http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1585522,00.asp
While Longhorn has been discussed repeatedly in this blog, an aspect which has not received as much attention as it should is that of backwards compatibility. As the indexed article suggests, a lot of things which worked with previous Windows versions will not work with Longhorn. Balancing the needs for operating system effectiveness [and, increasingly, security] with those for gegacy support is a contentious quesiton at the best of times. But in this case, abandoning legacy support may make sense to Microsoft in economic terms as well.
An alternative to abandoning legacy support is to retain it with the added reliability of Linix, as discussed in this article:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1586641,00.asp
The fact that Linux can run legacy Windows applications with ease may be one of its major competitive advantages in the Longhorn future.
http://mcpmag.com/columns/article.asp?editorialsid=705
Something which would not have ocurred to me had I not heard of this article: it turns out that the help engine used in XP/Server 2003 allows the Server help files to be mounted on the desktop system. This is obviously a most handy reference source, and the indexed article gives an illustrated step-by-step guide on how to do this.
Here are three articles/tutorials of potential interest to anyone teaching Windows Server 2003:
"NAT in Windows 2003: Setup and Configuration" describes how to make this important security service work, and can be found at:
http://www.WindowsNetworking.com/pages/article.asp?id=307
"Installing DNS On Windows 2003" deals with one of the most vital central services which runs on any Windows 2003 Server, and can be found here:
http://www.WindowsNetworking.com/pages/article.asp?id=304
"DNS Stub Zones in Windows Server 2003" covers a somewhat more esoteric aspect of DNS configuration, worth knowing because of the efficiency improvement it entails, available from:
http://www.WindowsNetworking.com/pages/article.asp?id=305
A more general articlle looking at DNS errors which can bring down your Active Directory network, obviously has application to Server 2003 as wel, and can be found here:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=413
http://searchwin2000.techtarget.com/columnItem/0,294698,sid1_gci960904,00.html?%20offer=SB0502
WIth all of the emphasis on security [and there is no doubt about how well placed that is], it is easy to overlook stability as a desirable criterion. And there is no doubt that instability can bring your server down, so the 12-step checklist offered by this article is well worth reviewing. In addition to discussion, the checklist has a few links to downloadable software which can help maintain stability. Most of this is common sense, but it is good to be reminded now and again.
The comments to the article offer some useful practical extensions.
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=62
Active Directory in Microsoft Windows has been mentioned in this blog before, and with good reason. Here is a special report on AD, with an indication that the NT user base is shifting over, a look at what AD holds in the future, and mention of the availability of a stand-alone AD which does not have to be associated with a server.
http://securityadmin.info/faq.asp
A searchable, filterable FAQ on Microsoft Security, with the default showing the top frequently asked questions. A sidebar lists over a dozen subsections of the FAQ base, along with management and contact tools, plus links and a way to view the entire FAQ contents.
Since the FAQ's provide links to both home and business content, they can serve as a most useful source of information generally, as well as, perhaps, inspiring one or more laboratory exercises or case studies.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/fileandprint/file/dfs/tshootfrs.mspx
File Replication Service (FRS) is one of those important pieces of Microsoft network plumbing which can be the source of undetected [and therefore deadly dangerous] woes. What once was balky and clunky in NT has become a vital Active Directory supporting component in Server 2003. Because it operates 'behind the scene', teaching it and understanding it are more than somewhat challenging. The indexed URL provides a page of downloadable tools for managing/troubleshooting FRS, along with the instructions on how to use these tools and how to work with FRS.
The technical reference for Server 2003 supporting FRS, as well as all of the other technologies functioning in the operating system, can be found here:
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=61
Issues surrounding Server 2003 adoption rates have been ventilated in this blog, and this current sepcial report refines and updates this information. Consisting of a set of survey results and an in-depth case study [with a plethora, though not a surfiet, of related links], this report suggests that Server 2003 is being accepted rapidly [indeed, in the absence of any definitive statistics, I would suggest it is outpacing Windows 2000 Server in terms of site penetration].
Getting a good grip on what is happening here is important for curriculum planning and development in any institution expecting to teach about Microsoft servers, and this article certainly helps in that regard.
Straight from some portion of the horse's anatomy, this page indexes Windows 2000 Server Active Directory Maintenance resources for operations, optimization, and troubleshooting. Following the 'Active Directory Operations Overview" link ultimately will lead you to two alphabetized indices of every task and procedure involved in Active Directory, with active links to both short and detailed explanations of the items involved.
A similar resource for Server 2003 can be found here:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windowsserver2003/default.mspx
The service operations guide appears identical for both, however.
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-167-1-1-618817-7768-1
The travails of Sun Microsystems have been mentioned in this blog before, which may go some way to explaining why Sun settled with Microsoft for $1.6 billion. From this author's viewpoint, which which I largely agree, Sun really has not gotten anything of value in the long term, simply the ability to keep afloat for a while longer in increasingly stormy compettitive waters.
http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_16/b3879009_mz001.htm
In what has become an all-too-familiar pattern, this article dicusses how many of the features originally considered for implementing in the next Windows OS release, code-named 'Longhorn", are being dropped so the OS can be brought in somewhere close to its anticipated time. Such things as the radically improved file system now are to be implemented in 'Blackcomb', the successor to Longhorn, not expected before the end of the decade.
Given that people are just becoming acclimated to Server 2003, of course, one wonders what the real hurry is here.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/migration/linux/mvc/win2kcd.mspx
While most of the buzz these days is about migrating from other operating systems to Linux, with Windows being one of the major feedstock pools for this, in fact the migration may proceed the other way, in some cases. Microsoft's site, at the indexed URL provides a complete guide to Linus to Windows migration, inluding a virtual conference covering migration in extensive detail, white papers on pre-, post-, and ongoing-migration issues, case studies, analyst reports, and additional resources for specific platforms and activities.
If you want to go this way, Microsoft wants you to be sure to know how to do it. The fact that this in-depth how-to covers 6 pages of extensively illustrated and annotated articles is testimony to that.
http://www.aci.com.pl/mwichary/guidebook/index
This website preserves and showcases Graphical User Interfaces, with a featured interface of the day, featured component, and featured icon. News, a featured site, and contact information round out the home page. This is a good way to compare the look, if not the feel, of different OS without having to install them on disk partitions, and should find a place in many teachers' toolbox.
http://www.WindowsNetworking.com/pages/article.asp?id=300
http://www.WindowsNetworking.com/pages/article.asp?id=302
The importance of remote control tools in network administration is close to self-evident. The two URLs link to an excellent 2-part article on using the Terminal Services application in Windows 2003 to implement remote administration. Heavily illustrated, with copious examples, the article shows you how and why to use Terminal Services, as well as providing trouble-shooting information plus hints and tips. Since it is not always possible to demonstrate Terminal Services in the classroom, having a good article for students to access certainly is a useful alternative.
http://www.windowsnetworking.com/
The URL indexes a site devoted to the world of Windows networking, with its major focus being a good selection of article and tutorials. Downloadable networking software for Windows is another feature of the site, which also offers useful links plus newsletters to which you can subscribe. The interface is clean, uncluttered, and functional, making for a highly worthwhile interactive experience.
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=407
Event Logs are an important part of Microsoft computing (particularly, server computing), but the nature of the beast makes it somewhat difficult to teach. You can show Event Logs, and how they are displayed, but the details are so cryptic they often have no significance for students, and are thus quickly forgotten. The indexed article discussed Windows Event Logging, how to get over the frustration of cryptic messages, and how to use the Event Log for specific purposes.
Providing in-depth illustrated coverage of Event Viewer and its logs, this article therefore is a useful item for faculty and students to access.
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1079029984_674&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
The URL indexes a white paper on "Integrated Security: Defending against Evolving Threats with Self-Defending Networks", which is Cisco's initiative to produce integrated security deep within the infrastructure. Something like this does seem like the best solution to this problem, and of course, can help improved Cisco's bottom line.
