[gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

Great thank yet again Alan, I will grab a copy of these this afternoon and 
continue my testing...
 
Patrick Leathen

________________________________

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Alan & Margaret
Sent: Tue 18/11/2008 10:36 a.m.
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files



Hi Patrick,

 

It was a problem with the old adm file having a non standard character in it. I 
thought I had caught them all but obviously missed one.

 

I have updated the website with the corrected adml file for office. 
http://www.sysprosoft.com/adm_to_admx.shtml 

 

Alan Cuthbertson

 

________________________________

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Patrick Leathen 
Sent: Tuesday, 18 November 2008 7:54 AM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

 

Just an FYI 

 

I finally had a moment to import these Office ADMX templates into a clean test 
environment and upon trying to edit a new GPO I received the attached error 
messages. Though the polices still seem to work, I'll do some more testing 
later on today when I have a little more time.

 

Thanks and regards,

Patrick Leathen

 

________________________________

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Alan & Margaret
Sent: Mon 10/11/2008 7:26 p.m.
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

Hi Patrick,

 

I am not surprised that FullArmour had problems converting the ADM files. 
Microsoft used every possible structure for writing them that they could think 
of! But I did eventually create admx files which appear to work. i.e they load 
into gpmc and a quick check of the registry keys looks correct.

 

However, it showed up a bug in ADMX processing and a couple of inconsistencies 
in the ADM files.

 

Firstly, the Outlk11.adm file has an entry under  Microsoft Office Outlook 
2003/ Tools | Options.../Other/Advanced/Reminder Options - Other Reminders 
which writes to the registry key 
AppEvents\Schemes\Apps\Office97\Office97-Reminder\.Current with a valuename 
which is blank. ADMX files do not seem to support writing to blank Valuenames, 
so I have disabled that policy with a warning

 

Secondly, there are three entries which are managed by two different policy 
settings. The first is OK, since both policies set them to the same values. 
However the second two set them to different values. 

 

Case 1

office11.adm - Microsoft Office 2003/Tools | Options |Spelling - Recognize 
smart tags in Excel

            (Checkbox - Check to use German post-reform rules when running 
spell check)

            Registry key: Software\Policies\Microsoft\Shared Tools\Proofing 
Tools\Spelling

            Valuename : GermanPostReform

            On value = 1, Off value =0

word11.adm - Microsoft Office word 2003\ Tools | Options...\Spelling & Grammar- 
Use German post reform rules

            (Checkbox - Check to block Excel from recognizing SmartTags)

            Registry key: Software\Policies\Microsoft\Shared Tools\Proofing 
Tools\Spelling

            Valuename : GermanPostReform

            On value = 1, Off value =0

 

Case 2

office11.adm - Microsoft Office 2003/ Tools | AutoCorrect Options... (Excel, 
PowerPoint and Access)\Smart Tags - Recognize smart tags in Excel

            (Checkbox - Check to enforce setting on; uncheck to enforce setting 
off)

            Registry key: Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Excel\Options

            Valuename : RecognizeSmartTags

            On value = 2, Off value =0

excel11.adm - Microsoft Office Excel 2003\Miscellaneous - Recognize SmartTags

            (Checkbox - Check to block Excel from recognizing SmartTags)

            Registry key: Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Excel\Options

            Valuename : RecognizeSmartTags

            On value =0, Off value =1

 

Case 3

office11.adm - Microsoft Office 2003/collaboration settings - Outlook: Ad hoc 
reviewing

            (DropList ))

            Registry key: 
Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Outlook\Options\Mail

            Valuename : AdHocReviewBehavior

Enable ad hoc reviewing = 0, Exclude author's e-mail in documents = 2, Disable 
ad hoc reviewing =1

outlk11.adm - Microsoft Office Outlook 2003\Tools | Options 
...\Preferences\Email-Options\Advanced Emal Options - When sending a message

            (Checkbox - Check to block Excel from recognizing SmartTags)

            Registry key: 
Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Outlook\Options\Mail

            Valuename : AdHocReviewBehavior

            On value =0, Off value =1

 

One thing that they regularly do is have a policy which consists solely of a 
checkbox. If you enable the policy, then check the checkbox it stays enabled. 
If you enable the policy then uncheck the checkbox, then save the policy, it 
then shows the policy as disabled. I consider this to be bad design. It should 
be implemented simply as a policy without a checkbox   

 

The other thing I realised during the conversion was that ADMX files always 
display Categories and Policies in alphabetical order. ADM files allow you to 
set your own order.

