Been using for a long time off and on, but my experience wasn't the same. It did have bugs, I reported a couple of them. Pinning tabs was quirky, some behaviors were quirky, some pages didn't load right for online apps.
Of course it didn't have integration with LastPass for a long time so that alone prevented me from using for anything serious.

I think it's fine to have a browser that really cracks down on ads, but I consider it more of a utility browser, I just couldn't use it for regular work.

I also switched to OneNote recently for much of the same reasons.

There are some quirks to feel out but so far it's coming along.

Keep in mind that each Evernote section/book/folder becomes an entire OneNote notebook. OneNote does not automatically show all notebooks so the feel of it won't be the same as Evernote. You don't see everything all at once, you only see the current notebook you have open.

For example in EN you see a tree-list on the left of all your sections. In ON each section is now a separate notebook, which is physically just a file on OneDrive. You can't see them all at once, you have to open one notebook at a time.

That said, I used the MS tool to convert EN and it worked fine, but now I'm actually having to combine notebooks together because I don't want like 150 different notebooks!

In EN one section contains a bunch of note cards. In ON you get an extra set of sections, the notebook has tabs for sections and then pages within each tab. I'm having to re-organize my notebooks to combine them where they could just be tabs within the same notebook, then pages within the tabs.

As for sharing, you can share the entire notebook right now but that's it. MS will have the feature to be able to share individual tabs as well as individual pages very soon. They've had a feature release just in recent weeks preparing for this sharing ability.

As an example I have one notebook for a certain type of client. All my tabs are actually just alphabet so "A, B, C, D, E, etc) then within each letter I'll put individuals' pages (with sub-pages!) for each client.

CLIENT
--> G
--> --> Bill Gates
--> --> --> Subpages (info1, todo, info2, invoices, etc)

As of now I could only share the whole "CLIENT" notebook, but very soon I'll be able to share just the info2 page directly with Bill, or the entire Bill Gates page with subpages.

So far OneNote is working fine on all devices (Windows, Android, iPad) but I'm having to do a lot or re-organizing of notes into the different way ON stores them. However, some notebooks completely fail to open in the web interface, I'm hoping this will be fixed after I reorganize my notebooks.

Also, you don't need Office to get ON, it can be used as a standalone app.

As an 80s,90s kid this was a fun song. Sorry if posted already.

Youtube Video

@Dashrender said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

@guyinpv said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

If all else fails, I can always tell the client to run a Join.me session from somewhere else in the network.

assuming they can get on the internet when your server is down.

At some point in the escalation process, the physical visit will be necessary.

Usually this is me asking them to look at their router and cable modem for the lights, tell them to call the ISP.
Check for lights on the server. Lights on the NIC port, etc.

Sometimes I'll have a savvy person ping stuff for me.

@IRJ said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@guyinpv said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

Question: Why should I participate at Mangolassi?

Answer: Um, well, ok, think of it as kinda like a hamburger, but it has no onions. The hamburger is tasty and useful, but maybe missing some flavor. You click reply and type something. That something is like onions you're adding to the burger. The burger becomes tasty and has more flavors, people like it. The entire burger becomes more complete. And the more people reply and add ingredients, the better the burger tastes. When you create new threads, it's like having fries or shake, and then other people add some salt or chocolate. Mangolassi is like a multi-course meal, the Internet is like a restaurant.....

That answer your question?

Ok I'm out.....

Aliens love burgers...

Aliens are like other forums.......

Question: Why should I participate at Mangolassi?

Answer: Um, well, ok, think of it as kinda like a hamburger, but it has no onions. The hamburger is tasty and useful, but maybe missing some flavor. You click reply and type something. That something is like onions you're adding to the burger. The burger becomes tasty and has more flavors, people like it. The entire burger becomes more complete. And the more people reply and add ingredients, the better the burger tastes. When you create new threads, it's like having fries or shake, and then other people add some salt or chocolate. Mangolassi is like a multi-course meal, the Internet is like a restaurant.....

That answer your question?

Ok I'm out.....

Is there some benefit to all the SSH/VPN/Jumpbox/ZT stuff over simply installing a remote tool on each machine I want to access?

If I just install remote on the VM(s), and one primary workstation, I can access anything I need, whether XO or XC. And from there I can RDP to other internal workstations if needed as well.

To me this seems easiest, barring possible cost of remote tool, but RemoteUtilities can be used in business for free up to 10 clients. My account only has a few so it's an easy button at this point.

I would think the very next easiest method is to go ahead and open up the server to RDP and deal with the dynamic IP issue some other way. As long as the server is functional, I can get in and do anything. But if the server is down, I'd be totally locked out.
The jumpbox or ZT elsewhere in the network would mitigate that one.

If all else fails, I can always tell the client to run a Join.me session from somewhere else in the network.

