Posts Tagged ‘Enterprise’

Integrating Enterprise Search into Windows 7

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009

One of the things I like about Vista and Windows 7 is the way search has been integrated into almost every part of the interface.  Sure it’s not something you immediately start using, but for me at least it’s really grown into something that I use more than once a day to help find information and save me time.

On top of the ability to search the local disk, one of the great things about the Vista/2008/7/R2 windows family is the ability to federate search across a number of sources. 

What does that mean?  Search federation allows Windows to query against remote data stores without the need to index those locations itself.  Imagine that you wanted to search your SharePoint sites for a document, and you wanted to do it from within Windows.  One way to do this would be to get Windows to index all of the SharePoint content and keep its own index.   That’s not very efficient though, if there is more than one computer each one would need a copy, so in an enterprise that’s a whole lot of duplication. 

With federated search you enter your search query in one place, in this case Windows, and that query is then forwarded on to the other systems which have indexed content.  They then execute the query against their own index and send back the results.  Those results are then displayed back in the original application as if they were searched and indexed locally.  The benefit of this is that it’s much more efficient, each source can have it’s own index and search tool (provided it supports federation of searching) and only the query and results are passed over the network.

So, how do we make use of this?  Well Windows 7 supports search federation in the form of OpenSearch.  Fortunately quite a few different search engines support this, but for the sake of this post I’ll use SharePoint as I’m guessing that one of the more common data sources people will want to search. 

What it looks like
Before I get into how this can be setup and configured, here’s a screenshot of what it looks like in action:

SharePoint Search in Windows 7

This is a screenshot from Windows Explorer on a Win7 a test machine I was using today. First you can see that there’s an addition to the Favourites for your new search.  When you enter something into the search box, the results from the SharePoint location are returned directly into Explorer Window.  If you select one of the files and have the preview pane turned on you get a live preview of the document (the preview pane is something else I really find useful!).

In addition to the view above, you can pin your new search to the bottom of any other results… but more on that later.

So how do you set this up?  Well there’s the manual setup and an automated setup using Active Directory Group Policy.

The Manual Way
For manually setting up a new search location you can create a new OpenSearch Description file which you can then double click to install.  An OpenSearch Description file (.osdx) is an XML document that tells Windows where to send the search terms and how the results should be formatted.  These are fully document here, but I’ve included an example below:

   1: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

   2: <OpenSearchDescription xmlns="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" xmlns:ms-ose="http://schemas.microsoft.com/opensearchext/2009/">

   3: <ShortName>SharePoint Search</ShortName>

   4: <Description>Search SharePoint</Description>

   5: <Url type="application/rss+xml" template="http://yoursharepointsite.com/searchcentre/_layouts/srchrss.aspx?k={searchTerms}&amp;start={startIndex}&amp;cnt={count}"/>

   6: <Url type="text/html" template="http://yoursharepointsite.com/searchcentre/Pages/Results.aspx?k={searchTerms}&amp;page={startPage}&amp;cnt={count}"/>

   7: <ms-ose:ResultsProcessing format="application/rss+xml">

   8: <ms-ose:LinkIsFilePath>-1</ms-ose:LinkIsFilePath>

   9: </ms-ose:ResultsProcessing>

  10: </OpenSearchDescription>

When you double click on this .osdx file, Windows uses the information it contains to create two new files.  The first is a Search Connector (a .searchconnector-ms file) in the “%userprofile%/searches” directory, and the second is a shortcut to it in the “%userprofile%/links” directory.   It’s this shortcut that appears in the ‘Favorites’ folder in to Screenshot above.

The Automated Way

The simplest way to deploy the new search settings out to a number of computers is though Group Policy. 

As the search config is stored within the Search Connector, all you need to do is deploy the .searchcconnector-ms file and shortcut out to your target computers.  There are a few ways to do this, but personally I’d use Group Policy Preferences.  This will give you a good level of control over the targeting of the files, and easily allow you to adjust the settings over time.  You could also use things like logon scripts.

