Microsoft

System Center Configuration Manager Feedback

Suggestion box powered by UserVoice

Jason Sandys

My feedback

  1. 0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Ideas » Operating System Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys commented  · 

    Note that the desire here is actually "asynchronous" and not "synchronous" Synchronous is the current behavior.

  2. 10 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Ideas » Power Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys commented  · 

    As a note here, this wouldn't be a change in the wake-up proxy functionality, it would be a complete re-design as MAC ownership/spoofing is a fundamental part of how wake-up proxy works. Wake-up proxy is fundamentally different from how those other products work so while the ask for a peer wakeup methodology that doesn't use MAC ownership is valid, it's much more than change a change. Note also though that because wakeup proxy does use MAC ownership, it is useful and works for scenarios not involving ConfigMgr tasks or traffic so removing MAC ownership swapping would also remove this feature completely as well.

  3. 41 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Noted  ·  7 comments  ·  Ideas » Troubleshooting & Support  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys commented  · 

    To be clear, not every little line from all of the client logs needs to added, just the "major" events as outlined in the original post.

    Jason Sandys supported this idea  · 
    Jason Sandys commented  · 

    This would be even better as events in a Windows event log.

  4. 711 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Noted  ·  30 comments  ·  Ideas » Application Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys supported this idea  · 
  5. 812 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Noted  ·  28 comments  ·  Ideas » Operating System Deployment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys supported this idea  · 
  6. 2 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Ideas » Client Settings  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys shared this idea  · 
  7. 17 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Ideas » Software Updates  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys shared this idea  · 
  8. 62 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Ideas » Software Updates  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys shared this idea  · 
  9. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Ideas » Role Based Access & Security  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys shared this idea  · 
  10. 25 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Ideas » Software Updates  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys shared this idea  · 
  11. 243 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Noted  ·  17 comments  ·  Ideas » Application Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys commented  · 

    Why not create a combined collection using include rules and then deploy to it instead? That's the expectation here. Limiting yourself to collections based on locations only is the actual source of your scenario here.

  12. 58 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    9 comments  ·  Ideas » Software Updates  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys commented  · 

    The recommended solution for available deployments is to use a required deployment with a deadline 12 months out -- I filed a DCR and this was the response I got. While I agree that just creating an available deployment would be better, this is pretty much the same thing.

  13. 861 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    36 comments  ·  Ideas » Application Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys supported this idea  · 
  14. 325 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Noted  ·  14 comments  ·  Ideas » Compliance Settings  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jason Sandys supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base