If LAN is legacy, what is the UN-legacy...?
-
@Dashrender said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@Dashrender Printers being your bane using your example. Sorry I got lunch I've been away
It's not about drives, it's about deploying printers.
I haven't looked at AAD enough yet to look at printers - But I'm guessing since AAD doesn't have Group Policy (or at least I don't think it does) you can't use AAD to deploy printers. So now printers all end up like stand alone devices from 25 years ago or more and manual driver deployment or a third party deployment solution.
I do not believe that it does, it does not "include" it, but you might be able to get it to work otherwise.
However GP requires a legacy file server structure, so we need to see that evolve into something more modern, too.
Right now, the answer for that is dropping AD and GPO and moving to MDM instead. That's the way that most places that do this are going.
-
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
This only works because those people were deemed separately to need Windows 10 and would be staying up to date on the latest Windows. While other teams are moving to Linux and there Azure AD won't work (yet.)
Are they going to be introducing AADFS or a similar SSO option?
According to Scott, things like O365 already work with SSO with AAD.
Yup, at least to some degree. What I want MS to do is to give us hooks into the SSO. SSO for Windows 10 + Office 365 is wonderful, but limited. I want my third party CRM and my ownCloud and my XO and stuff like that to all authenticate to Azure AD.
I think that they will, if they don't, Google is going to grab that market from them in no time and then it will be too late.
-
So you think that Azure AD is going to go the way of SSO services like FaceBook and Google have today, and websites or applications will just implement a standard interface to it and people can log into services with AAD, Google, Twitter or Facebook?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
This only works because those people were deemed separately to need Windows 10 and would be staying up to date on the latest Windows. While other teams are moving to Linux and there Azure AD won't work (yet.)
Are they going to be introducing AADFS or a similar SSO option?
According to Scott, things like O365 already work with SSO with AAD.
Yup, at least to some degree. What I want MS to do is to give us hooks into the SSO. SSO for Windows 10 + Office 365 is wonderful, but limited. I want my third party CRM and my ownCloud and my XO and stuff like that to all authenticate to Azure AD.
I think that they will, if they don't, Google is going to grab that market from them in no time and then it will be too late.
This is what I meant. Give the customer the ability to deploy applications that use AAD as the authentication source.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Right now, the answer for that is dropping AD and GPO and moving to MDM instead. That's the way that most places that do this are going.
This statement to me more or less implies that MDM vs AD and GPO are sorta related. They serve a lot of the same functions. I know MDM doesn't provide authentication - but it could.
This is why I always felt that MS should have an MDM solution as part of AD, now instead it should be part of AAD.
-
@Reid-Cooper said:
So you think that Azure AD is going to go the way of SSO services like FaceBook and Google have today, and websites or applications will just implement a standard interface to it and people can log into services with AAD, Google, Twitter or Facebook?
Precisely. This is purely a prediction on my part, but that is where I see this going. Microsoft can provide a high end, enterprise version of what Google and others are already doing. If they don't it is a lost market ripe for the picking.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
This only works because those people were deemed separately to need Windows 10 and would be staying up to date on the latest Windows. While other teams are moving to Linux and there Azure AD won't work (yet.)
Are they going to be introducing AADFS or a similar SSO option?
According to Scott, things like O365 already work with SSO with AAD.
Yup, at least to some degree. What I want MS to do is to give us hooks into the SSO. SSO for Windows 10 + Office 365 is wonderful, but limited. I want my third party CRM and my ownCloud and my XO and stuff like that to all authenticate to Azure AD.
I think that they will, if they don't, Google is going to grab that market from them in no time and then it will be too late.
Agreed - facebook and Google already do this with their authentication systems.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Reid-Cooper said:
So you think that Azure AD is going to go the way of SSO services like FaceBook and Google have today, and websites or applications will just implement a standard interface to it and people can log into services with AAD, Google, Twitter or Facebook?
Precisely. This is purely a prediction on my part, but that is where I see this going. Microsoft can provide a high end, enterprise version of what Google and others are already doing. If they don't it is a lost market ripe for the picking.
If they can pull this off, think about how easy it would be to onboard a new employee. Instead of creating dozens of accounts for them all over the web, they just have an account you created for them in AAD or Google or FB.. when they quit or get fired.. just as easy to disable them all too.
-
Yes, and I'm sure that they can. It is just a matter of getting them to actually do it. Imagine a Facebook-like account integration, but enterprise with central account control!?! Who wouldn't pay for that! And the tie-in to MS services would be awesome. I think it is a huge win for them, I can't believe that they didn't do this years ago.
-
Oh, apparently I'm totally out of touch.
Ask and you shall receive...
https://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Open/Using-Azure-AD-for-Linux-logins
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Oh, apparently I'm totally out of touch.
Ask and you shall receive...
https://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Open/Using-Azure-AD-for-Linux-logins
I see a project for Scott this afternoon.
-
No, no time, I'm afraid. But that is definitely my project for the morning! I am SO excited!!
-
My question would be if we migrate to something like this what will our jobs consist of in the future? We are just going to work directly with servers at a cloud provider or read EULA's and managing permissions and licensing?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Oh, apparently I'm totally out of touch.
Ask and you shall receive...
https://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Open/Using-Azure-AD-for-Linux-logins
I see a project for Scott this afternoon.