You can configure Group Policy Preferences to deploy files with the User Configuration > Preferences > Windows Settings > Files area of a GPO.  You’ll have to do this as a user based policy as the files must be copied into the User Profile, if you copied the files as a computer policy it would apply before a user was logged on so they would end up in the wrong place.

Within the Files Preferences, you have to specify a source file location and a target location.  For the source location I would tend to use the Netlogon share for your domain (//domain.com/netlogon/) as a copy will be on every domain controller and usually therefore local to the end users.  The target locations should be the same as those described in the manual steps above:

Search Connector: %userprofile%/searches/File.searchconnector-ms

Shortcut: %userprofile%/links/SearchTitle.lnk

As well as the source and target info, you also need to set a few of the other options.  The first is ‘Run in logged on user’s security context (user policy option)’ as this will ensure that the file is copied in context of the user logging on. 

You may also wish to consider whether to set the ‘Remove this item when it is no longer applied’ options so that the files are removed if you decide to remove the policy.

Adding Links to Your Search Connector

Following the steps above will add your new search location into the Favourites folder and allow you to search against it.  You can however also add your new Search Connector to both the ‘Search Again’ links that appear at the bottom of any search results, and to the Start Menu.  This is done by configuring the ‘Pin Libraries or Search Connectors to the ‘Search Connectors’ to the ‘Search Again’ links and the Start Menu’ Group Policy that can be found within the User Configuration > Policies > Administrative Templates > Windows Components > Windows Explorer area.

I hope this has been useful!

Google Aims for the Enterprise

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

 

Gmail_out_of_beta(2)A few months ago I spent a day at Google talking about their products for enterprise customers.  Whilst their products at the time were impressive, there were a few key things that I thought were missing, in fact I posted some thoughts here about what I would do if I were them.  It seems I wasn’t too far off the mark (woohoo).

As they have posted on their blog today, Google have released a host of new features aimed at luring large companies away from the likes of Microsoft Exchange and Lotus Notes.

Over the last few weeks and months there has been support for Blackberrys, Outlook and Offline access.  Now today they have announced support for email delegation and mail retention, both features that companies would look for in an email solution.  Oh and they’ve taken off the ‘beta’ labels!

So what questions remain?  Well there are a few obvious ones like does delegation work with the Outlook integration?  Delegation is one of things that most people won’t use, but those that do will be the PA’s of important people who will make lots of noise if it doesn’t work.  So you want to make any move of email system as easy as possible, Outlook support would be a big help.

The other gap I can see is in the Unified Communications area.  Microsoft have a very good suite of products in the area with Exchange and Office Communications Server, and IBM have a pretty good solution in SameTime.  Google Talk – from what I have seen – isn’t nearly as convincing.  They have the makings of a wider service, but nothing solid as yet.

The good news for Google is that MS’s Online services don’t currently do a great deal in the Unified Comms space, if you want that you need to go with an on premise solution. 

I think I’ve written before that personally I think Microsoft moving Exchange online might be Googles biggest opportunity.  By going online MS are validating the cloud messaging model in a big way, and companies looking to move to Exchange 2010 will have to ask themselves whether to go the traditional server route or go online.  With Google now supporting Outlook as a client, Google is a legitimate alternative to an online Exchange product.

It’ll be interesting to see what MS do to fight off Google.  With Exchange 2010 online and web based versions of Office they have the makings of a great product.  But the pricing will have to be very good, Googles $50 a year per user is hard to ignore.

iPhone Enterprise Deployment

Tuesday, June 30th, 2009

Alongside the release of the V.3 iPhone firmware Apple have also updated their Enterprise Deployment Guide.

If you’re using iPhones within a corporate environment this is a really useful doc.  I provides some good info on how best to configure settings for VPN connections, Exchange access, Wifi settings etc, and also how provision these settings and other applications to your companies iPhones.

