Technology Musings

Whilst lurking in a Macrumors forum the other day, I came across a mention of something I'd just never heard of before - and it's really easy to setup. If you have more than one Mac on your network, you can setup content caching, so that updates and iCloud downloads from Apple on one machine are cached for others on the network to use. Setting it up is just a few clicks, really simple. Go into System Preferences, select Sharing, then click on Content Sharing and tick the box. And - unless you run anything more complex than a single subnet on your network - that's it. Apple do recommend that you reboot any clients so they can take advantage of the cache. Full details are in this Apple support document , which also has links to other documents on more advanced settings (and how to set it up if you have a much larger network, for example). Does it work? I enabled my main Mac (a 2018 13-inch MacBook Pro - which is normally has a wired Ethernet connection, which is what Apple r...

  Came across an annoying issue with Poly CCX Teams phones this week, so worth documenting here briefly to save others the same pain. In short: The phones log into Office 365 and MUST have the time accurate to within 5 minutes, otherwise they will not log on. Indeed, if they drift, they will stop working. Out of the box, they will try and get time over NTP from time.windows.com, and fall back to north-america.pool.ntp.org. If you do not have port 123 open to the Internet from the network where the phones will sit, then you can get them to look at an on-prem NTP server, but there is a major gotcha.  You can configure DHCP scope option 42 to point at your on-prem NTP server (usually, in a Windows environment, a local domain controller) however that's not enough - you also need to tell the phone NOT to override this setting: because out of the box, it does . So to get a phone working in such an environment, you may need to follow these steps (assuming you do have Scope Option 42 ...

Microsoft Teams is a great solution for chats, calls, and meetings - but it's not so great for larger meetings. For that, there's Microsoft Teams live events, which is the next evolution of Skype Meeting Broadcast. Why is Live Events better for larger meetings? Well, Teams is fundamentally a collaboration tool, and Teams meetings are many-to-many meetings. Whilst Teams has a maximum of 250 attendees, such a large Teams meeting would be pretty hard to manage, to say the least. Live Events is designed to work for one-to-many meetings (up to 10,000 attendees), and is much better suited to that type of event: all attendees are muted for example, and just the presenter's video is shown. There are also audience feedback mechanisms much more suited to large-scale events. As this is a <cough> live area of interest right now, here's a quick run-down which might be useful if you're looking at trying it out. Understanding Event Types Although this doesn't ...

For many years when I worked as an IT Manager in 'corporate IT', Macs were a big No No for me. "It's not our standard!" we would say. "We can't manage them!" we would assert. But a few years ago, when I needed to buy a new computer for myself, I went out and bought a Mac. I guess from a professional point of view, I felt I really should find out what they're like. And from a personal point of view, I use an iPad and an iPhone, and I knew that the Mac would integrate well into the ecosystem. I thought I'd find it hard getting used to the Mac - but d'you know what? I didn't. Sure, some of the keyboard shortcuts took me a while to find or get used to (but to be fair, most PC laptop keyboards have things like their cursor keys and other special keys in non-standard locations). But by-and-large, things Just Worked. On a couple of occasions - like when my work laptop died suddenly with no warning, and it wasn't until the follo...

A new item popped up last week on the Teams roadmap - and it's quite a big deal: Whilst Microsoft want everyone in the world to fully adopt Teams as soon as possible, for some customers, it's not an easy transition: there are complex dependencies, especially on the telephony side, for which there is no quick fix. So, there needs to be interoperability between users who are fully in Teams ('Teams only') and those who are still using Skype for Business. The current interop provides chat and calling, but until now, has not provided for screen-sharing: and for many users, that's a big deal. In fact, I've heard of a number of companies where the IT Department has chosen to be the first group to move to Teams-only: but has then had to roll-back because the lack of screen-sharing has proved too inconvenient. But Microsoft announced last week that the current interop is to be improved to provide screen-sharing between Teams-only users and those running Skype fo...

If you're looking at moving to Microsoft Teams, or you're currently using Skype for Business Online for telephony but are thinking about the inevitable move to Teams, you may be wondering about what your options for handsets are. The situation is evolving all the time, but I've tried to summarise the current (August 2019) situation here. Of course, the question as to why anyone needs a handset - rather than using a headset with their PC - to use Teams or Skype for Business is a question in itself, but personal preference does mean that there is some requirement in most organisations. And of course, not everyone in a business uses a computer, so most environments have at least a few non-personal common-area phones (and sometimes more than a few - I've worked on projects with hundreds of common-area phones). If you need phones for Teams now Today, your choices are to buy phones from Audiocodes, Yealink or Crestron (the Crestron phones are actually by Yealink). The...