Thanks to everyone who came to Minneapolis last week to create the best JNUC ever! While the event is still fresh in everyone's mind, we'd love to hear your ideas for making it even bigger and better next year.
Also, thanks again to the presenters who put a ton of effort into all the amazing sessions. It wouldn't be the JNUC without you!
Resolve WiFi issue, maybe get another sponsor to show off their goods by beefing up what we can use.
Guthrie is great for viewing sessions.
A session of "BAM" here is what is new or will be new would be nice. I know this year was a year of woah, we aren't ready, which is fine. But I really enjoyed that from the JNUC 2014.
Thanks Cam for organizing and JAMF for putting on another fantastic JNUC! Thanks to the presenters for your time!
I would agree with @mhasman about a "new in..." session.
@cshepp - I agree with #2 but know it is the Guthre and nothing to do with JAMF. #4, it may be getting tight but what a cool venue especially for those out of towners.
maybe some sessions/workshops that people can go attend to learn the basics of things (Xcode / Scripting / API come to mind) but don't take up a session slot for it, maybe an after hours thing. With DEP / VPP coming becoming big, maybe a workshop on how to integrate that in someones environment (How to setup groups, assign, revoke, etc). Something maybe they can hop onto their test environment and see how it pertains directly to their environment.
Some hands-on sessions would be awesome. When I lived in Mankato MN, Apple Engineers would come to town twice a year to actually go through entire processes. Eg, one morning, we all brought 3 testing laptops and set up a full Deploy Studio imaging setup from start to finish. We went home with a fully functioning DS setup.
I think starting to break out the conference into edu and enterprise might be advantageous. The concerns in the EDU space are not the same as in the enterprise space. The presentations were great this year, however, many ended 20 - 30 minutes early. A lot of the presenters are doing amazing things and I think helping them develop their topics a taste more would benefit all.
Maybe limit Q & A to 1 question per person. Q & A tends to lose me when one person starts seeking advice from 500 people on their one-off environment specific problem and then continues asking follow-up questions.
As previously stated, since this is a JAMF conference, it'd be nice to see JAMF do a bit more to make sure they cover recent changes and new features to their product(s). Staying current with Casper Suite functionality is one of my primary reasons for going.
The big sessions may be needed for popular topics, but having a few small ones that allow for more interaction would be a great alternative. Perhaps one 45 minutes slot could be in each of the 4 classrooms, allowing for 4, more interactive topics, like hands on approaches mentioned. These sessions might require in advance signups, though.
And looking at this past week, one problem I could highlight with nearly all presentations, the spot on JAMFNation for each session is virtually ignored by presenters. I would expect JAMF to strongly recommend they promptly (in advance?) post their presentations there, or a link to their own sites with same. Otherwise, why does this feature exist in JAMFNation? This kind of resource lets attendees review the details before the videos are processed and posted, especially for sessions we missed but do not want to spend the real-time hour to watch the video edition later.
I think an actual call for presenters and call for session topics would be helpful. It felt like there was practically no out-reach to JAMF users this year to get topics. I bet there would have been a greater variety of topics and levels (beginner/intermediate/advanced) if JAMF actually put out a call and hit a broader scope of people that would be interested in talking.
I mentioned this last year also, but I think poster sessions would work create for complex solutions that are one-offs for certain environments but are still work sharing/talking about. It would be a shame to separate EDU and Enterprise into separate events, but maybe there could be clearly-defined EDU and Enterprise tracks built into the conference? By adding another session and having the conference run a little longer, maybe until 5pm (not unreasonable, especially since the Society for Music Theory conferences start at around 8:50 and go to 5, and then even have evening sessions for more broad or "unique" topics).
It might also be interesting to group like-topics together, have three 30-45 minute talks grouped together into a longer sessions tied together by a theme (VPP, Imaging, Security, etc.) for more viewpoints and variety, then have the panelists all field questions or arm wrestle or something.
