« first day (927 days earlier)      last day (4074 days later) » 

11:00 PM
@HopelessN00b well doing it all via SCCM gives you fine grained control.. but it's alot of work
 
@pauska Yeah, and considering we have basically 5 guys for >1000 users and a couple dozen sites, that's a ridiculous approach to... well, anything.
@JoelESalas Where am I at as in....?
 
@HopelessN00b Which metro area (if any)
 
@JoelESalas Oh, Columbus, OH. Pretty good town for tech.
 
@HopelessN00b I'd probably do the SCCM approach with that many clients. I'd be really sad if a single update killed a couple dozen sites..
(allthough you could fine-grain with different computer groups in wsus)
besides, how are you installing patches anyways without sccm? logging in to each server manually and install via windows update?
 
@pauska Me too... but seeing as how we don't have the time to do any testing, or a test environment that has any resemblance to production, well SCCM groups aren't gonna prevent that anyway.
@pauska Push from WSUS, auto-download and install.
 
11:09 PM
@HopelessN00b Your servers are auto-installing updates?
 
@pauska Yeah, but only when we push the updates out. So, not really.
 
I hope you stage this with tiered computer groups
Imagine server X with SQL server starts to auto-install a SQL service pack while server Y who depends on SQL is also installing a upgrade.. like Lync
 
@pauska Yeah, wouldn't that be nice. Not that it matters much, it'll be SCCM from here on out. Also without tiered groups.
 
Ok
I honestly believe you're taking the good route here man
I know, SCCM is a bitch and all that.. but it pays off in the end
combine it with MDT and you have a killer deployment solution for both clients and servers
 
@pauska Probably are... but it's just another thing that requires more work and more time that we already have a deficit of.
 
11:12 PM
@pauska When you want to manage it from a single pane
so you can upload .ipa and .apks and stuff right from config manager
and it shows you all devices associated with users in one look. So you can see all associated devices, PC, phone, tablet, for a user right in the config manager console
 
so you run intune AND sccm on all clients?
 
no no. You don't use Intune for PC management in that deployment
 
I vaguely remember someone talking about sccm 2012 being able to manage phones/tablets via exchange..
 
You use intune for MDM and SCCM for everything else
@pauska only for remote wipe/pin enforcement
the normal activesync stuff
Intune lets you sideload apps and stuff
In a "unified" deployment, Intune adds MDM for iOS, Android, Windows 8 phone, and Win RT capabilities to SCCM
So when you set it up, you log into the tenant Intune account to basically register the thing, then you install the Intune connector in SCCM and never touch Intune again. You handle MDM through SCCM and it transparently leverages Intune behind the scenes
 
I see
but intune can also do PC stuff right? Cause that's what I got the impression of when I heard schools talking about it
 
11:18 PM
yeah it can
it's like a cloud-based SCCM sort of. There is some feature overlap
 
got it
 
But if you already have on-premise SCCM, you'd really only leverage it for MDM
 
that's what I thought intune was. Cloud sccm for those who don't use sccm
 
What it has that SCCM doesn't is actual MDM capabilities like sideloading, selective wiping, etc
 
MDM is interesting though. We do have a couple of mobiles/tablets that I wish we had better control of (legal/finance/hr dept)
 
11:21 PM
So when you combine the two with the SCCM 2012 SP1 integration, you get the client PC management that SCCM offers, the MDM management that Intune offers which is absent otherwise, all managed from your on-premise SCCM console
Our Intune tenant is all fucked up though so I've had a hard time setting it up in our demo environment :(
We're considering blowing away everything including our Azure AD and starting over fresh haha
 
sounds like you got your work cut out for you
and that you finally found a job that fits
 
yep, pretty excited
I need to learn SCSM, SCO, and SCOM now
already have an exam on the table that I need to pass
 
orchestrator is cool shit
you can even make runbooks for mdt with it
 
yeah
I need to get up to speed
 
SCOM is also on the list of big things I need to learn
 
11:25 PM
You can do some cool stuff with capturing SCOM alerts and feeding them to SCO for auto-ticket creation in SM
 
I have one SUPER DUPER important tip tho
 
@pauska Oh, good to know... another component I'll probably be putting into our new SCCM deployment.
 
don't go apeshit and install every single management pack you'll think you use
 
install ONE pack (like basic windows server), and fine-tune it
cause SCOM will spam your ass down in alerts
 
11:26 PM
haha yeah
I ran nagios for years
I know how to prune shit alerts
 
it literally alerts you for everything
and its a good reason to
 
@pauska Oh, yeah, we have Solarwinds for spamming ourselves with useless and counter-productive alerts.
 
some shops might think that a RDS session getting terminated is a big deal
for us it's "meh"
so we got like 40 of those each day..
oh and another tip
 
anything client-side that can trip an alert is a no-no
 
you don't get monitoring by just installing a pack
you have to enable the software to talk with scom
even if it's a microsoft product
some applications does not export data to event log and so on
 
11:28 PM
Yeah, there's all kinds of partner training resources that I get access to now
So I have like 12 hours of internal training videos and virtual labs to do for this stuff
 
same here, we have a huge enterprise agreement voucher waiting
which will be used for system center stuff
 
vouchers!
We're the ones that come out an fill those voucher hours :)
 
I know you all changed your facebook profile pictures!
(grrr)
 
good luck on that mark, from what I've heard microsoft is anal about those things
@ewwhite ?
 
