I sense a disturbance in the Force...

...it's as if dozens of voices cried out in terror and were silenced.

Seems the Zune wasn't ready for leap-year 2008... 366 days in 2008 have caused the Zune to crash at boot.

May I say, Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha~~~aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Stupid Microsoft.

Also Reference:
Zune 30 Faq [Zune.net]
Zune Freeze Result of Leap Year [blog.wired.com]
Zune.net (forums) [forums.zune.net]
Microsoft Zune Committing Mass Suicide [it.slashdot.org]

Help - Help is not avaliable in this version of Windows!!!

Today at work, I was tinkering with a Vista computer (trying to pin down what can be done about it's excessive RAM utilization), and upon closing all of the open Windows on the computer, I found this notice behind everything.

I loved the wording of the message. "Windows Help Program is no longer included with Windows." - Strategically worded so they don't say "Help isn't included with Windows anymore... we gave up on "helping" with this version of Windows."

* * *
Why couldn't this be phased out anyway? I've even got help file viewers on Linux and Mac OS X computers, it seems a little odd that Microsoft would just stop including it with Windows. What I would have done is include the old help viewer, but start writing all the new help documentation in the new format. Maybe with the next version of Windows, include the old help viewer as an optional addition, but not have it installed by default.

At least Microsoft does include it as a download from their website [.link] - however, there is a total of 6 pages of documentation, over half of which is "known issues after installing WinHlp32.exe" - sigh.

Well, that's my two-cents anyway.

Finally, The Horrors of Exchange, part 1

Last week, Wednesday, September 26, 2007, I was assigned to an on-site contract for a local Owosso business. On day 1, I focused on getting oriented with the network there, mostly just familiarizing myself with the 5 on site servers and the one off site server.

The network is interesting, it is international, two exchange servers, and a whole kaboodle of other traits of the system that give it a personality all its own.

Standard IT policy for managing a network, be it from day one administration or having a new administrator come into a network, the first place we look is at the domain controllers and fire up the event viewer to find out what errors the system is having.

I noticed several errors labeled as "MSExchange..." This is one of my nightmares. Exchange is really sensitive, and can be easy to break or lose data if it isn't dealt with according to Microsoft policy. I'm not sure why Microsoft made Exchange in such a sensitive way, but they must have had a reason for it, seeing as how they've been doing it for over a decade now [Microsoft Exchange Server, Wikipedia]. One of the interesting design concepts of Exchange is how messages are stored on the server. Exchange drops messages into one of several databases: priv1.edb priv1.stm pub1.edb pub1.stm or into an ever-increasing amount of log files. But one of the annoying features of Exchange is that it requires everything to be 100% operational for most of it's own functions to work correctly.

For example, while on site, I found that the Exchange wasn't backing up correctly each night and it had been doing this for several months. After doing some tinkering, I also noticed that it was running out of space. The MS Exchange database --the database is priv1.edb + priv1.stm, was 15.9 GB, while Microsoft has set maximum capacity on the Exchange database to be 16 GB. Email doesn't exactly come in at an extreme speed for the network, so it wasn't slated as a major thing, so we scheduled Exchange Database management for the upcoming Saturday, which would give me plenty of time to check to see what commands I need to run on the database and what contingencies I should be prepared to deal with (cough-disaster recovery-cough).

One day went by without major events, but then on Friday, I arrived on site to find that the Exchange had crashed and was re-enabled. It had crashed, according to event viewer, because the hard drive had gone down to less than 10 MB of free space (thankfully, Exchange was hosted on "D drive" instead of on C). However, when I fired up My Computer to see how much space was presently left on the drive, and found it to be under 512 KB, I immediately reported to my on-site boss that the Exchange server was going to go down any minute, due to the drive being filled up again and I was going to have to shut Exchange down to prevent it. He quickly remote into the server to take a look at the data, and noticed that the drive had 2 MB free and was growing?? And then several people immediately stated that they had suddenly lost email... Yup, Exchange had crashed again.

