PCs optimize

SolutionBase: Ease Vista deployments with the Business Desktop Deployment Workbench

Rolling out a new operating system like Windows Vista across an organization presents all sorts of challenges. To help ease the pain, Microsoft has developed the Business Desktop Deployment Workbench. Here's how it works.

In medium to large organizations, deploying new workstations or upgrading the operating system on existing workstations has always been tedious at best and problematic at worst. Several different methods are commonly used to deploy OSs onto new PCs or to upgrade an existing workstation's OS, but each of these methods has its drawbacks.

The introduction of Windows Vista adds a whole new layer of complexity to these tasks. Microsoft has tried to make it easier by creating the Business Desktop Deployment (BDD) Workbench. In this article, we'll see how BDD can help speed desktop deployments.

What's wrong with the old ways?

A common technique for provisioning new workstations involves manually configuring one workstation and then creating a disk image based on that workstation. This image can then be used to provision any additional PCs that need to be set up.

Although imaging sounds like a quick and easy method for setting up new workstations, there are two major drawbacks to using this technique. The first drawback is that using an exact image of a PC to provision other PCs can lead to complications with Window's Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL). Unless the computers that are being set up using the image have identical hardware to the machine that the image was originally made on, using the image could result in problems resulting from missing or incompatible drivers. In situations where the machine the image is made on has very different hardware from the machine that is being setup using the image, the new workstation could be rendered unbootable.

The other problem with using an image to provision new PCs is that every PC that is created from the image will have exactly the same SID as the machine that was used to create the image. Since Windows requires each PC on the network to have a unique SID, this presents a bit of a problem to say the least. It is possible to get around this problem by running a SID randomizer on the new PC prior to connecting it to the network.

To help companies deal with these types of problems, Microsoft has traditionally offered two primary solutions for setting up new PCs. One solution involves using System Management Server (SMS), while the other solution involves using the Remote Installation Services (RIS).

Larger companies tend to use SMS Server since it allows for hands free deployments, and offers other capabilities such as the ability to inventory network workstations. Smaller companies often try to avoid the expense and complexity of SMS by using RIS instead. Like SMS, RIS can be complicated to configure, but since it is included with Windows Server 2003, the price is right.

RIS gets around some of the problems associated with traditional imaging solutions because RIS ensures that each workstation receives a unique computer name and a unique SID. The biggest disadvantage to using RIS is that it requires workstations to connect to a RIS server by either using a BOOTP enabled network card or a boot floppy. This is a problem is because there are very few network adapters that are natively supported by RIS. The Microsoft Knowledgebase contains articles explaining how to configure RIS to work with additional types of network cards, but my experience has been that many common types of network adapters simply won't work with RIS. Even if you are able to get your network cards to work with RIS, you may find yourself constantly having to tweak RIS each time your company buys a PC with a new type of network card.

New options in Vista

Regardless of which method you use to provision new PCs or to upgrade workstations, the process can be a real pain for the administrator. Microsoft has addressed this problem in Windows Vista, and has taken several steps in an effort to make Vista easier to deploy than previous versions of Windows.

The most significant thing Microsoft has done to make Windows Vista deployments easier than deploying earlier versions of Windows was to separate the OS from the HAL. This means you will no longer need to maintain multiple Windows deployment images just to compensate for differences in hardware. Instead, you can use a single image file; and Vista is smart enough to figure out which HAL it needs to use.

There is one major exception to this rule, however. You cannot use a single image file for both 32-bit and 64-bit Vista deployments. If you plan on deploying both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Vista, you will need two different image files.

To make it easier to deploy, Microsoft has also made Vista language neutral. This language neutralization essentially means that you are not going to have to maintain separate deployment images for various localizations.

As you can imagine, the fact that Microsoft has made Vista language neutral and has modularized the HAL does a lot to make Vista easier to deploy than other versions of Windows. However, the best thing Microsoft has done to make deploying Vista easier is to create a tool named Business Desktop Deployment 2007 (BDD 2007).

If you have worked with Windows networks for a while, then you probably know that in addition to major deployment tools such as SMS Server and RIS, Microsoft has created a multitude of small, single purpose, deployment tools. BDD 2007 is essentially a collection of these smaller deployment tools, but organized in a manner that allows them to be used effectively in large scale deployment scenarios. BDD 2007 can be used by itself to provide "light touch" desktop deployments. This essentially means that there is a negligible amount of activity that needs to occur at the PC in order to facilitate the deployment. BDD 2007 can also be used in conjunction with SMS Server 2003 to provide "zero touch" Windows deployments.

System requirements

Microsoft doesn't specify any firm hardware requirements for running BDD 2007. They do, however, specify the some minimum software requirements.