I'll echo what @emilykausalik said, a call for presenters/sessions would be very helpful. The last two years when asking to present, there was no list of "we'd like talks on this", and there was no notification that JAMF was looking for presenters. If we knew what the community wanted/needed, or what JAMF wanted/needed, we could craft talks around those subjects based on our experience.
It was nice being able to attend again this year, missed you guys last year.
Brandon had a great idea, simple little thing, round the corners of the name badges. =D
Beyond that I would also have to agree with @emilykausalik in terms of getting a sense of topics for next year. And here's the deal...you need to get that from people actually attending. Not that the whole community isn't important, but the attendees should have more weight. I see there is another thread for that, so that's cool. The topics were good. The content was good. Much of it doesn't apply to me, and I don't necessarily expect it to since we have a smaller and purposefully simpler environment than others.
@rtrouton's content was probably best for me, and I appreciate the mention of the change in the binary. I knew that was coming, but I still think that's going to trip up people, despite the great notice in the JSS interface after upgrading.
Getting a lot of content to appeal to so many people is a challenge, but generally speaking it wasn't technical enough for me, the level ratings didn't align in my opinion. Hard considering more than half of the people seemed to be first-time attendees.
I'd like a deeper dive into iOS and management. Filevault and encryption on mobile (for HIPAA) would be awesome.
I concur with the WiFi issues. Aerohive (what the Guthrie has) is not managed too well when it comes to load distribution. I'd suggest using something that has NAPLB.
Regardless, this was my first JNUC and I enjoyed meeting so many people!
I agree with the iOS side, although there's only so deep you can go. Certificates is an endless discussion but 802.1X, SCEP (real work demos), AD certs (real work examples) etc would be good.
I'd like to see lots more panels and co-presenting sessions. A scripting session would be great. Particularly using scripts with Casper with (again) real world scenarios and examples.
I will certainly volunteer myself for any cert / bash / AppleScript co-presenting talks if it's of interest.
Thank you for hosting this great event and mini events!
I agree with a lot of what people said before but here's my list.
Overall the experience was great and I hope my boss will let me go again next year. Thanks!
Something worth doing now that the conference is getting so large is a JNUC 101 panel, held in the main stage right after the Keynote, where someone from JAMF introduces the venue, sessions, how lunch works, events, sessions Q&A, etc. works. This will be particularly useful for new attendees year over year as the attendance is now so large that finding a particular person to ask for help will be more difficult to parse out.
They were able to stream the Keynote in the McGuire stage for overflow. I don't think hooking up GoToWebinar or uStream would be that much of a reach. I don't think it would be a bandwidth issue, as the bandwidth at the Guthrie was fine, it was just the IP pool and wifi interference causing issues (from what I could tell).
Sign me up for more technical sessions, in-depth, and maybe even required pre-reading (or understanding). If a presentation is flagged advanced, so it should be.
This year, some presentations were rather short.
I have no problem with getting another session in during the day, at least in the afternoon. When you travel the world, you want to max the outcome. Starting at 8am and finish at 5pm or even 6pm would be no problem, rather advantageous. That way, we could have 6 sessions a day, or make way for longer, more in-depth sessions spanning several hours.
JAMF should really look into the idea of @mhasman. A "what's new" and "best practice"-session would be awesome.
Success-stories are nice, but there should be more time allocated to really show off any smart solutions so that we all can benefit. If they are proprietary and not shareable, so be it, but otherwise, that would really be great thing to bring back home.
A few thoughts, unrelated to each other...
It was my first JNUC and I thought it was superbly organised. As for what I would like to see ...
As said previously a distinction between EDU and enterprise (maybe even so on attendee badges) that way if I wanted to find someone to chat with from Enterprise at lunch, they would be wearing a different colour badge. Also a tag on the session to say the session would be better suited for EDU or enterprise might help first timers.
Demos/Best Practises. They would be great. EG, walk up to a station they can demo imaging workflows/ some cool scripts (anything really).
It would be great to have the session videos immediately, this may be a little too much as but would be really helpful to recap and the end of the day in the hotel.
