Tuesday, 25 November 2008

To "s" or to "z" (?)

To quote James O'Neill: "So our customers have Data centres (places, British spelling) in which they run Windows Server 2008 Datacenter edition (product name, American spelling), in which they say they Virtualise workloads (quoted text of an English author) using Microsoft Virtualization. (Product name)."

[Full post here]

 

This was only a few weeks before this from Eileen

 

I am SO pleased that I am not the only one... I feel better about my "picky" QA comments/feedback... What's wrong in getting it right? Nothing.


On a personal note, I have a 2 year old boy who loves Thomas the Tank Engine (both books and TV), I really like it myself too, especially characters like Fergus who insists that others "Do it right". I totally agree ;)

Tuesday, 11 November 2008

Remember this…

“Whether it is Twitter, Facebook, or even your Messenger status, think first: "Do I really want the whole world to know I just said that?"

 

-Woody (www.thesanitypoint.com)

SharePoint Quote

"Without effective and specialized governance, SharePoint will only replicate your business’ existing problems at a faster rate and on a larger scale than you thought possible! "

 

– Julian Warne

 

"He's right..."

 

- Matt Groves

SharePoint MCM/MCA

Just seen this from Joel (via twitter).

 

A micro debate has ensued on twitter and although it pains me to admit defeat (about anything) I must agree with Andrew - to be true SharePoint "master" you need to be able to cover both IT Pro/infrastructure and Dev. This pretty much rules me out as I simply do not have the time to dust off my old dev skills and brush up on .Net/SharePoint OM/etc...


It makes for a good debate though, compare the SharePoint MCM with Exchange (etc) MCM and the SharePoint program requires broader skilled people, but then the product is broader (and much more interesting IMO), this is running (light hearted) debate I have with one of my colleagues (he's an Exchange guy): that Exchange is just email, SharePoint a rich business tool.


Myself and James Butler conceived a way of negating Exchange and replacing with SharePoint, it was late in a bar in Seattle (but that's a post for another day)...

 

I can only think of a few UK guys who would meet the criteria, e.g. Andrew Woodward/Liam Cleary, maybe a couple of others, either way it should be tough, it's the premier MSFT SharePoint certification afterall ;)

 

But then, arguing with myself, do you actually need to know detailed dev to be a good architect? I don't think so... I certainly don't get into detail on the dev side, knowing what is possible, sensible and viable is what architecting is about - designing a solution that affords the best compromise between business requirement, technical strategy, UX, security, and (of course) cost/time...

 

External links:

 

http://www.sharepointjoel.com/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?List=0cd1a63d%2D183c%2D4fc2%2D8320%2Dba5369008acb&ID=128

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/sharepoint/archive/2008/11/10/introducing-the-microsoft-certified-master-and-certified-architect-for-sharepoint.aspx

 

http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/master/SharePoint/default.mspx

20 things you should know about Virtualisation

I am a big fan of virtualisation, the main reasons for me are:

 

  • Agility (ease of scale out, provisioning, server management, deployment, etc)

  • DR/Failover

  • Lowers TCO

  •  

IMO virtualisation is the default stance, give me a reason to not virtualise!

 

Here are 20 things that everyone, OK maybe not everyone, but certainly every IT Pro, should know about virtualisation:

 

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=309

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=313

 

Both are lightweight articles that will only take a few minutes to read through ;)

Tuesday, 4 November 2008

UK User Groups Community Day(s)

Earlier this week I attended the UK User Groups Community day at TVP, here is a brief review and some of my thoughts from the sessions...

 

The keynotes from Gareth Hall and Kamal Patel were interesting and well delivered, I certainly agree with Gareths comment that there is a degree of honesty from MSFT that we haven't seen before...

 

The breakout sessions I attended were mainly the SharePoint track, but I also went to Mark Wilsons session on Hyper-V which for Mark's first UG presentation was very well delivered. IMO MSFT have done well with Hyper-V and I think Mark's summation that Hyper-V gets you 80/90% of what you get with the industry leading product but at 10% of the cost is very apt.

 

Steve Smith sessions were up to there usual high standard.


The "Capacity Planning" session wasn't what I was expecting as it was more about load/stress testing, but very valuable nonetheless - esp as he highlighted some of nice new things in Visual Studio 2008 that are improved on 2005.


