Why can Vista (and beyond) be 'better' for Network admins?

[Catweazle]

Here's a challenge, asked because I'm no network admin and I'm curious to know and understand.

When Vista came along we heard about 'new features' in the release which sussposedly carried the potential for making life better for network admins by allowing them enhanced control over the networks (and users) they administer to. Amidst the tidal wave of Vista-hate that's kinda got lost. But I know there are plenty enough quite capable (and thoughtful) network admins post here so I'm asking.

Here's the scenario:

It's a perfect world. You're confronted with no legacy hardware/software problems. You're the kinda person who welcomes and embraces change, when it brings you newer capabilities, and the kind of person who quickly learns new techniques and puts them into practice. You're no stick-in-the-mud, and neither are the people around you. Those people are all eager, anxious and inspiring.

You've no problems or cause for complaint, in other words, and you're eager to 'move forward'.

And into your lap drops Vista which, we hear, comes with a whole raft of new features aimed just at you. Security stuff. A new deployment method. Heaps of new Group Policy controls. Whatever.


I've read lots of technical documents, and got the bare beginnings of a grasp, but to a non-technically trained person like myself the detail of it all gets easy lost amongst the jargon. So, please, explain it to me in English. Just what is it that Vista can now allow you to DO, which makes your life in the workplace a better one?





Serious question, by the way. Topic is inspired by a comment in another thread, claiming that pretty much all network admins should wait for Windows 7, even if they're ready to move forward now, which I find kinda conceptually silly.

 

[Zlash]

Well for me at least until sysprep is fixed and hopefully simplified no newer features will benefit at all since there is or wasn't an easy way to deploy it.

 

[Monkey God]

So, please, explain it to me in English. Just what is it that Vista can now allow you to DO, which makes your life in the workplace a better one?
.

That's a great question. The lack of decent answers is one of the reasons why I think Vista adoption in the workplace has been so slow.

Businesses generally avoid the "oh look its shiny lets get it" mantra unless there is a tangible benefit to doing so.

I am a developer, not an Admin, so I dont know the answers myself. From what I can tell, active directory and all our networking(security) stuff work just fine with Server 2003 and XP clients. If there are some compelling reasons to upgrade im curious to know what they are. Most people are not admins on their XP boxes so they can't install too much crap. We run enterprise anti-virus and LanDesk for security and deployments. Its a stable and functional environment.

 

[Catweazle]

Well for me at least until sysprep is fixed and hopefully simplified no newer features will benefit at all since there is or wasn't an easy way to deploy it.

'Fixed' as in what? Does it actually not work as promoted it does? Sure, procedures have changed, but do the new procedures actually not work?

'Simplified' and 'easy way' as in what? Made so that it can use already prepared text files as the basis of prepping, to avoid replicating work already done in earluer versions, perhaps? That can't happen, since the preparations now use an XML answer file instead. From Vista on it's a 'start over' scenario. Simplified as in made so that the newer techniques don't need to be learnt? Or simplified as in it genuinely is too complex now?

To an untrained but reasonably literate 'layman' such as myself the concepts involved don't sound to be all that difficult to grasp:

• Lab environment, which comprises 'technician' computer upon which the work is done, 'master' computer upon which the initial image is built, and PE boot media which allows machine(s) to be booted to pre-installation environment.
• Build the 'answer file', which contains inclusions, settings, etc etc etc (by using Windows SIM running on the 'technician' computer. Validate settings and save to removable media.
• Build, on the 'master' computer, the customised installation you plan to deploy, by using the Vista install disk and the answer file on removable media. Verify that and shut down.
• Boot the now completed 'master' computer into PE, and 'capture' the image using ImageX. Bung that image on a network share.

From there deployment is simply boot the newly acquired/replaced machine into PE, connect to and copy the prepared image, and deploy it using ImageX.



Have I got that right? Doesn't it work? What's so complex about it? I'm not claiming you're 'wrong', merely wanting to know. I've never looked into the detail of procedures used for previous versions, so can't compare, but what's described there doesn't sound to conceptually complex to me and most of it is the initial, one-off preparations.

 

[Zlash]

No sysprep is horribly broken if you want your computers to join a domain. It's genius, it makes up a random computer name joins the network THEN it asks you for a computer name therefore totally fubaring what it joined with and if you didn't have the local admin account enabled to login with you could not login to the machine at all.

Not to mention just making the sysprep answer file was a much much much much more complex process that it ever needed to be. There needs to be a simple way like with previous versions of windows and then they can keep thier overly complex way for the people that want it. It shouldn't take days to figure out how to get a proper answer file when it should take 2 minutes tops.

Your concepts are nice and all but go try it and let me know how it goes.