BDD 2007 can run on Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or on Windows Vista. Keep in mind, though, that BDD 2007 was designed primarily for the purposes of deploying Windows Vista. It is possible to use BDD 2007 to deploy Windows XP, but don't expect Windows XP deployments to be quite as easy as Vista deployments.

The software also requires the use of a server running Windows Server 2003 (with Service Pack 1 or higher). This server must be running the Windows Deployment Services (Windows DS) and must also have access to Active Directory.

BDD 2007 depends on MMC 3.0, which is not included with Windows XP or with earlier versions of Windows Server 2003. Therefore, unless you are running BDD 2007 on Windows Vista or on Windows Server 2003 R2, you will have to download and install MMC 3.0 prior to installing BDD 2007. You can download MMC 3.0 from Microsoft's Web site.

Depending on the configuration of the computer you're running the Business Desktop Deployment Workbench on, you may also need to install Windows Script Host version 5.6. Again, this update is not required if you are running BDD 2007 on Windows Vista. You can download this version from the Microsoft Web site as well.

One last component you need before getting started is the .NET Framework version 2.0. Once again, this update is not needed if you are running BDD 2007 on Windows Vista.

There are several other required components, but they can be downloaded automatically through BDD 2007. I will address these additional requirements later on.

Installing BDD 2007

Begin the installation process by downloading Business Desktop Deployment 2007. The download consists of a 27.7 MB, MSI file.

Once the download is complete, double-click the downloaded file and Windows will launch the BDD 2007 Setup wizard, as shown in Figure A.

Figure A

Double-clicking the downloaded file launches the Setup wizard.

Press Next to bypass the wizard's Welcome screen, and you will see a screen asking you to accept the End User License Agreement (EULA), as shown in Figure B.

Figure B

You must accept the End User License Agreement prior to installing BDD 2007.

After accepting the EULA, you will see a screen asking you to choose which features will be installed, as shown in Figure C. By default, all of the BDD 2007 features will be installed to your local hard drive. Since the entire installation consumes a mere 55 MB, go ahead and accept the default installation choices.

Figure C

Press Next to accept the default installation choices.

You will then see a screen that gives you a last chance to review your installation choices, as shown in Figure D. Press the Install button to complete the installation process.

Figure D

Press the Install button to begin copying the necessary files.

The installation process should complete fairly quickly. Once Setup finishes, you can launch BDD 2007 by selecting the Deployment Workbench command from the Windows Start menu. When BDD 2007 starts, you will be taken to the screen shown in Figure E.

Figure E

This is the initial BDD 2007 screen.

As you can see in the figure, BDD 2007 consists of a number of different components. I will be writing separate articles for each of these individual components. For now, though, I want to give you a brief description of each of the areas that I will be discussing.

  • Application Compatibility: One of the biggest problems with Windows Vista is that its new security mechanisms cause some applications not to run. The Application Compatibility components allow you to research your application's Vista compatibility prior to actually deploying Vista on a large scale.
  • Infrastructure Remediation: The basic idea behind infrastructure remediation is that in order to effectively manage your network, you need to understand what infrastructure is actually in place. Part of that process involves creating network documentation that can be adapted as changes to the network infrastructure occur.
  • Computer Imaging System: I have already talked about how imaging can be used for desktop deployment. The Computer Imaging System component allows you to create modular images that easily adapt to your organization's changing needs.
  • Application Management: The Application Management components are designed to help you deploy applications to the desktops in a consistent manner. Applications not installed in a consistent manner often cause usability and other support issues.
  • Office Deployment: Deploying Microsoft Office could easily be considered to be application management. Even so, Microsoft Office is considered to be a core application is many organizations. Since Microsoft Office is a Microsoft product, they have created some special provisions for making the installation of Office 2007 easier.
  • Securing the Desktop: Any time you're planning for a mass upgrade or deployment of an OS, security becomes a paramount concern. The security settings that you implement during the deployment are often in effect for some time to come. It is therefore important to choose those settings wisely.
  • The Deployment Process: One of the articles in this series will focus solely on the deployment process. This involves planning for things such as deployment server placement and capacity, deciding on a deployment method, and deciding on how you will handle activations when the deployment is complete.
  • User State Migration: In situations in which you are upgrading or migrating existing desktops, you will often find that users have at least some customization in place. They might have selected personalized wallpaper or have implemented a preferred layout for Microsoft Outlook, for example. In these cases, it is often desirable to move user's files and settings as a part of the migration. User state migration involves migrating anything on a desktop that a user might have personalized.

Downloading additional components

Earlier, I mentioned BDD 2007 required additional components that didn't have to be installed until after BDD 2007 was installed. Technically, you may not actually need all of these additional components. The components you need depend on the BDD 2007 features you're going to be using. For the sake of simplicity, I recommend downloading any available components.

To do so, select the Components container. As you can see in Figure F, BDD 2007 will display a list of components that are available for download. To download a component, simply select it and then press the Download button, found near the bottom of the screen.