Some other security white papers from Cisco are:
Cisco IP Communications Security Policy Development and Planning Guide
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1078939330_728&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
Trust and Identity Management: Solutions Overview
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1079026302_550&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
IP Telephony Security in Depth
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1057858103_115&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
Another major white paper on identity management, "Enterprise Identity Management: It's About the Business" defines the technologies involved to produce a solutions roadmap, and can be found here:
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1079109672_743&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
A white paper on "Log Management: Closing the Loop on Security Event Management" explains this crucial networking activity, and can be cound at:
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1079109677_478&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
Two security papers relating to the Windows world are "Best Practices for Designing a Secure Active Directory - Multi-Org Exchange Edition", available at:
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1042225768_732&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
and "Architecture and Design Review for Security", which can be found here:
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1079366506_346&type=RES&src=KA_RES_20040317
A major difference between Windows NT and Server 2003 is the concept of a 'forest'. Now that a number of NT shops are taking the plunge and converting to Server 2003 [which is entirely logical given two things: 1) That the cost of server machinery has decreased to the point that boxes which were adequate for NT can easily be replaced by 2003-capable boxes; and 2) Windows 2000's limited lease on life], resources explaining how to use this far-from intuitive concept are valuable, and the indexed articles explains how a migration can be conducted which will still allow NT domain controllers to function.
Information about advanced features of Windows 2003 domains and forests can be found here:
and an overview of the NT-to-Windows 2003 migration can be found here:
http://channelzone.ziffdavis.com/article2/0,,1542604,00.asp
The case for open source software has been made in many places, and rebutted in many others, as for example here, and here, and here. The indexed headline article suggests that the Microsoft way is better, and provides important publicity advantages to go along with this superiority.
Like the skeptical Scotsman, "I ha'e mee doubts!", but this nevertheless represents a position which must be addressed in the open source debate.
http://www.linuxinsider.com/perl/story/33089.html
Seasoned computer professionals can recognize the difference between Linux and Windows seven times out of nine, but that is not quite the issue being raised in this article, which is differentiation -- the change in value an organization realizes from implementing one solution rather than the other. Unsurprisingly given its venue, the article comes to the conclusion that the market-driven nature of Windows results in bass-ackward engineering, striving for features first, and layering compatibility afterwards.
One thought strikes immediately: it may well be less Microsoft's being driven by the market which is the problem, if any exists, and more Microsoft's misperception of what the market it. This is particularly the case, I would argue, in the case of operating systems, where I think most IT professionals would choose stability over features any old day.
http://searchwin2000.techtarget.com/tip/1,289483,sid1_gci944954,00.html?Offer=sb03012
Active Directory is an important foundation for Microsoft Windows security, and as it represents a working database, it must be secured itself. While the tip indexed by this URL provides only a brief overview of best practices for AD, it also admits that this subject is sufficiently deep that it will have to be revisited, and promises to do so.
One thing worth considering in managing security for an AD installation of any size is that third-party tools will probably be necessary for success.
http://www.nwfusion.com/best/2004/0223os.html?fsrc=rss-microsoft
Benchmarking and comparative testing are one of the most hotly disputed topics in IT -- it have been ever thus. The authors of the indexed article effectively admit that in their introduction, which pittedWindows Server 2003 against Novell NetWare, Red Hat Linux, Apple's OS X, and SUsE Linux. The result found that Server 2003 was the best performer.
Naturally, this result will be disputed by all the losing parties, often quite vigorously. It is, however, an interesting case study to assign to students, since they should read the report, look for any evidence of bias, and be able to give some estimate of how reliable the reported outcome really is.
http://searchwin2000.techtarget.com/infoCenter/tip/0,294276,sid1_gci951925.html?Offer=sb03013
With boot floppies going the way of the passenger pidgeon, Windows XP is supposed to be installed from CD. There will be rare cases, however, where a boot floppy is the only solution; although XP shipped without a boot disk creation utility, public demand assured its belated release. The download address for the tool itself is given as a hot link on this site, and it sounds like a useful item to have in an instructor's software toolkit.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,114982,tk,dn022604X,00.asp
'Longhorn' and its unfurling development have been the subject of much previous comment in this blog. An equal emphasis has been given to security, and mention has been made of autonomous systems which are capable of 'healing' themselves. The importance of security in its broadest sense [i.e. not merely keeping things confidential, but also keeping the system bandwidth available for productive use] has sharply escalated in the last couple of years. Complex problems require complex solutions, which is why all three above-mentioned themes are converging in 'Longhorn' development.
Thus the discussion in this article of how Microsoft's next-generation operating system will automagically take care of many important security problems is worth some attention. If Bill Gates can delliver on this promise, he well may make Microsoft's desktop position unassailable.
In big enterprise shops, management software is an essential component of the IT administrator's toolkit. This site is rather poorly laid-out and rife with interspersed advertisements, but it still covers "hints, tips and the answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), relating to Systems Management technologies such as Microsoft Systems Management Server (SMS), Operations Manager (MOM), and Software Update Services (SUS)". Since this is sufficiently rare and valuable, the site design flaws can be overlooked, much as the issue of systems management software tends to be overlooked in applied IT curricula.
The site also has extensive links to commercial software which system managers may find useful.
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6129
Short but interesting article reporting the latest NetCraft survey, which shows that Server 2003 has slightly outstripped Windows NT as a Web Server supporting OS. There are, however, a couple of interesting sidelights here:
* The total of both Server 2003 and NT installations is less than half [and somewhat closer to 1/3] of the installed Windows 2000 base for Web services.
* The manority of migrations are from NT to Server 2003, not from Windows 2000 to Server 2003.
This suggests that those leaving the NT boat are doing so -- those who remain probably face relatively heavy hardware costs, so one would expect this growth source to be an wasting asset. It also suggests that those who have paid the price to make Windows 2000 work are not anxious to spend more in search of what Server 2003 has to offer. Of course, once Windows 2000 is not sold over-the-counter [a point we have just about reached], then Server 2003 should grow in adoption measures for new installs alone.
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid14_gci949830,00.html
The major flap about the ASN.1 vulnerability issue in Microsoft Windows of course represents a serious core issue [not least the fact that the company 'sat on' the problem for 6 months after being notified]. But it is just as important to understand how fundamental this flaw is -- ASN.1 is the specification which drives the data definition for all networked elements, and is at the heart of SNMP.
Also important is understanding the nature of the flaw -- it was a buffer overflow [and where have we heard that before?], allowing the attacker to take over and run the affected machine remotely. The fact that the flaw was located in the parser library for ASN.1 just makes this worse, since this library is used in cryptographic and authentication routines like Kerberos. The irony of this, of course, is that the exploit just affects the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the Windows OS, which are supposed to be the most secure.
Now a patch is available at:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/security/bulletin/MS04-007.asp
but this should not really help us sleep at night. Because ASN.1 is so fundamental to network operations, we have to ask ourselves: are the ASN.1 libraries used by other operating systems really safe?
Your InterNet server can never be too fast, and the more popular it gets, the slower it is likely to be. Here is an article with five different practical tweaks for Windows servers which will make the Net experience faster from the user's perspective.
This could form the basis of a useful practical test in a class devoted to network servers.
http://www20.tomshardware.com/storage/20040129/index.html
While tom's hardware guide is known for its coverage of, well, hardware, it also looks at operating system software. In the case of this article, it is Microsoft's 'Longhorn' WinFS file management system which is under examination. As the article makes clear, 'Longhorn' and WinFS are not inextricably intertwined, although many of the advances promised by the new OS do depend on using WinFS. Conversely, WinFS can be implemented on existing 32-bit Windows versions [in practice this means Server 2003/XP].
The article discusses Cross-Format File Administration XML metadata and the Clipboard, the details of WinFS, how WinFS and data tags for XML Schemas relate to each other, the WinFS Services, and Virtual Folders.
Such a detailed explanation would be sufficient reason to bookmark this article, but another aspect of this is slightly haunting: with WinFS, it would appear to me, the computer OS has the capability of interfacing with the 'semantic Web' discussed elsewhere in this blog. The significance of this, if correct, needs no underlining.