I would echo everything Steve said here and really stress the importance of base-lining your deployments (both before and after customisations), I would also add that load/stress testing must be communicated to your Ops teams as they may get alarms (etc) when you place additional load on the LAN/WAN and servers, I've seen clients who haven't communicated this and had test results ruined by Ops guys reacting to a perceived attack!

 

The Forefront session was excellent, really got the importance of SharePoint AV across to the audience, obviously with me Steve was preaching to the converted but the number of people who will now be thinking about Forefront/AV was much increased by the end of the session. I have used both Forefront and Trend in deployments for clients and have both products to be excellent, Forefront tends to offer better protection (multiple engines) at a performance hit, as I said in the session McAffee's PortalSheild is not compatible with the v3 products (to the best of my knowledge).

 

Penny's session on SPD was great, the DVWP is very powerful and Penny showed how to start harnessing some it's power very well indeed.


I also picked up some good info from Penny after her session and think what we discussed would make a great SUGUK session (hint hint!).

 

Nick Swan's session on building solutions was also excellent, I'd never seen Nick present before and found his style very easy going and easy to follow, the content he covered off is essential (IMO) to deploying SharePoint with customisations in a supportable and sustainable manner.

 

The real gem for me was Colin's session on PowerShell and MOSS, absolutely fantastic, really blurs the lines traditionally drawn between ITPro/Admin functions and Dev's. The power of PowerShell (excuse the pun) is there for all to see, it's scripting (so falls largly in the remit of the ITPro) but can use .Net and talk to the SharePoint OM (typically Dev remit). The content migration example Colin used is really just the tip of the iceberg, I can see 1,000's of uses for this in automating deployments and maintenance...


The chalk and talk session were good, hopefully my contributions were useful.


I have blogged about service accounts in response to a question that cropped up from a few attendees, the other common questions were around Licencing and the use of content DB's, so watch this space for blogs posting and maybe a SUGUK session to cover these confusing topics off...

 

Another highlight, for me at least, was winning a copy of Vista Ultimate for my IT Hero presentation. Thanks!!

 

Big thanks to the SUGUK and other User groups guys for organising the event and to MSFT for hosting it (esp Phil Cross).

Monday, 3 November 2008

SUGUK comes to Birmingham!

The first Birmingham event (http://suguk.org/blogs/combined_knowledge/archive/2008/10/17/14536.aspx) went very well, Eversheds did a great job of hosting, Sergey and Steve delivered some good content.

 

Hopefully this will be the first of a series of events, there was demand for demonstrating the "quick wins" discussed which would make an excellent format, one session on the Quick Win, and one other covering either something more advanced or more fluffy - I wonder who could talk fluffy??? (he he)

 

On a side note: it looks like Nigel has grabbed the bull by the horns and started blogging again: http://suguk.org/blogs/the_moss-pit/default.aspx

Wednesday, 29 October 2008

SharePoint – the DMS for law firms?

"SharePoint will be the dominant DMS at law firms.   Nothing happens overnight in the legal vertical, but check back in ten years, more or less, and we shall see. "

-Bill Gratsch

 

View the article here: Part 1 | Part 2

 

My thoughts: I concur, in the mid-term at least, I think the momentum that SAAS (and S+S) is gaining is likely to replace in-house deployments of SharePoint in the longer (8 yr +) term, that said, I defiantly agree that nothing happens overnight within legal so will this actually (and perversely)  bring the "longer term" closer? I.e. if a DMS lives for another 3-5 years will firms look seriously at hosted solutions at that point? In the mid-tier maybe, but I doubt the big boys will...

Monday, 27 October 2008

Search providers (adding MOSS search to IE7/Firefox)

Just thought I would share something I knocked together earlier today...

 

This based partly on this from Mark Harrison and a sample from Greg Griffiths

 

So, you'd like the nice IE/Firefox search box to include searching your MOSS site(s)?? You can do Mark's registry manipulation (which if you control the desktops is easy enough through GPO) or something a little more elegant (IMO!). This works well for public facing or internal deployments (i.e. where authentication is seamless, because it's Windows Integrated or Anon!) but I would see issues with the user experience for an FBA deployment (be that SharePoint FBA or ISA FBA), but the functionality may be worthwhile enough to suffer with poor UX?? I guess "it depends" ...