One of the interesting changes to the overall solution has been the addition of an ‘activation-only mode’ to iTunes.  This setting configures iTunes to only only activate the iPhone then eject the device.  In combination with some of the other restrictions available both on installation and at runtime (through the parental controls) it goes some way to making iTunes more palatable to businesses.  I can only assume this was added in response to a fairly common complaint from businesses that they didn’t really want to install iTunes on their corporate machines.  Whilst this doesn’t do away with the need, it does help to mitigate some of the concerns around it.

I may write about some of the particular subjects covered in the doc over the next few weeks, but I thought I’d post up the link in case anyone hasn’t seen it.

Smartphone and iPhone polices in Exchange

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

There’s a lot of well deserved buzz about the Exchange 2010 announcements today, but unfortunately this post is more about the present day versions!

I’ve had a few conversations over the past few weeks about managing mobile devices like smartphones and iPhones.  Many companies now have a lot of phones and PDA’s being used to access email, calendars and contacts.  Now I think this is great news, having consistent access to my calendar and contacts from all my phones is fantastic.  From a company perspective though it can pose some challenges. 

With all those devices wandering around the countryside with copies of mailboxes, attachments, address books etc on them, the risk of loosing something important increases.  So how do you go about managing the things?

Fortunately there are quite a few people out there who can help.  There are a number of products out there that will manage phones, PDA’s smartphones etc.  Some will manage just specific devices and others will look after anything that’s even slightly intelligent.  Depending on your size, you can probably also get these as a managed service from people like Brightpoint, so no need to buy kit of your own. 

These dedicated solutions offer a fantastic amount of control over remote devices, including software distribution even remote control.  But the costs do add up. 

If you’re using Microsoft Exchange and Activesync, another option is to look at the management options that they provide out the box.  Since Exchange 2003 you’ve been able to apply polices to devices that connect to Exchange for mail.  This has the advantage that you can apply policies to all devices that connect to Exchange, including those that might be personal phones (of course you’d need to warn people!).

Whilst Exchange doesn’t offer quite the same level of control as something like Mobile Device Manager or mProdigy, for some it will offer enough for free that the dedicated solutions aren’t necessary.

When this subject first came up at work last year I put this table together that shows what options are available from Exchange 2003 through to Exchange 2007 SP1, and on Windows Mobile and iPhone.  The info came from quite a few places, but I can’t remember exactly where so sorry if anyone recognises a bit of it as theirs! 

Unfortunately the table is too big too wide post here directly, but here’s  a copy of the spreadsheet with the info:

‘What will be the most widely adopted Enterprise Mobile Device in 2009?’

Sunday, March 29th, 2009

A few people have written about this over the last few days but I thought I’d mention a few things I’ve not seen mentioned elsewhere.

LinkedInPoll

Over on LinkedIn there’s a Poll asking the question ‘What will be the widestly adopted Enterprise Mobile Device in 2009?’.  Although not that scientific (there’s no accounting for whether the respondents are actually in a position to assess or influence the matter) it does pose some interesting questions, for example is the iPhone ready for widespread enterprise adoption?

I reckon it is, but within limits.  For people that just want a smartphone that will access their mailbox, calendar, contacts and the web then I reckon the iPhone does a fantastic job.  It’s not perfect by any means, but for your average  user it’s fine.  It does pretty much everything Windows Mobile can do but with a tad more style, and without the extra infrastructure/services a Blackberry solution would need.

What’s more, by supporting Microsoft’s ActiveSync protocol not only does it play nicely with Exchange, it also supports Exchange’s basic device management capabilities (enforce pin codes, remote wipe etc).  That support makes the iPhone a lot more acceptable to corporate IS departments – quite how many use device management is another matter…

Of course if you have existing mobile applications you need to support then the iPhone may not fit quite yet.  But business apps are starting to trickle through onto the App Store (Salesforce, Oracle) and with Apples simple model for publishing and distribution I’m sure many more will follow. 

