@coliver said:

So would this be something like OpenStack or CloudStack? Or are those just a management/obfuscation layer?

No, MaaS is designed to help OpenStack specifically (but you can use anywhere. OpenStack is the cloud layer. This is a hardware management layer that makes tons of sense in a cloud scenario. It could be used without cloud, like for a computer cluster (Hadoop maybe) but would be uncommon. And you normally use cloud without MaaS. But it works really well for clouds to make them less effort to manage at the hardware level.

I have been back and forth using it all day (between windows desktop and MacBook) looks good works great. No complaints.

Ugh glad I didn't have to help you!

@garak0410 said:

@scottalanmiller said:

Correct, Adobe has moved to a pure subscription model.

I don't mind some subscription models (I actually like Office 365) but Abode's prices are just out of the park...

That's a completely different issue. They ALSO raised their prices. So now they cost more. If you were to have other buying options, they would cost just as much. The issue is that you don't like their new prices. That makes more sense.

I'd look to alternatives, Adobe operates on the assumption that their user base won't leave them at any price.

Got the same email today.

Oh, good idea. The image uploader isn't working in the latest mobile version anyway, so that is an improvement.

ROFL Nice!

Much better! Thanks!

I am just not able to find any pricing information, though. No idea what this might cost. It is a British company and does not appear to have any US operations.

atleast their switches are reasonably priced 🙂

@scottalanmiller said:

4% is not a reasonable failure number. 3% is a best case for the best drives. External USB arrays don't get those drives. 3% is not achievable by those drives even under ideal (fixed, datacenter) conditions.

Who says 4% is not reasonable? Also, define failure. My understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that a server will fail a drive if it reports a certain number of errors (or any errors?), but that doesn't mean the drive won't work or that the drive will have data loss does it? So many of my external drives may actually have errors (or have had temporary errors - the drive could fail to read, then try again and succeed) but they weren't errors that caused data loss (they weren't fatal errors) so were undetectable to me and didn't compromise my backups, even though a server would have failed them. To use our car analogy, a car can fail in lots of different ways without preventing you from completing your journey.

If 30% is realistic, then the probability of 17 drives (that's the number I get through a year) working without errors over the course of a year is 0.23%. Even with such a small sample size, that's a small enough number to make me doubt your figure. A 4% failure rate, gives me a 50% probability of being error free. Throw in dozens of laptops, and dozens of portable hard drives that I've looked after over the years, and 4% sounds a reasonable reflection of my experience, with a reasonably large sample size.

The figure that really matters is the probability of taking one of those drives after a site disaster and attempting a restore and having it fatally fail. I reckon that figure could be around 1%. I reckon human error is a much bigger risk to recovery failure than physical error (like the classic one of discovering you were using a cleaning tape as your backup).

That's great that it can do that.

I have seen some books for the Apple certifications, but they were always Apple books.

All linking must be approved by an admin or myself. Sorry but with issues we have seen as of late we are being extra cautious.

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

Understood, but you can grow/shrink partitions in VMWare as well

No partitions here. We are talking about a file, not a partition.

THINKS - aw yes.. you're right - I see my missing logic.

@scottalanmiller said:

It's OpenVPN and IPSec, I've used both a ton. No concerns there at all. But it doesn't do what Pertino does. While both are VPNs, they are completely different things. Pertino is a hosted full mesh. Ubiquiti, like any hardware VPN, is a site to site VPN. ** There are very few times that both would be an option for the same network.**

Really? I could see this being useful in my case where I have 4 remote locations using Site to Site, and for my mobile users they could use Pertino.

@Dashrender said:

Aww.. I guess I'm to used to working on Firewalls, not routers.

A firewall is a set of extensions on top of a router, typically. You can have a layer 2 firewall (a bridging firewall) but those are very rare in the SMB. I've seen them, but almost never. Those that I do see are normally Untangle devices set to bridging rather than routing mode because they make crappy routers. In the enterprise space, bridged firewalls are pretty common because they want the firewall functionality separate from the routing appliance.

What you are used to is an "all in one" device that puts a router, switch, firewall and access point (wireless hub) all into one device. So what you are seeing with the VLANs is the switch functionality, not the router nor the firewall components.

@scottalanmiller said:

So this interesting. We have our first desktop added into InTune that is running Windows 10 Tech Preview. In InTune it does not display as "Windows 10" as I would have expected. Instead it displays as "Windows 6.4" which is slightly confusing as the kernel is "NT 6.4" and the name is "Windows 10." Blending the two is odd.

Just found it interesting.

I've seen this behavior before - I think it was WSUS - windows 8(.1) was reported by something than it's normal name.

@scottalanmiller said:

You can use Meraki MDM for free to do the basic stuff.

Let's hope for Ubiquiti's sake they do come out with an MDM solution for this - it would be so ironic to use Meraki's (Cisco's) solution to support Ubiquiti's stuff.