Now, this isn't a huge issue, Exchange is designed to protect itself in situations like this, by shutting down and displaying error messages so we avoid data loss. However, now that the drive had less than 10 MB free, we were in a bit of a bind. Exchange needs to be defraged (that would be the command eseutil /d) --the defrag command deletes information in the database that has been deleted by users or mailboxes that have been deleted by administrators, which should free up a decent bit of space in the database. The recommended procedure by Microsoft is that we take a backup of Exchange and then run the defrag command. While it is very common for the defrag command to cause problems with the database, it is still a possibility, especially if we have undetected hard ware problems.

So started the second fiasco. Backing up Exchange. Now, we have known for a while that the Veritas Backup Exec backups have been failing on that server for a while now, but they were backing up the entire server, and while it was getting an error while backing up Exchange, it wasn't clear if the Exchange errors were causing the backups to fail, or if it was more related to a tape/tape drive issue. So, I decided to just do an NTBackup.exe backup and save it to an external drive. It was redundant enough for our situation.

The backup started, and 2.5 hours later it had not displayed an error message and switched to data verification. 2.5 hours after that (a total of 5 hours after starting the backup), it returned "Backup failed." I checked the logs, and it said "\Mailsore (%servername%)" failed. The database may be corrupt or inaccessible. The file will not restore correctly. This was a becoming a major stressor for me. I have to do a defrag on the database, which a backup prior-to doing the defrag is highly recommended by Microsoft, yet I am unable to do the backup due to a corrupt database.

To keep this story from getting horribly long, I eventually was able to just run Defrag on priv1.edb, pub1.edb, and pub1.stm, which freed up nearly 6 GB of space. However, I was not able to defrag priv1.stm, which seems to be corrupt. I spent a lot of time with other variations of the eseutil command, but wasn't able to get the database back. I could use eseutil /p [database] /i to rebuild the indexes between priv1.edb and priv1.stm, however, the P switch will not only repair the database, but it will also delete anything it determines to be corrupt. Which, frequently will cause other problems with the database. But, there is one nice thing, even if it does delete files that it shouldn't, we can use the *.log files to replay transactions in exchange to get it back up and running with the correct information.

Once again however, my hopes were dashed. To save space, some log files had been deleted. There is no guarantee that we'll be able to use the log files to get the database up and running again. Hopes dashed. And upon further research, I'm suck between a rock and a hard place. There is no other options available. The only options I've got are to break the RAID array and tinker with one half of the mirrored image to see what happens (no guarantee of success, and it is possible to damage the RAID array in the process), or I can call Microsoft and start a support ticket. My boss at CyberMedics suggests the latter, after talking with the guys on site, we'll make the final decision come Monday.

More details as the story progresses.

Major Microsoft Change Slated --Did We Learn From History?

In July '08, Craig Mundie and Ray Ozzie will each be taking over a portion of Bill Gates' role at Microsoft, as the Chairman steps down. This will be a major change in Microsoft that may have an impact on the entire industry.

A "slightly similar" situation has happened in the past, when Apple Computer (now Apple Incorporated) Partner and Co-Founder Steve Jobs [2] was ousted from the company by the board of directors and then CEO John Sculley. Apple started to fall behind in industrial development. The Apple line of computers were slowly being phased out while the Macintosh line kept taking more and more power away from the Apple line. Unfortunately, there wasn't enough major changes in the Macintosh line, which was focused mostly on "Portable Computers," which seemed to hit it's prime with the Macintosh SE and Color Classic. Inevitably, Scully was removed from his position of CEO and replaced with Michael Spindler, who further compounded Apple's problems, including problems areas such as allowing other companies to develop "clone" systems that were not developed by Apple, continuing research into a new OS (Code named: Copland) and failed negotiations of a take over with companies IBM, Phillips, and Sun.

While this was going on in the early 1990s, Microsoft was perfecting it's Windows, improving on Windows 3.1 with 3.11, NT, and 95.