This is a simple, straightforward searchable site dealing with Windows networking. It includes articles and tutorials, for both general topocs and specifc OS versions, a directory of networking software for Windows, plus newsletters and links. This is well worth a bookmark.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1525080,00.asp
Sometimes the biter gets bit, and this article covers a particularly delicious example. Microsoft, famous for suing everyone on the planet for abusing its trademark on the word "the", took on a company called 'Lindows', which offered a Linux GUI. Despite what would seem to just about any unbiassed observer that there would be no confusion between 'Windows' and 'Lindows' [even in China and Japan], Microsoft persisted.
Now a judge has ruled, in a US court, that in deciding this case, the jury should consider the use of 'window' as a term before Microsoft trademarked the name. There is a very real potential that the name will be recognized to be generic, and therefore not capable of being trademarked. This article, with numeous embedded links, explains the ins and outs of this case.
Another heartwarmer, for sure.
Postscript: As Mr. Berra says: "it ain't over 'till it's over", and so it proved in this case -- enough other judges, in enough other venues, either found for Microsoft or allowed the case to continue, that the Lindows name is no more:
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-171-1-1-618817-7894-1
So now, instead of being heartwarmed, I find myself unLinspired.
http://aumha.org/win4/a/shutdown.htm
Inability to shut down cleanly has always been one of the annoyances when dealing with Windows 9x, and while this operating system is on its way out, lots of people still have it, and some of the same problems afflict Windows XP. This site has pages of information on the problems, suggests solutions, provides articles, FAQ's, and downloadable files, indexes Knowledge Base article, and offers fora for discussion, and is therefore worth a look.
Love it, hate it, be indifferent, or evaluate it realistically, Microsoft is the 800-pound gorilla of the software world. It therefore bears watching, and this site is an excellent source of late-breaking news, information, and guides. The news links are annotated, so you have some idea of what to expect when you click, and the whole site seems honed to providing effective information fast.
Particularly useful are links to 1-page summaries of major Microsoft mojo, which below the explanation contain a plethora of categorized links on the summary subject, including Web sites, FAQ's, and articles.
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=58
Microsoft's 'trustworthy computing' initiative has been ongoing for two years now; this article attempts to provide a scorecard. Clearly, much has been done; equally clearly, much more remains to be done. The latest worm exploits would seem to indicate the vulnerability of a monoculture, which itself raises an interesting question: suppose the Microsoft monoculture is at fault, what would a cure look like?
Imagine for a moment, a world in which Linux/UNIX, Mac OS X [to the extent that, functioning as a server or a desktop machine, it is different from UNIX], and Windows all had about 1/3 the share of desktops and backdoor infrastructure. This would still provide scope for attacks, but in three areas rather than just one. Co-ordinating such attacks to provide a single exploit as damaging as the current MyDoom could be somewhat more difficult than it is at present. Would the game be worth the candle?
But as this article indicates, Microsoft itself is capable of more radical and effective responses. Will we like these any better when we experience their full impact? Is there a baby in all that bathwater?
http://itw.itworld.com/GoNow/a14724a94937a89073442a1
With the advent of multimedia files and the whole brouhaha over peer-to-peer file sharing, administrators need to know how to develop policies for controlling shared disk volumes. This is particularly important in educational environments, since students are a vigorous source of file-swapping. This white paper, "Windows Quota Management and File Blocking 'Best Practices'" is intended to allow you to control storage size and access rights with reasonable ease, and thus is relevant to this question.
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts/
As Mark Twain said: "There are lies, and there are damn lies, and there are statistics". Microsoft is feeling sufficient competitive pressure from Linux that they have started dishing out "the facts" which show that Linux is more costly while performing less effectively than Windows. True, false? There is some educational value in using sources like these as a case study in source bias, even if the facts are correct.
This site also misses the point that many are disenchanted with Microsoft for a variety of reasons other than cost -- and indeed, I would myself support an alternative OS of proved reliability even if the running costs [apart from the conversion costs] were equal, for many of those same reasons.
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=56
I am sure it says something (and equally sure that I don't know what) about the range of products Microsoft produces and the intensity with which it upgrades them that there could be reason for a "special report" constituting a roadmap of what will be coming out of Redmond now and in the near future. For 2004, the short answer is "not much", and while this may be a bad thing for the company and its stockholders, there are a number of reasons why it could be a good thing for the rest of us.
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1071837167_677&type=RES&src=KA_RES
One of the advantaged to Active Directory is the much larger number of accounts which can be managed using it. Here we have a white paper: "Deployment Trends and Methods for Optimizing Large Active Directory Configurations" which speaks directly to issues relating to converting from NT 4.0 to an AD-enabled Windows version. It also looks at AD use within larger organizations, and thus looks like a useful case study.
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6070
Article pointing out that Microsoft is going to begin the retirement process for Windows 2000 starting in April, 2004. This is certainly much too soon, in my opinion, and given W2K's considerable advantages over NT4.0, and seeing how resistant that latter OS has been to universal upgrade, I would expect similar heels-digging over W2K.
After all, if you have implemented an Active Directory installation and have it working, the chances are that any hair remaining on your head is grey or white, so why would you want to go through this all over again?
Either the difference between 2K and 2003 is so major that significant planning and BST will have to be extended on it, or else the difference is minor, in which case, why upgrade at all?
A lean and clean set of support fora [they say 'forums', humph!] covering every major operating system and several minor ones, plus hardware, drivers, software, IT reports, how-tos, news, articles and opinions, installation guides, and a variety of site search tools.
http://mcpmag.com/columns/article.asp?editorialsid=530
For Server 2003, as this blog already exemplifies, there is no end of commentary -- so of course here are some more articles:
Details of setting up a Server 2003 lab:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=337
Now you have the lab set up, here are some exercises:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?EditorialsID=338
A Microsoft product without holes needing patching is like a golf course upon which you can never score:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=336
Dilettantes talk case mods, amateurs talk configuration, but professionals talk policy:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=328
The road goes ever onward, and Microsoft goes with it:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=326
If all servers were IIS 6.0, would you let one host your sister's Web pages?:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=330
What's .NET got to do with it, what's .NET but an overblown IDE?:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=307
And what all this means for MCSEs, MCSAs and all the other certification issues is covered here:
http://mcpmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=567
http://www.mcpmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=565
http://www.mcpmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=564
http://www.mcpmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=549
http://www.mcpmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=543
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=/servicedesks/fileversion/dllinfo.asp
'.DLL Hell' expresses a major issue in dealing with Microsofy software -- file version conflicts between different versions of dynamically shared libraries. Before tearing out your last hair, try this database which indexes information about the .DLLs shipping with Microsof products.
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=16700356
Windows 98 is finally being put out to pasture to join Windows 95 -- the key factor here being that Microsoft no longer has any obligation to release security hotfixes for either product after 16 January, 2003. I have remarked on the prevalance of 'outmoded' OS before, but to hear statistics quoted that as on the end of 2003 a whopping 27% of all installed Windows machines are W95/98 is something of a stunner. However undesirable these older Windows versions may be on performance grounds [can you spell "crash", Billy?], their 'retired' status now makes them a severe security risk if they are connected to the InterNet.
As this article notes, the softening of the economy made the traditional upgrade in 2000/01, which would have replaced W9x, much less attractive, accounting in part for this lingering OS aroma. But that was then and this is now, where [providing a monitor does not need to be purchased], perfectly reasonable desktop systems have a sticker price around $300. On this basis, it is hard to justify refusing to upgrade, particularly for connected systems, or to look at alternative OS [which, in the case of the penny-pinching, means the latest Linux release].
This is not just a matter of security, important though that may be, but also the deplorable condition of expecting knowledge workers to produce with demonstrably obsolete tools. In previous posts I have been dismissive of what I consider an overly-abbreviated product life cycle for Microsoft's 32-bit systems, but the present case is different, for two reasons:
1) In comparison to the latest Microsoft OS, or even NT, the W9x flavour simply does not work as well; and
2) The product life cycle for W95 in particular is certainly long enough.
That I am not alone in supporting this line of argument is suggested by this article:
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-105-1-1-618817-4353-1
and more extensive coverage of the implications of retiring W9x is provided here:
http://www.eweek.com/category2/0,4148,1411728,00.asp
And now, in a more recent reprieve, Microsoft has had a change of heart, so "support will now last until June 30, 2006 for Windows 98, Windows 98 SE and Windows Me [sic]":
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6084
I do wish they would make up their minds about this! Even so, the main point remains valid -- Windows 98 is a fading technology, and companies still using it should plan for a replacement now.