 

Firstly, you need to know the URL's for your search result pages (one for "content" results and one for people) in MOSS, e.g. http://portal/searchcenter/pages/mainresult.aspx and http://portal/searchcenter/pages/staffresult.aspx (yours are likely to be different).

 

Then the need to know the format of the query passed to these pages, e.g. http://portal/searchcenter/Pages/Results.aspx?k=queryhere&s=All%20Sites note the query strings passed, in this example we have:

 

  • k= "the textual query" (queryhere)

  • s= the scope

  •  

Then you need to build the XML file that you will later reference... use the sample below:

 

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OpenSearchDescription xmlns="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/">
    <ShortName>Sample Search</ShortName>
    <Description>Sample for searching your MOSS sites</Description>
    <Url type="text/html" template="http://portal/searchcenter/Pages/Results.aspx?k={searchTerms}&amp;s=All%20Sites"/>
</OpenSearchDescription>


 



Warning: be careful with reserved characters in the XML - e.g. & which is common when using query strings, replace this with &amp; to avoid issues!



 



Edit the following fields to suit your environment:



 





  • ShortName





  • Description





  • URL template





  •  





You then need to upload this XML into a document library (for example) within MOSS or publish it to a URL by other means, whatever floats your boat, if using a MOSS library ensure you have checked in and published the file (if needed).



 



All you need to do then is reference the XML file in some java script, see example below:



 



<a href="javascript:window.external.AddSearchProvider('http://portal/resources/search_sample.xml');">Add Search (sample)</a>




This can be done either in a CEWP or a HTML FC, or in a normal HTML/ASP/ASPX/etc page (again, whatever floats your boat!)



 



There you have it, an installable search provider that searches your MOSS sites, you can, as shown above, have multiple result pages (e.g. dedicated to certain search functions like people search) or multiple scopes, this sample above allows you to leverage either method, depending on your own configuration. The only thing to be wary of is that each page/scope will require a different provider, also, if you have followed normal practice and have implemented tabbed searching in MOSS it's probably wise to include the "catch all" page in the provider and allow the users to filter the result base using tabs...



 



Hope this was useful...



 



There is a live and working example below:



 



XML:



 



<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OpenSearchDescription xmlns="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/">
    <ShortName>Search Matt Groves Blog</ShortName>
    <Description>Sample for searching Matt Groves Blog</Description>
    <Url type="text/html" template="http://www.sharepointblogs.com/search/SearchResults.aspx?q={searchTerms}&amp;s=104"/>
</OpenSearchDescription>


 



Java script:



 



<a href="javascript:window.external.AddSearchProvider('http://samples.poweredbysharepoint.co.uk/Pages/src_mg_blog.xml');">
<img src="http://samples.poweredbysharepoint.co.uk/images1/com_serv_logo.jpg">Add Search Provider (Matt Groves Blog)</a>


 



Demo: http://samples.poweredbysharepoint.co.uk/Pages/searchblog.aspx (opens in new window)

Saturday, 4 October 2008

MOSS Service accounts

I recently attended a great 2 day event at MSFT, the UK User Groups came together and had 2 full days of presentations, demo's and discussions, I found it very beneficial, the SUGUK sessions were great and I thought Mark Wilson's session on Hyper-V was excellent...

 

There were several questions raised in the SharePoint track chalk and talk sessions about service accounts so I thought I'd clarify things a little bit... I'll also see if a SUGUK session on Content DB's and Licensing is warranted, there were a few questions around these topics and I was asked about them by several people during the breaks, watch this space...

 

MOSS requires several service accounts, fact. Running everything as one user isn't good practice and isn't a good idea, even for dev/demo - IMO at least, Colin and Nick don't completely agree...

So, how many accounts do you need to run MOSS? The answer: "it depends..."

(yes, I am a technical consultant, since when did you expect me to actually answer a question?)

 

Seriously though, it does depend on your scenario, but at least 6...

 

Here a table that breaks down what you need:

 

Account Type

Purpose

Suggested Service Account

MOSS Farm Account

Server Farm Account

This account needs some SQL permissions granting: dbcreator and security admin (do not grant this account SA!)

If using ADACM this is the account used for creating objects in the OU specified - so you'll need to delagate permissions on the OU to this user.