Not me. I write my representatives instead of setting a picture to another picture that no one ever cares about
 
11:30 PM
@pauska Oh, I guess it's a US thing
 
@pauska It's not too bad from what I understand. We just need to turn in a project/implementation plan and follow up with implementation docs
 
@pauska just remember that the US is messed up.
 
It's more keeping your shit in order from the beginning than anything. At least that's how it was explained to me
@pauska The US supreme court is hearing arguments for striking down the gay marriage ban in California. There's a small chance that they could make a ruling that would apply to all 50 states (but that's unlikely) so people are all changing their Facebook pics to a red equals sign for marriage equality
Most likely the supreme court won't overturn California and will say that as of right now, it's up to the states
 
ha
 
11:34 PM
@MDMarra Really? The SCOUTUS hasn't exactly been known for leaving things up to the states for a few generations now.
 
california has banned gay marriages? did I read that right?
 
@pauska years ago..
 
yeah
 
they were allowed, then banned....
 
@pauska California is the most fucked up state. They have a direct democracy
so the citizens vote on everything
 
11:35 PM
I actually believed California were one of the good ones (smoking ban and so on)
 
So it's always broke since tax hikes never pass, but they always vote to implement shit that costs $$$
 
@MDMarra Well, not really. They have a direct democracy, except for the budget, which is what causes a lot of the more fuctup bits.
 
I guess every state in US is fucked up in it's own special way
I really don't get why each state gets to decide stuff like that
 
It's like 50 loosely affiliated countries that you can travel through without a passport
 
some laws should be country-wide..
 
11:35 PM
@pauska indeed...
 
@pauska Enh. I think those are an awful thing, dictating what legal activities can and cannot be permitted on private property.
 
you'd think... but everything's separate...
 
@pauska some laws should be EU-wide?
 
@HopelessN00b Did you listen to any of the proceedings today?
 
@MichaelHampton many are
and EU is not a country
 
11:36 PM
@MDMarra I did not.
 
(I'm sad on your behalf right now)
 
@pauska Not yet, but in 200 years it will be.
 
@MDMarra No, I was busy dicking around with new ridiculousness at work... and trying to set up Windows Updates via SCCM for our servers.
 
Most of the justices were pissed that the case was even in front of them
it didn't seem like any of them thought that there was even any legal standing for them to be hearing the case
But then Scalia started talking about how historically the supreme court has left it up to the states and let each decide for themselves
 
@MDMarra Well, that's unlikely, since if they had felt that way, they could have declined to hear the case and let the appellate ruling stand.
 
11:39 PM
I wonder what the instance name is for the wsus 2012 WID..
 
Sotomayer and Kagan kept asking why each person though that it was appropriate for them to hear the case
 
found it
 
And Alito and Scalia kept saying that the supreme court has usually let this stuff slide until history/public opinion decides it definitively, and they specifically cited racial inequality and how long it took to get a ruling out of that supreme court
 
@MDMarra Interesting. Guess we'll see. If recent history is any indication though, we ought to prepare for the worst possible ruling, whatever that would be in this instance.
 
Very strange to see the country change in real-time.
 
11:42 PM
So, it's not like a majority of justices were on the same page about why they were unhappy, or at least cautious, about this case. But for one reason or another, justices from both sides were uneasy
They were all uneasy, just for different reasons
(per usual)
 
mark, how do I pass function keys over to RDP on a mac?
like F5?
 
@pauska Use F5
 
that will dim down the keyboard locally :(
 
Or hit the fn key if you haven't configured the keyboard.
 
well that was dumb of me
thanks
 
11:44 PM
In English... there's an option to make function keys do what they say... and reverse the operation...
 
@pauska hehe, Fn key got you too? Nice to know, makes me feel less stupid for the fact that it happens to me a few times a year.
 
@pauska fn+f5
@HopelessN00b too bad this couldn't wait until Scalia or Kennedy retire
Though, at this rate, they might try and hold on for the next election
 
@HopelessN00b the best ruling would be for them to completely ban all state recognition of marriage. Leave it all up to the people to do whatever the heck they want.
 
