Friday, December 5, 2008

[THIN] Re: MSTSC Lock Users

Replace this caoomand with TSLOGINS - a free program from Ctrl-Alt-Del IT consultancy.
http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com.au/CAD_TSUtils.htm

This utility was written to replace the command CHANGE LOGON currently found in the MS Windows
Operating System. This utility offers the ability to enable or disable remote sessions to a single
server or host of servers located in a domain, with one command
--
Warren Simondson

Ctrl-Alt-Del IT Consultancy Pty Ltd
Website: http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com.au


Quoting Doug Rooney <Doug@sonomatilemakers.com>:

>
>
> Greetings,
>
> As of this morning the script 'Change login /disable' no longer
> works.
> Windows Terminal server Win2003.
>
> Thank You
>
> -Doug Rooney
> Sonoma Tilemakers
> IT Systems Administrator
> 7750 Bell Rd.
> Windsor Ca, 95492
> (707) 837-8177 X11
> (707) 837-9472 FAX
> it@sonomatilemakers.com <mailto:it@sonomatilemakers.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***
>
>

************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************

[THIN] Re: TS-Compliant 'Proxy'

We introduced many clients to a program called Freeproxy and they have been extremely happy
with the results. As the name suggests, it is free. It does take a little bit to understand the
configuraiton, but there are active forums on the site to dicuss settings etc. It will allow NT
authenication and groups to access different whitelists/ blacklists and has a simple logging system.
It has not failed us yet.

Get it from here: http://www.handcraftedsoftware.org/
--
Warren Simondson

Ctrl-Alt-Del IT Consultancy Pty Ltd
Website: http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com.au


Quoting Nick Smith <nick@officeanyplace.com>:

> Guys,
> I am tasked with providing granular web access, control , and
> logging. (EG Noone can access Hotmail except the MD, no IM except the
> Finance Department). Massively preferable that users not need logon
> to anything after they've got onto their published Desktop.
>
> Anyone got any recommendations/experience? FWIW I've never got on
> well with Microsoft Proxy/ISA server...
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>

************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************

[THIN] Re: MSTSC Lock Users

Note that the GPO setting for the command prompt can allow scripts to execute (it’s a suboption).  Also picked up this tidbit somewhere along the way:

 

How to Enable or Disable Client Logons in the Registry

 

Disable logons

 

X86:  HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon

X64:  HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon

 

Add a REG_SZ value called WinStationsDisabled and set the value to 1.

 

Enable logons

 

Change the WinStationsDisabled value to 0.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Layman

National City Corporation

Common Services - Platform Engineering

eric.layman@nationalcity.com

Mail Locator 01-5212

Office 216.257.7147

 

 


From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Raffensberger, Stephen D
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:10 PM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: MSTSC Lock Users

 

Doug,

 

I’ve see this too. When someone sets the GPO you can no longer use the command line to disable logins.

Strangely, if you’re using Citrix the CMC can still disable them on a per server basis. I wish I knew what trick they use.

 

Steve Raffensberger

Sovereign Bank

1125 Berkshire Boulevard

Wyomissing, PA 19610

email: sraffens@sovereignbank.com

 


From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Doug Rooney
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 11:48 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] MSTSC Lock Users

 

 

Greetings,

As of this morning the script ‘Change login /disable’ no longer works. Windows Terminal server Win2003.

Thank You

-Doug Rooney
Sonoma Tilemakers
IT Systems Administrator
7750 Bell Rd.
Windsor Ca, 95492
(707) 837-8177 X11
(707) 837-9472 FAX
it@sonomatilemakers.com

 

 

***


This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail, and delete or destroy the message. Thank you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***National City made the following annotations ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
This communication is a confidential and proprietary business communication. It is intended solely for the use of the designated recipient(s). If this communication is received in error, please contact the sender and delete this communication. ===========================================================================================

[THIN] Re: MSTSC Lock Users

Doug,

 

I’ve see this too. When someone sets the GPO you can no longer use the command line to disable logins.