With the industry being geared toward freedom of thought and design, having one primary company stressing innovation within it's own set boundaries while also having a concept of "Think Different" [2] ended up being counter intuitive. By the late 90s, when Windows 95 and later Windows 98 were gaining market share from new computer users and Macintosh people that had converted to Windows, either by necessity or by preference, began to dramatically gain power is when forecasts of Apple's demise began to circulate, citing them as a computer company that just didn't understand modern thinking in the IT industry.

With the limited changes with Mac OS, decreasing market share to Windows, and increasing financial problems, Mac became a minor player in the industry by the late 1990s, when Microsoft's Windows reached 90% market share for the first time. In 1996, Spindler was replaced by Gil Amelio [2], Apple's shortest lived CEO.

Many people link this "down-swing" of Apple's status directly to Apple's longest running and then CEO --Scully. Mac OS 7 (1991 to 1997) was in it's final life, it's foundation (System 6) and age was making programming difficult and implementation of new hardware concepts increasingly challenging. Scully attempted to implement Mac OS 8, its development starting back during the days of System 6, however the project, known as Copland suffered from stagnation...

Eventually ignored by Apple itself, the Copland project finally dried off in 1996 as Apple began talks with the now defunct Be Incorporated for development of a new Mac OS. However, the Copland project wasn't a total loss however, its features that were favored were slowly integrated into OS 7, while the development of a new OS was abandoned for purchasing of a third party OS that would be purchased by Apple Computer.

Then the shock came. Be Inc. refused to settle for anything lower than $400 Million for Be OS, while Apple refused to pay more than $125 Million for it, by some, the cost of $125 million was considered to be three times as much as it was worth; citing bad blood between then Be CEO Jean-Louis Gassée (a former Apple official) and Apple Computer. Due to the stressors of encountering such resistance and lack of development of Mac OS 8, Amelio turned to NeXT. A NeXTSTEP OS and Mac OS merger was quite unexpected by the Macintosh industry, whom cited concern over the NeXT CEO and the short duration of negotiations between Apple Computer and NeXT Computer.

The primary concern of Apple Fanatics was the similarities between the Be negotiations and the NeXT negotiations... After Apple Partner and Co-Founder Steve Jobs was forced out of Apple, he founded NeXT, and began work on a new OS concepts and design. Based on the UNIX Mach kernel and BSD Source, the system was slated to revolutionize the OS market. However, differently from Be, and once again a failing of Steve Jobs' business model, the proprietary foundations of NeXT held the company back; NeXT being designed to only run on NeXTSTEP computers, with their high price tag (of around $10,000) limited adaption, and the company was struggling to keep itself afloat. One desperate move after another was made to try to keep the OS going, and then along came Apple... Desperate for a new OS, Jobs required Apple to pay through the nose of NeXT Computers. It isn't clear exactly how much Apple had to pay for NeXT, but it is commonly believed to be at least $375 Million, but no higher than $450 Million; however NeXT also required approximately 1 million shares of Apple for the merger, and placing Jobs as the interim CEO for Apple in 1999.

The story is sweet and simple from there on. Apple released Mac OS 9 shortly after Jobs took over as interim CEO. iMac, iTool (now, .Mac), iTunes and later OS X (based on NeXT) was integrated into Apple's line up, as Steve Jobs took over as Apple's present CEO in 2000.

It is now considered that Steve Jobs saved Apple from folding in 2000, it was an expensive and long term process, but with the salvation of Apple comes a new line of thinking for the IT industry: how dangerous is it to have a major software player have huge changes with its founders? This concept came up when Bill Gates stepped down from CEO to chief software architect and Chairman of the Board, placing Steve Balmer as CEO; allowing Bill Gates to further reduce his role in Microsoft, eventually removing from all day-to-day activity at the business. Bill Gates has slated Ray Ozzie [2] for "day-to-day management" of Microsoft and Craig Mundie [2] as "chief research and strategy officer." While it remains to be seen what will Develop for Bill Gates and Microsoft come 2008, it's ramifications won't be obvious for several years after.

This will definitely be an interesting turning point for Microsoft, and the IT industry in general.

