Russ Kaufmann

I decided a few weeks ago that I would like to get a Jeep Wrangler. So far so good.

 

I went online and requested quotes. In return, I got 40+ emails from dealers which included emails from non-Jeep selling companies that tried to sell me their competing products. No problem with that.

 

Of the Jeep dealers, none of them provided me a quote based on the parameters that I put in for my request. None. They all requested to know:

Oddly, the above parameters are ones that I had already entered in my quest for a new Jeep. In my responses, I provided the information again, and I made it a point to say that I would be interested in other colors, trim packagets, etc, and I also said I would be interested in a used Jeep Wrangler as well. Of the 40+ responses, 5 came from Jeep dealers. Those five all received the same information from me. So, the responses I got were:

I, very politely, responded to each of them saying that I was dissapointed that they were not interested enough to provide a quote. I tried to explain to them how email works, but they didn't seem to get it.

 

Yesterday, I received requests for feedback. Can you imagine how much fun I had filling out evaluations on each of the dealers?

 

Today, I received an email from dealer number 2 telling me that they were going out of business and were liquidating their inventory and didn't I wish that I wasn't so rude to them. I really had a great time with the response to that one. No wonder they are going out of business, they have no ability to sell over the Internet, and they have a real problem with customer relations. Just for the fun of it, I drover over to the lot, found the person that wrote the stupid email, showed the person my check book and said, "Don't you wish you weren't so rude to me and that you won't get any of the money that I have here?"

 

So, all in all, I had some fun, but still don't have a Jeep. <G>

 

 

I hate to see Cutler being traded. I keep hearing how he is immature and needs to grow up. However, I have been trying to take the big picture view of all of it.

First off, we need to remember how good the offense was last year, and that was with 100 running backs on the DL (actually, it was like 7 or 8). So, Shanny gets fired, which was deserved with the inability for him to get a good defense in place despite it being a weakness for a few years.

 

In comes McD to save the day. Myself, I am thinking this was  a stupid hire. The Broncs need a good defenisive mind. The offense needed no work. What does McD do? He signs another 100 running backs, all second or third stringers from other teams when Hillis showed that he was a super stud before he got hurt and a couple of other RBs already on the roster are also thought of as really top quality. To address the defense, he signs a safety that is 70 years old to a four year contract, and then spends over a million on a long snapper even though he had one already signed to a much smaller contract that hadn't had a bad snap in years. I am beginning to doubt McD is the man just based on his first steps. Then he announces that he wants to trade his stud TE that is well known as a great receiving TE because his new offense doesn't really use receiving TEs. Hmmm, remember why Graham left New England? Because he wasn't anything more than a glorified lineman in the NE offense and wanted to go where his skills fit better. So, the answer? Trade Scheffler and put Graham back where he was a few years ago.

 

Did I mention that the offense was top-notch last year? WTF is McD doing changing the offense around that was already good? Did I mention that he really hasn't addressed the defense needs yet?

 

Next, he tries to trade for Cassel, who is making a billion dollars and replace Cutler who has made a name for himself and has a really low cap number. Not only does he try to make the trade, he then lies to Cutler about it. Hmm, who is immature here? The liar or the QB that was just dissed by his coach? Did I mention that the offense was top-notch last year and that Cutler played in the Pro Bowl?

 

After being caught lying, McD ties to cover his tail and tries to make up with Cutler. What does he do? He says, yeah, Cutler is our guy, but if we get a good offer, he can be traded just like anyone else. Yep, that is a great way to instill trust. Tell your franchise player that he might still be traded even though he is your guy. Oh yeah, its not like I would not be pissed off. So, another face to face meeting... same behavior from the coach. Isn't it the coach's job to build trust with his players?

 

Things get worse because Cutler is fed up with what he hears from his coach. He is told that he is the man, BUT, he might be traded at any point. Gee, why didn't he like to hear that?

 

Anyways, Cutler is gone, the Broncs got a couple of draft pics and a worthless QB.

 

So, the starting point: Good offense, bad defense. The steps: Coach gets caught lying and pisses off the franchise QB and fails to do a good job fixing things. The end result: New crappy QB, a suspect offense (a downgrade from last year) and no real improvement in the defense other than a really old Safety and a couple of defensive backs, but not a single quality lineman.

 

Yeah, count me in as fan that is far from happy. Those draft picks better be used to get some super studs and make everyone forget how screwed up everything is now with our rookie coach.

