Come on Edward, government jobs are the pits! Good luck Joe. Jon
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Ziots, Edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wows that is a seriously wacked situation, I wish you the best of luck > with that. And maybe its time to head to a new vertical, because it looks > like Govt Jobs arent where its at out there. > > > > Z > > > > Edward E. Ziots > > Network Engineer > > Lifespan Organization > > MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA > > Phone: 401-639-3505 > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:47 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > Just had a union workplace meeting today at lunch, with our union's > bargaining team. One of them said that on the way back to the office > yesterday after a rally at the capitol, she passed a homeless guy on the > street. He stopped her, asking if she was a state worker. She says yes, > and he says "I feel sorry for you…you guys'll never make it on $6.55/hour. > I make more than that begging on the street." Really makes you think… I'm > not too worried right now, but let's see what's going on in a couple of > weeks. Once the budget is passed, we're supposed to get the rest of our > pay, retroactively, so in reality we're not really losing anything, except > possible credit ratings, getting behind on car payments/mortgage, etc. The > credit unions in the area have also come out saying that if this does > happen, they will issue low-to-no interest loans, making up the difference > in our paychecks, which could save a lot of people. > > > > Joe Heaton > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 29, 2008 1:41 PM > > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > I see your point, > > > > Arnie is a weird one anyways J > > > > Z > > > > Edward E. Ziots > > Network Engineer > > Lifespan Organization > > MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA > > Phone: 401-639-3505 > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:40 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > Exactly. It's all a political ploy, but our unions are massively up in > arms at the moment. He was supposed to sign the Executive Order this > morning, but has delayed that until Thursday. Once he signs it, pretty much > every union in the state will file injunctions against it in court. The > State Controller has also come out publicly disagreeing with Arnie about how > much cash the state has (which is supposedly the reason behind this. Arnie > thinks the state will run out of cash around mid-September, and the > Controller says we're good through the end of September), and the Controller > has already stated that he will ignore the order and pay us anyway. It's > just a scare tactic, to get the public angry so that we get on the > legislature to pass the darn budget. It's only a month and a half late as > it is… > > > > Joe Heaton > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Ziots, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 29, 2008 1:34 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > How the hell can you live in CA at 6.55 a hr? SO he wants to put all the > Govt workers in card-board boxes because earning that much an hr you be > better off working at MCdonalds > > > > Z > > > > Edward E. Ziots > > Network Engineer > > Lifespan Organization > > MCSE,MCSA,MCP,Security+,Network+,CCA > > Phone: 401-639-3505 > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:28 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > Well, seems that our support with Symantec isn't up until December, so I > don't think I'm going to be able to push anything else until around then. > We don't have any money until the stupid legislature passes the budget > anyway. The Governator is even reducing all state workers' salaries to > Federal minimum wage until the budget is passed, effective August 1. That > means that I'll be making a whopping $6.55/hour. Isn't that lovely? > > > > Joe Heaton > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Stu Sjouwerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Monday, July 28, 2008 6:24 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Cc:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > Hey, and don't forget Sunbelt's Ninja for the exchange server. > > http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/Ninja-Email-Security/ > > > > While we are talking, VIPRE Enterprise on the desktop will > > prevent those insanely long boot times as well. > > http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ > > > > Simon, ask for a quote. Will make you an offer you cannot refuse. > > > Warm regards, > > > Stu > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Simon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Monday, July 28, 2008 6:30 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > "But I do like that we have the one brand for both desktop AV and Exchange > AV, and would like to keep it that way." > > > > You like having a single point of failure for your AV software? > > > > I am the complete opposite to you. I hate having the same brand on Exchange > and the desktops and will avoid it where possible. > > > > In your current scenario you have one defence system - as both the desktop > and Exchange AV will be working on the same set of definition files. It gets > past one it will get past the other and your machines will be infected. > > I will leave the Symantec bashing out of it, but will say that I see more > infected systems that are "protected" by Symantec than any others. > > > > What you should be looking for is to have something different on the > Exchange server to provide dual levels of protection. Something like GFI > Mail Security, Microsoft Forefront or the list host's product. Something > using multiple definition files that are not the same as what you are using > now. > > The idea being that if one doesn't catch, the other will. > > > > Simon. > > > > -- > Simon Butler > MVP: Exchange, MCSE > Amset IT Solutions Ltd. > > e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > w: www.amset.co.uk > w: www.amset.info > > Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with Windows Mobile 5.0? > http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ <http://certificatesforexchange.com/>for > certificates from just $23.99. > Need a domain for your certificate? > http://DomainsForExchange.net/<http://domainsforexchange.net/> > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* 28 July 2008 21:44 > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > So I guess what I'm really asking here, now that I'm not trying to bash > Symantec, is this: > > > > Are there enough improvements with the new version (mainly overhead, bloat, > etc.) to recommend upgrading to it? My users' main complaint is that their > computer takes sooooo long to completely boot up in the morning, and this is > because Symantec is doing a startup scan and takes a huge portion of CPU > cycles, which bogs down the entire system. I personally would love to tell > them not to upgrade, but wait until the contract ends, and dump Symantec > like a hot potato. But I do like that we have the one brand for both > desktop AV and Exchange AV, and would like to keep it that way. > > > > Joe Heaton > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Michael Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Monday, July 28, 2008 11:56 AM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > I liked the product, it's just that at launch it was too heavy to run on > anything but a dedicated box. As all our clients have SBS we just renewed > and kept them on v.10. The new version is a lot lighter, but I'm still > nervous about older servers and we are looking at a more blended defence. > I'll probably keep renewing my clients for one more year and then see. > > > > Mike > > > > *From:* Michael Ross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* 28 July 2008 19:11 > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > I have v11.. and the latest greatest rendition, MP2 MR1.. fantastic.. > > But for email servers, id use trend micro's scanmail. IMHO. > > > > *From:* Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Monday, July 28, 2008 12:34 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Symantec Endpoint Protection > > > > Anyone using this that is happy with it? Also, is there anyone here that > doesn't think Symantec is a big pile? I personally hate the product, and > wish that I made the decisions around here, but I don't, so I have to come > up with objective reviews of SEP, and whether or not we should upgrade from > v.10 to the Symantec Mulit-tier protection system, with SEP, SAV Mobile and > Mail Security. > > > > Joe Heaton > > AISA > > Employment Training Panel > > 1100 J Street, 4th Floor > > Sacramento, CA 95814 > > (916) 327-5276 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > > Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.6/1577 - Release Date: 7/28/2008 > 6:55 AM > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - > http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.6/1579 - > Release Date: 7/29/2008 6:43 AMNo virus found in this incoming message. > Checked > by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: > 270.5.6/1579 - Release Date: 7/29/2008 6:43 AMNo virus found in this > incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / > Virus Database: 270.5.6/1579 - Release Date: 7/29/2008 6:43 AM ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