Vista Vista bo Bista banana fana foe Fista, mi my moe Mi-sta... Vista.

What do you do when your state-of-the-art OS on a high-end laptop won't connect to the Internet? Ya call CyberMedics.

We just had a laptop come in, exceptionally new laptop, with Vista Home Premium pre-installed on it. The computer was able to get online for a while and then it wasn't able to. Our "Triage" diagnostic (performed by yours-truly) came up with a preliminary report that Norton Internet Security or the built in Windows/Internet Explorer security settings were set so high that they prevented the laptop from getting online. Triage showed that the laptop was able to get online, and was able to ping the router and DNS server, but it wasn't able to ping any domains, use IE7, or utilize any third-party programs to access the Internet.

After working with the laptop for a while, I was confused to say the least. I lowered much of the security related to connecting to the Internet, including Norton Internet Security. I even went through some of the automated diagnostic software included with Windows to check the system over (which seemed to work well, but in turn, revealed nothing of consequence). However, at one reboot of the system, MySpace IM was able to get online, however no other applications were. Thinking there must be a software issue going on, I restarted the computer in safe mode.

It was the first time I attempted to boot Vista into safe mode. I managed to hit the wrong key the first time, which brought up the Windows Boot Loader, much like Grub in Linux, upon hitting the correct key on the Grub screen will allow the user to pass different startup options to adjust how the OS boots. Now, it seems that Windows has a similar feature. I quickly showed by boss who was quite surprised and pleased with this new feature of Vista.

Not to become distracted by a new feature, I moved right along to get the system into Safe Mode. The first thing I noticed about the new "Advanced Startup Options" menu was that there was a "reverse print" title bar at the top that said "Advanced Startup Options," anyone who has used the Linux "man pages" knows what this looks like, the centered black text with the white "bar-like" background stretching from one side of the screen to the other.

There was also a new option, "Repair your computer" [link]. This looks like the Windows XP repair installation that has so many times saved a system that has crossed my bench at CyberMedics. If it is, and I am having trouble finding much details on the "repair your computer" option in the Vista ASO, then it would simplify matters from XP, which always had to be run from the CD after going through the preliminary section of the Windows XP installer. By the way, one should take note that the "Repair your computer" options is not always on the ASO screen, it seems that the option is only available if the system has the necessary system files stored on the computer itself.

The last thing that I noticed about the new ASO screen is that as you move between options, a section at the bottom (in bright white text) displays a description of what the option will do. This should help decrease the number of people that select Debugging or Directory Services Restore Mode... Neither of which are really needed on the average home user's computer.

Oh, and that customer's computer, after entering safe mode, the Internet was working correctly. 10 to 1 odds: the Internet isn't working correctly in Vista because of a conflict in Norton Internet Security.

Vista by-gosh!

At work, Vista is just a name of an OS that we hardly ever see. With Microsoft's release time between Vista and XP being around five-and-a-half years, we still see a majority of Windows XP systems in the store (and a frightening number of Windows 98 systems). But, we have seen a few Vista systems pass though our doors recently.

So far, reports have been bad. With Apple's suggestion of delaying upgrading (for their Windows iPod users), and with the recommendations [more details] for 1 GB of RAM for users wanting to use the Aero interface are just annoying. Mac OS X and it's interface work just fine starting as low as 128 MB of RAM, granted, things are better with more memory, but it's not a requirement like it is in Vista.

The security is quite a concern for me. Bill Gates has recently been quoted along the lines of saying Vista is extremely secure, enough to run as Life Support machines while daring hackers to break Vista. They've hacked Vista already, at least pirated it. Hacking Vista is going to be a chore of the serious hackers and crackers out there, but it is quite possible, and with Microsoft's recent statements of the intense security and the market saturation Microsoft has, I'm betting in a years time, I'll be seeing a rush of virus riddled Vista boxes with customers complaining that "Microsoft said I wouldn't get viruses if I used Vista." Note to everyone reading this blog: if you are using a Microsoft OS (hell, if you are using Microsoft software on your system) get an Anti-Virus... Microsoft software is just attacked too much. It's wise to have an AntiVirus solution anyway, just to be sure that your systems (including non-Microsoft OS systems) aren't filled with virus infected files that could infect Windows boxes that connect to you. For reference, there are free AntiVirus solutions out there:

Windows:

• Avira AntiVir
  
• Grisoft AVG Free for Windows
  Avast 4 Home (Windows)
  
• ClamWin.