Figure F

There are a number of additional components that you can download.

BDD helps speed Vista deployments

One of Microsoft's goals in creating Windows Vista was to make deployment easier than that of previous Windows versions. To help accomplish this goal, Microsoft has provided the Business Desktop Deployment 2007 tool. In this article, I have explained how to download and install this tool, and have briefly discussed the tool's features. Other articles in this article series will discuss each of the tool's features in detail.

14 comments
LOUIETR ...
LOUIETR ...

I dunno about this. Vista is still in "baby-mode"!

Stephen Howard-Sarin
Stephen Howard-Sarin

Vista needs a lot of help to be a productivity improvement for most business functions. A smart rollout would instruct users on how to use it to their benefit -- otherwise the rollout is a waste of IT's precious time.

j101c
j101c

Don't you also need to upgrade all your applications such as MS Office etc. for your vista? Does vista support the Word_Perfect at all?

Fil0403
Fil0403

People like you need to try out Vista before bashing it. A smart comment would consider the fact that only retards or someone who has never use Windows XP would find any difficulties in being instantly more productive with Vista, as it doesn't take much training to do things like clicking the start menu button, typing the name of a document or e-mail and have it shown up in less than 5 seconds -- otherwise the comment is just a waste of people's time.

jason.townsend27
jason.townsend27

I give it a 2.5 or 3 outta 5 to be honest, its a resource hog and I just don't see enough improvements to warrant a company wide upgrade. I refuse to be on the "bleeding edge" of technology. I'll stick with XP for now.

hatfira
hatfira

To answer the first question, No, you don't NECESSARILY have to get all new versions of your applications. Some, like your AV software, will need a new version since their core functionality is different. Fortunately, as long as you're current on your maintenance (and most are since it's so critical) then the upgrade is free. I know that both Symantec and McAfee's are this way. Office 2003 works with no issues under Vista. that being said, most companies I am working with take this opportunity to upgrade to Office 2007 as well due to the open-source document handling (XML) and file comression by default, resulting in a much smaller file size. All the additional features of Office are well and good (expanded rows/columns of Excel for example) and some companies use them, but they are the icing, and since Office is the defacto standard (no offense to your WP install base) people know that the DocX, XlsX, PPTX are all coming and they want to be ready sooner rather than later. I cannot tell you with certainty whether WP will run in Vista. If it can be installed using Admin rights and run as a Standard User (which I believe to be the case) then it SHOULD run under Vista with no issues. You could get a copy of Vista from MS and see. All the versions are identical in the core, and even if you got an Eval copy that's valid only for 30 days, you could start to see if it will work for your apps. To be honest, there are going to be application compat issues. In our experience, over 80% work in Vista, more if they worked in XP, but that also means that 20% didn't. So there will be some work to do. If you remember the 95 -> NT days, then you know that whenever you introduce an OS that is more secure, some poorly behaving applications simply would not work correctly in the more restrictive OS. The same is true here. The positive to take out of that is the understanding that those are usually the same applications that caused system instability, crashes, and system unresponsiveness. (Of course, I also fully understand that those are the applications you can't live without! ;) Bottom line is that like any major upgrade, some things will work and some won't. The best plan is to get a copy of Vista and start loading your applications into it. See what happens. If everything blows up or requires Admin rights to run (Note that I didn't say INSTALL) then you know what road is ahead if you pursue Vista. If not, then maybe the road isn't as rocky as it appears. Good luck!

tomhass
tomhass

You go to other extreme of supporting Vista when (currently) there appears to be very little reason for upgrading from XP. Vista is mainly XP tarted-up to look nicer...who needs that ! In time there will be a case to upgrade but not now.

Fil0403
Fil0403

I give it a 5 outta 5 to be honest too, and to say Vista is a "resource hog" is quite an amusing comment, given I'm writing this on a 3+ year old Toshiba Satellite A60-122 laptop with Windows Vista Business and it's running smoothly (just because you don't know how to configure Vista it doesn't mean it's a resource hog) and only someone who knows nothing about Vista wouldn't see or consider important improvements like security, reliability/stability and productivity, just to name a few. What you refuse is to admit Vista is a very good OS and way better than XP. Good luck with malware, if you'll stick to XP.

hatfira
hatfira

Please see my post regarding Been There... I hope you will see that there are some legitimate business reasons to change to Vista. (The student's crude posting not being one of them... ;) ) If you have specific questions, I will do my best to answer them for you. I have done four deployments over the last six months and seen a lot of the pain points (real and imagined) that people go through for an upgrade. Also, it's important to note that the topic of this thread revolves around BDD and NOT just Vista. BDD is a good tool for the XP crowd as well. Not as ideally suited as BDD and Vista, but it does work and simplifies your XP deployment's too! Good luck!

