BlaiseG

My feedback

  1. 145 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Agent  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    under review  ·  Ken Galvin responded

    Thank you for your very thorough desciption of the issue. We will consider this as a feature request in the future. We prioritize based on feedback like yours – so we encourage others to vote for this feature request.

    BlaiseG commented  · 

    We're impacted by this issue, as well. Particularly for our mobile users who move between retail locations. We use labels for determining which replication share to use, which is based upon IP (i.e., "where am I now?").

    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
  2. 630 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    45 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Agent  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    under review  ·  Ken Galvin responded

    Thank you for your input. Offering both 32 and 64 bit clients would double our Windows agent QA testing time and we are sensitive to the impact of extending test times as it impacts our ability to release full-featured updates at our desired pace. A surprisingly large amount of our customers still need 32bit support today. We are going to continue monitoring this closely to determine the best time to drop 32 bit support (of course older versions of the agent would still be available once we moved to 64 bit). In the meantime, it would be helpful to know specifically what difficulties a 32bit client is causing so we might consider work-arounds in parallel with the 64bit only decision.

    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Yes, there are workarounds available but they shouldn't be necessary: which version of the cscript engine to invoke for vb, which utilities to invoke for reg.exe, properly configuring custom inventory rules, etc. Furthermore, the workaround for Microsoft Direct Access is also sloppy without a native 64-bit agent.

    It seems senseless to not have a native 64-bit client by now. We're not asking to drop 32-bit support either. Figure it out.

    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
  3. 2 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Scripting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    No takers? Please use some votes on this before conference!

    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    C'mon fellow KACE admins, let's bring this one to the top!

    BlaiseG shared this idea  · 
  4. 5 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  SMA (K1000) » General Feedback  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    I actually opened a support case and received an "its by design" explanation. I feel this is more of a 'bug' than a 'feature' that I need to request be added back.

    The ability to multi-select from the devices drop-down is the functional equivalent of the "add all devices" that matched your search criteria prior to 6.0. The inability to add multiple, filtered devices is a productivity killer. I also agree it worked in 6.0 and something changed after upgrading to 6.3.

  5. 36 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Asset Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    We have an enormous challenge with duplicate records in our computer asset table. The issue doesn't occur during bulk asset imports so long as the current PK is selected, However, I want KACE to prevent anyone from attempting to add another record to the computer asset table if the serial number already exists. By default (at least at one time) KACE prevented duplicate computernames but that's not ideal for our environment. This would have to be an opt-in feature and I realize we'd have to clean up our existing table before we could turn it on.

  6. 55 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  7 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Asset Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    We had to develop our own scripts to process a raw USB inventory into the various types of USB peripherals (besides printers). We need to know what peripherals are attached (by model) so that they can be placed on a refresh schedule (or to aid support in troubleshooting issues). I recognize this would be difficult to implement with just a VID and PID combination from raw inventory. However, if we could build our own reference/lookup table, we'd give KACE the smarts it needs to make the data collected into something more human readable/intelligible.

  7. 10 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  4 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Managed Install  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    This would be so beneficial, I've used 3 votes on it. The size of our environment coupled with our inventory interval makes it very difficult to validate the results of a software release to the enterprise. It would be EXTREMELY useful for the agent to run a very quick inventory to report back to the K1 as part of the MI process to confirm that the software was indeed installed BEFORE the next full inventory interval.

    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
  8. 63 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Asset Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    This is under consideration but not planned for the next release, Please continue voting if you’d like to see this feature prioritized for a future release.

    BlaiseG commented  · 

    This idea has been in STARTED status for 2 years. What's the latest? We currently use a custom inventory rule to collect this data with all of the results being in a single field. Ideally, we'd like this to be native functionality to aid in reporting.

  9. 269 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    23 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Agent  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Having been in PLANNED for nearly 4 yrs, the status of this suggestion needs to be changed (despite the fact I support the idea).

    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Our Help Desk and End User Computing teams wish to know what the agent is doing. We typically do not utilize KACE notifications to indicate a script is running or software is being installed to avoid the inevitable confusion by our end users (and the eventual calls to our Help Desk). Our techs would ideally like to peak into an icon into the system tray to confirm a requested action has been completed (e.g., status of script or software installation). This is often difficult when logged into the targeted machine. Having status messages written to a log that can be easily viewed from the system tray icon would be extremely useful.

  10. 660 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    19 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Patch Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
  11. 11 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Managed Install  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG shared this idea  · 
  12. 146 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Patch Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    This is under consideration but not planned for the next release, Please continue voting if you’d like to see this feature prioritized for a future release.

    BlaiseG shared this idea  · 
  13. 11 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  SDA (K2000) » New Features  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    I realize the role of RSAs is being reconsidered. I'm posting this here as a specific item for consideration during those architectural/design discussions.

    BlaiseG shared this idea  · 
  14. 244 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  28 comments  ·  SDA (K2000) » New Features  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Anxiously awaiting this feature...

    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Why was this functionality not 'built-in'? I cannot think of a single use-case where the 'readonly admin' will be used. Enterprise customers need the ability to segregate who does what--the team that builds the images is not the team that deploys the images in our organization.

    I would give this suggestion 3 votes if I had any leftover.

  15. 139 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  11 comments  ·  SDA (K2000) » Feature Enhancements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Had I known this was not possible at the time of implementation, I would have deployed virtual K2s instead of the physical K2s (and leveraged full-VM backups). Instead, I have to rely on 'hope and prayer' that I won't, one day, have to recover from a failed K2200 appliance.

  16. 165 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Backups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    I'll echo the sentiments of Larry and TimM. No need to retype word-for-word. :)

  17. 113 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  7 comments  ·  SDA (K2000) » New Features  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    Replication schedule parity with K1: the K2 replication to remote sites uses bandwidth throttling only. Ideally, we'd like the ability to replicate files more quickly during specific periods (e.g., after hours/weekends when retail locations are closed).

  18. 47 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  SMA (K1000) » Appliance  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG supported this idea  · 
  19. 147 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    BlaiseG commented  · 

    I concur. I would like the ability to tune the content of these e-mails.

    I would also like the ability to send patch download notifications to the techs that manage our patching process.

    I would also like to see those patch download notificaitons contain an organization reference. We have multiple organizations on our K1200 for servers, QA for clients and production for clients. The notifications from each org take a little bit of detective work to correlate.

  20. 106 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    8 comments  ·  SMA (K1000) » Replication  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    under review  ·  Ken Galvin responded

    Thank you for your suggestion. This has been added to the feature request list. We encourage others to vote as we use this input for prioritizing our release plans.

    BlaiseG commented  · 

    I concur. We need the ability to be more selective with what gets replicated to each location. We don't need the same software packages used at our corporate locations replicated to all remote locations.

    I'd also like to see a 'replication only' agent. It's very challenging to have a handful of servers in the organization that is predominately intended to contain only our client systems. We use organizations to segregate servers and client computers given the different teams of people supporting each.

← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base