Remote Utilities allows use up to 10 clients including business for free. Chances are good I'll hook that up to the server. From there I suppose I could RDP to workstations.
Doesn't take care of using XO though. Maybe I would hook up RU to one workstation as well just in case. Otherwise I could access XO from the server VM, assuming it isn't down. If it is down, then I could get to the workstation instead and try to access XO. If that doesn't work, something is up with the hardware or network.

@scottalanmiller said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

@guyinpv said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

Lastly, I'll probably throw XC on the boss's workstation as a means of dealing with VMs, but otherwise I should be able to do most work just getting directly into the guests.

Move them to XO and solve that issue. No need for workstation access or Windows licenses.

Then I still have to remote in somewhere to access XO unless you're saying I should open it up to the world and use Zerotier?
That means I would need 2 more VMs on the server, one for jump and other for XO.

@scottalanmiller said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@guyinpv said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@scottalanmiller said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@IRJ said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

I think that progression is listed fairly well for a working foundation. To add to that (in no particular order)...

Network+ > CCNA

Why not CCENT > CCNA? CCENT is basically the same as Network+, but gives you credit towards CCNA

Because it costs money and, as you said, it's basically the same thing. I've told people to just keep studying and skip it if they already have the Net+. Assuming they want to keep going and are considering the CCENT because they think it holds more merit than the Net+ as far as difficulty and industry recognition goes. Only reason is I think it's just a waste of money when someone could spend more time studying for the CCNA and just go ahead and test on that.

Just my opinion though.

I agree, I'd rather have the Net+ and the CCNA because it's two totally different exams and tests. The CCENT is pointless if you get the CCNA.

Eli the computer guy abhors the CCNA. Not sure the story on that.

Probably saturation. He probably sees the CCNA now as people saw the A+ more than 5 years ago. Also probably has to do with being vendor specific for being so regarded... instead of something that is truly standard.

That's a good reason. I see the CCNA as worthless. It's dead common, only useful for people too low on the totem pole to need Cisco specific details. If someone has one, I start to assume that they aren't sure what a networking job looks like. It's "that cert" that you get when you are confused about what different certs are for.

Is CCNA not "Cisco"? Is it very general?

Is there a high-level but general networking cert above Net+ that is worthwhile? Or should one only look to Cisco tracts? What about Juniper? I would kind of want to ride both trains. When job hunting, sure Cisco turns up more, but I've been interested in plenty of jobs where it turns out they use Juniper. Makes me hesitate to jump deep into either unless job required it.

No need to belabor the points. I think the legal question is pretty much settled. There is no way to avoid it if a company wants to go after you, and they wouldn't sign off on full release of liability either.

The convenience of unattended access should be recommended, as long as the business fully understands what that means and how it will be used. They could be given an envelope for the lock box with instructions about the system in case they ever want to change support or remove it, etc.

Support pricing should not change even if labor time decreases due to automation, remote tools and so forth. Cost of tools still passes on to customer.

I could use a dedicated jump box and open it to the web, or use ZeroTier and leave remote control open only once inside the network. Or I could use standard remote tools directly on the workstations/server that don't require changes to router such as ScreenConnect, TeamViewer, Deskroll, NoMachine, Remote Utilities, etc.

Lastly, I'll probably throw XC on the boss's workstation as a means of dealing with VMs, but otherwise I should be able to do most work just getting directly into the guests.

@IRJ said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@guyinpv said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@scottalanmiller said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@IRJ said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

I think that progression is listed fairly well for a working foundation. To add to that (in no particular order)...

Network+ > CCNA

Why not CCENT > CCNA? CCENT is basically the same as Network+, but gives you credit towards CCNA

Because it costs money and, as you said, it's basically the same thing. I've told people to just keep studying and skip it if they already have the Net+. Assuming they want to keep going and are considering the CCENT because they think it holds more merit than the Net+ as far as difficulty and industry recognition goes. Only reason is I think it's just a waste of money when someone could spend more time studying for the CCNA and just go ahead and test on that.

Just my opinion though.

I agree, I'd rather have the Net+ and the CCNA because it's two totally different exams and tests. The CCENT is pointless if you get the CCNA.

Eli the computer guy abhors the CCNA. Not sure the story on that.

Eli the computer guy is far from an authority on anything IMO.

I'm sure he would beg to differ. I randomly decided to let a couple of his daily vlogs run in the background, the dude is quite sure of himself when it comes to be an IT person. What would make you think he's got nothing to offer? Just curious.

@scottalanmiller said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@IRJ said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@BBigford said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

I think that progression is listed fairly well for a working foundation. To add to that (in no particular order)...