A blog which serves as an OS tweaking site with help on a wide variety of operating systems, plus some resources for imaging and Visual Basic. Searchable with news articles and downloads. Well laid-out, with an interesting block showing the IP address you are using to contact the site, the browser being used, and what language is set in the browser.
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=55
Despite repeated predictions for its demise, NT 4.0 continues to keep on ticking in many organizations, and this in-depth article explains why. The support deadline dates have been extended again, and many of the BackOffice bits and pieces working with NT 4.0 have also had their support extended.
As geeks are fond to remark: "If it ain't broke, fix it until it is!". This gives increased strength to the arguments that many organizations will make the leap directly from NT to Server 2003, which is an interesting datum for planners and educators alike.
http://www.informit.com/guide/content.asp?guide=windowsserver&seq_id=36&120703
Group policies are a most valuable and powerful tool in an Windows Active Directroy Envrionment; they are also somewhat abstract and difficult to explain. Here is an article which goes into group policies and the tools used to administer them, presenting a wealth of useful background information to allow ready comprehension of this topic.
http://download.microsoft.com/download/a/2/f/a2fc47d2-8bdf-4977-8364-1f38b893dba5/lharch_pdc2003.png
How many words this picture is worth in terms of discussing Microsoft's next-generation operating system may be debatable, but if you compare this with the standard UI/Kernel diagrams published for W2K, the complexity of the new OS is enough to demand padding on your jaw, to avoid bruises as it drops. There is a lot more to this new OS [presuming that what is bruited about now in fact comes to pass, about which there is more than a little doubt] compared to previous 32-bit Windows editions.
An important component of all this is the new "Aero" user interface, about which a cornucopia of articles can be viewed here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/longhorn/understanding/ux/
The set of communications technologies for building and running the Longhorn communictions infrastructure is described here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnlong/html/indigofaq1.asp
While the only appropriate colour I could render my opinions about the Next Generation Secure Computing Base would be incandescent purple, a point worth hoisting aboard, contrary to rumours, is that you won't have to have or use it:
which is fine by me -- I will give up a little security to gain a little liberty.
One last note: the hardware demands for Longhorn are somewhat steep, though not out of line with the direction computer developments are taking. Were I to be buying systems with an eye to installing Longhorn in the future, I think the extra dollars involved in specifying compatible machines now would be very well invested indeed.
Microsoft knows it faces some uphill battles -- but it does seem to be making its next-generation OS fatally attractive.
http://mcpmag.com/Features/article.asp?EditorialsID=384
In a lot of IT teaching programmes, a main student demand is for 'hands-on experience', and there is every pedagogic reason to comply. The problem is cost -- racks of servers with installed operating systems and software carry a hefty price tag. While I will argue that those institutions willing to pay this price tag give themselves a considerable competitive advantage, not all institutions involved in IT teaching will be able/willing to pay it.
Here is a detailed article with sources and suggestions on creating a low-cost laboratory for MCSA/MCSE work for about $1K per laboratory station. In addition, it offers a useful checklist of potential activities which could be employed in any program teaching network resource access management, whether directed towards certification or not.
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1069950012_176&type=RES&src=KA_RES
I must be in an exceptional mood today -- usually, if a resource requires an extensive registration [and this one certainly does], I don't feature it in these selections. It is hard enough just finding and understanding the information we need to teach IT effectively without battling additional obstacles. In this case, however, the reward is worth jumping through the hoops: a meaty, 79-page guide to the whole mare's nest of issues surrounding WINDOWS Group Policies.
Now Group Policies are one of these annoying things which are immensely powerful, extremely important for IT students to know about, and yet remarkably resistant to effective teaching, because they are so abstract in the absence of a specific environment in which to apply them. Having a guide which can make some practical sense out of this is comforting in itself, and will, no doubt, serve as a source of precept and example to assist in teaching this subject.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/MSIT/Security/mssecbp.asp
Given that Microsoft's own network is a number-one target for attacks, some explanation of the principles used in that corporation to safeguard themselves is certainly worth inspection, and that is what this white paper: "Security at Microsoft", provides.
Most of the suggestions relate to using Windows 2003, but could be retrofitted to W2K systems.
The range of Ziff-Davis/EWeek topic centers is certainly comprehensive, and each features news, reviews, opinions, and analysis, in the following categories:
Database http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3850-1
Desktop http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3853-1
Developer & Web Services http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3856-1
Enterprise Applications http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3859-1
Linux and Open Source http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3862-1
Macintosh http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3865-1
Messaging & Collaboration http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3868-1
Mobile Devices http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3871-1
Networking http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3874-1
Security http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3877-1
Storage http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3880-1
Windows http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3883-1
Wireless http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-95-1-1-618817-3886-1
With this cornucopia, there should be little reason for an assignment or a research paper to lack content.
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21300.html
The MCSE certification is certainly the most popular, with holders numbering in the hundreds of thousands. The real question -- are all these people really necessary? This article concludes that there is a glut of MCSEs over all, though those with Server 2003 and security certrifications may well stand out from the crowd.
A site article which is continually updated [available as a downloadable .PDF file as well] comparing Windows XP against Apple's OS/X. While the author admits that the criteria weights are not pellucidly watertight, they do give readers some insight into what works with each operating system, and what does not. The overall score puts OS/X into a solid lead.
Now if the hardware was not so blamed expensive....
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=53
With Windows Server 2003 now upon us, vendors of enterprise management software for servers have been busily rewriting their offerings. This article covers the state of play for the various classes of software under development. Server add-on software is something which is important in many real-life deployments, but which gets neglected in both certification studies and coverage of applied IT.
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5103314.html
Extensive article suggesting that with the 'Longhorn' operating system build, Microsoft is moving away from general and open standards back into proprietary standards. The many improvements in the computing experience which Longhorn deliveres are also specifically designed for it, creating user lock-in.
There may be resistance to lock-in, and I personally hope there would be, but past events give no reason for looking at this development cheerfully -- unless you hold wads of Microsoft stock.
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/22542.html
One of the many questions about Mocrosoft's next desktop version of Windows [the Longhorn project] is whether security will be enhanced to the degree the IT community feels appropriate. While Microsoft has had major problems with this issue, it has continued to make improvements. Yet to the extent that Longhorn adds new features, it also adds new risks. With a due date at least two years in the future, there will be, at least, some time to assess this carefully.
In addition to this article, links to some related articles on Longhorn and on security are provided.
More information on Longhorn can be found at:
http://news.com.com/2100-7345-5097537.html http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6012
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-82-1-1-618817-3367-1
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-82-1-1-618817-3373-1
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-82-1-1-618817-3376-1
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd1/cts?d=75-82-1-1-618817-3376-1]
http://www.kbst.bund.de/Anlage303777/pdf_datei.pdf
A detailed, warts-n-alll look at the issues and problems involved in migrating from Windows [both as an operatings system and a support plaftorm for major service applications] to Linux. Equally valuable is the acceptance of the large degree of variables which can apply in this stuation, suggesting a multiplicity of migration paths rather than just a single conduit from A to B.
http://www.computerworld.com/managementtopics/management/itspending/story/0,10801,86122,00.html
Despite appearances, I am just as human as the next person who has my same quotient of human kindness, and one thing to we are prone is looking at which technologies are on the upward slope, since these are the logical candidates for curriculum development. This article lists 5 technologies which are going in the opposite direction, plans to abandon which should be put in place posthaste:
* Windows 9x
* Client/server computing [as strictly construed]
* IBM SNA and proprietary network architectures
* Tape backup
* Visual Basic 6
In fact, I de-emphasize the first four of these in my current classroom teaching, only avoiding the last one because I don't teach programming.
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=51
One thing which should be clear to all System Administrators is that Server 2003 and W2KS are not, compared to NT, "your father's Oldsmobile". Even Microsoft's bitterest critics agree that the later versions of the server OS are capable and much more secure than NT, which really did not qualify as "enterprise-ready".
