Password problem

Discussion in 'Home Networking' started by Mack, Jul 31, 2006.

  1. Mack

    Jon Guest

    One thing that made my choice was the ability of Pro to act as a VPN
    server, which apparently Home can't.
     
    Jon, Aug 1, 2006
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Here's a start:

    In a "hot-desking" office, having to set up individual accounts on all
    the machines, for all of the users, would simply be impractical..

    With Pro, you just set up and manage the accounts on one machine, once.
     
    Palindr☻me, Aug 1, 2006
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mack

    Pier Danone Guest

    | Pier Danone wrote:
    | > | > | | > | > Problem is, ask anyone why they have bought XP Pro and
    | > | > most will just shrug and say 'because it's pro'. Very few
    | > | > people are aware of the differences.
    | > |
    | > | I am, which is why I chose it.
    | >
    | > Would you like to share them with us, just for the record, in case anyone is
    | > really wondering what the extra money gets.
    | > I am not being sarcastic, but clearly you must know and your knowledge would
    be
    | > a benefit to all of us.
    | >
    | >
    |
    | Here's a start:
    |
    | In a "hot-desking" office, having to set up individual accounts on all
    | the machines, for all of the users, would simply be impractical..
    |
    | With Pro, you just set up and manage the accounts on one machine, once.
    |
    | --
    | Sue

    And I guess the changes reflect accross any 'pro' machine on the network?
     
    Pier Danone, Aug 1, 2006
    #23
  4. Mack

    Pier Danone Guest

    | "Pier Danone" <Pier > declared for all the world to hear...
    | > Would you like to share them with us, just for the record, in case anyone is
    | > really wondering what the extra money gets.
    | > I am not being sarcastic, but clearly you must know and your knowledge would
    be
    | > a benefit to all of us.
    |
    | One thing that made my choice was the ability of Pro to act as a VPN
    | server, which apparently Home can't.
    | --
    | Regards
    | Jon

    But it will work as a client. I connect between 2 machines over VPN both running
    home. I must confess I have never tried to see into the network beyond the XP
    Home machine. I can't recall how I did it, think it was just a case of setting
    up a new 'network connection'. That said, I only used it once.
     
    Pier Danone, Aug 1, 2006
    #24
  5. Yep, once changed on the domain controller, the changes reflect across
    all the 'pro' machines on the domain, and the Win2k machines on the
    domain, and the Win NT machines on the domain...plus, of course, to
    other domains with a suitable trust relationship..

    I tend to use old laptops as pdc and bdc, running NT server, just for
    account/token management. They also do the print server jobs. NT server
    licences are pretty cheap, as are old lappies at 25GBP a time.

    Unfortunately, IIUC, Home machines can't join a domain - unless you know
    different.

    Actually I am rather hoping that someone will say, "Waaah you got that
    wrong", as I have just taken on an office with a load of Home machines
    and haven't quite figured out yet how I am going to set them up for
    hot-desking..
     
    Palindr☻me, Aug 1, 2006
    #25
  6. Mack

    Simon Dobson Guest

    Are you talking about attaching them to a domain here? I'm not sure how
    to achieve what you've described with XP Pro alone?

    Just to add to the thread, some features I've noticed missing from Home
    which are in Pro.. There's likely a definitive list on the web though:

    * Remote Desktop (How anyone can live without this I don't know!)
    * Home won't join a domain, so no Group Policy and the rest of it
    * EFS (Wouldn't like to run Home on a laptop that goes missing!)
     
    Simon Dobson, Aug 1, 2006
    #26
  7. Mack

    Pier Danone Guest

    | Pier Danone wrote:
    | > | > | Pier Danone wrote:
    | > | > | > | > | | > | > | > Problem is, ask anyone why they have bought XP Pro and
    | > | > | > most will just shrug and say 'because it's pro'. Very few
    | > | > | > people are aware of the differences.
    | > | > |
    | > | > | I am, which is why I chose it.
    | > | >
    | > | > Would you like to share them with us, just for the record, in case
    anyone is
    | > | > really wondering what the extra money gets.
    | > | > I am not being sarcastic, but clearly you must know and your knowledge
    would
    | > be
    | > | > a benefit to all of us.
    | > | >
    | > | >
    | > |
    | > | Here's a start:
    | > |
    | > | In a "hot-desking" office, having to set up individual accounts on all
    | > | the machines, for all of the users, would simply be impractical..
    | > |
    | > | With Pro, you just set up and manage the accounts on one machine, once.
    | > |
    | > | --
    | > | Sue
    | >
    | > And I guess the changes reflect accross any 'pro' machine on the network?
    | >
    | >
    | Yep, once changed on the domain controller, the changes reflect across
    | all the 'pro' machines on the domain, and the Win2k machines on the
    | domain, and the Win NT machines on the domain...plus, of course, to
    | other domains with a suitable trust relationship..
    |
    | I tend to use old laptops as pdc and bdc, running NT server, just for
    | account/token management. They also do the print server jobs. NT server
    | licences are pretty cheap, as are old lappies at 25GBP a time.

