ICW options

Some interesting feedback from folks on how to get people to run the CEICW - most people seem to say “just run it for them”. <sigh> If only we could do that.

There are several issues around forcing a user to run a configuration wizard after the setup - most of them are user interaction and psychology issues than technical:

- Many servers are installed off-site and then taken to the business. Forcing the wizard to run after setup would be of no or little value to these customers.

- Today, users are so over-prompted with security warnings that they just click through that I don't want the value of the wizard to be brushed away. I was not a fan of Office's decision to put up an “OK” textbox for every time you open an Office doc from a Sharepoint site. To be honest, to this day I can't tell you what the hell the damn thing says, and I must see it 10-20 times a day.

- The install of SBS is so long as it is (unless you've purchased an OEM server), that to add in more required steps after you've just finished installing it risks entering into what I call the AFW effect (or “Another <bleeping> Wizard”)

We've gone round several times on thinking about making ICW required, but the wizard as it exists today is still probably too complicated and long to force all users to run through right away. Now, if we can take the functionality of ICW and just place it into the setup experience, that may be more interesting....


Comments (5)
  1. JayPea says:

    I found it very useful to have it still available after setup:

    I recently upgraded a network card in my SBS box, just reran the ICW…it even kept my custom ISA config 😉

    So setup-integrated is fine as long as we can still run it post setup.

    My 2cents

  2. I made a comment to Susan’s weblog entry. Read and respond please.


    There was a nice little bit of code that I happened to find in my SBS package to help with the domainusername issue, but no one has blogged about it. I wonder if my Eopen SBS 2003 CD is a newer build and this little snippet of code was released in that new build. Just an idea, trying to figure out why no one else has talked about this function page_submit code before, and I was thinking maybe it was because they didn’t know it existed. Not really a big piece of code, anyone could have written it but I think a lot of people will be happy to know it exists.


Comments are closed.

Skip to main content