@MDMarra Meh. Isn't that the eternal lie of democratic politics, though? "This time, it'll be different."
 
11:48 PM
Well, if one (or both) Reagan appointees were replaced by Obama appointees, this would probably already have been voted on haha
 
@Zoredache Yup. Government shouldn't be in the business of certifying personal relationships anyway, especially not in a discriminatory fashion (as with marriage). Odds of that ruling coming down are less than 0, though.
 
@Zoredache Marriage is a legal status though. For things like next-of-kin decision, tax status, insurance benefits, etc
No gay people care about it from a religious standpoint. Most religions won't have them anyway. It's all about the legal things that come with it
 
@MDMarra That could all be handled by basic contract law.
 
pretty much
 
Oh, and custody of children in the even of the death of one partner, etc
 
11:50 PM
for me it's weird that politicians can influence who gets to be a judge or not
 
so what's the case against it?
 
@pauska The president appoints the supreme court justices but congress still has to confirm them
 
@pauska: thats practically how it happens anywhere
 
@MDMarra So government involvement in it should only extend as far as a matter of contract law. And in matters of contract law, consenting adults are free to make contracts with other consent adults, regardless of sexual affiliation or gender.
 
@ewwhite people might be tempted to have bareback sex, which would upset god
 
11:50 PM
the advantage with the US supreme court system is, unless a single party is in power too long, it averages out
 
@pauska So if you have a liberal president but a conservative senate, it might be hard to get a really liberal guy through the process
Also, supreme court appointments are so important, because they're for life
 
@ewwhite People not liking gays and/or thinking that marriage is somehow inherently up to religion.
 
well, I find marriage as a legal institution a little wierd in the modern context, personally
 
I had a friend that voted republican and we talked about it and she was like "If I think obama could leagalize gay marriage in 4 years, I'd vote for him. But I don't think he can do that and I agree with Romney on other issues"
 
@JourneymanGeek Amen to that.
 
11:52 PM
When I pointed out the supreme court appointemnt (or two) that could happen
And that if that was a republican appointment it would kill the chance of gay marriage at a federal level for 20+ years she was like...oh yeah
 
but is that any actual chance? to me it sounds like the senate is doing all it can to block obama
 
@MDMarra I was gonna say, there's no way a republican candidate will do a better job at that
 
Sometimes, supreme court appointements are the most important thing a president does during his term
 
Feb 28 at 19:50, by Cole
@JoelESalas I always rawdog it.
 
@pauska Generally, you can get a liberal justice through as long as they're close to moderate
 
11:53 PM
@MDMarra I thought the most important thing a president did was to decide what group of people to kill next and to make up the lies to justify it?
 
@MichaelHampton Nope. Justice appointments are bigger
:)
 
@MichaelHampton nah, the president is just the mouth piece for that kinda stuff. That is all decided by the military industrial complex.
 
At least in a split court like the current one
 
@MichaelHampton No. Justices get to decide what killings a to give a legal blessing to.
 
Starting a war or two has been pretty high on that list aswell. Them bushes do love their oil.
 
11:55 PM
think of it. Most of these guys server 25-30 years as a supreme court justice
 
@pauska: Well, obama's gotten into a few too
 
In a court like this, if Romney had won, Scalia and Kennedy would have retired and Romney would have appointed 2 more conservatives
No gay marriage, abortion would be up for grabs
All for the next 20+ years
 
@pauska Not like any one else is different on that score, though. Whole reason European appointees didn't back GW II was that Sadam was giving them oil kickbacks.
 
At least in the current state, there is a chance to get a liberal-leaning bench
 
I really don't understand a purely-conservative mindset.
 
11:56 PM
Though Scalia might hang on until the next election to see if a republican can win
Ginsberg might retire too before obama leaves office so she can be replaced by another liberal
If she and scalia hangs on and then a republican wins the next election, we could be in some serious trouble
 
But we Americans luuurv to hate.
 
@ewwhite: in different ways
 
I hate stupid people.
 
@ewwhite: The "conservative" mindset really isn't, Unless you mean VERY small goverment
 
i think that fiscally conservative values make sense
 
11:58 PM
Yup
 
the problem is that there are no viable candidates like that
 
just cause the government can print money, dosen't mean it should.
 
My politics: Stay out of my wallet, AND my bedroom!
 
lol
a-fucking-men
 
they mingle all of this religious stuff with it and people won't vote against their conscience
 
11:58 PM
(or woman, or...)
 
@MDMarra Because people prefer to vote for the guy who promises them free stuff. The problem, as usual, is people.
 
so I can't see myself voting for anyone in the republican party today
 
Don't blame me, I voted for Ron Paul.
 
Ron Paul is crazy though
He's anti-abortion, anti-birth control, etc
 

« first day (927 days earlier)      last day (4074 days later) »