"Free Hosted" doesn't mean it's the right thing. But in many cases - you can beat it to work for you. Just depends on the work and stress you want to deal with, what you want to give up and what you will never have..
I'd go as far to say that the "free" version is seldom the right thing. Often the reason to look for a solution in the first place is to become more effective and spend less time on something. Just stepping up to the first paying tier usually gets you a lot of features that will save you time for a very modest monthly cost.
they generally come with AV and other crap you don't want at purchase
Oh I see, that sucks. Are the company devices being bought from Walmart or something?
I order these from DCW. I haven't had a laptop not come with at least some third party AV in ages...
I suppose one of the reasons to not order Dell/HP, or at least not the default stuff.
Can't speak to HP, but with Dell, unless you get setup with their imaging program (you provide them with your desired stock image and it's $$$ from what I recall) they're sending you their stock OEM image with a significant amount of bloat-ware. In a corporate / enterprise setup consistency is king so it's normal that you want to reimage with something that's tested and known to play nice in your environment.
Business class devices shipping with trial anti-virus software that is well known to be much worse than the default Windows Defender? That alone is reason enough not to go with that manufacturer (still not a showstopper, as automation can fix that in later steps). If you need to touch a device before an end user gets it, you're wasting a ton of time and money. That's decades old procedures... having your IT department receive the device, reimage, configure, maintain images, and all the requirements that go along? That is a huge waste of resources.
Wouldn't you rather have a device sent directly from CDW to the end-user, without needing a special image, ready to go for the user and the work environment... managed, configured, secured, and compliant as part of the OOBE?
Dell charges a bit more for imaging with your Intune AutoPilot profile but can be arranged and most Dell with Windows Professional and up licensing barely come with bloatware as far as I have been working with them.
CDW and many other CSPs will register them in Autopilot for you for a couple dollars extra, OEMs can do it too, there's no need for a custom image. For some special purpose orders, sure, but not typically needed.
Perhaps this is something newer I simply haven't looked into yet.
I'm not using autopilot. Perhaps the vendors know that that extra crap isn't wanted, so they don't bother to include it in machines that companies pay more dollars for the vendor to include in autopilot.
@siringo watch resource monitor, resmon.exe, when during the delay of opening an app seemingly caused solely by connecting to the wifi network.
For paint.exe to open instantly prior to wifi connection, then slowly after, and instantly off wifi... seems like you'll notice something in resmon somewhere. Maybe A/V or something. Look at everything even the network and possible new tcp connections when you open paint.
Inherited an old SBS network which has been upgraded, but is still using the 10.0.0.0 /8 setup.
I was thinking of changing the subnet to /24.
while the old addressing is insane, what's the reason to change? Unless there is a benefit, why? Just reducing the address pool isn't going to buy you anything.
Yes this ^^^ exactly Scott. I'm of the same mind, that's part of why I threw the question out there, I wanted 2nd opinions.
Everything is working fine ATM, why would I want to make an unneccessary change that provided no benefit but could introduce downtime. I susbcribe heavily to the KISS principal, hence my lack of interest in VLANing in this instance.
The only reason I came up with, when thinking about the change is that it may make the environment 'look' more professional by having a more appropriately scoped, network.
Thanks for all the opinions and information it is all greatly appreciated.
@Pete-S thanks for pointing this out, it does look good, I'd like to test it out.
I'm suspecting that since it's a file copy operation from Windows, there'll be nothing like auto-reconnect, retry on reconnect etc etc?