_Serv_MOSSFarm1

MOSS App Pool

Identity for the any MOSS Web App Application Pool(s)A separate process identity should be used for each content Web App (this allows for greater security and auditing). Using the site name in the naming is not advisable as although this may make troubleshooting and auditing easier it reduces security by showing the relationship between App Pools and Web Apps.

_Serv_MOSSAppPool1
_Serv_MOSSAppPool2
_Serv_MOSSAppPool3

SSP Service Account

SSP service account

_Serv_MOSSSSP1

SSP App Pool

Identity for the SSP Web App Application Pool

_Serv_MOSSSSPAppPool1

MOSS Search

Account under which the Office SharePoint Server Search runs under

_Serv_MOSSSearch1

MOSS Content Access

Account used to access content sources to be crawled and indexed. Need to grant this account permission to any NON-MOSS content sources (e.g. NTFS file share, Exchange public folder, websites etc...)Separate accounts may be configured for access to specific content sources using crawl rules.

_Serv_MOSSCrawl1

User profile & Properties Access Account

Account used to access Active Directory for the Profile import

_Serv_MOSSDSA1

WSS Search

Account which the Windows SharePoint Services Search service runs under. Due to the fact the Office SharePoint Server Search service is running this will only index the WSS Help files.

_Serv_MOSSWSSSearch1

WSS Content Access

Account used by WSS search service to crawl content.

_Serv_MOSSWSSCrawl1

MOSS Install Account

Account used to install MOSS and perform all the required configuration changes.As this account will be used to install and configure the SharePoint servers it must be granted local admin on all farms members and have permissions to the SQL instance.This account can be disabled after installation and configuration is complete (it is not advised to delete it).

_Serv_MOSSInstall1

SQL Services

Used to run MS SQL Services

_Serv_SQLSVC1
_Serv_SQLRS1
_Serv_SQLAS1

 

 

Hope this helps!

 

Useful reading:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc263445.aspx

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/934838

Friday, 3 October 2008

web 2.0 in Legal

Myself and Antony Clay recently delivered an excellent (if I do say so myself Stick out tongue) presentation on the use of Web 2.0 technologies in the legal sector.

 

This was delivered at Legal Insight to an audience of top legal IT directors and IT professionals.

 

The presentation was very well received and stimulated a great discussion on topics such as governance (striking the balance between the "open" nature of Web 2.0 and the "control" of information required in a law firm), Second life, Social objects, internal adoption, client/public facing adoption and many other salient points...

 

The audience included illustrious bloggers such as Peter Birley

Wednesday, 24 September 2008

Clean MOSS install: Error 5586 SQL Exception 15123

Just seen a weird error building a clean MOSS VM, running the config wizard after install resulting in a config DB being created but errors being logged.

 

The error refers to the setup routine not being able to set properties within SQL...

 

After a few minutes googling I found the following post from an MVP:

 

http://hinsua.blogspot.com/2008/03/error-5586-sql-exception-15123.html

 

This includes a SQL script to run (which errored due to slightly incorrect syntax), the updating and working script is shown below:

 

exec
sp_configure
'show advanced options', 1;
GO
RECONFIGURE
WITH
OVERRIDE;
GO
sp_configure
'allow updates', 0;
GO
RECONFIGURE
WITH
OVERRIDE;
GO 


 



Thanks Hector!

Friday, 15 August 2008

SUGUK Session - August 2008

The SUGUK session was the largest to date with 140 attendees, I thought it was an excellent session and Eric's presentation of performance considerations when coding was awesome, I picked up some useful stuff that I wish some of my dev's were there to hear ;)

 

My presentation on SharePoint Extranets seemed to be well received, and certainly kicked off some stimulating debate in the Duke of York afterwards!

 

I didn't manage to answer all questions (due to time constraints) but will keep my eye on the SUGUK forums (I would suggest either the Admin forum: http://suguk.org/forums/19/ShowForum.aspx or the Deployment one: http://suguk.org/forums/16/ShowForum.aspx) for anything arising.

 

There were several requests for my deck, this is available here:





Get Adobe Reader (required to open PDF files)


Sunday, 3 August 2008

Content DB's - clearing up some confusion

Just thought I would qualify something, as I have been asked this a few times of late, and sometimes by people whom I would have expected to have understood this...

