Personally I wouldn't touch XP.. Of course thats just me so to keep the conversation
honest.. I think if you are looking at using XP as a file server then you probably are
going to fall short just like any other workstation.. (Limit 10). In addition the
thread handling of a workstation is designed to handle Workstation processes as a
priority to Server processes.. Personally I would either lay down NT server or 2000
Server for handling this.. If you don't want the extra overhead then go with NT.. If
your needing some advanced functions like MMC, Clustering, etc.. then you would need
to go 2000.. You should also consider using Linux and Samba.. They work very nice for
a file server and even act perfectly as a NT domain controller and is transparent to
the user.
Danny
On 04/Nov/2002 08:40:37, James Wright wrote:
> Just think ahead and watch your security. It will pick up every share it can find
>and workgroups and subnets won't contain it; so a traditional network we've done for
>years no longer applies without additional routing and rules. I've had to re-wire
>more than one network once XP got plugged in.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rodney Richison
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 8:07 AM
Subject: [sambar] new machines {01}
I am working up some machines for a customer and will hopefully talk them into
sambar later. Are there issues with XP Professional that I should consider before I
built the file server?
Highest Regards,
Rodney
<A HREF="http://www.rcrnet.net";>www.rcrnet.net</A>
918-358-1111
-------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe please go to <A TARGET="_blank"
HREF="http://www.sambar.ch/list/";>http://www.sambar.ch/list/</A>
-------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe please go to <A TARGET="_blank"
HREF="http://www.sambar.ch/list/";>http://www.sambar.ch/list/</A>
-------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe please go to http://www.sambar.ch/list/
