Good job MS

[stash]

No it isn't. Especially on an internal network.

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Why would a server admin want to use Terminal services to admin his server? That's a HUGE security risk.

It's really useful. And if you are on the local network, or on VPN, security is a moot point.

 

[Solema]

Originally posted by: InlineFive

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Why would a server admin want to use Terminal services to admin his server? That's a HUGE security risk.

It's really useful. And if you are on the local network, or on VPN, security is a moot point.

That should have been under the category of "DUH" for Quinton. TS is great for LAN and VPN use and is secure with used through those means. Who would even think of opening it publicly?

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: stash

If the problem had been found during, say...August, it would have been fixed prior to release. The problem is the QA testing did not have test cases to cover the products (at least not until the very end of the dev cycle).

You're assuming a lot about this 'mistake'

no...

I'm assuming it either

1. was a late problem (worked in prior builds, tests pushed to the sparsed regression testing), so the time to fix and push out another version and get a significant portion of regression done would have impacted release (since it hit RC in what...october, it was found probably right before RC or between RC and now)
or
2. It was missed in all the testing (or most) up until know.

I doubt it was discovered early on in development, and the decision was made to ignore (no fix) the bug.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Why would a server admin want to use Terminal services to admin his server? That's a HUGE security risk.

yeah, because an encrypted, secure session across the lan is soooo bad.

 

[stash]

I'm assuming it either

See what I mean? 🙂

You are making statements without knowing the facts. Sorry, I can't really get into it more than that.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: stash

I'm assuming it either

See what I mean? 🙂

You are making statements without knowing the facts. Sorry, I can't really get into it more than that.

Regardless, it looks bad. Not so bad to someone who understands QA and the development cycle, but to the general public, it's still "Microsoft's newest OS not compatible with itself" (please note, that's not a flambait statments, It's easily something I could see comfing from any number of webistes/news orginizations)

 

[networkman]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I think at this stage Vista has no place in a business other than in the lab setting.

Exactly!

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Why would a server admin want to use Terminal services to admin his server? That's a HUGE security risk.

Why is that Quinton?

 

[Schnieds]

I can't speak for Exchange as I am not in IT, but SQL Management Studio works fine. Other software that works fine:

-Visual Studio 2005
-SQL 2005 Developer Edition
-SQL 2005 Express
-SQL 2005 Express Management Studio

You may need to make a few Login changes in Security in SQL 2005 for everything to work correctly however. Also, the beta VS 2005 SP1 is required for debugging breakpoints.

Everything works great though, love Vista. I think you just need to spend a little time reading and searching for solutions for the problems you run into.

 

[spherrod]

Originally posted by: Solema

Originally posted by: InlineFive

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Why would a server admin want to use Terminal services to admin his server? That's a HUGE security risk.

It's really useful. And if you are on the local network, or on VPN, security is a moot point.

That should have been under the category of "DUH" for Quinton. TS is great for LAN and VPN use and is secure with used through those means. Who would even think of opening it publicly?

Yep, it's perfect for a LAN environment - publicly would be different. I think Quinton is looking for something else to hold against Vista

 

[drag]

LAN != secure.

It _can_ be secure, but not nessicarially. 😉

I know how to put a passive tap on a ethernet line and nobody would ever know if I wanted to be a bastard about it. Also it's pretty popular for executive folk to try to sneak in a wireless access point or two. So if you want to be safe safe about it you'd want to stick it in a dedicated VPN.

Unless this stuff is running over RDP version 6.0. I assume that Microsoft fixed the keystroke vunerability design flaw they introduced with RDP 5.0/5.1...