Tony and I had grand ambitions of recording a podcast but, uh, things have been a little busy, what with all the lockdown, working-under-quarantine, and so on. We did something a little different this time– we recorded this episode in a Teams meeting with guests in attendance. See if you can spot the difference!
(programming note: we originally recorded a section planned on the coming death of Basic Authentication in Exchange Online. As Microsoft has pushed this date back until sometime in the happy future, we took that segment out since most of it was us expressing certainty that Microsoft wouldn’t push the date back.)
First off, let’s start with the bad news: I didn’t do any triathlons. In fact, I didn’t get in the pool to exercise at all in 2019. Not even once. It just sort of worked out that way. I missed the registration deadline for the Chattanooga 70.3, volunteered as a bike sentry at Rocketman, and just generally avoided that part of the multisport world. But I’m repenting, and I’ve already signed up for Chatty 70.3 in 2020.
On the plus side, I had a pretty good year running. I finished the year with just under 1000 miles; I didn’t set a mileage goal but am pleased with the amount of time I got in. Along the way I set several PRs, including a 1:53 half marathon, a 24:30 5K, and a 53:12 10K.
Another negative: I broke my stupid toe in early October. I was getting out of a chair like a cowboy, swung my leg over, and whacked the end of my second right toe on the wooden chair frame. It hurt, but I ran on it for a few days anyway before it became clear what a bad idea that was. I missed the Army Ten Miler and the Marine Corps Marathon 50K because I couldn’t run or train, and then I dropped down from the marathon to half-marathon distance for Rocket City. However, at Rocket City I put up a 1:57, which I was really happy with given how much my run volume dropped off since October.
Digression about the toe: this was what is called an intra-articular fracture. My podiatrist, the excellent David Kyle at TOC, cheerfully told me “oh, that’s a real turd of an injury” and that I could run as much as I wanted without worsening the fracture– “it’s just going to hurt,” he said. It did, but it could have been much worse. Injuries suck, especially when they’re the result of my own clumsiness.
Now, on to powerlifting: I had one meet this year, in the spring. I didn’t focus as much on lifting towards the end of the year. I’d told my coach in mid-year that my 2019 goals were “deadlift 500lb” and “finish a 50K race”, and I figured I’d have time to focus on the deadlift after the Marine Corps 50K. I ended up with a few gains from last year; my squat 1RM is now at 380lb and my deadlift 1RM at 430lb. Sadly, I still have poverty bench– no gain in my 1RM there, I’m afraid. I am hoping to squeeze in one more max-test workout before the end of the year so these numbers may go up a bit, which would be nice.
Cycling… well, let’s just say I didn’t do much of it this year. I had some time on the trainer indoors, but only did one metric century. It’s become clear that riding my Cervelo P2 aggravates my right knee’s IT band somehow; despite being fitted and refitted, and changing shoes, it just ain’t right. I think I’m going to have to sell the P2 and get another bike, because I’ve consistently had this problem since I started riding it and never had the problem, even with much higher riding mileage, when I was still riding my Defy 1. I’m not nearly as powerful on the bike as I should be given a) my run fitness and b) my leg strength. This remains something to work on in the new year, just like it was in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018.
To end on a high note: I did PR both of the cyclorun events I did, Heel & Crank and Racin’ the Station.
Actually, a high-er note: I was fortunate to get to race and train in some amazing places this year. Besides training runs in London, Bratislava, Zilina, Las Vegas, Zurich, Palma de Mallorca, and Key West, I raced in New York City, Seattle, Stockholm, Quantico, Cape Coral, and Lynchburg, Tennessee.
More importantly, I got to race and train with my friends– thanks to Scott, Tom, Matt, Rese, Ashley, Darralyn, Brian, the Panera Pounders, and, most of all, Erica for all the miles, sweat, and encouragement. I’m looking forward to seeing what the new year brings!
Even though it’s not quite the end of the year yet, I’m going to post my top 10 books for the year, selected from the 102 I’ve read so far. Closer to the end of the month, I’ll post the rest of the year’s list, but for now, here are a few that I thought especially worthy of mention, in no particular order.
Star of the North: terrific spy thriller set mostly in North Korea based on a simple premise: what if you found out your twin sister didn’t die, but had instead been kidnapped by the North Korean government? Remarkable characterizations and a realistic portrayal of life inside the Hermit Kingdom.
Valley of Genius: a compilation of interviews and quotes from Silicon Valley luminaries, some of whom you may never have heard of, tell the story of how Silly Valley came to be what it is today. Features the usual suspects (Jobs, Woz, Stewart Brand), but also mentions many lesser-known people whose contributions, although important, never got the same kind of visibility.