Mac OS X Users:

• ClamXav: Free AntiVirus for Mac OS X

Linux:

• ClamAV
  
• Grisoft AVG Free for Linux
  
• Avast 4 Home (Linux)
  
• Avira AntiVir (Linux).

Note: Vista versions may not yet be available. While Avira and Grisoft offer their software for free, they are distributed under an EULA that, from my understanding, requires their software to be used at home or not-for-profit industries. Clam uses the GPL EULA, which includes stipulations against such legal mumbo-jumbo. However, to be sure always read the EULA before installing!

After the release of the OS, I was glad to learn exactly what the OS versions are. Home Basic, to Business, things are looking okay, but Vista Enterprise still is a bit of a mystery to me. I'll have to delve into my IT circles to figure out the details on Enterprise... To a degree, it seems geared to replace Windows Server 2003, which I am throughly trained, however not certified yet... The most annoying thing for me would be to go in to be going through the MCSE process, only to get stopped mid-way by a OS revision.

This is something that Microsoft always does, and it usually does major OS revamps every two to four years, whereas Vista took five to six because of Microsoft's big security overhaul back in the first half of this decade, shortly after the XP launch. I shouldn't bother too much, for the Apple Certified Techs things are much worse, with certs costing ten-times as much as the MCSE, and occurring nearly annually, things must suck for them. However, at least their OS isn't going through such a major change as the XP and 2003 Certifieds are with the change to Vista.

Right after Microsoft releases a new revision to the Windows series, there comes new issues with installing. Not only is this is first version of Windows to be distributed on a DVD (as opposed to a CD), Vista also has a new activation routine. Back in the day, there weren't even product codes! Then came number codes, followed by longer codes, and then random letters were thrown in starting with Windows 98 and 2000. Windows XP upped the ante with activation and product lock outs if the program wasn't activated in a timely fashion. Windows Vista will take the XP activation to the next level, by not only requiring the system to be activated within 30 days, but also limiting functionality during that time frame, finally after the 30 days are up, users are limited to logging in and getting access to Internet Explorer for a period of 60 minutes before the system logs off, allowing no other functionality aside from activation of course.

This activation is unlike anything seen in the "Alt OS" department (dominated by Mac OS X and Linux derivatives), both of which have made it into the twenty-first century, without having such intrusive security requirements... With Apple being around for just as long as Microsoft, one would think Apple would have the same concerns... But Apple seems to trust their users, and the GPL and foundations of Linux in general are for freedom of source, nearly to the point of requiring the OS to be distributed freely.

Worst of all happens to be personified in a recent Apple commercial entitled: Security [caution: QuickTime Video link]. I've actually seen this happen in Vista! It can get quite confusing to the user, especially one not experienced with Microsoft Windows Vista security. I even find it hard to understand why it asks so often to "Cancel or Allow" actions that should be trusted in the first place.

On a side note, I still think it's too early to make a final judgment for or against Vista, only time will tell if the OS will "make or break" the Microsoft empire, but one thing is for sure... There are going to be some interesting times coming up at CyberMedics, as Vista makes its presence known in our humble repair shop... It might not be long before we're all running out to get Vista certified, or OSX, or L+.


Once again, in annoyance of Microsoft's recent business goals, this has all been proudly written on a computer running exclusively Open Source Software: openSUSE Linux (the OS), using OpenOffice.org for word processing and the Firefox web browser for research and blog management.

