That is correct.. I believe .net would be its partner in the server world.
As for XP Home, don't even think about joining it to a domain.. I guess Microsoft felt
if they stripped that old built in windows 95 feature they could sell it as an XP pro
only feature.
Also, to followup on the gentlemens questions of win95/98/ instances of Sambar I can
tell you that the TCP/IP stack on these operating systems is a far cry than those of a
WINNT nature (NT,2k,xp).. The TCP/IP stack in these OSs can handle a lot more
concurrent connections and are also much better at managing them and killing dead
ones. Although 95/98 are lighter OS's, there is a reason for it. If your curious,
check out registry comparisons on Max TCP Connections and their capable dword values
in the different OSs.
Danny
On 04/Nov/2002 14:38:15, James Wright wrote:
> I wasn't even thinking about that... XP hasn't come out with a server
> edition yet, has it?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 10:57 AM
> Subject: [sambar] new machines {03}
>
>
> > 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 <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/