Strangely, if you’re using Citrix the CMC can still disable them on a per server basis. I wish I knew what trick they use.

 

Steve Raffensberger

Sovereign Bank

1125 Berkshire Boulevard

Wyomissing, PA 19610

email: sraffens@sovereignbank.com

 


From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Doug Rooney
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 11:48 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] MSTSC Lock Users

 

 

Greetings,

As of this morning the script ‘Change login /disable’ no longer works. Windows Terminal server Win2003.

Thank You

-Doug Rooney
Sonoma Tilemakers
IT Systems Administrator
7750 Bell Rd.
Windsor Ca, 95492
(707) 837-8177 X11
(707) 837-9472 FAX
it@sonomatilemakers.com

 

 

***


This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail, and delete or destroy the message. Thank you.

[THIN] Re: MSTSC Lock Users

for all of us or just you?
 
:^)
 
sorry, couldn't resist.
 
Greg

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Doug Rooney <Doug@sonomatilemakers.com> wrote:

 

Greetings,

As of this morning the script 'Change login /disable' no longer works. Windows Terminal server Win2003.

Thank You

-Doug Rooney
Sonoma Tilemakers
IT Systems Administrator
7750 Bell Rd.
Windsor Ca, 95492
(707) 837-8177 X11
(707) 837-9472 FAX
it@sonomatilemakers.com

 

 

***


[THIN] Re: AD Group membership merge

Chad a combination from http://www.joeware.net/freetools/index.htm
and http://www.systemtools.com/free.htm might get you there.

Jim Kenzig
Blog: http://www.techblink.com


On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Chad Schneider (IT) <Chad.M.Schneider@thedacare.org> wrote:
I am looking for a tool (Free is best) that I can use to look at 2 AD groups, compare, and merge members from one to the other if necessary.  Trying to clean up years of poor AD group management.
 
 
Chad Schneider
Systems Engineer
ThedaCare IT
920-735-7615

[THIN] AD Group membership merge

I am looking for a tool (Free is best) that I can use to look at 2 AD groups, compare, and merge members from one to the other if necessary.  Trying to clean up years of poor AD group management.
 
 
Chad Schneider
Systems Engineer
ThedaCare IT
920-735-7615

[THIN] Re: GP to stop Windows Sounds

If you are using XenApp you can enable/disable audio with a Citrix policy
and assign by user/group


Steve Greenberg
Thin Client Computing
34522 N. Scottsdale Rd D8453
Scottsdale, AZ 85266
(602) 432-8649
www.thinclient.net
steveg@thinclient.net

-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf
Of Dogers
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:36 AM
To: Thin List
Subject: [THIN] GP to stop Windows Sounds

Has anyone managed this? Spent most of the afternoon trying to create
an ADM to stop the windows sounds but it's just not applying. We don't
want to stop all audio, just the default windows sounds..

Some users want it, others don't, so deleting the wavs or changing
permissions isn't a great option, unfortunately :(

Andrew
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************

************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************

[THIN] MSTSC Lock Users

 

Greetings,

As of this morning the script ‘Change login /disable’ no longer works. Windows Terminal server Win2003.

Thank You

-Doug Rooney
Sonoma Tilemakers
IT Systems Administrator
7750 Bell Rd.
Windsor Ca, 95492
(707) 837-8177 X11
(707) 837-9472 FAX
it@sonomatilemakers.com

 

 

***

[THIN] GP to stop Windows Sounds

Has anyone managed this? Spent most of the afternoon trying to create
an ADM to stop the windows sounds but it's just not applying. We don't
want to stop all audio, just the default windows sounds..