Personally for me Wifi isn't a priority, yes it was nice when it worked but not a game changer
As a new Casper Admin and first-time JNUC attendee, I was hoping for:
• Presentations by JAMF Employees
• Hands-on workshops
• Posting presentation resources on JAMF Nation before the session
Also, the Wi-Fi could be harder, better, faster, stronger.
The Mini-Sessions were awesome—thank you JAMF for hosting the Beer Swap—and I also got to connect with a local admins group from Southern California.
Two quick ideas:
My two cents are:
A better wifi would be great, some of us had to do work while at JNUC. Maybe a vendor would want to setup wifi at the Guthrie as an advertisement ( though that would be bad if it all falls apart though)
8th floor could be used for Smaller sessions. The hallways and other areas were actually fairly quiet enough during sessions.
Shorter sessions for quicker items - longer ones for more complex or time consuming items - more time slots - 5pm isn't that late is it?
Possibility of using Aloft meeting rooms or the Mill Museum meeting rooms? Maybe for the Vendors / Sponsors? JAMF's Update or info meetings? Not all of us knows everything about JAMF and it would give us a reason to go to another building to see the Vendors.
We all agree with the WiFi requests but I like the sponsor idea. I know that I mentioned some of the Xirrus arrays that could easily handle the traffic so long as the rest of the infrastructure can. That said, it may be time for the conference to broaden out a little bit. I do mean a "little" though. I like kind of having to bump into folks and have conversation start up simply by overhearing some tidbit or other.
As for the separation of EDU, Small Business, Gov/Corporate tracks I'm a bit torn. I certainly understand the difference of opinion and focus, however I don't think that they are as opposed as so many seem to think. I tend to spend a lot of time listening to large corporate concerns as they expose me to ideas that I may not have otherwise considered and apply them within our space. At the same time, I see just as many schools and corporations dealing with large scale, nepotistic cruft (i.e. fighting with AD, InfoSec, etc). So, I'm in favor of sticking with the defining of broader topics to be discussed (Imaging, deployment, DEP, Security, etc). That way, all concerned can mix and match easily based on interest. However, I wouldn't mind different colors of badging if that would help some. Yet, I still encourage everyone to break out of your comfort zone and stop making silos of your experiences! We all have a LOT to learn form each other!
The main difference between corporate and edu is that edu (particularly higher ed) has guidelines we must stick by. We are a university, so we have other guidelines that we must go by (TBR policies, HIPAA, HITECH, NOAH, State of TN, etc.). Corporate "writes their own" policies when it comes to computer management (on/off domain, software security, etc.).
I feel that the EDU spectrum could benefit from having their own JNUC, just my $.02
Corporate "writes their own" policies when it comes to computer management
Not necessarily. Often times companies fall under regulatory or statutory requirements due to the industry that they're in. FINRA, NISPOM, PCI DSS, DISA, HIPPA, DOD directives, Presidential Directives, Homeland Security Directives, Intrinsic Safety... The list goes on.
While what you state is true for EVERYONE, the EDU spectrum has different directives and policies (government related) that corporations write on their top end (non-government) such as FERPA. I've been in higher ed for 10 years now after moving out of the corporate world, so I have a good feel of both "realms".
I had some frustrations with the Intermediate/Beginner/Advanced designations for the JNUC presentations this year -- I thought they weren't very accurate. I went to several that I would have classified as beginner topics that were listed as advanced topics. As a result, some of the sessions, while helpful for some I'm sure, were somewhat a waste of my time.
I think listing prerequisites of knowledge (or experiences) would be more effective than having presenters self-judge how advanced their material is. And it would make it so JAMF didn't need to gauge that either. I've talked with several other admins around my area that attended JNUC 2015 and they seemed to express some of the same frustrations. The folks I bounced this off of seemed to think this was one possible was to resolve that.
Maybe there's a better way to achieve this, but it feels like the current way things are rated is somewhat broken.