To me though the key thing the iPhone has in its favour are the end users.  Ultimately to most people, phones and smartphones – even their work ones – are personal devices.  And even as a long time Windows Mobile user I have to say that the iPhone walks all over it’s competition as a phone everyone can use and enjoy. 

I’m still looking forward to seeing Windows Mobile 6.5 and 7.0 though… :)

If I was Google…

Friday, March 27th, 2009

Google is I giant, there’s no denying that, but one area where they are only just beginning to make inroads is enterprise IT.  It’s pretty obvious this is where they want to be, after all there’s a huge market to be had there.  A market currently dominated by Microsoft and the thousands of partners that the MS ecosystem supports.

On the face of it Google have a pretty good suite of products for business.  It covers pretty much everything you would need in terms of messaging (email, Calendar, Instant Messaging, Conferencing, email security and spam filtering) and collaboration (word processing, spreadsheets, presentations, video) with large storage allowances and very competitive pricing at $50 per user per year.  Certainly if you were a new business you’d have pretty much everything you’d need for very little up-front cost.

The pricing of the Google services is key.  $50 dollars per user per year for the fully suite of apps, a mailbox, and 25GB of storage for mail and documents is very cheap.  As a comparison MS’s current hosted Exchange model is $10 per user per month just for a 5GB mail box.  You can bundle in SharePoint, Office Communications Server and Live Meeting for a cost of $15 dollars per user per month, but you’d still need to buy MS Office (or equivalent) for each user.

To my mind there are two main obstacles that Google will need to overcome in order to quickly gain some of the enterprise market. 

First the the concept of having everything in the cloud.  Traditionally companies will have built and managed their own systems for mail, storage, etc.  It’s a big jump to start giving that up and relying on services you can’t see or touch in the cloud.  Fortunately most companies are now becoming more open to this, at least for things that can now be considered as ‘commodity’ services like email.  The current economic climate is, if anything, helping cloud services gain some traction.  Companies will be very reluctant to go spending Capex on new servers.  If a service provider can offer the same or better service , with no capital outlay and vastly reduced operational costs (you don’t need to manage servers you don’t own or host) then that’s a very attractive option.  The arguments for and against cloud computing have been done over and over so I won’t go into them again here. 

The second obstacle for Google, in my view at least, is that most people working for companies now will simply be used to Microsoft Office.  Like it or hate it, Office is the probably the single most important app in many companies.  I know from experience that any suggestion of changing it – even just for a new version – has a very serious change management exercise ahead if it’s going to succeed.  Moving from Office is going to put a lot of people off of going to a Google Apps solution. 

So what would I do?  Well I think Google has a lot going for it in its search for the enterprise market.  Strangely one advantage is that MS themselves are about to change the way people can buy Exchange.  As well as a boxed version you’ll buy and install yourself they’ll be selling it as a hosted/managed service.  So once Exchange 14 arrives people will have to start considering cloud services anyway.  Google need to get themselves positioned in peoples minds as the natural alternative to Exchange 14.  Not only in terms of functionality and cost, but in terms of ease of migration.  For some they already are, but it’s not yet an obvious decision.

To do that I think that they need to do a few things.