Some users want it, others don't, so deleting the wavs or changing
permissions isn't a great option, unfortunately :(

Andrew
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://www.freelists.org/list/thin
Follow ThinList on Twitter
http://twitter.com/thinlist
Thin List discussion is now available in blog format at:
http://thinmaillist.blogspot.com
Thinlist MOBILE Feed
http://thinlist.net/mobile
************************************************

[THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

To report on my links below. I installed Lookout 1.3.0 with Outlook closed.  I then copied in the modified lookout.dll and Inventures_Olk.dll into the install directory and overwrote the originals. I opened up Outlook and the Lookout wizard opened.  Lookout is currently indexing right now.. There were various blog replies about people having issues on XP and Vista, but not others, but all looks well for me thus far.


It founds my PST’s and additional mailboxes. I am using Outlook 2007 SP1 on XP SP3.  I don’t have any extra Add-ins installed into Outlook except for whatever McAfee VirusScan Enterprise 8.5i installed.


if this works as advertised (won’t know 100% until indexing is done), I will be a very happy person, and will say bye-bye to WDS!

 

 

 

 

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Evan Mann
Sent: 05 December 2008 15:37
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Download link for Lookout 1.3.0 (was the last release);

 

http://majorgeeks.com/Lookout_d4808.html

 

In my searching, I just found the following article on getting Lookout to work in Outlook 2007

 

http://www.belshe.com/2007/12/06/how-to-install-lookout-on-outlook-2007/

 

And looking into the November 2008 replies, the following updated method:

 

http://www.wirwar.com/blog/2008/01/22/search-e-mail-at-lightspeed-using-lookout-with-outlook-2007/

 

There’s various other links, methods, patches, etc., but people seem to be pretty  gungho on keeping Lookout search working in Outlook 2007.  I think I’m going to uninstall WDS and go back to Lookout using these methods.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Harry Singh
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:10 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Great Feedback Evan.

I actually used Copernic Desktop Search for outlook, but their recent upgrade has actually regressed some functionality and it's actually not even tolerable at this point.

where can i get lookout ? as i'm currently running outlook 2k3.

I've heard that one needs to be wary of the desktop search engines when it comes to outlook connecting to an Exchange box as it could possible lead to unnecessary overhead on the server side..

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Evan Mann <emann@tpcflorida.com> wrote:

I was an avid user of Lookout Search under Outlook 2003, simply the best thing out there.  Small, lean, QUICK. When I upgraded to Office 2007 I was stuck in that Lookout doesn't work.  Since MS purchased Lookout Software, I figured the search capabilities of WDS combined with Outlook 2007 would be just as good.  So I broke down and installed WDS and configured it to index nothing but Outlook (slows down my computer too much for file system indexing).

 

Verdict?  Not as good as Lookout.  Nowhere near as fast to pull up search results, WAY more intensive overhead on the system.  That being said, it's VASTLY superior to using the built in Outlook 2007 search without WDS.

 

I haven't looked into any other options.   I believe the MSN toolbar has integrated search capabilities that are supposed to work with Outlook, but I have always assumed it would be exactly the same as if you had WDS installed.  Maybe not?    I'm disappointed that MS screwed the pooch on integrating Lookout search technology in the way they did.  They should have simply integrated Lookout into Outlook 2007 and not required WDS.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of IT Support
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:45 AM
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.

 

BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

 

[THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

8GB mailbox size = wow.

I can't even imagine the type of horsepower you would need on an exchange server(s) let alone storage capacity on a SAN to support 8GB mailbox sizes, but i imagine that's the future and present, depending on type of business

We're discussing bumping all staff to 1GB and executive 5GB limits. So I guess i'll be facing the same dilemma other people are facing right now.



On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Nick Smith <nick@officeanyplace.com> wrote:

Just to add to the conversation, we've enabled Desktop Search on 3 Terminal Servers, as Outlook 2007 search is basically broken without it. On one, 40+ users at a time, no problem. On another, 8 users, no problems. On a  third, 10 users, absolute disaster as it basically used up all CPU. 10 users =10 Indexing thread, each throttled to 10% by Threadmaster, = unusable TS.

