«

In Sybex's 70-218 W2k Network Management book, on page 467, #6:

There's a question I can't reason out for sure. First, the question
and answer:

"6. Charles is the network administrator for the Worldwide Apparel
Company. He is responsible for all the accounts in single-domain
Windows 2000 network that has two sites; one in Los Angeles and one in
New York. He has been told that a new application must be distributed
to the designers in each location. It is a Windows 2000 compliant
program that has been tested in the lab by the support engineers. He
has already created a Designer OU that contains the workstations that
need the application. Charlesl packages the application as an MSI
file. He then defines the package in a GPO and links it to the
Designer OU. The next day, the gets calls from the users that the
promised application is not in their Start menus. What does Charles
most likely need to do to deploy the network application to the
specified computers?

A. Make a Windows Installer shortcut for the application
B. Repackage the application as an MSI file and redploy the
application
C. Apply a transformation file to the installed application on the
Designer OU computers.
D. Re-creat the ZAP file and then deploy it to the Designer OU."

Answer given:
"6. B. ZAP files cannot be assigned, they must be published, and since
the application is Windows 2000 compliant there's no reason not to use
an MSI file. ZAP files are created when there is no MSI file available
or one cannot be created. These are usually applications that are not
Windows 2000 compliant. Transoformation files are used to customize a
package file to determine which features will be available in the
application."

My confusion:

But it was already packaged as an MSI file to begin with. Is this
implying that the MSI file was packaged improperly the first time? If
so, shouldn't it suggest this, instead of just saying to do it again?
It makes me doubt whether the possible answers are all worded
correctly, or whether the correct answer given has the wrong
description. None of the other answers seem right to me, so I'm
guessing that B is indeed the correct answer, but it isn't clear to
me. Can someone explain this?

I've looked into MSI file creation via 3rd party utilities and have
learned that it's a very sensitive process, so I could see how a
package could be made improperly. But the book doesn't make this
clear.

Dave

I think the question had a typo. It probably wasn't supposed to say package
the file as an MSI file.
MSI file deployment become more interesting with 2003 and Longhorn, btw.
Glenn
"David K" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In Sybex's 70-218 W2k Network Management book, on page 467, #6:
>
> There's a question I can't reason out for sure. First, the question
> and answer:
>
> "6. Charles is the network administrator for the Worldwide Apparel
> Company. He is responsible for all the accounts in single-domain
> Windows 2000 network that has two sites; one in Los Angeles and one in
> New York. He has been told that a new application must be distributed
> to the designers in each location. It is a Windows 2000 compliant
> program that has been tested in the lab by the support engineers. He
> has already created a Designer OU that contains the workstations that
> need the application. Charlesl packages the application as an MSI
> file. He then defines the package in a GPO and links it to the
> Designer OU. The next day, the gets calls from the users that the
> promised application is not in their Start menus. What does Charles
> most likely need to do to deploy the network application to the
> specified computers?
>
> A. Make a Windows Installer shortcut for the application
> B. Repackage the application as an MSI file and redploy the
> application
> C. Apply a transformation file to the installed application on the
> Designer OU computers.
> D. Re-creat the ZAP file and then deploy it to the Designer OU."
>
> Answer given:
> "6. B. ZAP files cannot be assigned, they must be published, and since
> the application is Windows 2000 compliant there's no reason not to use
> an MSI file. ZAP files are created when there is no MSI file available
> or one cannot be created. These are usually applications that are not
> Windows 2000 compliant. Transoformation files are used to customize a
> package file to determine which features will be available in the
> application."
>
> My confusion:
>
> But it was already packaged as an MSI file to begin with. Is this
> implying that the MSI file was packaged improperly the first time? If
> so, shouldn't it suggest this, instead of just saying to do it again?
> It makes me doubt whether the possible answers are all worded
> correctly, or whether the correct answer given has the wrong
> description. None of the other answers seem right to me, so I'm
> guessing that B is indeed the correct answer, but it isn't clear to
> me. Can someone explain this?
>
> I've looked into MSI file creation via 3rd party utilities and have
> learned that it's a very sensitive process, so I could see how a
> package could be made improperly. But the book doesn't make this
> clear.
>
> Dave

A little late, i know, but i have the answer, i think.

This is why everyone that "knows" hates multiple choice questions. This is
a "trick" question in the sense that none of the answers are ideal. The
"trick" is that you are asked to chose the "best" answer from the list.
This is something you must get used to when taking multiple choice tests.

The answer is "B" because the other answers are wrong and so the only
logical thing to do is pick "B". If you had this happen for real on the
job, you would review what you did and maybe reason that everything was done
right so it should have worked, but it did not work, so you do it again.
Repackage. The original must have been bad. that is the only alternative
given the other answers.

Aren't multiple choice questions fun?