Some of the 'ways of thought' which prevailed in the NT days have carried over to the later server versions, according to this article, which downplays many of the previous problems which NT had. Worth reading in itself, but made even more so by the spirited and diverse commentary attached to each reason discussed.
http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_pages/startup_full.htm
With the increasing proliferation of scumware and other pestiliferous software, knowing what is going on in a Windows system when it starts up is crucial. However knowing what is going on requires additional information, which this site provides: an alphabetic index of startup entries [not] processes, including which ones are actually caused by a virus.
Another take on this, using the same information base classified in a different way, which may be just the way students will most easily understand it, is this site:
http://www.lafn.org/webconnect/mentor/startup/PENINDEX.HTM
This lists startups and executable programs with a direct link to each item mentioned.
Here is a startup application database which classifies starting programs into categories ranging from essential to dangerous:
http://www.greatis.com/regrun3appdatabase.htm
http://www.theregister.com/content/61/33292.html
When the numbers are foggy, what's a poor crystal-baller to do? Enthusiasts on both sides of the Windows-Linux divide have been forecasting the death of the opposition in the server market for some time now. This article indicates the complexity of the environment in which such claims are being made.
It all rather reminds me about the old joke about the two-car race held in the Soviet Union, in which the Chevrolet won and the Moskovitch lost: in discribing the event, Tass indicated that the Moscovitch came in second, whereas the Chevrolet was just ahead of the last-place finisher in the race!
http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printable/article/0,aid,112749,00.asp
Article which explores several important aspects of 64-bitness, including which hardware systems are ready, which operating systems are ready, the limited state of play with available applications, and what the future is likely to bring. What struck me so forceably is the reminder that it took 15 years between the introduction of the first 32-bit capable Intel processor and the rollout of a 32-bit operating system.
A number of factors suggests the delay in moving to 64-bits will be much less, and just like the 386 chips, the overall performance of the 64-bit chip even on 32-bit software may be sufficiently attractive in itself to guarantee it a market.
The other item worth remark in this article -- in a [admittedly crude] faceoff between Athlon-64s using the FX technology [the high end Athlon] and the Apple G5, the Athlon-64 boxes wielded a tin of the proverbial substance on most tests, and were 10% cheaper to boot.
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5983
As the gorilla of inteterminate weight sitting smack-dab in the middle of major security problems, Microsoft is not sitting back and snacking on bananas. This article indicates its PR reaction, with intentions for more secure technologies Real Soon Now. Given the prominence of the Microsoft bashers, it is only reasonable to consider the alternative case.
For this article, the multitude of lengthy, technically detailed, and mostly negative comments are as interesting as the original statement, if not more so.
This is a SANS report [as distinguished from an AVEC report, which is something else altogether] on the top 20 InterNet vulnerabilities, 10 from the Windows side of the house and 10 from UNIX/Linux. That IIS should continue to hold top position in the Windows listing should not come as a flabbergasting surprise to anyone.
http://www.theregister.com/content/56/33226.html
A common riposte to the continuint vulnerability of Windows to viruses is the claim that if other OS represented the same sized "target" as Windows, they too would be infested. This article suggests otherwise: the basic structure of OS X and Linux help make them more resistant to viruses from the get-go. There is considerable resonance, mentioned here, with the "monoculture" problem, which does not exist for either of these other OS.
If true, then this is another cost factor which needs to be evaluated when looking at the practicality of replacing Windows in an organization.
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,4248,1308772,00.asp
Article explaining what all the buzz about the next-generation Microsoft desktop is all about, and what the software is likely to include. One thing it makes crystal-clear is that the trend towards integrating the desktop and the server which culminated in Windows 2000 is definitely being reversed.
Of course, this new version of the OS will make such demands on hardware that most desktop users will have to upgrade [but what about those who invest in 64-bit systems now?], surprise! surprise!
In addition to the article, this page also provides a number of related links, including one which suggests there will be a 'Longhorn Server' after all....
The main article referenced is about the problems, perils, and pleasures of using a Macintosh computer in an PC-networked workplace, and is interesting enough, but the added commentary to the article takes it into whole other dimension of what is possible and reasonable on a network. Oddly enough, I strongly suspect if Apple were to dump their hardware exclusivity so as to make their prices "competitive", I think they would face a window of opportunity for replacing the faltering Wintel standard. As it is, they stand to reap the worst of both worlds -- never gaining critical mass, and eventually being hammered under.
Still, even at their rather jaw-dropping prices, the 17" Powerbook and the dual processor G5 [with the inevitable 23" Cinema display] are extremely attractive machines in their own right. In fact I would happily accept donations of slightly used ones, or the equivalent of in-store credit....
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,4248,1332766,00.asp
Intimations of indisposed immanence on the part of the "Longhorn" desktop update to Microsoft Windows have been bandied about, but now it is official -- the earliest the OS will be ready to ship is 2006. There will be a considerable knock-on effect for the rest of the products which Microsoft is developing.
Of course, now SP 2 for XP is promised to be a "new version" of the OS, but still, I think the overall reduction in the pace of OS obsolescence will be highly welcome.
http://computerperformance.co.uk/ebooks.htm
Having a fair tinge of Scottish blood in my veins, my general rule on this blog is to recommend only items which are free -- teaching budgets are strapped enough as it is. This is an exception: a selection of e-books on Windows 2000, 2003, and Exchange. covering Scripting, Active Directory, Performance Monitoring, Migration, and Configuring, most of which are priced under $5.
Each e-book is described in some detail on the site and free sampler is available to allow you to judge the quality of these works before paying anything.
http://www.laurenceholbrook.com/TechnicalInformation/Win2KProfessionalCommonDialogBox.html
The Windows Common Dialog Box is often a source of frustration for users, surely an ironic situation for a GUI element which is seen so often. The URL indexes an explanation of how you can customize the CDB and the limitations of this approach, plus links to 3rd-party tools which can be used for further change and configuration.
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=1405
Microsoft applications and the operating system speak not only with a forked toungue, but also with one which is hard to comprehend. This utility will translate the error message codes into something meaningful for human beings.
http://www.ccianet.org/papers/cyberinsecurity.pdf
The title and subtitle of this paper pretty much sum it up: "CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly; How the Dominance of Microsoft's Products Poses a Risk to Security". Despite its alarmist title, it is written by a bevy of well-known security analysts from all sections of the IT industry, and presents an argument for a diversified software ecology clearly and concisely.
The report makes a point that is worth quoting: "The average user is not, does not want to be, and should not need to be a computer security expert any more than an airplane passenger wants to or should need to be an expert in aerodynamics or piloting.". The tendency to "blame the victim" in many of these cases is totally misplaced, and in fact impedes potential solutions.
A short commentary on this paper is available here:
http://mcpmag.com/news/article.asp?editorialsid=613
and a more extended commentary with reflection on the wider issues is available here:
http://news.com.com/2009-7349_3-5140971.html
Another more recent rebuttal is here:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1276959,00.asp
Now 64-bit processing is available to us on the desktop, with three desirable [and pricy!] machines under review here, in addition to related links, including one to Apple's [not-so-pricy in comparison] G5.
But wait! There is more! Microsoft is speedily rolling out Windows versions to make use of both AMD's and Intel's 64-bit chips:
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5966
The extreme technical viewpoint, with some beta tests and a great deal of additional technical information, can be found at:
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd/cts?d=75-63-1-1-618817-2626-1
One of the major points being made here is that "who needs it?" = "Gamers!" -- but then, what gets adopted in business a short time later is all the technical development which gamers made possible in the first place. Again, the history of the 16-bit to 32-bit transition is worth reviewing for useful pointers.
http://searchwin2000.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid1_gci916094,00.html?Offer=ws92233
Since Active Directory was the major new technology introduced with Windows 2000, continuing as a mainstay in 2003 Server, a good learning guide to its plan and design is certainly worth a look. This article goes into considerable detail, covering Active Directory basics, planning your Active Directory, Active Directory migration, and Active Directory deployment. Many of these topics are supported by white papers, articles, and web links; a set of Resources includes tips, tricks, and traps as well as some webcasts on more esoteric issues, such as migrating from UNIX or executing an Exchange Server upgrade.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/windowsupdate/sus/
Courtesy of Serdar Yegulalp's Windows 2000 Power Users newsletter, here is a free download of a tool which allows network rollout of patches and updates.
http://www.only4gurus.com/v2/index.asp
A somewhat ad-laden but nevertheless effectively arranged front end to information relating to Microsoft issues, linking mainly to Microsoft sites an an easily-used format.
