It seems silly that, after all these years, we're still dealing with bundles of INF's and stuff like that. Can't they all just move to an MSI format or something? I wish some focus was put on stuff like this instead of more trivial things.
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Marable, Mike <mmara...@med.umich.edu> wrote: > In theory that sounds good, in actual practice not so much. > > > > We have a small group using a standalone MDT build for some special case > machines. They rely on Microsoft Update for their drivers and it is > painfully slow downloading them from Microsoft’s servers. So dynamically > trying to pull drivers down from Dell, HP or Lenovo’s sites would most > likely be an exercise in frustration. > > > > Mike > > > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jerousek, Jeff > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 19, 2017 1:30 PM > > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* RE: [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions? > > > > So you still need the packages on all of the remote DPs? > > > > It would be cool if you could just have it download the drivers directly > from the vendor’s website. > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On Behalf Of *Marable, > Mike > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:38 AM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* RE: [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions? > > > > Actually, it works fairly well for non-conforming models. That’s exactly > the situation we are in. The hospital I work for has a very controlled > process for acquiring hardware. All the models are known, limited and > configured identically. We’re absorbing the medical school where they have > been allowed to purchase freely what-ever they please. > > > > What I’ve done is to create packages of drivers for known models just like > the article says. For the “dummy” package I use a package that contains > just those network and MSD drivers that I need to get WinPE (v 10) to > function (to be able to access the network and the hard drive). If a > driver package specific for that model cannot be found, it falls back on > the same set of drivers that allowed WinPE to function. That generally > gets any non-conformist machine through the build. The tech building the > machine may have to download and manually add drivers for video and other > components post-build. We have a process for them to provide feedback so > that I can continue to create model specific packages of drivers when > needed. > > > > Mike > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On Behalf Of *Miller, > Todd > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:54 AM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* RE: [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions? > > > > Is it unclear to me what you do about non-conforming computer models in > this method. With no drivers loaded into Configmgr directly, there is no > “chaos theory” for *unsupported* models to fall back to. > > This seems like it would work perfectly for a perfectly managed > organization, but my reality is a bit more dystopian. We have 20,000 > computers and 90% of them fall into less than 20 models but the remaining > 2000 computers cover over 200 more models. And that is after trying very > hard and being very resistant to folks purchasing non-conforming models. > I see you are also at an EDU – so I imagine your make/model list has > similarly long tail. > > > > How could this method be enhanced to support the unsupported? > > > > > > BIOS updating is mentioned in the comments of that blog post and that > seems pretty intriguing. > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On Behalf Of *Murray, > Mike > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 18, 2017 4:59 PM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* [External] [mssms] RE: Driver management - opinions? > > > > Biggety Bump > > > > *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists. > myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On Behalf Of *Murray, > Mike > *Sent:* Monday, April 17, 2017 4:22 PM > *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com > *Subject:* [mssms] Driver management - opinions? > > > > We’re thinking of testing the tool linked below. Anyone have experience > with it? Are there any other tools you prefer that can accomplish similar? > > > > http://www.scconfigmgr.com/2017/03/29/modern-driver- > management-using-web-services-during-osd-with-configmgr/ > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scconfigmgr.com%2F2017%2F03%2F29%2Fmodern-driver-management-using-web-services-during-osd-with-configmgr%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C01ed4988cf5445a8046f08d4873ae959%7C62af9ccc42164ae2a1d306614c59c315%7C0%7C0%7C636282134469207820&sdata=ejGvuGlCuuFr8CKJFAPTAN4YSQSpTk0wZb0QbwePgDE%3D&reserved=0> > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Mike Murray > > Desktop Engineer/IT Consultant - IT Support Services > > California State University, Chico > > 530.898.4357 <(530)%20898-4357> > mmur...@csuchico.edu > > > > Remember, Chico State will NEVER ask you for your password via email! > > For more information about recognizing phishing scam emails go to: > http://www.csuchico.edu/isec/basics/spam-and-phishing.shtml > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.csuchico.edu%2Fisec%2Fbasics%2Fspam-and-phishing.shtml&data=02%7C01%7C%7C01ed4988cf5445a8046f08d4873ae959%7C62af9ccc42164ae2a1d306614c59c315%7C0%7C0%7C636282134469207820&sdata=xgMO1FlY8feurYtWDN5As7STaDsZbAZVB5enpyBujXE%3D&reserved=0> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Notice: This UI Health Care e-mail (including attachments) is covered by > the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is > intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is > addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, > and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the > intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this > communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete or > destroy all copies of the original message and attachments thereto. Email > sent to or from UI Health Care may be retained as required by law or > regulation. Thank you. > ------------------------------ > > > > ********************************************************** > Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not > be used for urgent or sensitive issues > > > > > > ********************************************************** > Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not > be used for urgent or sensitive issues > >