 

In fairness, these users have never deleted anything and their mailboxes are up around 3-8GBs each or so, but we nearly lost them as a client – though that was our fault, they're very twitchy about slowness and complain every moment their broadband blinks, so we kinda ignored their slowness complaints for a while…

 

 

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Evan Mann
Sent: 05 December 2008 15:37


To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Download link for Lookout 1.3.0 (was the last release);

 

http://majorgeeks.com/Lookout_d4808.html

 

In my searching, I just found the following article on getting Lookout to work in Outlook 2007

 

http://www.belshe.com/2007/12/06/how-to-install-lookout-on-outlook-2007/

 

And looking into the November 2008 replies, the following updated method:

 

http://www.wirwar.com/blog/2008/01/22/search-e-mail-at-lightspeed-using-lookout-with-outlook-2007/

 

There's various other links, methods, patches, etc., but people seem to be pretty  gungho on keeping Lookout search working in Outlook 2007.  I think I'm going to uninstall WDS and go back to Lookout using these methods.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Harry Singh
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:10 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Great Feedback Evan.

I actually used Copernic Desktop Search for outlook, but their recent upgrade has actually regressed some functionality and it's actually not even tolerable at this point.

where can i get lookout ? as i'm currently running outlook 2k3.

I've heard that one needs to be wary of the desktop search engines when it comes to outlook connecting to an Exchange box as it could possible lead to unnecessary overhead on the server side..

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Evan Mann <emann@tpcflorida.com> wrote:

I was an avid user of Lookout Search under Outlook 2003, simply the best thing out there.  Small, lean, QUICK. When I upgraded to Office 2007 I was stuck in that Lookout doesn't work.  Since MS purchased Lookout Software, I figured the search capabilities of WDS combined with Outlook 2007 would be just as good.  So I broke down and installed WDS and configured it to index nothing but Outlook (slows down my computer too much for file system indexing).

 

Verdict?  Not as good as Lookout.  Nowhere near as fast to pull up search results, WAY more intensive overhead on the system.  That being said, it's VASTLY superior to using the built in Outlook 2007 search without WDS.

 

I haven't looked into any other options.   I believe the MSN toolbar has integrated search capabilities that are supposed to work with Outlook, but I have always assumed it would be exactly the same as if you had WDS installed.  Maybe not?    I'm disappointed that MS screwed the pooch on integrating Lookout search technology in the way they did.  They should have simply integrated Lookout into Outlook 2007 and not required WDS.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of IT Support
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:45 AM
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.

 

BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

 


[THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

Just to add to the conversation, we’ve enabled Desktop Search on 3 Terminal Servers, as Outlook 2007 search is basically broken without it. On one, 40+ users at a time, no problem. On another, 8 users, no problems. On a  third, 10 users, absolute disaster as it basically used up all CPU. 10 users =10 Indexing thread, each throttled to 10% by Threadmaster, = unusable TS.

 

In fairness, these users have never deleted anything and their mailboxes are up around 3-8GBs each or so, but we nearly lost them as a client – though that was our fault, they’re very twitchy about slowness and complain every moment their broadband blinks, so we kinda ignored their slowness complaints for a while…

 

 

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Evan Mann
Sent: 05 December 2008 15:37
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Download link for Lookout 1.3.0 (was the last release);

 

http://majorgeeks.com/Lookout_d4808.html

 

In my searching, I just found the following article on getting Lookout to work in Outlook 2007

 

http://www.belshe.com/2007/12/06/how-to-install-lookout-on-outlook-2007/

 

And looking into the November 2008 replies, the following updated method:

 

http://www.wirwar.com/blog/2008/01/22/search-e-mail-at-lightspeed-using-lookout-with-outlook-2007/

 

There’s various other links, methods, patches, etc., but people seem to be pretty  gungho on keeping Lookout search working in Outlook 2007.  I think I’m going to uninstall WDS and go back to Lookout using these methods.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Harry Singh
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:10 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Great Feedback Evan.