I started a new blog on the MindsharpBlogs.com site. So far, I am just having a little fun, but I will be adding lots of new content there in the next few weeks. Make sure to add it to your feed list.

My plan is to discuss Unified Communications in general, OCS 2007 and OCS 2007 R2, and hardware such as headsets and phone devices. I have a few headsets that I need to review, so I will post those reviews there, too.

For those that hate links, here is the URL: http://unifiedcommunications.mindsharpblogs.com/RussK/default.aspx

It seems like I am hearing more questions about certification in recent months than I have in a few years.

 

I have been seeing lots of job ads with a requirement for an MCSE in Windows Server 2008. Let me make it clear, there is no such thing. Never has been, and it appears that there never will be one. I think this deserves discussion, but to me, it makes sense that Microsoft has changed the program. The products have become more and more specialized, and the MCSE just didn't do justice when it comes to these specializations. Microsoft explains why they changed to the new generation of certification here: http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/newgen/why/default.mspx.

 

The big discussion in the last few weeks has been around the new Master certification. You can read more about it here: http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/master/default.mspx. What it really comes down to is that it is a super depth program that requires three weeks of class attendence with long days of super in-depth information around a particular product or feature. The Master does not replace the Architecture certification (MCA) that has been around for awhile. Instead, Microsoft decoupled the depth technical training from the MCA program to create the Master program. The MCA will focus on more of the soft skills around the technology, and the MCA can be completed at a later date after achieving the Master certification.

 

The big issue is that people are upset that the Master cert is so hard to achieve and that it is so expensive. Yep, life sucks sometimes, get over it. The Master and the Architecture certs are not for everyone; they are both intended for a very select audience.

 

For lots of great information regarding the certification programs, I recommend that you add Trika's blog to your list. Trika is a marketing person that is focused on the certification programs. She really does a great job of explaining the certs and keeps everyone well informed on changes to the programs. Keep in mind that she is also a little "off" in many ways <G>, but she is really a great lady.

Really, it is true.

 

I am working my butt off writing OCS 2007 content and am working all sorts of odd hours putting up and tearing down images while I verify what I write. I am also having lots of fun creating tons of Visio diagrams.

 

I am way behind my schedule and extremely stressed, but, it is a good stress. Really, it is a good stress.

 

I hate being behind schedule with anything I do, but I really expected it to happen based on an extremely aggressive schedule.

 

What I really love? I am learning a ton! I am happily working from my comfy chair, like right now, and am taking on lots of little tasks here and there related to marketing. The other day, I just had to call up a few friends while I worked outside on my desk smoking a nice cigar.

 

BTW, this working from home thing is not that great of a deal as I find myself working tons of hours - like right now it is about 4:30am on Saturday morning.  But despite the long hours, I am having an absolute blast!

The Best Practices SharePoint Conference in Washington, DC is scheduled for September 15-17.

 

Well, first the bad news. It is offically SOLD OUT.

 

The good new?  It is officially SOLD OUT.

 

 

For serveral years, we have had heard in the industry how great virtualization is and how it can save us a fortune in reduced data center foot prints and make our companies more efficient as well as more effective when it comes to moving new products into production and consolidation of servers.

 

The big issue/concern has been whether we can get support from Microsoft for products that we are running in a virtualized environment. Who wants to invest in virtualization if it means that we won't get the high levels of support that we need for our business critical applications?

 

I remember hearing that when Hyper-V was released that we would be seeing a whole new perspective from Microsoft when it comes to virtualization. One rumor that I heard was that the Hyper-V guys were pushing all of the other product groups to approve and support the use of their products running in Hyper-V instances. It may not be true, but it makes a great deal of sense to me. We can clearly see from http://support.microsoft.com/kb/897615/en-us that Microsoft's stance is changing over time as this KB is now (as of 8/19/2008) at version 4.1. It is nice to see changes are taking place all the time.

 

Well, yesterday, Microsoft released a statement regarding virtualization, http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2008/08/19/449621.aspx. The key to this statement is that the product is Exchange Server 2007, which is a huge one when it comes to critical applications. Another key is that they mention Hyper-V and OTHER Hypervisors that have been approved under their new Server Virtualization Validation Program (SVVP), http://www.windowsservercatalog.com/svvp. Think of it as an HCL for virtualization products. :)

 

I expect to hear more announcements in the future.

 

I have been buying products from the Internet for several years now. I seldom do any of my major shopping in stores anymore.

