What the heck is he talking about you ask?  I was recently told by Intel Server support, that they do not support (or intend to support) using the Intel server diagnostics (Intel® Active System Console) on servers that provide a website using forms authentication (a really common type of login authentication).  I was told that their tools only work if you use ASP.NET authentication on the primary website on your server.

My understanding from them was that if  you authenticate against another database (which many pages do), then you can not check the status of the hardware on your Intel server.  WTF?

Over a year ago, we bought a couple of big Intel servers for a new website that our company was launching.  After several issues getting the hardware delivered, we were finally up and running.  Then, our hardware guy decided to check on the status of the RAID and things went downhill rapidly.

The tools that Intel provides to check the RAID, redundant power supply etc, just generated errors when we tried to start them up.  We spent a lot of time talking to support about this and getting stupid suggestions like “reload all the software” or “reinstall the OS”.  Finally, we had to actually take the machine apart in order to get ALL of the part numbers so that they would escilate the issue.  Apparently it had never occured to them that we might want to use this for a production server where we need it to reliably run 24/7 and not be taken down and taken apart to address unrelated software issues.  I begged and pleeded, but they would not escilate our software issue unless we did this!

After that, there were more delays.  Some days I would get told that they had replicated the issue and were working on it, other days they somehow could not replicate the issue.  This was pretty baffling since it is really simple to replicate and we had been told that they had gotten that far.  Then they returned to suggestions like “try reinstalling the OS and see what happens”.  Did I mention that this was the production server?

Eventually it came out that they assume that  you have a default website set up with the default ASP.NET authentication.  I was told that they do not support any other setup.  This is from what I thought was a serious sever!?

The last email that I got (7/31/2009, now I just get an automatic response when I email) said:

Hello Mark,

We have been informed by engineering that they have not been able to reproduce or fix the issue you are experiencing with your own form authentication. The only recommendation we have at this point is for you to uninstall the Intel® Active System Console completely, install its standard pre-requirements and use the software in the normal way it was intend to be used. If this is not suitable for you then you will not be able to use this software at this point.
Engineering at this point says that the only fact is that your authentication method will not work with the Intel® Active System Console 3.5.1, and the only other option would be for you to provide us with a copy of the software you use on this server and detailed information about the setup and the environment for us to try a more accurate reproduction.

Sincerely,

Jorge S
Intel Technical Support

Maybe I read it wrong, but it looks to me like it says “we can not reproduce the error, but we know that it will only work with authentication method that we intend you to use on your server”.  Seriously?  This is a server, but I can not use it to serve a website?

I have not heard from them since and since then, they don’t even bother to answer emails…

Needless to say, until Intel starts to support what they sell, we have stopped purchasing their equipment.

If anyone at Intel wants to explain this better, it is case number 8969057…

Tags: Intel, Intel Active System Console, Intel servers, Intel tech support, Intel Technical Support, tech support

Session parameters get used a lot in ASP.NET pages and they work pretty well, but when you try to use them in an ASMX web service, you get errors.  So, how do you get the session parameters?

It turns out that it is really simple.  Just add “EnableSession = true” to your WebMethod and it all works as expected.  For example:

[WebMethod (Description="Get a list of RMU GPS positions as JSON for the current custId.",
    EnableSession = true)]
public string GetSomeData()
{
    string  custId = "0";
    try

    {
        custId = Session["CustId"].ToString();
        return(GetSomeDataFromClientId( CustId );
    }
    catch (Exception ex)

    {
        handleException(ex, "GetGpsRmuCustListJSON");
        return(some failure message...);
    }
}

Tags: asmx services, ASP.NET, Session Parameters, web services, WebMethod

I am having an interesting issue with my WordPress 2.9.2 blogs.  On one of our computers, when I go to upload a file to it from my computer, I select the file and it says it is uploaded and says “Crunching…”.  Then I just get a blank rectangle with no image. 

• I tried “the Browser uploader instead” but it also failed.
• If I click “Save All Changes” I just get a blank list.

After a while of trying to solve this, I was rather frustrated and decided to try something that has worked for some issues that I had with Google Maps recently.  I deleted all the temporary files (in IE8, go to “Tools”, “Internet Options”, “Browsing History” and click “Delete”.  I made sure that “Temporary Internet Files” was selected (you should be able to leave “Cookies” alone so that you keep your account info).

After a while, it was finished and the graphics loaded perfectly!

Tags: add media files, Crunching, IE8, internet explorer, Wordpress 2.9.2, WordPress issues

The tagfoot "your account is restricted" message

I am always a little suspicious when people start trying to punish me without explaining why.  I am even more suspicious when that punishment involves a fine.

So, when I recently tried to use Tagfoot and got a message that my account was restricted and pointed to a help page that said “You have broken a rule, or rules, as outlined in the Usage Guidelines.  To immediately unlock your account, you will need to pay a $5 fine” that set off a lot of alarms.  Looking around, it gets even more interesting as I found a post by someone who paid the $5, but still couldn’t figure out why she was fined and they would not tell her (and no “you figure it out” is not a decent answer).  It is even more suspicious when you realize that they previously had a bug that was marking users as restricted when they were not…

Well, in light of this, I sent the Tagfoot support a request for clarification and an explination of just what I have done.  I have had this account since soon after they started and had not even seen when they released these guidlines and fines.