Network+ > CCNA

Why not CCENT > CCNA? CCENT is basically the same as Network+, but gives you credit towards CCNA

Because it costs money and, as you said, it's basically the same thing. I've told people to just keep studying and skip it if they already have the Net+. Assuming they want to keep going and are considering the CCENT because they think it holds more merit than the Net+ as far as difficulty and industry recognition goes. Only reason is I think it's just a waste of money when someone could spend more time studying for the CCNA and just go ahead and test on that.

Just my opinion though.

I agree, I'd rather have the Net+ and the CCNA because it's two totally different exams and tests. The CCENT is pointless if you get the CCNA.

Eli the computer guy abhors the CCNA. Not sure the story on that.

@scottalanmiller said in Web Application VS Windows Application:

Do you have an example of any real world bespoke software development where a native app would have been beneficial or is beneficial compared to what is available on modern web apps?

Up until recent years the only way I can think of to develop cross-platform applications from the getgo were using Java, or Adobe Air. Of course it could be done with C, C++ if the programmers were careful.

The only reason I can come up with is programmer resources, convenience, time, budget.

I developed a C# app that only one employee needed for a specific purpose on their Windows workstation. This is when MS had released C# Express for free. Having come from Visual Basic, the move to C# wasn't as bad as trying to move to C++ so it was fairly easy to get used to.

Given the fact that the app was only needed in Windows, and that my skill was VB and resources C# Express was free, there was no reason to plunge gung-ho into trying to create this master, cross-compiling, super web app universal tool for this situation. It would have cost me time, more learning, more testing, additional environments to develop and test compiled code, etc etc. So it made sense on many fronts to just create the WIndows-only C# Express app.

In any case I can't really answer your question because the only real limitation regarding cross platform is the availability and/or need for the OS-specific API. So no I can't think of an OS-specific API or library that would be absolutely required for a project and thus make it impossible to program for other OSes too.

Perhaps something with graphics subsystems or deep file system abilities. If you have an app that specifically deals with enhanced features of Ext4, then perhaps there might be no way to get all the same functions on a Windows port on NTFS?
For example Ext2Fsd is a Windows app that only has basic Ext4 support and can only have read-only access to a Ext4 drive. OS API limitations?
These deeper APIs are the only thing I can think of that make an app locked to a platform. A "registry editor" app makes sense in Windows, not Mac and Linux. Linux firewall tools or a CRON utility doesn't make sense in Windows.

@scottalanmiller said in Web Application VS Windows Application:

@guyinpv said in Web Application VS Windows Application:

...but they still have their C++ native Windows apps

Not for two generations they haven't. Last one was Office 2010.

What is your source for this? We are completely talking past each other.

My criticisms are for containerized "web apps" using tools like Electron. They are written in Javascript and Node for the most part and much more limited OS APIs than native apps get.

Every source I can find says Windows desktop MS Office is still a C++ app, it ain't a JS web app in a frame!

If you're saying that their C++ app runs inside some kind of container, that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about web languages (JS, HTML, CSS, Node, Meteor, React, et al) running in a container as a desktop app. Versus apps written in general languages Visual C++, C#, VB, Objective C, etc.
If a C++ app is running inside it's own sandbox/frame/whatever, that isn't what I'm talking about.

@aaron said in BackBlaze B2 competitors:

@DustinB3403 said in BackBlaze B2 competitors:

@aaron with BB is the platform just storage, or is there compute resources too?

B2 is storage only, not compute. But S3 doesn't compute either (at least how I've used it). I thought EC2 is what does Amazon's computing.

The trick is that if you have servers on Amazon, EC2 etc, and also buy S3 storage, you get wicked fast gigabit bandwidth between storage and servers on the backend.
Doing the same project between EC2 and some other cloud provider, you lose a ton of speed.

Fire for moral reason. Lying, cheating, stealing, laziness etc.

If people do those things once, chances are good they will keep doing them. Simply because they were caught once doesn't mean they will never do it again, it means they will try harder to not get caught the same way.

Another one is inability to learn or change. As someone else mentioned, if they make the same mistake and are told about it multiple times and can't stop, that means something. If they show zero ability to get better at anything. I mean, if you work with Excel for 2 years and still don't know how to do some visual design or a use a basic formula for some magic, that's an issue.
For me personally, if I have to use a tool regularly, I've got the user manual downloaded, I'm looking for hints and tricks, and I'm looking to automate repetitive tasks, and I'm occasionally testing alternate tools. I'm watching Youtube videos, or taking online classes. People who are stuck in their ways cannot drive a business forward, they can only plant it securely in place and hold up status quo.

A bad decision, sure. If your tech opens a game server and a bunch of router ports and starts serving torrents for a hacked game off your company server, that's pretty dumb. This shows complete carelessness, not just a lack of some knowledge.

If they can't be bothered to back something up before making a huge change. I understand many things in tech are complicated, and some things potentially have dozens of possible solutions, but the very "basic" stuff like do a backup before a major change, is base level.