 

The other day, buy.com advertised a laptop that looked like something that I could use and the price was right. So, I placed an order. It never arrived. I placed it again, and received an email saying that I need to provide more information.

 

They asked that I go to http://www.buy.com/ccalt.htm and fax them the form all filled out so they could ship my laptop. Look at it when you get a chance. They want me to copy my Driver's License AND my credit card. Yeah, right. Maybe I should just give them everything on me so they can easily steal my identity. OK, not buy.com, but anyone that works there could access that info.

 

I have sent several emails to their customer support and they all reply with the same response which is, "No, we won't tell you what is wrong with your online purchase and no, we won't help you unless you fill out our form and fax it to us."

 

I have a better idea. I won't buy from them, and I will gripe loud and long to everyone that I know.

 

I still can't believe that I could not get a voice number from their customer service web site and that I received such stupid requests.

 

BTW, does anyone in this country still own a fax machine?

 

 

Update: I finally got a phone number from one of the reps. Of course, everyone followed the company line, so it did me no good. Next step - I write the corporate office and file a complaint with the BBB. I doubt either will do any good, but they really need to change their policy or they will lose more customers.

John Anderson is a pretty well known person in the blogging community. and he is very active in the SharePoint arena.

His recent blog posts have really reinforced in me why I am glad that I now work for Mindsharp!

Here are the links for his posts on the first two days of one of our Mindsharp classes on SharePoint. 

It is kind of a stupid issue, but I decided to blog on it because it bugged me.

 

I run Vista. I needed to re-configure my email profile for Outlook 2007. When I tried to make a change to the email settings, I got an error that said I needed to close Outlook and make the changes in the Mail applet in control panel.

 

Problem. There is no such thing. Even if you switch to classic view in control panel, it is still not there.

 

The answer? Go to Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office12 and then double-click the MLCFG32.CPL file.

 

Now, you can make the changes.

Today is officially my first day at Mindsharp.

Many of you have heard of the company and most people immediately associate it with SharePoint. That is a good thing, but Mindsharp is going to be much more than SharePoint in the near future.

My job is to help complete courseware for Office Communications Server and help promote classes and consulting opportunities for OCS. I am excited about this opportunity. I get to work for a top-notch organization with a great reputation, and I get to help lead the company into new areas of technology.

Yeehaw... let the fun begin.

My focus, my time, and my odd dreams now include Mindsharp and the new logo. This week includes lots of paperwork and review of the current outlines and content to see what the next steps are oing to be in the next few weeks. 

I already had the question come up, "What does this mean for ClusterHelp.com?" Damn good question. We are talking with Mindsharp about selling the IP to them and then re-building the course for Windows Server 2008. It may take a good bit to make it happen, but it will not impact our current commitments. The next two classes (Pittsburgh and NYC) will still happen.

I don't know if it is possible to find the perfect job or not.

Over the last few weeks, I have been talking to several companies about opportunities. These conversations have been fun, and the interviewing has really been entertaining as well.

Interviewing - I bet you have all heard the basic questions, like, "What is your biggest weakness?" So, during the process, I put together my top 10 questions.

1. Why are you leaving your current position? Also, why did you leave your last job?
2. Can you describe a typical day at your last job?
3. How do you handle stress?
4. If you could change the last X number of years of your professional life, what would you change?
5. What major challenges did you face in your last position and how did you respond to those challenges?
6. Can you describe an occassion where you made a mistake and what you did afterwards?
7. What did you like/dislike about your previous supervisors?
8. How do you feel about travel?
9. How do you keep up on the constantly changing technology?
10. Why would you like to work for our organization?

My all time favorite question is, "What are your salary expectations?"

So, since I have all of these questions and appropriate answers memorized, the next step is always the initial technical screening. It is very unusual to have any issues with the technicals screen unless the interviewer doesn't know the right answer to their own questions. This has happened more than a few times with me which has resulted in me sending them email in the middle of the interview with the proof that my answer was right. Then the joy of salary negotiation, which I actually like doing.

OK, back to the perfect job for me. I thought about it long and hard. What were the things that I loved about previous jobs and what are the things that pissed me off most about previous jobs. The pissed off part was easiest. :)

So, what are the things that I like to do? So, another list...