 

Within SharePoint (v2 or v3) the lowest ratio of content DB’s to Web Applications (virtual servers in v2) is 1:1

  • You have multiple content DB’s for a given web application.
  • You can have multiple site collections in a web application.
  • The lowest ratio of content DB’s to site collections is 1:1
  • You can have multiple site collections in a given content DB (recommended max is 50k – performance drops off after 50k, it isn’t a hard limit)
  • By default you only get 1 content db when you create a web application, you can add more from http://sca:port/_admin/cntdbadm.aspx (SCA > AppMan > Content DB’s) or from STSADM.

 

Where you have multiple content DB’s for a given web application, SharePoint will distribute site collections across the content DB’s.

 

Let’s say you had 3 content DB’s for a web application (DB1, DB2 and DB3).

 

The first site (say a Portal/Intranet at root) will go into DB1.

 

When you create new site collections (these must be collections NOT sub-sites/webs of the “root” Portal) they are distributed (round robin style) to the other content DB’s based on the order of priority (basically the order the content DB’s were created in) and by the number of sites in the content DB’s.

So, “site-A” goes into DB2, “site-B” goes into DB3, “site-C” goes into DB1, “site-D” goes into DB2, round and round we go (like a card dealer!).

 

The logic is not present to distribute site collections based on any attribute (URL path, metadata etc) or size.

 

You could end up in a situation where you have multiple contents DB’s (say 3) but due to bad luck all the large collab spaces end up in DB1. Therefore you will have a even distribution (numerically) of site collections across the content DB’s but DB1 will be huge while DB2 and DB3 will be small.

Monday, 14 July 2008

SUGUK Session (July 10th)

Thanks to everyone who attended the session last week, and thanks to Steve (et al) for organising...
My slides are available here:

 






Get Adobe Reader (required to open PDF files)



I hope to provide a step-by-step article covering off my demo within a few days (time permitting).

Thanks also to Bill, Todd, Steve, Penny and Andrew for speaking, I was able to see Todd and Bill and thought them both up to their usual high standards!

I missed out on Andrews session on SCRUM but hopefully it may be replayed at another SUGUK session (?).

 

The Golf was good fun, the course was in great condition especially considering the rain we've had, personally -  I was awful, after playing quite well this year I was severely disappointed with my round. Myself, Andrew and Tony won the best group and some Srixon balls courtesy of Lee at Aardvark Resourcing.


Although disappointed with my performance, at least I managed to miss the car park off the first tee - which Andrew didn't ;)

Friday, 27 June 2008

SUGUK Event, July 10th...

We have a once a year user group evening lined up in July with two rooms , 6 sessions and speakers including Todd Bleeker , Bill English , Penny Coventry , Andrew Woodward , Steve Smith and I.

 

It will be a great evening following on from the Golf day with lots of great knowledge being passed on to everyone with some great sessions. The hotel venue is easy to get to from the M1 , M6 , A14 , A5 and the nearest station is Rugby just 50 minutes from London Euston.If anyone is coming up on the train post a comment on the SUGUK site and we can try to organise some transport to pick you up.

 

To see the agenda and to sign up for the event go here - http://suguk.org/forums/thread/11614.aspx

 

My session will follow on from my Extranet session (where I covered lots of functional, non-functional and business challenges with authentication being either SharePoint or ISA FBA). I will be covering configuring WSS for 'basic over SSL' and anonymous access...

Monday, 12 May 2008

SharePoint licensing - a common question I get asked...

SharePoint licensing is available in 8 models (if you count all flavours of SharePoint).

List pricing shown, your Select/EA “true” costs will vary significantly (i.e. will probably be much lower!).

 

WSS – licensed as part of the Windows OS on which it runs, no additional licensing is required unless you use SQL standard/enterprise. A single server solution (using SQL Embedded) requires only the Windows Server license ($1000 per server assuming Win2k3 R2 Standard Edition) and CAL’s (user/device for each user, $40 each assuming purchased in 20 Cal packs). The option of external users can be covered under the Windows External connector license ($2000 per server), this negates the need for CAL’s for external (non-employee) users. It is worth noting that other servers supporting the WSS implementation may require licensing (such as AD or SQL servers) but this depends entirely on the solution.