I actually used Copernic Desktop Search for outlook, but their recent upgrade has actually regressed some functionality and it's actually not even tolerable at this point.

where can i get lookout ? as i'm currently running outlook 2k3.

I've heard that one needs to be wary of the desktop search engines when it comes to outlook connecting to an Exchange box as it could possible lead to unnecessary overhead on the server side..

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Evan Mann <emann@tpcflorida.com> wrote:

I was an avid user of Lookout Search under Outlook 2003, simply the best thing out there.  Small, lean, QUICK. When I upgraded to Office 2007 I was stuck in that Lookout doesn't work.  Since MS purchased Lookout Software, I figured the search capabilities of WDS combined with Outlook 2007 would be just as good.  So I broke down and installed WDS and configured it to index nothing but Outlook (slows down my computer too much for file system indexing).

 

Verdict?  Not as good as Lookout.  Nowhere near as fast to pull up search results, WAY more intensive overhead on the system.  That being said, it's VASTLY superior to using the built in Outlook 2007 search without WDS.

 

I haven't looked into any other options.   I believe the MSN toolbar has integrated search capabilities that are supposed to work with Outlook, but I have always assumed it would be exactly the same as if you had WDS installed.  Maybe not?    I'm disappointed that MS screwed the pooch on integrating Lookout search technology in the way they did.  They should have simply integrated Lookout into Outlook 2007 and not required WDS.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of IT Support
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:45 AM
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.

 

BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

 

[THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

Download link for Lookout 1.3.0 (was the last release);

 

http://majorgeeks.com/Lookout_d4808.html

 

In my searching, I just found the following article on getting Lookout to work in Outlook 2007

 

http://www.belshe.com/2007/12/06/how-to-install-lookout-on-outlook-2007/

 

And looking into the November 2008 replies, the following updated method:

 

http://www.wirwar.com/blog/2008/01/22/search-e-mail-at-lightspeed-using-lookout-with-outlook-2007/

 

There's various other links, methods, patches, etc., but people seem to be pretty  gungho on keeping Lookout search working in Outlook 2007.  I think I'm going to uninstall WDS and go back to Lookout using these methods.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Harry Singh
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:10 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Great Feedback Evan.

I actually used Copernic Desktop Search for outlook, but their recent upgrade has actually regressed some functionality and it's actually not even tolerable at this point.

where can i get lookout ? as i'm currently running outlook 2k3.

I've heard that one needs to be wary of the desktop search engines when it comes to outlook connecting to an Exchange box as it could possible lead to unnecessary overhead on the server side..


On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Evan Mann <emann@tpcflorida.com> wrote:

I was an avid user of Lookout Search under Outlook 2003, simply the best thing out there.  Small, lean, QUICK. When I upgraded to Office 2007 I was stuck in that Lookout doesn't work.  Since MS purchased Lookout Software, I figured the search capabilities of WDS combined with Outlook 2007 would be just as good.  So I broke down and installed WDS and configured it to index nothing but Outlook (slows down my computer too much for file system indexing).

 

Verdict?  Not as good as Lookout.  Nowhere near as fast to pull up search results, WAY more intensive overhead on the system.  That being said, it's VASTLY superior to using the built in Outlook 2007 search without WDS.

 

I haven't looked into any other options.   I believe the MSN toolbar has integrated search capabilities that are supposed to work with Outlook, but I have always assumed it would be exactly the same as if you had WDS installed.  Maybe not?    I'm disappointed that MS screwed the pooch on integrating Lookout search technology in the way they did.  They should have simply integrated Lookout into Outlook 2007 and not required WDS.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of IT Support
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:45 AM
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.

 

BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

 

[THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

Great Feedback Evan.

I actually used Copernic Desktop Search for outlook, but their recent upgrade has actually regressed some functionality and it's actually not even tolerable at this point.

where can i get lookout ? as i'm currently running outlook 2k3.

I've heard that one needs to be wary of the desktop search engines when it comes to outlook connecting to an Exchange box as it could possible lead to unnecessary overhead on the server side..