A while later, I got this very turse form message with a couple of links, but absolutely no real explanation…

Seriously?  Now you are fining long term users without any real explanation?  This seems similar to the police mailing you a ticket for $100 and telling you to look in the traffic code if you are unsure when or what it is for.  I figured that I might as well try to get a straight answer one more time and see if they got the point (I figure that my account is lost by now unless I do anyways).  I replied that I wanted to know what the specific issue is, but no answer.  It turns out that they block replies to support by restricted accounts.  So, now I have to jump through hoops to find that I can still send support a message from the support user profile page.  What a pain.  I replied that I had seen the usage guide but wanted to know just what I was specifically fined for.  Still waiting for an answer…

So, currently I am left with the choice of:

• abandon Tagfoot
• pay a random $5 user fee and just hope that they don’t just ding me again…

Since I really like to know what I am paying for and why, I guess this is the end of my Tagfoot usage (at least under that login).  Hopefully at some point they will consider improving their support and the definition of their rules and actually start explaining to users what they did wrong and how to fix it.  Otherwise, their fines just look like random user fees to me.

Frankly, at this point using Tagfoot just does not seem worth the $5 random usage fee, I mean “fine”.

Tags: scams, social media, Tagfoot, Tagfoot account restricted, TagFoot fines, tagfoot support, Tagfoot Usage

I have been working on an ASP.NET website for quite a while and recently went to flip it onto a different server for testing.  Like many before me, I was pretty baffled when I got a configuration error claiming that I needed the VJSharpCodeProvider.  I don’t even use Visual J Sharp.

Further research came up with the fact that if your project uses Java, then Microsoft will kindly add this in for you.  I just went into the web.config file and deleted the assembly reference to VJSharpCodeProvider and everything was happy.

The error page looked like:

Server Error in ‘/’ Application.

---

Configuration Error

Description: An error occurred during the processing of a configuration file required to service this request. Please review the specific error details below and modify your configuration file appropriately.

Parser Error Message: Could not load file or assembly ‘VJSharpCodeProvider, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a’ or one of its dependencies. The system cannot find the file specified.

Source Error:

Line 89: 		<compilation debug="true" strict="false" explicit="true">
Line 90: 			<assemblies>
Line 91: 				<add assembly="VJSharpCodeProvider, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B03F5F7F11D50A3A"/>
Line 92: 				<add assembly="System.Core, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089"/>
Line 93: 				<add assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/>

Source File: C:\corView\WebSite\web.config Line: 91

Assembly Load Trace: The following information can be helpful to determine why the assembly ‘VJSharpCodeProvider, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a’ could not be loaded.

=== Pre-bind state information ===
LOG: User = NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE
LOG: DisplayName = VJSharpCodeProvider, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a
 (Fully-specified)
LOG: Appbase = file:///C:/corView/WebSite/
LOG: Initial PrivatePath = C:\corView\WebSite\bin
Calling assembly : (Unknown).
===
LOG: This bind starts in default load context.
LOG: Using application configuration file: C:\corView\WebSite\web.config
LOG: Using host configuration file: C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\Aspnet.config
LOG: Using machine configuration file from C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\config\machine.config.
LOG: Post-policy reference: VJSharpCodeProvider, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a
LOG: The same bind was seen before, and was failed with hr = 0x80070002.

Tags: ASP.NET, c#, Microsoft Visual Studio, VJSharpCodeProvider

Ever since using a relative’s GPS navigation system while visiting, I have been looking at getting a new Garmin navegation system.  We bought one for my Mother-In-Law for Christmas since she is pretty bad with directions.  It works great except for one HUGE flaw.  It is missing a huge divided provincial highway nearby (Stoney Trail in Calgary).  Now this thing took years to build and is super fast for us, but the navigator just chokes if you go onto it.

So, I reported it to Garmin and got a nice email back saying that they are aware that it is missing and it was delayed because they had to get NavTeq to add it in.  However, they go on to say that despite the fact that it is now in the NavTeq maps, it will not be in the next release and that hopefully (no promises though) it will be in one after that in July.  At that point it will be almost a year that the section near me has been open!  They are currently missing a section that opened Sept 2009 and more that opened Nov 2009.

So, right now, if I buy a Garmin, it will not be able to get me out of my subdivision for at least 4 more months.  Then it will likely work for about 6 months before they are closing a road nearby and I will have to wait another year for it to get updated.  And every time that I need an update, they are going to charge $60 to $100 for the update.

While Garmin certainly does not seem concerned about making sure that their products are close to up to date, they certainly know how to keep you paying.

For now, I think that I will pass on GPS navigation until I can at least get basic directions correctly.

Tags: Calgary, Garmin, Garmin map updates, GPS Navigation, NavTeq, Stoney Trail