Freedom’s Forge: do you know who Bill Knudsen was? How about Henry Kaiser? What if I told you that, if not for them, there’s a good chance the US would have lost World War II? True, and fascinating, story. (Along the way, it explains the “Permanente” part of Kaiser Permanente’s name).
Those Who Wish Me Dead: part mystery, part thriller, part wilderness exploration, the plot and characterization and dialogue here are among the best I’ve ever read. Koryta makes a forest fire into a believable, and fearsome, character as part of this tale of revenge and escape. It would make a terrific movie.
Chief Engineer: it seems remarkable, maybe even preposterous, to us now that a single man could be chiefly responsible for a huge public works project, but that’s exactly true of Washington Roebling, the titular engineer and the man who gave us (among other contributions) the Brooklyn Bridge. Masterful biography of the man and his wife Emily, whose role in Roebling’s bridge-building career has mostly been skipped over but deserves wider exposure.
Creative Selection: thoughtful meditation, with lots of amusing stories, about Apple’s design process at the start of the iPhone era by one of their lead iPhone engineers, the man whose epitaph will probably read “Autocorrect Was His Fault.”
How Bad Do You Want It? Absolutely fascinating survey of what we know about the links between mental resilience and toughness and elite sport performance. Fitzgerald does a masterful job of highlighting different areas of mental development that are applicable to everyday athletes, explaining why they matter, and discussing how to develop them.
Exploding the Phone: I grew up at the tail end of the “phone phreak” era, and I’d always thought I was pretty familiar with it, but I learned a ton from this well-researched and cleverly told history… including that AT&T used to tape millions of toll calls in a project named “Greenstar” and that John “Cap’n Crunch” Draper didn’t actually invent the technique for making free calls that came to be strongly associated with him. Great stuff if you’re interested in the history of technology at all.
A Few Seconds of Panic: Most grown men would know better than to try to make it as a walk-on player in the NFL, but not sportswriter Stefan Fatsis. I very quickly started rooting for him as he made his way through Denver Broncos training camp; he had a marvelous adventure and told its story clearly and well.
The Path Between the Seas: speaking of “marvelous adventure,” how abut that Panama Canal? During the nearly 45 years of its construction, countless people died,and the political and commercial maneuvering incident to getting the Canal built left marks that we still see today in the US and Panamanian governments. I knew nothing about the engineering or politics behind this work, so this entire book was a terrific learning experience for me.
Tony and I are back again, this time from steamy Orlando. Recorded in the Podcast Center at Microsoft Ignite 2019, this episode features special guests from Microsoft: Mark Kashman, grand poobah of SharePoint, and Ross Smith IV, mobility ninja. Listen in to hear about Project Cortex, Microsoft Endpoint Manager, and a few other goodies.
It’s everyone’s favorite time of the year: Ignite Season!
In this episode, Tony and I are joined by Anna Chu from Microsoft; she has some pretty interesting answers to the questions we asked her about Microsoft Ignite, including why there’s an increased focus on developers and what she thinks the biggest change from years past is. Along the way, we also talk about the spreading evil of self-service license purchases and make a few predictions about things you might see from the show floor at Ignite.
Good news– we’ll be recording an episode from Ignite this year, so plan to tune in week after next for more Ignite-y goodness.
The other day, I got a request from one of my staff: could we please start using Shifts for scheduling his team’s on-call rotations? “Sure,” I said, little realizing what a journey that would entail. To make a long and painful story as short as possible: Shifts didn’t work in our tenant, so I filed a ticket, which took six weeks and multiple escalations before it got to someone who actually realized the problem (it was a back-end provisioning issue) and fixed it.
Six weeks. Hold that thought.
Now, a digression.
It is no big secret that Microsoft is working very, very hard to increase adoption of their cloud services. At their recent Inspire partner conference, there was a steady drumbeat of adoption-focused messaging directed, loudly, at Microsoft partners, and many Microsoft partner and sales personnel have found that their fiscal year (FY) 2020 compensation is directly tied to increasing adoption. For example, one person I spoke to told me that in FY 2020, the target they were expected to meet was to drive Teams adoption in their target market year-over-year (YoY) up by more than 250%.