 

MOSS Standard – Uses server/CAL licensing model. Each server in the farm (running MOSS) requires a server licence ($4500 per server, note: there is no price difference on Standard vs Enterprise MOSS on the server, the cost is weighted on the CAL). Each user/device requires a CAL ($100 per user/device), this is often included as part of the “Core CAL” in EA’s. As it is unlikely that MOSS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).This can be used for Internal Intranets, Portals, collaboration and BI platforms (etc) and for authenticated access extranets, it cannot be used for public facing (anonymous access) web sites.

 

MOSS Enterprise – Uses server/CAL licensing model. Each server in the farm (running MOSS) requires a server licence ($4500 per server, note: there is no price difference on Standard vs Enterprise MOSS on the server, the cost is weighted on the CAL). Each user/device requires an Enterprise CAL ($75 per user/device), this is in addition to the “Standard” CAL, the CAL cost for Enterprise MOSS could therefore be taken as $175 . As it is unlikely that MOSS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).This can be used for Internal Intranets, Portals, collaboration and BI platforms (etc) and for authenticated access extranets, it cannot be used for public facing (anonymous access) web sites.

 

MOSS FIS – The MOSSFIS (MOSS For Internet Sites, pronounced MOSSFIZZ) is a server only (no CAL) license for MOSS ($41,000 per server in the farm running MOSS). As it is unlikely that MOSS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).MOSS FIS can be used for public facing (i.e. anonymous access) web sites and for authenticated extranets, it cannot be used for internal only systems (i.e. Internal Intranets, Portals, collaboration and BI platforms, etc).

 

IFS – InfoPath Forms Server, uses server/CAL licensing model. Each server in the farm (running IFS) requires a server licence ($4500 per server). Each user/device requires a CAL ($55 per user/device). As it is unlikely that IFS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).This can be used for Internal forms (surfaced on Intranets and via LOB systems, etc) and for authenticated access extranets, it cannot be used for public facing (anonymous access) web sites.

 

IFS FIS – The IFS FIS (IFS For Internet Sites) is a server only (no CAL) license for IFS ($22,000 per server in the farm running IFS). As it is unlikely that IFS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).IFS FIS can be used for public facing (i.e. anonymous access) web sites and for authenticated extranets, it cannot be used for Internal only forms (surfaced on Intranets and via LOB systems, etc).

 

MOSS Search Standard – The MOSS for Search Standard Edition (MOSS with only search functionality, no ECM, WCM or BI – being replaced with Search Server, see: http://www.microsoft.com/enterprisesearch/) is a server only (no CAL) license for MOSS SSE ($8,000 per server in the farm running MOSS SSE). As it is unlikely that MOSS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).

 

MOSS Search Enterprise – The MOSS for Search Enterprise Edition (MOSS with only search functionality, no ECM, WCM or BI – being replaced with Search Server, see: http://www.microsoft.com/enterprisesearch/) is a server only (no CAL) license for MOSS SEE ($58,000 per server in the farm running MOSS SEE). As it is unlikely that MOSS will be deployed without separate SQL (SQL Standard or SQL Enterprise) additional licenses for SQL will be required (see SQL licensing below). All Windows Servers used in delivering the solution require licensing (both server and CAL).

 

SQL Server – SQL is required for SharePoint (all flavours). WSS will install SQL Embedded by default (although can use SQL Standard or Enterprise). Due the size (in terms of user bases and content storage requirements) of most MOSS implementations either SQL standard or SQL Enterprise is required. With SQL 2005 a 2 node cluster can be created on Standard Edition reducing the requirement for SQL Enterprise in many instances. SQL can be licensed in 2 ways, server/CAL or CPU. Assuming Standard Edition, the Server licence (for each server running SQL, or in a clustered scenario each active node) is around $1000 per server, with CAL’s at around $170. The CPU (sockets, not cores) licence is around $6000/CPU (so a server with 2 quad cores would require 2 CPU licences). The Windows Servers on which SQL is running also require licensing.

 

Windows Server - A server licence for each windows server - don't forget "peripheral" systems, one's that are often missed are ISA and AD... A windows CAL is needed by each user/device accessing the "system". Windows Server 2003 R2 Standard will cost $1000 with CAL's at $40 per user/device assuming purchased in 20 CAL packs...