 

Note: If you are using V4 of my ADM Template Editor or Polman, this work showed 
up a couple of minor bugs related to copying Categories and interpreting ADM 
files. It also displays categories and policies in alphabetical order. I have 
updated both products on the web

 

Alan Cuthbertson

 

 

 Policy Management Software (Now with ADMX and Preference support):-

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=pol_summary.shtml

 

ADM Template Editor(Now with ADMX support):-

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=adm_summary.shtml

 

Policy Log Reporter - including Preference logging(Free)

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=policyreporter.shtml

 

 

 

________________________________

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Alan & Margaret
Sent: Friday, 7 November 2008 6:56 AM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

 

Hi Scott and Jerry,

 

Thanks for your support... Yes, Version 4 of my software does handle conversion 
of ADM files to ADMX files. Having said that, I tried converting the 2003 ADM 
files yesterday and found a bug in converting Checkboxes with multiple registry 
keys. So I hope to have a new version of my program out today and I will post 
the converted ADMX files then.....

 

Alan Cuthbertson

 

 

 Policy Management Software (Now with ADMX and Preference support):-

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=pol_summary.shtml

 

ADM Template Editor(Now with ADMX support):-

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=adm_summary.shtml

 

Policy Log Reporter - including Preference logging(Free)

http://www.sysprosoft.com/index.php?ref=activedir&f=policyreporter.shtml

 

 

   

 

________________________________

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Scott Klassen
Sent: Friday, 7 November 2008 4:57 AM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

 

The V4 version of the SysProSoft tool can convert ADM directly to ADMX and to 
my experience does a better job than the Full Armor software.  As an added 
bonus, the person behind SysProSoft, Alan Cuthbertson, hangs out on this list.

 

Scott Klassen

 

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Cruz, Jerome L
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 10:38 AM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

 

All,

 

Just some thoughts....

 

When I have run into issues with a direct conversion of an ADM template with 
the Full Armor tool, I have had some success by first running an ADM template 
through the SysProSoft 'ADM Template Editor' tool 
(http://www.sysprosoft.com/products.shtml) and then running the resulting (and 
renamed) ADM file through the 'Full Armor' tool. From what I can tell, the 
changes are mostly focused on rearrangement of the Strings within the template 
though there could easily be others.

 

That said, I have NOT attempted anything as complex as the Office 2003 
templates. One of the issues (nits) I've had in the past with the Office 
templates was the lack of any "Explain" tab text. Looking from this at a higher 
level, that 'should' make them simpler to covert. On the other hand, you never 
know what might set off problems. Perhaps the ADMX formats 'really' want 
'Explain' text...and if missing...could generate problems in the converter.

 

Like I said, just some thoughts...

 

Jerry Cruz | Group Policies Product Manager | Windows Infrastructure 
Architecture | Boeing IT

 

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:15 PM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] Re: MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

 

Patrick-

I haven't tried it but knowing the Full Armor Migrator as I do, I suspect those 
ADMs are too complicated or not formatted well for it. What kinds of errors are 
you getting? 

 

Darren

 

From: gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gptalk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Patrick Leathen 
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:07 PM
To: gptalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gptalk] MS Office 2003 ADMX Files

 

Hi,

 

I hope I've got this right, first time I'm emailing here...

 

I just have a quick question, has anybody successfully migrated the Office 2003 
ADM files to ADMX? I've attempted this a few times using the FullArmour ADMX 
v1.2 tool unsuccessfully and have also posted the question on a few other 
forums without receiving any answers, so I thought I'd try my luck here.

 

Would be great to know if anyone else has attempted this and if they've managed 
to successfully convert the files.

 

Thanks

Patrick Leathen

________________________________

 

The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information 
that is CONFIDENTIAL and may be exempt from disclosure under applicable laws.

 

If you read this message and are not the addressee you are notified that use, 
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message is prohibited. If 
you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately and 
delete the original message. You should scan this message and any attached 
files for viruses.

 

Axon accepts no liability for any loss caused either directly or indirectly by 
a virus arising from the use of this message or any attached file.

 

________________________________

 

 

--
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the
use of the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain
information that is CONFIDENTIAL and may be exempt from disclosure under
applicable laws.

If you read this message and are not the addressee you are notified that
use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message is
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us
immediately and delete the original message. You should scan this message
and any attached files for viruses.

Axon accepts no liability for any loss caused either directly or
indirectly by a virus arising from the use of this message or any
attached file.
        


--
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the
use of the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain
information that is CONFIDENTIAL and may be exempt from disclosure under
applicable laws.

If you read this message and are not the addressee you are notified that
use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message is
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us
immediately and delete the original message. You should scan this message
and any attached files for viruses.

Axon accepts no liability for any loss caused either directly or
indirectly by a virus arising from the use of this message or any
attached file.

Other related posts: