Emily and Dana, 

Thanks for your reports.

The Compliance Caper is a super idea!   And I'm glad to say you have what I think is exactly the right handle on it -- that it's a good filler for a slow day, but takes second place to more-immediate teacher needs.  

Here are a few tips that might be helpful along the way:
<ol>
<li> 1)  The default view has a time-window of something like 30 days.  So it will list visitor laptops, other machines that were on the network during that time but not now, listings under both old and new names for machines you've renamed, and other detritus.  You can choose a shorter window to try and eliminate some of these, by clicking on 7-days or 1-day.  

<li> 2) The above might be part of the story with the computer Dana saw in the report but couldn't find in the reported location.  But also, the "room / seat / brand" info comes from the Description field and was put there by the installer, or maybe us!  They or we may have gotten something wrong, or gotten it right but not updated it when physically relocating the machine.  (The logged-in username, OTOH, should be valid; if it's non-generic and interpretable as a teacher name, that may suggest a room to look in.)

<li> 3) The SMS column seems to be used for a variety of things that don't sound directly like SMS, and some other columns have somewhat odd messages too..  If you click at the top of  most of  the columns (not the sorting button but near it) you can get a popup window with a little explanation of the problem indicator.   

<li> 4) In particular, there are a series of numbered messages in the SMS column (like 1789) that turn out to be Domain Trust issues.  At Fermi, where there is a semi-functional private domain, those messages are probably correct!  But what you can do about it is mostly make sure the client computer is on INSTR and not FERMIDOM.  
    <ul list-style="square">
  	<li>a] If on FERMIDOM, run the join-domain wizard from fermi-adm01 maintenance tools page to join INSTR.  
	<li>b] If apparently on INSTR, you can make sure by forcing it to leave and rejoin.  This means going to System Properties panel, Network Identification or Computer Name tab (it changes between W2K and XP), Change button.  Check Workgroup instead of Domain, fill in any name for the workgroup.  OKAY and reboot.  Go back in and join INSTR.  If you need to give it a "username authorized to join computers to this domain" the user is (SENT IN EMAIL, NOT POSTED) with password (SENT IN EMAIL, NOT POSTED) .  (Or you can use the join-domain wizard at this stage.)  If it complains about "this computer name already belongs to the INSTR domain, cannot join", then futz around with the name a little, like change the final letter U to V.  
	<li>c] It may be that the computer was correctly moved from FERMIDOM to INSTR some time ago but retains a manual DNS setting of the local server.  Check the Network Connection's settings, make sure both the IP Address and the DNS Server are Automatic.
    </ul>
<li> 5) In theory, OTS picks and chooses the patches and other updates to apply, and pushes them over the network from CPS.  So (still in theory) there is no need to actually run Windows Update direct from Microsoft.  In practice, sometimes there is need for that ... e.g., a laptop that is not going to stay connected overnight to get the updates (a case that recently came up for you at Fermi), or a just-now restored computer that is way behind.  An in-between case is a desktop computer with a good network connection, which was not getting the CPS critical patches because of some domain or SMS issue.  If that latter type issue has been resolved, probably you could leave the computer connected and running, and let the maintenance scan take care of that.  But equally it would be nice to see that red blotch cleared up!  So you could go for Windows Update in that case too.
<ul list-style="square">
  <li>5a) When you do use Windows Update direct to Microsoft, don't get IE 7.  It has some incompatibilities for IMPACT.
  <li> 5b) When you do use Windows Update direct to Microsoft, don't worry too much if some particular items refuse to install.  This may be a known problem, and this patch then wouldn't count against it on the compliance page.  
</ul>
</ol>
  Thanks again,

  ==Mitch