User Profile
GlenB
Brass Contributor
Joined Jun 11, 2021
User Widgets
Recent Discussions
Re: Number of unread chats etc. not showing on the taskbar icon.
We have created a master ticket in the feedback portal for this. Please consider signing in, upvoting and commenting on it. The only way to get this on the roadmap is to get this feedback item boosted up enough that Microsoft sees it's a priority. https://feedbackportal.microsoft.com/feedback/idea/da4db001-3f80-ee11-a81c-000d3ae46fcb Glen42KViews1like0CommentsRe: Hyper-V Server 2022
I'm not trying to be an apologetic for Microsoft here, but as I read back over this thread I've seen a lot of people assert that Microsoft "does not care." I think that it's inaccurate to make that claim. The very presence of Elden_Christensen - who is a significant part of the Hyper-V effort at Microsoft - in this thread shows that Microsoft does care, is engaging and is listening. Like many who have posted in this thread over the many months it's been here, I have experienced sadness and frustration at many changes Microsoft has made, on many fronts. I use Windows Server, Hyper-V, and Windows 11. I use Outlook, New Outlook, and Teams. I use Azure, Entra, and many 365 products. And I, too, am a Microsoft Partner, with (now legacy) Silver status. Microsoft has made a lot of changes in all of these areas over time that have saddened me personally. But the reason I've been sad and upset is really because the changes Microsoft has made have inconvenienced me personally or destabilized my world in some way, not because I've been attacked, mistreated, or experienced something significant at Microsoft's "hands." I put "hands" in quotes because Microsoft isn't a "person", it does not "care" or "not care." It is not some individual out there maliciously taking things away from us and laughing evilly at the result. Nor, we must remember, is Microsoft a charity. Microsoft DOES do many charitable things, but it is not a charity in the sense that it can continue to devote employee time to a free product that literally generates no revenue for them. It has done this for a long time, and we've liked it, but I can't help but wonder what the opportunity cost was. What else might they have done with those person-hours had they been shifted elsewhere? Microsoft has now asked itself that question, and made changes in response. We don't like this change, but that's not because we've been hurt. This thread has made exhaustively clear that we have choices. We can move to the new Microsoft HCI product, we can pay for a Windows Server license. We can use Hyper-V on Windows 11 for free. We can use XCP-NG. I've done them all, I use them all, they all work, they're all good options. We lose nothing here, we're not being cast adrift. We're upset here not because there is any real impact to us, we're upset primarily because our unjustified sense of entitlement is offended. Instead, we have to remember that Microsoft is a corporation. It is one of the largest corporations in the world, and it's got many different pressures, both internally and externally, that shape and inform its direction. Microsoft's primary job is to grow as a company, to take care of its employees, sell products to its customers, and make money for its shareholders. I'm not an employee, but I am a shareholder, and I want Microsoft to make decisions that will grow the business and the value of my fractional ownership therein. I am a partner, and as a partner, I want the same thing. I'm also a customer, and as a customer I want good products that I can use... and because we live in a global culture, I understand and expect that I will need to pay for those products if I expect them to be good and usable. Only in my role as a smaller business, and/or an individual who likes to tinker with free stuff do I want Microsoft to keep giving us a free Hyper-V. But just because I want a thing doesn't mean Microsoft can or even should pivot just to give me those things. Microsoft is making decisions based on many factors, and what we in this thread want IS one of them. But what we in this thread want simply isn't a large enough factor to override all the other factors that went into this decision. If Microsoft makes bad decisions, customers will vote with their wallets, and Microsoft will see that, and adjust. They've done so many times in the past, and will do so in the future as well. Their current size and success speaks to the correctness of many decisions they've made, decisions which often seemed wrong or problematic at first. Here's a fun little example to illustrate this. Most of us here will be familiar with Microsoft 365, and the recently-added "New Outlook for Windows." Did you know that, in a stunning reversal of precedent and in seeming violation of their own policies, someone at Microsoft made the decision that New Outlook for Windows would no longer support Business Basic users? That's right: If you have a Microsoft 365 Business Basic account (or E1, or F1, or EXO P1, or EXO P2, or any of the "small" yet PAID accounts), you cannot use New Outlook for Windows? The program literally and actively blocks you, with a message making clear that the blocking is because of your license. Someone at Microsoft made that decision. You can see the details here, if you like: https://feedbackportal.microsoft.com/feedback/idea/2f7925cb-3a80-ee11-a81c-000d3ae46fcb Imagine the thinking there! Someone actually said, "Let's support free Outlook, let's support our competitors like GMail and Yahoo, let's even support iCloud. But our paying Business Basic users, who give us money each month? Naah." People are going to leave Microsoft 365 over that (as you'll see in the comments in that post) and it's going to hurt MIcrosoft's bottom line. I objected to that change and started that thread because I believe the choice is wrong, and will cause Microsoft losses, and I want to prevent those losses. But Microsoft didn't make that choice to be malicious or because they don't care. They made that choice for a reason, and if they're right, they'll prosper and grow, and if they're wrong, they'll figure it out and adjust. With Free Hyper-V, the value is less clear. Elden has already explained - several times - that there is a new product out there and, yes, it's not free, but the paying workloads are going to be taken care of. We who are used to getting stuff for free don't like that, but ultimately, if the choice Microsoft has made to stop giving Hyper-V away for free turns out to impact their bottom line, they will figure it out and adjust. Meanwhile what we have here is a situation where a free product, to which Microsoft has committed countless person-hours in the past, yet which has clearly generated zero direct revenue for them, ever, is being withdrawn, impacting only people who weren't paying for it anyway. And yet, despite that, we have one of the leaders of the Windows Server team at Microsoft patiently sitting in this thread, month after month, responding to our messages, being present, and engaging. Which is more, I think, than ANY other large corporation would do, under these circumstances. So while I understand and even to some degree share in the frustration over changes (Don't move MY cheese! Not in MY backyard!), I think that in all of our interactions with Microsoft we should remember the context and the larger picture. The PEOPLE at Microsoft absolutely DO care about what's happening in every part of their company, and DO care about people, including us. But, just as we often have to in our own jobs and lives, they have to sort their priorities and make hard decisions that not everyone is going to like. Reducing that to "they don't care" just doesn't track, and it's not an accurate summation. We need to stay focused on the big picture here. We've provided our opinions about the impact of this decision on us and on Microsoft, to Microsoft, and they have listened and personally acknowledged us, in this thread! Given how many companies don't do that, we should be grateful that Microsoft does! Now we need to move ahead, and trust the process, and adapt if necessary as things continue to change and grow. Glen4.2KViews2likes17CommentsRe: New Teams: No notification badges in system tray
All - I've done a bit more research, with interesting results. As instructed, my colleagues and I have opened a feedback request here: https://feedbackportal.microsoft.com/feedback/idea/da4db001-3f80-ee11-a81c-000d3ae46fcb . Any of you who are experiencing frustration over this issue should consider upvoting that request. I hope they will listen!59KViews1like0CommentsRe: Microsoft 365 Business Basic in New Outlook
FWIW, I just got confirmation from Microsoft Support that they are not permitting cheaper paid email accounts on new Outlook. No reason was given. My colleagues and I have put in a feedback request here: https://feedbackportal.microsoft.com/feedback/idea/2f7925cb-3a80-ee11-a81c-000d3ae46fcb - anyone encountering this problem should consider upvoting that item.20KViews1like1CommentRe: New Teams: No notification badges in system tray
ASF - The only way you can get that now is to turn notifications on in New Teams settings... AND be sure to leave your Teams Window open or minimized all the time. The circle will show up on the main part of the taskbar if you have a Teams Window open or minimized. However, if you accidentally close the window, even if Teams is set to run in the background, you will not see any circles, which is exactly what I'm complaining about as well.62KViews11likes7CommentsRe: New Teams: No notification badges in system tray
Steven Collier - I'm not trying to be argumentative here, and don't get me wrong, I love Microsoft and I love Teams, but Windows' built-in notification system is used (almost universally) by (almost all) other apps, including Teams Personal. As I know you know, it's been a thing since before Windows 11. Saying that people aren't used to managing windows notifications doesn't really hold water, because it's a universal and well-documented thing on Windows. In the Windows notifications scheme, I could control how the banner appeared, how it behaved, and how it sounded. You can't do that in the current setup. But most importantly of all - under the new setup, notifications do not persist! If I walk away from my computer, and someone sends me a chat, the banner will pop up, sit for 5 seconds, and fade away, leaving NO trace whatsoever. In the Windows notification scheme, my little "alarm bell" icon would light up, and I could open the notification flyout to see my notifications. Now, you can't do that. Because Teams doesn't tie into Windows anymore, Teams notifications don't persist or even exist in the flyout. So if I step away, it could be quite a while before I see the notification. This is why I consider this a negative. I'd love to see the data that leads to the assertion of "universally unpopular" because when I "Bing" around for "Teams Notifications" the only complaints I see are complaints about this current version, and how people don't like it. It is my opinion that Microsoft went too far in the wrong direction, and I echo the sentiment of others who state that this makes New Teams "not ready for prime time" yet.67KViews12likes9CommentsRe: New Teams: No notification badges in system tray
All - This information is off-point. As posted here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/new-teams-known-issues , Microsoft has for some reason removed the connection between Teams and Windows for notifications. The page specifically says: What features are changing? As we improved the client, the experience also improved to align with similar features. Here are some of the changes you see. Classic Teams New Teams Post level notifications within a channel Users can no longer opt in or opt out of receiving notifications at a channel post level. Windows notifications Teams notifications are now fully served from Teams and all notifications preferences are handled within Teams Settings. I don't know why Microsoft considers this an "improvement", but since fixing this isn't on their roadmap, the only thing we can do is send feedback and complaints to try to get their attention on this. Glen64KViews2likes20CommentsRe: Number of unread chats etc. not showing on the taskbar icon.