On a personal note, I would probably fire butt kissers. These people drive me nuts. They not only butt kiss, but they will throw others under the bus for their own gain, to get an edge with the boss. A little office gossip, a little "just look what she did!"
I'd fire the boss/manager for falling for butt kissing.

@wirestyle22 said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

@IRJ said in Logical IT Certification Progression:

I agree with this 100% as someone who went the A+, Net +, MCSA track. A+ didn't teach me anything useful. It was a test just to get a piece of paper to help me get a job. Unfortunately, many IT companies require A+ or at least look at it like it should be a requirement.

Net+ is just basic networking knowledge and yes anyone in IT should know the material on there. Even HelpDesk techs could benefit from understanding networking. I feel like there are some desktop techs who don't really understand what a firewall, switch, or router really is. They would benefit greatly from Net+. While I believe Network+ was a decent certification, I would take CCENT if I had to do it over. The material is similiar and it gives you the option to continue to the CCNA track. CCENT is cisco focused, but most of it is learning networking that works the same with any device.

I never took Server+ or Security+. After taking A+ and Net+ I really wasn't too impressed with CompTIA.

I would say almost anyone would benefit from studying the network+ material

My Net+ books were great. Lots of "basic" info, foundational stuff, general stuff, multiple platforms, lots of reference material, etc etc. Hours doing IP address conversions, subnetting, binary math.
The test was just the icing on the cake. It's cheap enough, and "proves" some level of foundation. Otherwise you still have nothing left to show for studies.

@Dashrender said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

So I wonder, do you not trust yourself to do the right thing?

Of course I do.

My primary concerns were:

1. Does it open liabilities if something happens at the company and they want to try and blame me for the breach? (He has passwords, he has access, he has remote tools, he knows our backup sources, bla bla) Even if nothing is provable, even a small legal scuffle can ruin an independent like me.

2. I feel as though the business should pay for the convenience. I make far less money with a quick remote-access session and a reboot than I would having to drive down there in person with a minimum onsite fee. Maintaining unattended access seems like it's worth a support contract or some kind of retainer for monthly maintenance or monitoring tools. Pay me $X a month for remote access as needed, basic server monitoring and reporting goes to me, and the retainer also gives you a reduced rate for additional work or onsite visits. Something like that. Also needed to support the cost of remote software itself.

3. Finding good tools.

The idea is, let's say I have 5 small business clients. 2 of them allow me unattended access, 3 of them don't. If all 5 of them require the exact same work, the 3 will pay more for onsite visits and the other 2 I can do in my underwear eating pancakes and if I charge by the hour, they come out ahead.
The 2 companies that allow me unattended access trade some sense of extra security for a cheaper fee. The 3 companies trade being "more secure" for paying a higher fee for onsite visit.

Then from my perspective, I do the exact same work, but get paid less for MY own convenience. It's easier for me to use remote, but I don't want to lose money by being more efficient. I could charge MORE for having remote access, but then what's the benefit to the business? It's gone. Catch 22?
It's like saying, I could wash your car by hand in one hour, or you can drive through the automated machine in 10 minutes, but both cost the same. You'd think the automated, more efficient, quicker way would be cheaper.
If I do charge more for the faster, more efficient remote access, yet charge full price, you get the whole "you're charging THIS for 10 minutes of work!"

Anyway, Scott suggests there are no possible legal issues with unattended remote, and further that contracts and agreements wouldn't help anyway. Not sure I agree yet, but that's one answer.

Trying to get a retainer for maintaining unattended access is a hard sell, at least not without some other quality services.

It's not really an option to buy all the remote tools, only to then charge much less for work. That's a lose-lose for the technician.

Convincing the client that doing work for them in much less time is still worth the same/similar fee as going onsite. They may as well request the onsite time? At least I can be used more when onsite, can check other things, talk face to face, etc. So you have to keep charging premium prices no matter how easy/automated/efficient your work becomes.

@scottalanmiller said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

@guyinpv said in Best way to maintain some remote control but not absolute?:

If I were a business owner and did not have any kind of agreement or arrangement with a contractor, I simply wouldn't want them leaving their crap on my systems. It doesn't even matter if I'm always calling them for the work, we don't have an agreement for them to store their tools in my shed, hang their hat on my hook, or install their personal support tools on my computers.

Well that's not a very smart way to run a business

Is it??

When you've had multiple employees steal from you, do "secret" things, reveal corporate secrets to competitors, or try to entangle the boss in a legal scuffle because they don't like their job.

After a while, the boss just isn't interested in giving any random people any special privileges, access rights, full time control abilities, secret software only they know how to use, etc.

Sure it's paranoia, but if your last accountant stole money, how likely are you to tell the next one "ya do what you want, why not!?"