On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Evan Mann <emann@tpcflorida.com> wrote:

I was an avid user of Lookout Search under Outlook 2003, simply the best thing out there.  Small, lean, QUICK. When I upgraded to Office 2007 I was stuck in that Lookout doesn't work.  Since MS purchased Lookout Software, I figured the search capabilities of WDS combined with Outlook 2007 would be just as good.  So I broke down and installed WDS and configured it to index nothing but Outlook (slows down my computer too much for file system indexing).

 

Verdict?  Not as good as Lookout.  Nowhere near as fast to pull up search results, WAY more intensive overhead on the system.  That being said, it's VASTLY superior to using the built in Outlook 2007 search without WDS.

 

I haven't looked into any other options.   I believe the MSN toolbar has integrated search capabilities that are supposed to work with Outlook, but I have always assumed it would be exactly the same as if you had WDS installed.  Maybe not?    I'm disappointed that MS screwed the pooch on integrating Lookout search technology in the way they did.  They should have simply integrated Lookout into Outlook 2007 and not required WDS.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of IT Support
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:45 AM
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.

 

BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 


[THIN] Re: Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

I was an avid user of Lookout Search under Outlook 2003, simply the best thing out there.  Small, lean, QUICK. When I upgraded to Office 2007 I was stuck in that Lookout doesn’t work.  Since MS purchased Lookout Software, I figured the search capabilities of WDS combined with Outlook 2007 would be just as good.  So I broke down and installed WDS and configured it to index nothing but Outlook (slows down my computer too much for file system indexing).

 

Verdict?  Not as good as Lookout.  Nowhere near as fast to pull up search results, WAY more intensive overhead on the system.  That being said, it’s VASTLY superior to using the built in Outlook 2007 search without WDS.

 

I haven’t looked into any other options.   I believe the MSN toolbar has integrated search capabilities that are supposed to work with Outlook, but I have always assumed it would be exactly the same as if you had WDS installed.  Maybe not?    I’m disappointed that MS screwed the pooch on integrating Lookout search technology in the way they did.  They should have simply integrated Lookout into Outlook 2007 and not required WDS.

 

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of IT Support
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 9:45 AM
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

 

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.

 

BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

[THIN] Outlook 2007 Instant Search - Windows Desktop Search

Hello List,

 

What solutions do you use for Outlook 2007 Instant Search? Have any of you tried installed WDS (Windows Desktop Search) ?

 

System is Citrix Presentation Server 4.5, Office 2007 sp1.

 

We are having a torrid time getting anything working – turns out our users like to search lots!

 

Tia.

 

Jaime.



BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

[THIN] Re: TS-Compliant 'Proxy'

We  use Websense. It's rather pricey, but it's granularity is unparalleled and support is great too.

www.websense.com



On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:28 AM, IT Support <it@polyco.co.uk> wrote:

My company has used Clearswift products for years.

 

They do exactly what they say on the tin.

 

http://www.clearswift.com/products/msw/web_appliance/default.aspx

 

 

 

Kind Regards,

Jaime

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Nick Smith
Sent: 05 December 2008 14:11
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] TS-Compliant 'Proxy'

 

Guys,

I am tasked with providing granular web access, control , and logging. (EG Noone can access Hotmail except the MD, no IM except the Finance Department). Massively preferable that users not need logon to anything after they've got onto their published Desktop.

 

Anyone got any recommendations/experience? FWIW I've never got on well with Microsoft Proxy/ISA server…

 

 

 

Nick

 

 

 

Click here to report this email as spam.



BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 


[THIN] Re: TS-Compliant 'Proxy'

My company has used Clearswift products for years.

 

They do exactly what they say on the tin.