Now, really: I get it. Microsoft is selling their “three clouds” (Dynamics 365, Office 365, and Microsoft 365) as hard as they can, but the old phenomenon of “channel stuffing” rears its head when customers buy licenses for those three clouds and don’t use them fully. If you buy a bunch of O365 Enterprise E3 licenses, for example, but only use Exchange Online, Microsoft is worried that you might a) buy less expensive licenses at renewal or b) defect to Gmail. They therefore have a really strong interest in not only selling licenses for these services but ensuring that people actually use what they’ve paid for.
Not only that, if customers don’t use the licenses they already have, it’s darn hard to upsell them more expensive or more capable licenses. This is a major brake on Microsoft 365 adoption: it’s hard to sell people a new SKU for Windows 10 and Office 365 when they already have O365 licenses on a multi-year agreement and perpetual Win10 licenses on their existing devices.
Side note: Azure is of course a Microsoft cloud, and it absolutely has its own, and rather daunting, adoption and consumption targets, but since almost all Azure services are priced based on actual usage, the play in Azure-land is to get people to use more rather than to get more use out of what they’ve already bought. Thus the intense focus on topics such as “digital transformation,” which translates to “getting stuff out of your on-premises data centers and into Azure” and the various Azure security offerings (which translate to “pay us per-minute to do cool security stuff on your Azure-hosted resources.”)
To recap: Microsoft wants customers to use all of the workloads in their O365 or M365 SKUs because doing so helps them keep customers around longer and sell them more stuff. In fairness, customers can benefit too by getting better value (defined as “more productivity” or “better security” or whatever) from their existing investment, but I think Microsoft is mostly interested in this because “customers can benefit” directly turns into “customers give us money.”
With that background, you’d probably think that Microsoft is always looking for new ways to increase user adoption… and you’d be right. That explains the mail I received this morning.
It looked like a support ticket, but I figured it must just be a decent phishing attempt. After all, I didn’t open a ticket, so the “Your request…” language was suspicious. Then I read it and damn near threw my coffee mug at the monitor.
Think about it. This is Microsoft sending me a “support ambassador” to try to convince me to use more of their services, i.e. to increase adoption, in a test tenant with only 1 paid license… something which only benefits Microsoft.
Meanwhile, users in my production tenant have to wait SIX WEEKS to get an actual problem fixed, one that directly affects their ability to work. Oh, by the way, fixing that problem would drive adoption of the service! We wanted to use Shifts but couldn’t until the problem was fixed– so no need to manufacture a fake support ticket to try to get me engaged.
Apparently there are enough “support ambassadors” roaming around to waste time dunning the admin of a single-user test tenant because “[their] system detected that not all users are using the services included.” Now, of course I realize that the “support ambassadors” here are not really support engineers in the same mold as the people who answer, y’know, actual support requests. What this email really means is that Microsoft is spending money on trying to drive adoption that would be spent better on the actual support organization.
This is part of the same tiring and worrisome trend we’ve seen in Office 365 for years now, where Microsoft does questionable stuff behind their customers’ backs. Here are a few examples:
Contacting the tenant admin (me in this case) to drive adoption based on data I haven’t seen about what my users were doing– perhaps this would be an unpleasant surprise to admins who don’t realize that user usage data is used for this purpose
Faking a support ticket as a means to fool customers into thinking they should read the adoption-related propaganda. (I split this one out separately because it irritates me so much.)
Pushing feedback surveys directly to Teams end users. Here’s some feedback for y’all: don’t talk directly to my organization’s end users without permission. Interestingly, the Teams team has made no public comment on this feature despite the uniformly negative feedback I have heard they’ve received.
Magically generating O365 Group objects from distribution groups and making them appear in the GAL
Turning on any number of other features by default so that they appear to end users with little or no warning. I do appreciate that the roadmap communications have gotten more detailed, and more frequent, as the service has matured, but since I still don’t know exactly when feature X will hit my tenant, it’s harder to do adoption and change management than it should be.
MVPs have a reputation for giving Microsoft candid and honest feedback, so here it is in two short digestible sound bites.
First, tighten up the support organization so that it doesn’t take multiple weeks to fix any problem. I can migrate a 100,000+ user organization in the amount of time it takes Microsoft to recognize and fix simple provisioning problems.
Second, stop bypassing (or trying to bypass) the tenant admins. Be very, very judicious with which new features are on by default; provide admin controls for new features on day 1 (and not later), and don’t assume that your customers are OK with you interacting directly with their end users.
Just a little palate cleanser this time before Microsoft Inspire gets started! Tony, Vasil, and I talk about Teams security, the Search-Mailbox cmdlet’s journey to Death Row, and whether or not emoji reactions in email are a tool of the devil.