1. Speaking at conferences
2. Helping others through newsgroups and blogging
3. Writing and technical reviewing the work of other offers
4. Researching new technologies
5. Train and help others learn new technologies
6. Consulting - By this, I mean indentifying issues, creating solutions, and helping to deploy fixes to existing and new environments
7. Be able to leave work at a reasonable time - the always missing work/home life balance which everyone claims to support

I looked at all of the opportunities in front of me, and it was real easy to eliminate a few companies.

So, the result? I accepted a position with a great company, Mindsharp. I will be working as a lead courseware developer as well as a technical lead for all things related to Unified Communications. The first project? Yep, finish the courseware and get it out into the market place. After that, I will be working as a trainer on the courses that I help develop and will also work as a consultant in UC.

I can't wait to get started!

We have scheduled a class in Pittsburgh, PA. It is tentative at this point. What does that mean? Well, it means that there is no actual contract yet, but it looks like it will be a go.

If you are interested, please contact RiverHead Training in Pittsburgh by calling them at 412-224-2345 or by sending email to education@riverhead.com.

Philip Anderson is the point of contact.

This is another question that came up many times during TechEd.

It was usually phrased, "Why would I go with Windows Server 2008 over Windows Server 2003 when deploying my Exchange Server 2007 environment next month?" Sometimes they also threw in that they were going to to CCR.

My point, which actually seemed to please some of the people is that we, as administrators, should try to avoid NT 4.0 situations that we are still paying for today.

What does that mean? Well, think about it, in 2000, we were deploying new servers. The options were to deploy NT 4.0 or Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was still new and there was fear about using it for critical environments. So, NT 4.0 was used. In 2003, the hardware reached the end of its warranty. So, we paid for an extended warranty for a year, or more, until it got too costly. So, last year, we had an OS that was 11 years old running critical systems.

Take it forward today. I deploy a new and extremely critical email environment that is supposed to last me between 4 to 5 years. So, if I use Windows Server 2003, I will find myself running Windows Server 2003 in 2013. Sound familiar?

I am willing to bet you money that not a single person will be wanting to upgrade the OS to Windows Server 2008 when the application and the OS are still working properly. We, as IT people, do not mess with what is working. So, we don't upgrade and we end up in a bad position where we are way past the end of life on the operating system on a critical server environment. This is especially true if we are deploying a high availability environment to support the application. You don't mess with it.

I am a big proponent of aligning application and hardware refreshes because it just makes sense. What we end up with is a cycle of every 3-5 years, we replace our out of warranty equipment with new equipment running the latest OS and the latest application version just so that when we hit the end of our planned life cycle, we are not in an unsupported state and trying to remember how to manage an OS and an application that we haven't touched in years because we are constantly moving forward.

Something else to consider. Let's say it is the year 2010, and you call Microsoft for support for your Windows Server 2003 environment. Who do you think you will get to help you? Well, the very best people have already moved on to the other teams. They are working on the 2008 platform, or they are working on Win 7 (whatever its real name will be then). The best support guys will not be stuck working on the 2003 team. 

I hope that is enough reason for you to do your best to convince management that it is better to go with Windows Server 2008.

During my booth duty at the Failover Clustering booth, I must have heard questions regarding this topic about once per hour if not more.

The official stance: Microsoft does not support the virtualization of Exchange Server 2007 roles at this time. Why not? Well, Microsoft does not have a virtualization platform capable of supporting 64-bit virtual machines at this time. Hyper-V is not an RTM product. Whether Microsoft will change the stance once Hyper-V RTMs is another question, and I don't have an answer. Also, keep in mind, Microsoft is not about to support a third party's virtualization platform because they don't have the control over it to properly support it and fix problems that might be discovered.

My point of view: Why would you ever want to do that anyways? Exchange and SQL are two services that really do require top-notch resources and sharing them on a server with other virtualized servers just seems counter productive to providing the best performance possible for two key business services.

OK, now that I am off my soap box, can you virtualize Exchange Server 2007? Yes, you can. It make perfect sense to me for development and testing environments. It makes perfect sense for a proof of concept, too. It even make perfect sense in small organizations that won't push their Exchange implementation very hard.

Recently, I worked with a client that has a nice virtualization platform running Hyper-V RC1. They hosted mailbox servers, hub transport servers, and client access servers for their test environment. It ran wonderfully. They are considering doing it when Hyper-V RTMs because their expected load for 35 users isn't very large. 

UPDATED: Scott Schnoll posted the official stance in his blog post, Exchange Server 2007 and Hyper-V.