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~mrscary/winupfaq.htm
A collection of Microsoft Knowledge Base articles addressing the problems of updating Windows automatically, with the major focus being Windows 98. Some additional links at the bottom of the page cover more general Windows 98 update and configuration issues.
http://windowsxp.homedns.org/xp/
The URL instances a blog with information, including downloads, relating to Windows 2000, XP, and 2003, along with scripts and some scrolling news. While interesting in its own right, the download available at the site: "The Tweaking Experience" serves as a guide to this activity for 2000 and XP alike, and is well worth the trip all by itself.
http://pugetsoundsoftware.com/askleo-blog/archives/000015.html
For Microsoft Windows vict- er, users, .DLL problems are a way of life. Here is a short article with a number of remedial steps you can take to try to work yourself out of the famous ".DLL Hell".
http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1062090016_670&type=RES&src=KA_RES
A white paper titled "Fast Path to Secure Systems Architectures and Network Designs", directed towards enterprise/large-scale security, again from a source which has a lot of experience with this, both good and bad.
http://www.eweek.com/print_article/0,3048,a=58583,00.asp
"We will ship no operating system before its time." now appears to be a Microsoft mantra; this article speculates on reasons for the pullback. In addition, there is a box of related links to developments on this OS front.
One wonders if users have been polled on the desirability of a new OS, when they are still getting used to the old one. There might be even more reason for delay if this basic fact were hoisted inboard at Redmond.
http://www.infoworld.com/infoworld/article/03/08/29/34FElinux_1.html
Another article on the costs of switching to Linux, with a number of interesting observations, including one suggesting Linux is not always the cost solution. Points out as well that TCO needs to be related to ROI, rather than considered as a singular entity. If ROI rises faster than TCO, and there is a causal relationship, then "cheaper" is not always "better".
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1234349,00.asp
One more look at the cost issues surrounding Linux, this time focussing on the out-of-pocket costs involved in deploying Red Hat Linux.
http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,111652,00.asp
One of my major gripes about the Windows OS is the bland assumption that after using the system for a couple of years, a re-installation to restore stability and function is required. The words I would use to indicate my opinion of this cannot be printed in a posting directed at a professional audience, but they can be categorized as "sulfuric".
The purpose of a computer is to do things, and software and the OS are the means to that end. We should, as a matter of right, be able to install software on a regular basis without having to worry about OS stability. But since we cannot, this detailed article on how to reinstall Windows may prove to be a lifesafer.
Personally, I will accept a lot of instability, because to reinstall and reconfigure my system would take, at a minimum, a man-week, which makes root-canal work without anesthetic during a hurricane while renegotiating your mortgage look pleasant in contrast.
http://www.petri.co.il/index.htm
The formal title of this site is a bit misleading, since it holds hundreds of articles on 32-bit Windows variants, as well as information on patches/service packs, tutorials, links to other resources, an annotated booklist, and, naturallement, some information on becoming a MCSE.
There is a lot on this site, and the author has gone to great pains to explain how to access all of it in the initial "Welcome" screen. I experienced a JavaScript error on opening the page, but ymmv, and in any case, there still is one humongous amount of relevant information available.
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,4248,1230771,00.asp
New operating system? "We doan' need no steenkin' new operating system!" is one of my many rally cries [perhaps in itself an explanation why the expected rally fails to happen]. My oft-expressed rule-of-thumb is that it takes about two years to become really proficient in a new OS of the complexity of 32-bit Windows, another two years to roll it out, get everyone acculturated to it, and get the bugs worked out -- then you can enjoy your investment for a whole whopping year before starting the cycle all over again!
Indeed, if you are particularly desirous of being on the bleeding edge, since details of any upcoming OS are available months in advance of its scheduled advent, then you never have any period of functional stability. This does not see to me to be A Good Thing.
The announcement of delays in the rollout of "Longhorn" [I don't know if it frightens me, but it sure frightens Bill Gates] is, according to this article, not causing undue bearning of hearts outside that in my own breast, which remains quiet as a cooing dove at the prospect of Windows 2000 keeping on for several more years.
Herewith a clutch of tools which are of potential value to the serious Windows administrator:
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=358
These three high-end monitoring tools automate the management of
networks with thousands of nodes.
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=357
Microsoft's recently released Active Directory Migration Tool v2
offers important enhancements over the first version. One of
Hewlett-Packard's top AD experts briefs us on the improvements.
http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?editorialsid=360
Besides amending the EULA to maintain antitrust compliance and
adding USB and wireless support, Microsoft rolls up fixes for a
slew of performance bugs into its latest service pack.
http://mcpmag.com/reviews/products/article.asp?editorialsid=444
The tools you need to resurrect a dead computer.
Reviewed by Brian Reisman
http://mcpmag.com/reviews/products/article.asp?editorialsid=445
This tool leverages group power to ease administration. Reviewed by Joe Jorden
http://mcpmag.com/reviews/products/article.asp?editorialsid=446
Learn how to protect yourself with this wireless monitoring solution. Reviewed by James Carrion
http://mcpmag.com/reviews/products/article.asp?editorialsid=447
This tool allows for incredibly simple control over your enterprise desktops. Reviewed by Matt Kinsey
http://mcpmag.com/reviews/products/article.asp?editorialsid=441
Get up close and personal with your network's activity. Reviewed by Andy Barkl
http://mcpmag.com/Features/article.asp?EditorialsID=361
Getting a grip on Active Directory is not an activity to contemplate bare-handed. These two articles provide an in-depth reference to the dozen most common administrative tasks needed in an AD operation, along with valuable and effective reviews of third-party tools to help accomplish these tasks.
Most curriculum used for AD teaching concentrates on the Microsoft native tools. One theme I beat like a circus drum is the fact that in a large or complex AD deployment, third-party tools are practically essential. This article reinforces that point.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/howitworks/management/w2kservices.asp
Services are an important part of the Microsoft Operating system -- here is an online guide which can also be downloaded as a WORD document that gives an alphabetized summary of these services.
So if you wake up at night in a sweat that you can't remember what the Boot Information Negotiation Layer does -- dry yourself off and consult this document to jog your memory.
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/longhorn_preview_2003.asp#aero
I feel we need a new desktop OS from Microsoft about as much as we all need migrane headaches measuring 9.5 on the Richter Scale [If Windows 2000 was good enough for my grandmother, it definitely is good enough for me]. Microsoft disagrees, hence the "Longhorn" project detailed in this article.
Whose going to win this disagreement, do you think?
http://www.iqt.com.au/selectnewsletters/currentissue/windowsXPdifference.htm
Although I think it is to be avoided with the same assiduous intensity that one would apply to staying away from a land shark [if Windows 2000 was good enough for my great grandfather, it certainly is good enough for me], alas, Windows XP is becoming increasingly unaviodable, and even I will probably have to endure its charms when I next hit the hardware bar for a pick-me-up [can anyone spell "Alienware"?].
Under those circumstances, a good guide for evaluating whether you want the "Home" or "Pro" version [hint, real men don't eat quiche, though they may like the smell of it when it is cooking] can come in handy. Personally, I will plunk down the extra $100, but your mileage may vary. Here is a useful, highly-detailed, and hype-free article showing the differences between the the two OS types.
http://www.microsoft.com/education/?ID=21stCenturyCitizen
An extensive on-line and downloadable [WORD format] white paper titled "Educating the 21st Century Citizen" setting out Microsoft's future education vision. The broad coverage in this paper gives ample pause for thought, regardless of one's opinion of the originator.
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5910
Rivalling the argument about how many VC angels can dance on the head of a pin has been whether Linux or Windows has a lower TCO -- this article comes quite close to saying "both". Besides making some sensible analytical remarks about costs and their estimation, it also [along with commentaries in response] demonstrates that such issues as IP and Product Activation represent real factors to be considered above just cost issues.