  1. Make using Google Mail on the backend completely transparent to Outlook users.  Provide a MAPI interface into Google Mail, and make Outlook on Google Mail supports all the same functionality as Exchange.  Things like delegates on mailboxes and calendars may not be used by most, but those that do use them are likely to be important people and their secretaries.  If your project is going to be seen as a success you want to keep the PA’s happy.  I understand that a MAPI interface is coming, but quite how fully featured I’m not sure.
  2. Provide native support for mobile devices.  Whilst the web and Google mobile clients are good, people are used to using the native inbox, contact and calendar tools on their phones.  POP and IMAP support helps, but ‘Push’ email is often seen as important and support for the MS ActiveSync protocol would tick a lot of boxes, especially for Windows Mobile and iPhone.  Again, I understand it will be available for mail, calendar and contacts at some point this year.
  3. Improve the out-the-box tools that are available for migration and ongoing operations.  Whilst Google’s API’s are very good, and will allow you to do most thing you’d want to do, there don’t seem to be many fully featured tools to help migrate hundreds or thousands of mailboxes or calendars.  Whilst changing Exchange isn’t always simple, it is a known quantity.  Personally I’d like to see Google provide a good toolset and not refer back to API’s.  It’ll help them gain the support of the IT guys on the ground.  Maybe these things exist and I’ve not stumbled across them yet?

If Google can become an accepted host for mailboxes with an Outlook client, it’s then a much smaller jump for companies to start using the wider Google Apps package. 

If as part of your $50 a year mail solution you’ve also got access to 25GB of collaborative document storage and some office apps to work with, you’d have to think very seriously the next time you MS licensing agreement come around. 

Whilst Google Apps isn’t going to be a 100% fit for everyone (even within Google!), there’d be a lot of savings there if a subsection of the user base could get by with Google Apps rather than MS Office.

So, what is Enterprise Architecture?

Thursday, February 26th, 2009

Yesterday I spotted a post from Server Management magazine titled ‘What is Enterprise Architecture?’.  It’s a good question, it’s something I’ve been asked more than once.  The answer they gave (in a round-about way) is:

Using one of the more general descriptions I’ve heard, you could say that EA is the Big Picture of the Enterprise, now and in the future. If that is the case, then truly knowing that picture is probably impossible for any individual person.

If I said to you “What is the World?” the question would have almost no meaning. You cannot know what the world is, you can only have a viewpoint onto the world, which is tainted by your personal experiences, your areas of expertise, and your natural biases. So, while the world continues to exist, a true Big Picture of it is inherently impossible.

No wonder architects argue about what EA is. So if I’m asked today what Enterprise Architecture is, probably my best answer would also be my most enigmatic. “It is whatever the Enterprise needs it to be”.

They are right that Enterprise Architecture (EA) represents the big picture, and it does need to be whatever the business needs it to be.  For me however such vague descriptions do nothing to help EA or its practitioners.  If businesses are to invest scarce resources on EA, and IS in general, then I reckon the Architects better have a pretty good description of what they do and what the business will get from it.

In many cases when people talk about Enterprise Architecture they mean Enterprise IS Architecture.  The objective being to better align the IS to business objectives.  In it’s purest form EA can extend that scope out into the business to align non-IS business processes to try and get the most benefit for the organisation.  For a lot of companies that’s a step to far, although there can be fantastic benefits it represents a huge business change so EA remains a primarily IS lead initiative.  At least at first.

So how would I describe EA? 

For me Enterprise Architecture is a framework that helps a business guide decisions on investment and design.  It acts as a link between the overall business strategy and the specific IS strategy.  By specifying processes, standards and interfaces, and defining common IS services, it can guide the design, implementation and operational of IS to best support the objectives and strategy of the business. 

Most importantly EA can’t be static – you can’t just ‘do’ an EA and leave it.  It has to be a living part of the business/IS so it can evolve over time with the business.

Live Mesh Desktop… A pointer to a cloudy future?

Monday, February 16th, 2009

Over the past few weeks I’ve been doing a fair amount of thinking and work about how desktop computing will be delivered in the future.  I doubt we’ll be seeing the end of full-fat desktop and laptop computers anytime soon, but change is definitely in the air.

Within the enterprise thin provisioning of desktops is gaining pace.  Virtual desktops offer significant benefits in utilization, management and energy consumption.  Taken further, blade workstations such as HP’s can also offer performance benefits.  Especially in a world where data is increasing centralised and the workforce increasingly mobile.  The technology now allows true ‘desktop as a service’ solutions to be offered.

