Reimaging vs. Reporting & Software Updates

Author Message
z

  • Total Posts : 1
  • Scores: 0
  • Reward points : 100
  • Joined: 2/3/2012
  • Status: offline
Reimaging vs. Reporting & Software Updates Friday, February 03, 2012 8:03 PM (permalink)
0
I recently got SCCM 2007 R2 configured properly and have run reports and pushed software with it. My organization has historically used Ghost to reimage clients to make sure they have all the right software on them and security policies applied. I've noticed problems using Ghost where not all clients get the exact same image (hundreds of clients so multiple people working on it) or they rename the computer wrong or we end up with IP conflicts (static IPs). Since they last used Ghost we have also installed SCCM and HBSS on all the clients which would sort of be wiped out if we reimaged. ???I haven't tested if the SCCM OS deployment works for me yet, but it seems to be the same as Ghost. I want to know if it makes more sense to use SCCM to track what is on each computer and then add or remove software as necessary instead of pushing out a new image. This way all the clean up work I've been doing stays and we don't have to physically go to each computer to get it renamed and back on the domain. What do you experts suggest?
 
 
#1
    skissinger

    • Total Posts : 4645
    • Scores: 448
    • Reward points : 75260
    • Joined: 9/13/2001
    • Location: Sherry Kissinger
    • Status: offline
    Re:Reimaging vs. Reporting & Software Updates Saturday, February 04, 2012 6:23 AM (permalink)
    0
    I agree.  What it sounds like, to me, is that you have a process in place where someone (I'm guessing years and years ago) decided that the "best practice" was to have a) static IP (instead of dhcp) and b) lock the name of a computer to some arbitrary physical characteristic, like "the room the machine lives in".
    So, yes, I think you and your co-workers should revisit some of those years-old processes.  I'm not sure if there are technical reasons for static IP, but I'm guessing not.  And I have yet to understand any technical reason told to me for naming a computer something specific.  Those naming conventions always boil down to "so Bob and find the computer when he has to visit it".  Well, does that minor inconvenience of spending 2 minutes to lookup a report for top console user to figure out it's John's pc, vs, (apparently) hours and hours of work maintaining this "easy system" worth it?
    Long term, sure, start playing around with OSD (and MDT by extension).  You'll be pleasantly surprised.  There are lots of tools out there--even, I suppose--prompting the tech (you) to put in a static IP and a specific computer name (if you can't change your process).
    mofmaster@myitforum.com
    My Blog
    Microsoft MVP - ConfigMgr
     
    #2
      Online Bookmarks Sharing: Share/Bookmark

      Jump to:

      Current active users

      There are 0 members and 2 guests.

      Icon Legend and Permission

      • New Messages
      • No New Messages
      • Hot Topic w/ New Messages
      • Hot Topic w/o New Messages
      • Locked w/ New Messages
      • Locked w/o New Messages
      • Read Message
      • Post New Thread
      • Reply to message
      • Post New Poll
      • Submit Vote
      • Post reward post
      • Delete my own posts
      • Delete my own threads
      • Rate post

      2000-2012 ASPPlayground.NET Forum Version 3.9