Mark Minasi's Reader Forum
Mark Minasi's Reader Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Search | FAQ | Minasi Forum RSS Feed
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 General Forum
 Miscellany (Technical)
 Clean up forum?
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

aval
Honorable But Hopeless Addict

USA
3410 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  12:54:38 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I noticed that on one hand, there are more and more questions about Windows 8.

On the other hand, there is a section for NT Workstation and NT Server, and separate sections for W2K3 and W2K3 R2. Last post in the NT section goes back to 2008. The W2K sections are not very active either. It is not likely that their popularity increase much in the year to come.

Could some of these be archived to remove clutter and make room for newer technologies (Windows 8 for one)?

jadgate
Major Contributor

USA
962 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  1:03:07 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Dave-

Agreed, Windows 8 should probably be listed as a new OS. However, some time ago, I requested a forum topic on mobile devices -I believe it is under the hardware area, so keep that in mind when thinking about logical layout and where stuff should go (I was thinking more about phones, laptop like devices, and IPADs when I requested it). So keep that in mind as well. The forum moderators will have to create and someone will have to agree to moderate it.

I suppose we could create a "legacy OS" section and put anything more than 12 years old (XP is still being used in many environments). I can assure you that Windows 2000 is alive and well were I work as well, although you are correct, I haven't posted anything on it in some time (left it behind at home in about 2005).

Later,

Jim

James Adgate, CISSP
Cyber and Information Security
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
IT Security Policy (ISO)Risk Mitigation for Enterprises
IT Auditor and Compliance Specialist

http://linkedin.com/in/jamesadgatech
Go to Top of Page

wkasdo
Administrator

Netherlands
7673 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  1:28:22 PM  Show Profile  Click to see wkasdo's MSN Messenger address  Reply with Quote
Agreed. I dropped a line to the powers-that-be.

Make it as simple as you can, but not simpler -- Albert Einstein
Go to Top of Page

aval
Honorable But Hopeless Addict

USA
3410 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  1:48:22 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Yes, the layout seems to be challenging.

If I were a new forum member wanting to post a question about Vista or Windows 2008, I would scroll down, down, down and see that in the "HALP" section, there is a forum for Active Directory (OK), Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2, then a whole bunch of other subjects.

I might end up posting my Windows 2008 question in the Windows 2008 R2 section. I'd guess that for 80-90% of the time, it wouldn't matter. How many people asking questions know if the subject is a R2 subject only or not?

Otherwise, besides the newbie or even intermediate user not knowing whether the feature is W2K3 R2 specific, or W2K8 R2 specific,
wouldn't it be neater to have something like:

Active Directory
Group Policy
[...]

Windows 2003
Windows 2000 R2 (unless you could merge these)
Windows 2008
Windows 2008 R2
Windows 8 Server

Then for client OS:

Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Windows 8

I would say Windows 2000 and before is legacy - my opinion - and could all be placed... well, somewhere out of the way.

I also notice things like "Storage" being in the Windows section but "Networking Hardware" being in the "Other HALP" section. Yet storage is no less generic than networking hardware.

On the other hand, WSUS is a specifically Windows technology. For some reason, it is in the "Other HALP" section.
Go to Top of Page

aval
Honorable But Hopeless Addict

USA
3410 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  2:06:19 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
OK, looking at storage, I see we might be talking about Windows specific concepts like DFS and NTFS, as well as something more generic or non-windows (NAS or SAN device from NetApp or EMC) but once again, who is going to think:

"I'm working with Windows 2008 and have a question about DFS. Since this is Windows 2008 (and not Windows 2008 R2) question, I should post in the Windows 2008 section (and not the R2 section). But wait a second! I see there is a section on Storage, and reading more carefully, I see that DFS is covered in this section."

I must admit the logic is not entirely clear to me: Windows 2008 questions in the 2008 section, R2 questions in the R2 section (if you know the difference), unless it has to do with storage, then post in the storage section? Or if it has to do with networking, then post in the networking section - which unlike Storage, is in the non-Windows "HALP" section?
Go to Top of Page

lady_mcse
Old Timer

659 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  2:26:14 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Aaah yes, the age-old problem of data organization. This is why I like SharePoint so much. You're no longer boxed into linear "Folder" structures, instead your files get tagged with metadata that you can filter and sort on. So those occasions where maybe it's both Windows 7 and Server 2000, I don't have to pick one or the other.

Then again, for a forum like this, how many of us have landed here to post questions because a search crawler hit upon a phrase we were looking for, rather than saying "hey, let's go to Minasi's forum and look in the Windows 2000 folder"?

I for one hardly ever look at the folder structure, and tend to go only by currently active topics. Doesn't matter to me if your Windows 7 question is in Windows 2000, I'll probably only see it if I was using search or saw it in the active topics list.

As for archiving ... those of us who are still supporting 2003 technology might not want to see those threads go away forever. (Groan.)

Anne O'Day
MCITP: SharePoint 2010
Go to Top of Page

aval
Honorable But Hopeless Addict

USA
3410 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  2:33:54 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I still have plenty of W2K3 and XP machines to support, so I would draw the line one level lower (either after NT or just after W2K).
Go to Top of Page

timberk
Major Contributor

USA
786 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  3:47:47 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by aval

I noticed that on one hand, there are more and more questions about Windows 8.

.....<snip>.....


fwiw, I concur. Though, not much interest the last time it was suggested:

http://web2.minasi.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=38275&SearchTerms=win,8

~tb
Go to Top of Page

JamesNT
Moderator

USA
3202 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/26/2012 :  8:44:20 PM  Show Profile  Visit JamesNT's Homepage  Click to see JamesNT's MSN Messenger address  Reply with Quote
I agree. If there hasn't been any action in a section in a few years, I would archive it.

Who here runs NT these days?

JamesNT

James Summerlin
www.jamessummerlin.com
Go to Top of Page

Curt
Moderator

USA
6802 Posts
Status: offline

Posted - 03/27/2012 :  12:17:48 AM  Show Profile  Visit Curt's Homepage  Reply with Quote
I have a client with a NT 4.0 TS server.

quote:
Originally posted by JamesNT

I agree. If there hasn't been any action in a section in a few years, I would archive it.

Who here runs NT these days?

JamesNT


Curt Spanburgh
Microsoft Certified Business Solution Specialist.
Dynamics CRM MVP
Contributing Editor, Windows IT Pro

He that is walking with wise persons will become wise, but he that is having dealings with the stupid ones will fare badly.
Proverbs 13:20


Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Mark Minasi's Reader Forum © 2002-2011 Mark Minasi Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.06 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000