Hope this is helpful ;)

 

[Edit - I forgot to mention that due to a change in licencing from MSFT you can now run both MOSS in Server/CAL and FIS licencing models on a single farm]

Thursday, 8 May 2008

This IS the droid you're looking for...

It is official.

 

You can forget Vista Media Centre (although it is very good!), forget iPod's, forget 52" plasma TV's, forget XBox 360, forget Wii and forget Sky+ HD.

 

This is THE thing to have in your living room: http://www.red5.co.uk/R2D2-Projector-pr-318.html

 

I want need one.

 

Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi...

Tuesday, 29 April 2008

Is "web 2.0" killing the internet?

WebSiteOptimisation.com say:

 

Within the last five years, the size of the average web page has more than tripled, and the number of external objects has nearly doubled. While broadband users have experienced faster load times, dial-up users have been left behind. With the average web page sporting more than 50 external objects, object overhead now dominates most web page delays.

Read it: http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/average-web-page/

 

I am somewhat sceptical reading a report like this from a company that offer a solution to the problem identified in the report, but it makes for interesting reading...

 

I am delighted at the irony of this though, the success of the internet and adoption of web 2.0 is going to kill it... beautiful... I wonder what Bill Hicks would say?

Friday, 4 April 2008

BI? What does it mean to you?

Great post from Johan Pellicaan on BI:

 

http://officeapplications.typepad.com/bridge/2008/03/knowing-me-know.html

 

[EDIT: after some "interesting" comments and emails I want to clear up that "BI" is this post means Business Intelligence, nothing to do with sexual persuasion]

Tuesday, 11 March 2008

…and now for something completely stupid...

Every now and again I do something so stupid I question my status as a sentient being...

 

This time, I was quickly knocking a demo together and needed to remove the search input box from all pages, 15 seconds later I have completed my hacking of the master page in SPD and published the file...

 

Then I noticed all my list views stopped working... Angry

 

The usual MOSS error (unexpected error occurred Angry) was of little use, after enabling stack trace (thanks Vince Wink) I tracked it down to the missing search content placeholder (which I had just deleted from the mp - DOH!)...

 

So, lesson learned... if you don't think you need a content placeholder (even if you're sure) don't delete it, move it down to the bottom of the mp under:

 

<asp:panel visible="false" runat="server">


 



Thanks to Jason for pointing me in the right direction...

Saturday, 8 March 2008

Using the XML webPart in WSS to render RSS

Been asked a few time recently about RSS in WSS (I think one of the main reasons for confusion is the product comparison guide published by MSFT).

 

So, RSS in WSS, the consumption thereof. Is easy.

 

Simply add the XML webpart into your webpart zone, add the source URL to whatever you want (I was after Google news RRS) and then all you need a transform.

 

I am generally very lazy, so grabbed someone else's XSL:

http://www.dnncreative.com/Portals/0/tutorials/RSS/RSSDisplayHtml.zip

 

Add this to the XSL Editor and you're done.

 

This isn't the best way of surfacing RSS in WSS, but it is probably the quickest...

 

EDIT: check this: http://www.sharepointrss.com/ (thanks Derek)

Tuesday, 19 February 2008

PDF ifilter for x64

There has been a bit of an issue with a full x64 MOSS farm, mainly due to the lack of ifilters for x64, the obvious (and also, importantly, tested and supported) workaround being the use 32bit for the Index server and x64 elsewhere.

 

The most common third party ifilter needed by clients (in my experience) is for PDF documents, Adobe were very slow to respond and deliver an x64 ifilter (in fact they still haven't) but now have a publishing work around to running v8.1 ifilter on x64, see this:

 

http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/PDF_iFilter_8_-_64-bit_Support

 

there is no mention of the threading issue that existed previously, hopefully this is resolved now but our testing may highlight this as still existing, will post if this is the case...

Thursday, 14 February 2008

SUGUK session (Feb 12th 2008)

The SUGUK session (Tuesday 12th) went well! Big Smile

Hopefully everyone found the session informative, the feedback forms show very positive feedback (attendees: feel free to post your thoughts here). If you missed the session it may be repeated (if there is demand) at future events.

Thanks to all who attended, especially those who travelled a distance to listen to me, I hope you found it beneficial and enjoyed our hospitality... For those who were after the deck, it's available below:




Get Adobe Reader (required to open PDF files)