This won't settle this debate, but it can make the discussion more informed.
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5911
At the beginning of WWI, most of the troops involved said "home by Christmas" -- it did not quite work out that way. Nor will the war among Linux, UNIX, and Window be resolved by a knock-out blow any time in the immediate future.
The difference being, this war may ultimately benefit all computer users, something which assuredly cannot be claimed for "the War to End All Wars".
http://vo243techtricks.blogspot.com/
Here is a blog which has paid for itself the first time I used it, since it indicated that the B: drive is now assignable in Windows 2003 Server -- this is almost enough to get me to buy it for home use, and the first workstation version of Windows which comes with an assignable B: I will buy regardless of Product Activation [gag me with a spoon!] irritations.
The fact is that I have long held on to 5.25 drives as being more reliable floppy media than the 1.44, but my latest main home system, which I bought about 1.5 years ago, did not have a B: drive nor could I get one configured. There is no way to express how it bothered me not to have a B: drive, though I have suggested an irritation index above. The fact that Real Soon Now I will transfer over most of my 5.25" files to one [!] CD, and will not, as a regular practice, need a B: drive [actually, on most of my systems the A: drive was 5.25" and the B: was the 3.5"] simply makes this news all that much more of a lift.
Sometimes it is the smallest thing which bring the greatest joy....
http://www.w2knews.com/rd/rd.cfm?id=030804TB-Server_2003
One major advantage of Windows 2003 Server, so far as IPv6 is concerned, is that it offers a robust, fully functional IPv6-capable protocol stack. The link leads to a plethora [if not a surfiet] of information about IPv6 in Server 2003.
http://ct.com.com/click?q=12-jaAKIl.Q6lZQ.KFqUo1J6p2kqGPR
Given that Windows NT Server 4.0 is just about to pass its "best before date", an organization which has waited this long probably really needs a white paper titled " Evaluating Windows Server 2003 Migration Options", and Dell will be happy to let you download it free from the URL provided.
More details on migration planning from NT to an Active Directory server can be found here:
http://www.informit.com/guides/content.asp?g=windowsserver&seqNum=53
http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,3959,1192684,00.asp
Examines the problems Linux has experienced with negative competition, and points out that while the SCO suit is high-visibility, the shark in sheep's clothing is really Microsoft. Suggests as well that should Microsoft win out in this struggle, the long term consequences would make eating Grandma look like a picnic.
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5890
More indication that 64-bit computing is the wave of the future which is beginning to crest before breaking on our sunny beach of IT activity: a short article suggesting that the next version of Microsoft Visual Studio.NET will support 64-bit development.
We appear to be in the same condition relative to 64-bit computing that we were about a decade ago in relation to 32-bit computing: it was a big transition to make, there were lots of compatibility issues to resolve, and yet, within a couple of years, the market momentum had built to the point that the shift was inevitable. The question of utility was somewhat more pressing a decade ago; the change to 32-bit systems was made with good reason.
Right now, it is the server end of the IT spectrum which most needs 64-bit processing, and such hardware is being installed. It may take longer for this to manifest itself on the desktop, but only those who consider the current desktop the peak of computational perfection would think this will take very long, and my estimate is about 4 years maximum.
Incidentally, this may be the inflection point where there is once again a major hardware difference between systems used at work and those used for non-business purposes in the home environment.
A "Best Practice Guide for Securing Active Directory Installations and Day-to-Day Operations" in such detail that it is presented in two parts. The URL provided indexes the first part [oddly enough, there seems to be no way to index the report as a whole], but the second part is easily visible in the left-hand pane on the page.
An extensive and thorough treatment of its topic, well worth careful and continuous review.
Hot off the presses, an in-depth view of "Microsoft Windows Server 2003 TCP/IP Implementation Details"; just the thing if you want to see how TCP/IP works in Server 2003.
Although you have to go through a slightly convoluted registration process to get it, this free 32-page "Windows Server 2003 Resource Guide" is briskly written and filled with information and links of immediate, significant value.
And the price is unbeatable -- though there is some low-key advertising.
The issue of security patches is sufficiently high-visibility and -stress that a good guide to patch management is a valuable resource. Here is one from Microsoft itself, providing not only a wealth of detail about what patching is all about -- to the tune of some 100 pages -- but also in a downloadable as well as a Web version.
The downloadable version provides scripts, templates, and other useful supplements.
On the other hand, you should not rely on Microsoft to handle all your patching needs, so a white paper on "How to Keep Your Microsoft Software Secure" is a useful addition to the above publication, and can be found here:
http://cl.com.com/Click?q=eb-HlLoQkD1IUBe2PnEeahpbuKd99RR
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/07/24/HNgateslong_1.html
The fact that Bill Gates himself finds the "Longhorn" OS variant actually a bit scary ought to warn the rest of us to become stiff as boards at the prospect. Once again, the question is begged: do we really need a new OS every 4 years or so?
I happen to think the answer is "no", and that in this case, at least, Microsoft has been busy pushing string since the new millenium. On the other hand, they make quite a bit more money than I do....
http://www.atruereview.com/Articles/winsecurity.php
Short and to-the point article "Increasing Windows 2000 and XP Security", with a number of straightforward procedures simply and concisely described. Given continuing problems with W2000 and XP relating to security, it never hurts to have some more advice.
http://www.entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5877
Microsoft has alerted people to a critical flaw in Windows Server 2003, which was supposed to offer unprecedented security. The Remote Procedure Flaw could allow someone to take over another, remotely located, Windows machine. This does not enhance Microsoft's reputation for creating secure OSs.
http://linuxshop.ru/linuxbegin/win-lin-soft-en/
A somewhat rough-around-the-edges resource grammatically, but nevertheless useful, source for Linux software which is functionally compatible with the Windows equivalent [think "Office"]. In addition to those programs which can work on more or less a 1:1 replacement basis, Windows applications which can run under WINE are also covered.
http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/sigmil/RevEng/
A work-in-progress, admitted warts and all, representing an online book covering reverse engineering in both Linux and Windows, built along general approaches. One of the follies of current IP litigation is to outlaw reverse engineering, which can be a most valuable form of education and discovery for those involved in computer programming and IT applications. The long-term pernicious effects of such a narrow stance can only be expressed by forebodings, but the learned opinion with which I am familiar suggests strongly this IP stance is Not A Good Thing [nor it is, contrariwise, A Good King, either].
So here, perhaps, are Things Man Was Not Meant To Know.....
Microsoft's Windows Server 2003 Resources:
- Windows Server 2003 Home:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/default.mspx
- Top 10 Windows Server 2003 Benefits http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/whyupgrade/top10best.mspx
- Versions:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/features/compareeditions.mspx
- Evaluation Kit http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/trial/default.mspx
- Pricing, Licensing http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/default.mspx
- Windows Server 2003 Facts: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2003/apr03/04-23WinServerFacts.asp
- Upgrading from Windows NT 4.0 to Windows Server 2003 http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/whyupgrade/nt4/default.mspx
- Windows Server 2003 VPN Setup:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/networking/vpn/default.mspx
- Index of Windows Server 2003 Articles on Microsoft.com:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/techinfo/overview/articleindex.mspx
MCSA/MCSE on Windows Server 2003 Resources:
- New MCSA Requirements:
http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/mcp/mcsa/windows2003/
- New MCSE Requirements:
http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/mcp/mcse/windows2003/
New Windows Server 2003 Exams Objective Guides:
- MCSA/MCSE Core (Networking Systems)
70-290: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-290.asp
70-291: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-291.asp
- MCSE Core (Networking Systems)
70-293: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-293.asp
70-294: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-294.asp
- MCSE Core (Design)
70-297: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-297.asp
- MCSA/MCSE Upgrade
70-292: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-292.asp
- MCSE Upgrade
70-296: http://www.microsoft.com/traincert/exams/70-296.asp
http://eletters1.ziffdavis.com/cgi-bin10/DM/y/eUkJ0CyMye0HX60vzK0An
http://eletters1.ziffdavis.com/cgi-bin10/DM/y/eUkJ0CyMye0HX60v8e0A8
A special report on Windows 2003 Server as it is rolled out, together with an article indicating that the hackers went after the new release like sharks after a baby whale, along with a pointer to Microsoft's official security guide.