 

http://www.clearswift.com/products/msw/web_appliance/default.aspx

 

 

 

Kind Regards,

Jaime

From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Nick Smith
Sent: 05 December 2008 14:11
To: 'thin@freelists.org'
Subject: [THIN] TS-Compliant 'Proxy'

 

Guys,

I am tasked with providing granular web access, control , and logging. (EG Noone can access Hotmail except the MD, no IM except the Finance Department). Massively preferable that users not need logon to anything after they’ve got onto their published Desktop.

 

Anyone got any recommendations/experience? FWIW I’ve never got on well with Microsoft Proxy/ISA server…

 

 

 

Nick

 

 

 

Click here to report this email as spam.



BM Polyco Ltd Disclaimer
This e-mail and the information it contains are confidential. If you have received this message in error please notify us immediately. You should not use or copy it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other party. The contents of this communication are advisory and are not binding on the Company unless supported by authorised documentation.
It has also passed through the MailControl Anti-Virus service powered by BlackSpider for total peace of mind. 

[THIN] TS-Compliant 'Proxy'

Guys,

I am tasked with providing granular web access, control , and logging. (EG Noone can access Hotmail except the MD, no IM except the Finance Department). Massively preferable that users not need logon to anything after they’ve got onto their published Desktop.

 

Anyone got any recommendations/experience? FWIW I’ve never got on well with Microsoft Proxy/ISA server…

 

 

 

Nick

 

 

Thursday, December 4, 2008

[THIN] Re: Dual ZDCs?

We are not using bonding.  The NICs are used for different traffic - one NIC for client traffic coming from WI and one NIC for back-end traffic to run backups, send/receive files from our interface server etc.
 
We have a dedicated server for our SQL server data store.
 
I finally figured out disparity between member servers not rendering users, sessions, shadowing etc.  It boils down to networking.  For servers in different subnets we only open ports 2512, 2513 and 1494 from member servers to our 2 ZM named servers (used for primary and backup ZDC).  Once I presented my findings to our System Architects and Engineer, they agreed this was the case and the reason behind my original question.  I guess I won't forget this now that I spent 3 days wondering about it.
 
Thanks,
 
Stephanie Atkinson

Joe Shonk <joe.shonk@gmail.com> wrote:
Do these servers have multi-nics connected to different networks?  If so,  that is probably where your problem lies…  While it is possible to use multiple NICS (not bonded), it is highly NOT recommended and definitely not a best practice.
 
Each zone had a 1 Data Collector (DC) that is elected.  So if you have two zones, you will have two DCs (or we like to call them ZDCs).
Any server that has direct access to the database can function as a DC so in order to dedicate a server/vm to this role you must set the election preference (Most Preferred).  Some organizations like to have a backup ZDC.  Technically, there is no such thing.  It's simply a server that has been dedicated to serve as the ZDC in the event the real ZDC become unavailable.  Again, this is accomplished by setting election preference so the machine is next in line.  This prevents an application server from becoming the DC in the event of a failure.
 
Now having a "backup" ZDC is nice because you can also use that server to host additional infrastructure services or act as a backup.  So in the event of a failure of an infrastructure server you're not impacting your application servers.  Examples of additional infrastructure services.   DC Role, XML, STA, Metric Server.  Smaller farm could also host Web Interface and the Licensing server (CTX and/or MS) while large orgs will want to split WI and Licensing onto separate servers.
 
Also, the imalhc.mdb is the local host cache,  not the Data Store.  Do you know if your data store is Access, SQL Express or SQL?
 
Joe
 
From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Stephanie Atkinson
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 5:49 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Dual ZDCs?
 
Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for your suggestions.  I checked out a few things yesterday after speaking with a more senior Admin who has been on vacation.  In some ways he confused me even more trying to tell me that when you build the farm you designate the zone masters (2 in our case supposedly, when to me it just seems like a primary of most preferred and a backup of preferred) and that that info is stored in the imalhc.mdb (copy of persistent, not non-persistent data) on each server telling it to only communicate with the ZM in that database.  He also explained how the member server communicates with the ZM via the MGT NIC then the ZM sends the info back on the client-side NIC thus it's only able to send back to the same member server.  I find flaws with both of these explanations but I think you're right that the answer to my question lies in our configuration.  One thing I did find is that we don't have ports 2512, 2513 or 1494 open between non ZM servers, only from member server to ZM.  That would seem to account more for the lack of available info in the CMs.