But what about the consumer and small business world? 

I’m a big fan of Live Mesh.  I now use it on all of my PC’s and the work Mac to keep a single view of my working docs.  One thing that I’ve always wondered about though is the Live Desktop.  It’s undoubtedly useful as a server side copy of my files but why make it look so much like a desktop?  Is it just to deliver a similar user experience?

image

I would love to see the Live Desktop gain some application functionality.  We already know that browser based versions of the Office applications are on their way with the Office Web applications.  We also know that MS has a huuuuge amount of computing capacity at it’s disposal in the Azure platform. 

Could the Live Desktop (or something like it) be used to deliver a web desktop with both storage for data and the applications to open and use it?  With the capabilities that are coming over the next year or so I can’t see why not. 

Looking at what’s now possible with remote desktop protocols like HP’s Remote Graphics Software (RGS) it may even be possible to take that further and present a desktop running real applications.  It may not be something we’ll see in the short term but many of the components you would need are in place:

- Significant amounts of computing power in the cloud – yep
- Broadband to the end-point – getting there… but yep
- Efficient display protocols – yep
- People storing data in the cloud for fast access – yep
- Virtualisation layers to protect the host environment – yep
- Application virtualisation to protect the host and other apps – yep

It’s going to be an interesting 18 months I reckon.

Rules of Engagement for Social Media

Wednesday, January 28th, 2009

I spotted this a few weeks ago but forgot to post about it – fortunately a conversation at work today reminded me!

The rise of social media and its use in both our social and professional lives has caused some organisations a headache over the past few years.  Many have found it difficult to know how to react to this new form of media.  Should they allow its use at work?  Should they block it?  What if someone talks about the company or it work online?  To be fair, they’re not always easy questions to answer.

More enlightened companies will embrace this part of the internet – after all it’s not going to just disappear – and put in place guidelines or rules to help protect the company and it’s employees. 

There are a few good examples of these sorts of policy around, one of the best can be found over at Edelman.  A few weeks ago however I stumbled across this from the US Air Force

air_force_web_posting_response_assessment 

Personally I think this is a good, pragmatic approach to take.  It recognises the various characters you’ll find online and provides some sensible guidance for how to evaluate the conversation and whether to respond.

Having read a bit further it turns out that the USAF has some pretty lofty ambitions for its online presence, in effect preparing every airman to be an online communicator.  Someone who can support and promote the USAF online.  I think you’d be hard pressed to find many other organisations which actively encourage their employees to promote the company ‘brand’ online.  It’s a refreshing approach.

Links:
USAF on Twitter
Air Force Live blog
YouTube Channel
Podcasts

Hat tip to David Meerman Scott who has some good info on the subject (I can’t’ remember who’s tweet pointed me at his site though – sorry!)

Exchange 14

Tuesday, January 20th, 2009

Last week the next version of Exchange broke cover with a blog entry over on the Exchange team blog and video on Technet Edge.  The video has been posted quite a lot over the last few days, but it’s pretty interesting so I thought it was worth speaking about.

Exchange 14 is shaping up to be a huge change from the application we know and (most of the time) love.  Architecturally the biggest difference is that 14 is designed to run in the Cloud on MS’s Software + Services platform.   Of course you’ll still be able to buy it and run it locally, but the option is there to take the infrastructure components out of your buildings.  What’s more you’ll be able to run both scenarios and split your users between them.

This could be a huge advantage for some companies.  For example if you’re running a global company but with segregated IT organisations each region would be able to deliver mail services in the way that best suit that region. 

There are a heap of other changes in functionality too, both from the techie side and the end user experience.  From what I understand there are things like live mail box moves and federation between Exchange organisations for shared free/busy info.

From a user perspective webmail is much improved (again!) and includes things like Presence, and Out-of-office notifications are see proactively before an email is sent.  There’s also some interesting stuff around translation between languages.