As a professional stick-in-the-mud who yearns for the glorious days of steam computing, when bits were bits and servers knew their place, the idea of a server upgrade is low on my list of high priorities. However, this short column suggests there are lots of good reasons for moving to 2003 Server:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/02/27/09enterwin_1.html
http://entmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=5869
The poor performance of Intel's Itanium CPU on 32-bit processes has hindered its adoption, slnce little software is being written which is optimized for the new capabilities of the 64-bit chip. This short article indicates that Intel and Microsoft have joined together to introduce a SP1 beta for Server 2003 which allows 32-bit applications to run on the Itanium without penalty.
AMD and Intel Ship 64-bit Chips: http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd/cts?d=75-28-1-1-618817-1171-1
Red Hat, Dell and Others Support Intel's 64-bit Madison: http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd/cts?d=75-28-1-1-618817-1171-1
Does the G5 Really Matter: http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd/cts?d=75-28-1-1-618817-1174-1
The whole bandwagon towards 64-bit computing seems to have sprouted afterburners. In part this results from the ease with which Linux/UNIX variants can support 64-bit processors [they've been doing it for years], and Apple's venture results from the fact that OS X has BSD UNIX roots. Given all that, Intel simply could not afford to hold back from the fray, and the more progress and support that is given to hardware and software developments relating to this, the sooner we all will have supercomputers on our desktops.
Then the question to answer will be: "What do we need these for?" -- which, when you think about it, is really a pleasant position in which to be.
http://www.corante.com/personal/redir/25477.html
The long-unwinding legal dispute between Microsoft and Sun has taken a new turn: Microsoft is no longer forced to carry Java, but neither can it implement its own version of Java since this violated Sun's copyrights. In many technology-related cases [particularly with intellectual property], the legal system seems to produce absurd and unhelpful results. On this one, I agree with the court both on what it affirms and what it denies.
http://www.answersthatwork.com/Tasklist_pages/tasklist.htm
Especially with all the malware slithering about the Net these days, some of which attached to your startup process and run without intervention, some resource which can help you identify what's going on is more than just handy. You can see what is going on with Task List, but you can't tell the players without a program.
This is a searchable alphabetized source for decoding what the Task List tasks really mean, and whether you can deep-six them safely or not. You can also download programs to help control what happens when you start up, combining remedy with information.
A neatly arranged searchable message board site covering tips for Windows, Linux, and Apple OS, plus miscellaneous issues. Comprehensive with archives, downloads, FAQ, fora, news with archive, a glossary, reviews, surveys, tips, and web links, this looks to be a useful site for a wide variety of computer users.
http://www.nwfusion.com/reviews/2003/0623linuxreview.html
With all the distributions of Linux out there, which one is best? Foolish question, grasshopper! It all depends on what you want to use it for. But for enterprises, the scope is somewhat narrowed, so here is an article which compares Red Hat with several United Linux entries [with the main focus on SuSE] and also gives some glimpses as to how all this stacks up against Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition.
To save some suspense, in case time is too pressing to actually view the article, it was Red Hat by a nose.
http://www.activewin.com/win2000/
Some things do hold their capacity for constant amazement: the wonderous structure of a Bach fugue, the superb complex suffusion of a single-malt scotch on the tongue, but since this is a technically-oriented site, let me adduce one more which is relevant: the fact that even though I surf the Net 'till I nearly drown, and hoover up technology references like an eatanter on steroids, it remains true there are still superb sites that I miss until someone else [my students, in this case] points me at them.
This is definitely one of them -- ActiveWin2K is a sure and certain bookmark for those working in W2K, with articles, updated news on software and hardware, reviews, fora, a support centre, links to other MS operating systems, FAQ's on OS and a whole host of related subjects, and, as they say on the Ronco commercial, "much, much more". Whether you are interested in W2K, you work with it professionally, or you teach/train in it, this is a site to bookmark.
http://www.tomshardware.com/storage/20030617/index.html
An illuminating article on an important topic -- file systems. The standard file system used on most PCs, FAT, is really starting to show its age, and NTFS, while considerably more capable, is about a decade old too. Yet advances have been made in this area, and we can benefit from their application.
Microsoft's "Loghorn" will gore us, will-nilly, and one of the major things promised in this new release is a new file system which functions like a relational database [if I understand it correctly]. This is the sort of innovation which Microsoft needs to make if it wants to retain its premier position on the desktop. That it also can give Microsoft OS an additional competitive advantage has probably not escaped the attention of those in charge at Redmond.
http://cl.com.com/Click?q=73-__ZeIBBaP5il9iGAQhILJQGrBFRR
Changing from an old version of a Windows OS to a newer one is never to be taken llightly, but Microsoft's support policies are certainly going to push 9x/ME/NT users in the direction of 2000 or XP. So it is useful to have some hints and tips on how to do this well, which this white paper "OS Migration Best Practices for Midrange Organizations", supposedly offers.
The OS files is one of those sites, well worth bookmarking, which takes your breath (and time) away. From W95 to "Blackcomb", MS-DOS to FreeDOS, Linux in a variety of distros, BeOS to Netware, there is something here on just about every operating systems running on a PC. In addition to reading about it, there is a links page to free OS that you can download and play with.
Nothing quite like whiling the time away twiddling with an obsure OS....
This is a site for downloadable tools relating to the range of WINDOWS operating systems from 9x to XP, some of which include source code. Information articles on how the operating systems work [e.g an extensive BOOT.INI options reference] are also available on this site.
http://eletters.wnn.ziffdavis.com/zd/cts?d=75-19-1-1-618817-625-1
Every once in a while you come across a story which just makes you say "Ooog!" and reach for the nearest container of restorative beverage. This article on the re-integration of Internet Explorer with the Microsoft OS makes so much sense [and is so winningly annotated with links] that this development looks inevitable. Which means desktop bloat and increased operating system instability seem part of our Microsoft future.
Once again, when you look at the broader aspect of this, along with several other intiatives which Microsoft is taking which are hard to interpret as being in the customer's advantage, it makes the potential pain involved in switching to some other OS suddenly seem a lot more bearable.
http://entmag.com/reports/article.asp?EditorialsID=44
It was not all that long ago that Microsoft seemed to be nothin' but .NET -- confusing their audience more thoroughly than the Globetrotters ever bedazzled their opponnets. The extent to which this has been rewritten in an remarkably short time is eerily Orwellian -- and the .NET designator remains only on the Visual Studio environment. Here is an extensive look at where .NET is today -- again, the potentials here are sufficiently great that some extensive reading, marking, learning, and inward digesting will no doubt be necessary.
http://cl.com.com/Click?q=04-k9W0IFQjFfCUUR1_QHNpWzpOYWeR
When a company gets sufficiently worried about the competition to actually lower or eliminate profit margins in order to land the sale, the company is taking its competition seriously. Whether you view this as an anticompetitve tactic or a new-found appreciation of how Microsoft endangered by the Linux legions, the fact that statements like this can be made is an eloquent indicator of how things are changing in the OS arena.
http://rss.com.com/2100-1012_3-1010051.html?type=pt&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=news%22
There is, in a sense, no reason to store up trouble for the future, but the plain fact is that Microsoft is determined to keep on churning out versioned OS [as opposed to adding upgradable increments a la Linux kernels]. Here is something about the "next big thing", though there is many a slip between the beta lip and the gold version sip.
Given that Server 2003 is now upon us, being able to find out more about how it works, and what its advantages are is certainly useful -- here is a white paper on this:
Technical Overview of Windows Server 2003 Security Services http://whitepapers.comdex.com/data/detail?id=1052321112_291&type=RES&src=KA_RES
DESCRIPTION: This article discusses the tools and processes that deliver important security benefits to organizations deploying Windows Server.
PUBLISHER: Microsoft Corporation
http://storage.ziffdavis.com/article2/0,3973,1108850,00.asp
My prejudice against XP remains considerable, and this is another straw added to the straining camel -- there may be real technical reasons for preferring W2KPro.