It's after 9PM here, you know!
-
@wirestyle22 said:
My question would be if we migrate to something like this what will our jobs consist of in the future? We are just going to work directly with servers at a cloud provider or read EULA's and managing permissions and licensing?
Ah, I gave an awesome (so I like to say) talk on this at the MangoGuild meet up in NYC last year... the "moving commodity line of IT". I'll do a video about it sometime "soon". Stuff like this, eliminating the pointless parts of our jobs, is good, not bad, for us. It allows us to focus on adding value to the business and doing things that can't be automated. It lets us spend our time thinking, learning, being creative and solving tough problems that humans are good at and computers are bad at. The last thing that we want to do is spend our time doing "busy work" handling inefficient systems because we have little way to have serious business value if we do that.
-
Basically I had a couple of key points in the talk:
- IT is an career of embracing change and the greater the rate of change the bigger the benefit to IT (on average) compared to other job categories.
- All IT falls on a spectrum and over time more and more tasks fall on the "other side" of what I call the "commodity line." Anything that is commodity, you should not be touching (as an IT pro.)
- The more things that become commodity, the more IT can focus on value rather than boilerplate.
- Jobs change and move but do not diminish. Traditionally IT jobs have mostly focused around server farms and network gear - very "tech gear" oriented. As the commodity line moves the "center" jobs like systems administration & engineering, DBA and the like will decline while the jobs far to the right like DevOps and massive scale cloud computing will take over with more and more jobs and the jobs far to the left that are heavily hands on with users and the business itself will increase as people need business-aware guidance to navigate services, providers and local integration.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Basically I had a couple of key points in the talk:
- IT is an career of embracing change and the greater the rate of change the bigger the benefit to IT (on average) compared to other job categories.
- All IT falls on a spectrum and over time more and more tasks fall on the "other side" of what I call the "commodity line." Anything that is commodity, you should not be touching (as an IT pro.)
- The more things that become commodity, the more IT can focus on value rather than boilerplate.
- Jobs change and move but do not diminish. Traditionally IT jobs have mostly focused around server farms and network gear - very "tech gear" oriented. As the commodity line moves the "center" jobs like systems administration & engineering, DBA and the like will decline while the jobs far to the right like DevOps and massive scale cloud computing will take over with more and more jobs and the jobs far to the left that are heavily hands on with users and the business itself will increase as people need business-aware guidance to navigate services, providers and local integration.
I was setting up a 10,000 sq ft building alone--I'm the sole IT tech/sysadmin/network admin etc. When my company approached me about cost and what hardware was necessary I gave them estimates and in a detail oriented way, explained why each were necessary. Now keep in mind I have no idea how much money we have and I do NOT have an IT budget. I'm just at the mercy of my executive director who is extremely frugal. The absolute minimum for this building was a Sonicwall and two managed switches with the maximum adding a domain server. Not a huge cost difference. I was told we would only be purchasing the switches which I didn't give them as an option. I explained that we have over 50 PC's connected to the network and that a small comcast business router cannot possibly handle the throughput and they ignored me. 2 months later my executive director comes to me and says "What is the issue? How can we fix this?" to which I replied "We need to purchase a Sonicwall." It took 2 months of the network being unable to retain a connection to our terminal server (and this is our second biggest site) for them to spend a few thousand dollars which fixed their issue and gave me MUCH needed content filtering. The reason I bring this up is even with me managing 550+ employees, all of the servers, all of the network, all of the devices including scanners and printers over the entire county (which some of my sites are an hour one-way) I still cannot convince them of anything. Even though I've been right 100% of the time.
How can I justify my worth to people like this in a system that from their standpoint is mostly managed by other companies? Azure/Pertino/ZeroTier/Windows 10
-
If the culture around you is not changing and despite your best efforts you cannot improve it, find a culture who will value and embrace you.
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
If the culture around you is not changing and despite your best efforts you cannot improve it, find a culture who will value and embrace you.
I did this.
-
@wirestyle22 said:
How can I justify my worth to people like this in a system that from their standpoint is mostly managed by other companies?
Easy answer (that no one likes to hear is) .... you don't. IT is in demand, successful companies need it. IT isn't justifiable in a small environment. It just doesn't make sense. And especially not in companies that struggle with the basics and keep IT from being valuable.
The problem is you are trying to make people perceive value that doesn't exist. Both because the environment is too small (an MSP could manage that in its sleep) and doesn't have a means of leveraging a full time IT staffer even if they appreciated what you could offer. The very idea that you need to justify your existence should be a red flag, that's not how it should work. We should not be at work trying to sell the idea of being there. Does bookkeepers do that? Does HR? Does the operations department? No, then IT doesn't either.
The SMB is not a place where IT has much place as a full time, in house role. Everyone needs IT, but too often the SMB IT departments lean on doing IT inefficiently and poorly in order to maintain their positions. This is never a good strategy. It does two things - one it simply stops you from growing and being prepared to move onto a more valuable role and two it proves to the company that you are not a good investment. The best option, in general, is to do an amazing job, save the company a lot of money, provide them the best possible environment, get a happy recommendation and part ways to move on to something more challenging. Staying put is not a long term strategy, no matter what.