All - Unfortunately, as posted here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/new-teams-known-issues , Microsoft has for some reason removed the connection between Teams and Windows for notifications. The page specifically says: What features are changing? As we improved the client, the experience also improved to align with similar features. Here are some of the changes you see. Classic TeamsNew Teams Post level notifications within a channel Users can no longer opt in or opt out of receiving notifications at a channel post level. Windows notifications Teams notifications are now fully served from Teams and all notifications preferences are handled within Teams Settings. I don't know why Microsoft considers this an "improvement", but since fixing this isn't on their roadmap, the only thing we can do is send feedback and complaints to try to get their attention on this. Glen44KViews2likes0CommentsTeams bypassing EXO Address Book Policy Address Segmentation
I'm running into a strange problem with Microsoft Teams and Exchange Online Address Book Policies. There have been posts about preventing students from emailing faculty members, and similar situations, and using Address Book Policies to prevent that. So consider the situation where I have a Faculty Group and a Student Group. I've set up Address Book Policies for both groups, and applied them. Fine. Only Faculty appears in the Faculty members' address lists, and only Students appear in the Students' address lists. That all works. However... it seems that if we're using Microsoft Teams, Address Book Policies can be easily bypassed. Consider the situation where a Microsoft Team exists, with a faculty person (or people) as the team owner, and students as team members. When that happens, when such a team exists, the student can create a new chat, and do a search in the Teams client, and locate that faculty member. If the student then clicks the search result to actually add the faculty member to the chat, the student can then hover over the added faculty member and view their email address and contact information right from their mailbox record. This is possible, by the way, even with Role-based chat controls enabled, and even when the faculty member is set to be hidden from address lists tenant-wide. In just a few clicks, a member of one segment can access the address of a member of another segment simply because they're in a team together. (And from there, it's easy for the student to open EXO OWA and link to the faculty person through their own contact card under the organization/works-with section.) I've followed the procedures and verified that Address Book Segmentation is otherwise working perfectly - this seems to be something of a "back door" to let segmented users view the addresses of users in other address book segments, just because they happen to share a Team relationship. Has anyone else encountered this? Is there a way to prevent this? Am I just confused?Solved1.5KViews1like1CommentMicrisoft Teams (or maybe Groups) breaks EXO Address Book Policy Segmentation Functionality
I'm running into a strange problem with Exchange Online Address Book Policies. There have been posts about preventing students from emailing faculty members, and similar situations, and using Address Book Policies to prevent that. So consider the situation where I have a Faculty Group and a Student Group. I've set up Address Book Policies for both groups, and applied them. Fine. Only Faculty appears in the Faculty members' address lists, and only Students appear in the Students' address lists. That all works. However... it seems that if we're using Microsoft Teams, Address Book Policies can be easily bypassed. Consider the situation where a Microsoft Team exists, with a faculty person (or people) as the team owner, and students as team members. When that happens, when such a team exists, the student can go to EXO, look at the student's own address record in the address book and - under the "Organization" tab on the student contact page - a link to the faculty person will appear. The student can then click on that Faculty member's box, and then link directly to that Faculty member's contact card - showing email address and everything else - and that despite Address Book segmentation otherwise being in effect. This is even possible when the faculty member is set to "Hide from Address Lists" in Microsoft 365 User Admin. I've followed the procedures and verified that Address Book Segmentation is otherwise working perfectly - this seems to be something of a "back door" to let segmented users view the addresses of users in other address book segments, just because they happen to share a Team relationship. Has anyone else encountered this? Is there a way to prevent this? Am I just confused?740Views0likes0Comments
Recent Blog Articles
No content to show