samba shares may not make sense. -
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
I think my best plan of action is to scrap AzureAD as they will never have servers hosted on Azure.
Not arguing against scrapping AzureAD, but hosting servers on Azure is really in no way a decision factor there. That's neither here nor there in deciding if AzureAD is for your or not.
-
@brandon220 said in AzureAD and shares:
I know AD doesn't make much sense with 20 employees but it seems managing users in a regular "workgroup" with local accounts would take more effort. Am I wrong?
For me, managing local users is normally easier at that size. But you are into the grey area where it can go either way. But two servers, all that cost and management and maintenance and updates and licensing alone, is more time and money than managing the users without it nine times out of ten. I could manage the users of 20 devices faster than you could even discuss getting AD.