I started questioning this b/c I am studying for my CCA.  The more you learn the more you can question.  Anyhow, I will just keep digging into this.  Thanks for your clarifications.

Best Regards,

Stephanie

Jeremy Saunders <Jeremy.Saunders@datacom.com.au> wrote:
Hi Stephanie,
 
Have a look at the way the Presentation Server Administrators have been set up in the Access Management Console, and perhaps also the DCOM permissions on the servers, ensuring that the COM Plus network access Windows component has been added to all servers. As far as I'm concerned, this stuff should configured the same across all servers. Maybe you need to quiz that Engineer a bit further???
 
Cheers,
Jeremy.
 
From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Stephanie Atkinson
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 8:23 PM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Re: Dual ZDCs?
 
I'd forgotten the qfarm identifies the ZM as well.  I ran that and it confirmed just 1 ZM is in affect.  So then here is where I guess I am confused.  You stated,

By the way, it is not a requirement to run the Access Management Console or Presentation Server Console (AKA CMC) from the Data Collector. Any farm server will do, and if your zone is working correctly, the information returned will be consistent no matter which server you connect to.

and when I read that ports 2512 and 2513 are used for server to server and server to MC respectively, I took that to mean that all MCs from all servers in a given farm provide results for all servers in the farm. In our case, it is only the dedicated primary and backup ZMs that have this bird's eye view for Servers.  The MCs from any other server DO provide Pub App and Policies data for example but NOT Servers.  So you can't see what users are logged on, try to shadow or directly connect to any other server than the one you are logged on to. 

Regards,

Stephanie



Jeremy Saunders <Jeremy.Saunders@datacom.com.au> wrote:
Hi Stephanie,
 
What you are seeing is correct, it obviously just hasn't been explained to you correctly. The Engineer should have whiteboarded this for you.
 
Each zone can only have ONE Data Collector at any one time. You have a "Primary", which will always be the server set to "Most Preferred", and you have a Backup, which is set to "Preferred". The backup will take over when the Primary fails, is taken off-line, etc. I personally always set the remainder of farm member servers to "Not Preferred" to ensure they never take part in any zone elections. Others will leave them set to "Default", just in case.
 
If you go to the command line on any server, type "qfarm". This will list all servers in the farm. The ones with the D after their IP Address will be the active Data Collectors for those zones. So in your case you will see two.
 
By the way, it is not a requirement to run the Access Management Console or Presentation Server Console (AKA CMC) from the Data Collector. Any farm server will do, and if your zone is working correctly, the information returned will be consistent no matter which server you connect to.
 
I hope that explains it.
 
Cheers,
Jeremy.
 
From: thin-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:thin-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Stephanie Atkinson
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 9:58 AM
To: thin@freelists.org
Subject: [THIN] Dual ZDCs?
 
How is it that a Zone can have 2 operating Data Collectors?  Of everything I have read, each zone can only have one so maybe I misunderstand what is going on.  The Citrix Engineer who setup this environment advised we have data collection on 2 servers because 1 is set to Most Preferred and the other Preferred.  All other servers are left to default. We have 2 dedicated servers for each zone intended to be data collectors and by all accounts that is how they are working.  All the information from every server in the zone is available from both servers in the CMC; all other servers only provide their local information.
 
Can anyone clarify or explain this?
 
Thanks,
 
Stephanie Atkinson
 
  

Confidentiality and Privilege Notice
This document is intended solely for the named addressee.  The information contained in the pages is confidential and contains legally privileged information. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Confidentiality and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you.

 
 

Confidentiality and Privilege Notice
This document is intended solely for the named addressee.  The information contained in the pages is confidential and contains legally privileged information. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Confidentiality and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you.