Research for this blog used the following sites:
Apple: iTunes and Windows Vista --Apple's notice about Vista screwing up iTunes files and iPod devices.
Apple: Still the world's most advanced OS --Apple's comparison about the similarities of Vista vs. OSX.
Microsoft: Vista --Microsoft's Vista "homepage" – check out the sub-sites in there to get detailed Vista info, including upgrade options and system requirements.
Will Your PC Run Windows Vista? --eWeek Contemplates having Aero interface as a main selling point, and not having that function in machines with low RAM.
MyMac.com: Vista better than the Mac OS X --MyMac.com's publisher Tim Robertson debates Bill Gates' recent statements about the security flaws of OS X while Gates' also touts Vista as the "most secure version of Windows yet."
Slashdot: Hack in the Box meets Windows Vista --Slashdot discusses having Microsoft security programmer Dave Tamasi and Microsoft penetration engineer (the guy that tries to break security) Douglas MacIver at the 2006 Hack in the Box conference.
InfoWorld: Vista: hard to crack, not to pirate --InfoWorld Daily discusses the new Anti-Hacking touts of Microsoft, while pointing out that piracy is already firing up for the final release.
ZDNet: Microsoft to lock pirates out of their PCs --ZDNet discusses the new lock-down features of an unactivated Windows Vista PC, and what preinstallers, after-market installers, and corporate installers can expect to have to work with.

Over Hauled

It's finally happened, Microsoft has officially released Windows Vista. Computers are now coming with Vista preinstalled, and the IT industry is about to go through a transitional period from Windows XP to Windows Vista (always a painful experience, but usually, it's for the better).

Unlike previous editions of Windows, which were released as server series, sometimes with a business client included with that release (such as with Windows 2000 Server with it's business client Windows 2000 Professional) or in more of a home user series, such as Windows Server 2003 with its client, Windows XP Professional being released two years prior with XP Home; Vista is completely different. From my resources, Vista is the complete package, Vista Enterprise being the "server" series, only coming pre-installed on Microsoft approved servers. To keep current network administrators happy though, there is a version of Windows Vista that functions as a server that can be bought and installed on any compatible hardware (just without the added assurances from Microsoft that it won't crash), called Windows Vista Business (designed for small businesses). At this time, I haven't been able to confirm if Vista Enterprise and Business editions are designed to replace Windows Server 2003 or just supplement it.

Moving right along with this confusing array of software versions, Microsoft has also broken down the home user version of Vista into three groups now instead of the usual two, however, this time, there is no clear "business client" version, such as XP Home and XP Pro. This time, we've got Vista Home Basic, Vista Home Premium, and Vista Ultimate. Each with more features than the previous. Vista Home Basic is designed for the general home user with limited multimedia experience, such as just web and email functions -- this probably will only be seen rarely, most commonly in systems designed for very basic "Internet and Word processing" boxes. Home Premium has more features, and is the most likely candidate to be used in the average home system... But as with all previous versions of Windows, I can't help but wonder if there can be some over-rides applied to add functionality.

With the cost of Vista Home Basic Upgrade starting at around US$100 and Vista Ultimate Upgrade upwards of US$270, the question of "which version is right for me" will suddenly take on a new financial concept, seeing as how there is $170 difference! Also, notice the "upgrade" appendage to each, requiring a version of Windows to be pre-installed before upgrading. This is not the same ol' installing the OS with having an old CD-copy of Windows and it's associated CD-Key. Now, it has to be fully installed. Weather it can be older operating systems (such as 2000 -- which don't require activation) is as yet unknown to me.

And, for the first time that I'm aware of, Microsoft is now releasing it's OS via a "digital locker" (courtesy of Circuit City). The price is approximately the same, but it is yet unclear to me as to how this works (is it a burnable CD? an upgrade .exe file?).

There is much to this operating system that will take much more time to adjust to. Things are definitively going to be interesting in the industry for the next few months.


In protest of all of Microsoft's difficult to understand and highly intrusive software licencing, all of this was proudly written on a Macintosh.

Avoiding Microsoft and in search of Open Source Software?
openSUSE | Ubuntu