kadosh
kadosh

I agree with you guys, I have to fight for 3 days to install Vista in my wife's computer.Crash after crash. It's working now but no SLI so far to mention just one problem I had. I'm sticking with XP for a while... Am I a retard? I don't think so.

hatfira
hatfira

I assume that the tool you speak of is the UIU? (Universal Imaging Utility) I used that a ton for XP migrations, and that was indeed a lifesaver! I understand the company's reluctance to keep the maintenance, and while this is off-topic, I wanted to share with you what I did to get them to see the light: Show them the money! Do a little research and see how much of your time is spent fighting image issues. Include build, maintenance, support, patching... Anything having to do with that time. Then multiply that by your hourly, and show them that cost miunus the cost of UIU maintenance. When they see that the UIU MAKES them money and in bundles, then they are hard-pressed NOT to buy it! If that's not enough, show them another chart (again, the homework! ;) )that shows that not only are they spending money uselessly, but that same time can be reinvested in other IT pursuits. It's like they are gaining two employees for the price of one tool! (Not only are they gaining regarding cost-to-maintain images, but also gaining in your other pursuits.) Like I said... Been there... Done that... ! ;) I tell you this because BDD won't work for your 2K machines, but maybe all this will help spur the move to XP if not Vista. As you know, mainline support for 2K has ended, so every support call costs mucho denero, software vendors aren't supporting it as much anymore, and patches are getting fewer and fewer. Good luck!

IT cowgirl
IT cowgirl

We still have not completed the upgrade from 2000 to XP yet! With over 1500 machines worldwide and too many "home grown" applications, I do not see a move to Vista for any reason. Although I must say that deployment looks like it may be better with this tool. I have spent so much time trying to get 100's of images into one basic image per peice of hardware, that it would be a dream for a tool that uses one image for all hardware. I tried another software that does this by keeping a "bundle" of drivers which you must pay for updates. Of course the company did not want to pay! So it was OK as long as we kept the same hardware set. Until the vendor, kept tweaking the hardware facilitating new drivers... I will give this a try. Thanks for your input as to the product!!

hatfira
hatfira

I agree with the student's assedrtion, but I certainly do NOT agree with the tone. For him to call anyone "reatard" is demeaning and ill-advised at best. That being said, there are a ton of security enhancements that Vista offers (UAC, Session 0 isolation, shadow registry and files for example), usability improvements (Start -> enter your executable here as an example), slick interface (granting the need fcr a DirectX 9 compliant card), and 800+ new GPO setting possibilities just to get started. Add in IE7's Protected Mode that XP can't offer, user protection, rewritten TCP/IP stack, support for IPV6 out-of-the-box, improved Terminal Services, and more stringent requirements for drivers, and I hope you can see that there are some compelling reasons to give Vista a look. I have personally been involved in four Vista rollouts since the debut in January, and do these types of projects for a living, so I am not just spouting off at the lip. Also, no, I don't work for Microsoft, and I don't have any vested interest in trying to force anyone to Vista. I do believe however, that there are some seriously compelling reasons to upgrade, and they don't all revolve around the user interface. To get back on topic, all my deployments utilize BDD2007, and I can pretty much take my deployment from place to place, plug in the files, and my builds work in the new environment. Of course, I have to adjust for product keys, different applications, different GUI requirements, etc, but the core of what I do remains the same. Once I developed the initial framework, subsequent deployments have been designed, built, and initial testing done in less than three weeks. I could never do that with XP. As a by-the-way, as the article said, XP can be used in a BDD deployment scenario as well. It's a bit more complicated, but once setup, you can use BDD to deploy XP until your Vista deployment is ready, then simply point to a new server share, DVD, or RDS image, and your Vista deployment in in process. It's really pretty slick. Bottom line: Even if you don't want to begin to look at Vista right away, you can still look into BDD, gain some familiarity with it, and hopefully utilize its features. Once you get ready for Vista, you can use the same BDD framework to configure and deploy it as well. Good luck to you! And no, I don't think you're a "retard". ;)

just_do_it
just_do_it

I see you are a student. That explains your arrogant and demeaning attitude. In your other reply you use the word 'retard' to refer to folks who refuse to deploy Vista. Having worked professionally in the IT industry for over a decade I have seen attitudes like yours many times. Almost all come from people like yourself with no experience in the day-to-day rigors of supporting a real business environment. In the 'real' world there are few compelling reasons for a business with a large installed base of proven OS's to upgrade to Vista (at least for now) You obviously have no grasp of the cost and man-hours involved in upgrading a business with 250 PCs in 18 locations to a new OS that requires software upgrades as well. Add to that the known issues Vista has with legacy hardware. Once you have experience in the trenches come back and see if you still think we are all retards.

Editor's Picks

IT Buying Cycle

Learn more