    I am glad to see you take this route. I am no network expert (I am not in your
    leauge)
    So many people bang on about linux and it's wonderful networking ability with
    SAMBA,
    but even on small networks I have found it slow and as for using linux as a
    print server, forget it unless you are lucky enough to get it to work with your
    hardware.
    I personally would take the approach of going with an NT Server, as you say,
    it's cheap enough and the support is really good.


    | Unfortunately, IIUC, Home machines can't join a domain - unless you know
    | different.

    Not that I am aware of. Then I don't do large networks so I have never looked at
    it.

    Tell me, as you clearly know your subject, and as I am always looking to
    understand things better.
    What is the storage set-up for the hot desking set up? I mean, if 'Jack' jumps
    onto machine 2, types up a word document, and saves it in 'my documents'
    He then comes back for the afternoon shift and has to work on machine 4. Can he
    still get at 'my documents'. Where are the user documents stored??? Are they
    spread across machines? Probably seems like a stupid retard question - but thats
    the kind of guy I am!
    | --
    | Sue
    |
    |
     
    Pier Danone, Aug 2, 2006
    #27
  8. Mack

    james Guest

    Yeah - you can either use roaming profiles or a group policy to redirect "My
    Documents" to \\server\user\mydocs etc.
     
    james, Aug 2, 2006
    #28
  9. Mack

    Pier Danone Guest

    |
    | | > Tell me, as you clearly know your subject, and as I am always looking to
    | > understand things better.
    | > What is the storage set-up for the hot desking set up? I mean, if 'Jack'
    | > jumps
    | > onto machine 2, types up a word document, and saves it in 'my documents'
    | > He then comes back for the afternoon shift and has to work on machine 4.
    | > Can he
    | > still get at 'my documents'. Where are the user documents stored??? Are
    | > they
    | > spread across machines? Probably seems like a stupid retard question - but
    | > thats
    | > the kind of guy I am!
    |
    | Yeah - you can either use roaming profiles or a group policy to redirect "My
    | Documents" to \\server\user\mydocs etc.
    |
    |

    So they always end up being in stored in the same place, on a server.
    That makes sense. I have never really sat down and thought about the purpose of
    a server in all these years.
     
    Pier Danone, Aug 3, 2006
    #29
  10. Mack

    james Guest

    Thats the idea. That way, they are backed up, people can swap PC's etc, all
    without the hassle of copying stuff around.
     
    james, Aug 3, 2006
    #30
  11. Mack

    Pier Danone Guest

    |
    | | >
    | > |
    | > | Yeah - you can either use roaming profiles or a group policy to redirect
    | > "My
    | > | Documents" to \\server\user\mydocs etc.
    | > |
    | > |
    | >
    | > So they always end up being in stored in the same place, on a server.
    | > That makes sense. I have never really sat down and thought about the
    | > purpose of
    | > a server in all these years.
    | >
    |
    | Thats the idea. That way, they are backed up, people can swap PC's etc, all
    | without the hassle of copying stuff around.
    |
    I never sat and thought about it, but the advantages are very clear. The server
    does not need to be anything special at all, does it.
    Only thing I see as a problem is if it goes down! I guess there is a way to
    cluster a couple of servers up to deal with this?
     
    Pier Danone, Aug 3, 2006
    #31
  12. Mack

    james Guest

    Gets a bit more complex then - i've never set it up, but certainly using
    win2000 server you can set up something called DFS that should allow you to
    replicate stuff across locations but that gets accessed by a common
    name/path.
    A lot of people would suggest using Linux for your server (mainly cuz it's
    free) but I couldn't tell you how to sort this out and whether it can now do
    policies for windows boxes etc.
     
    james, Aug 3, 2006
    #32
  13. Mack

    Pier Danone Guest

    |
    | | > |
    | > | Thats the idea. That way, they are backed up, people can swap PC's etc,
    | > all
    | > | without the hassle of copying stuff around.
    | > |
    | > I never sat and thought about it, but the advantages are very clear. The
    | > server
    | > does not need to be anything special at all, does it.
    | > Only thing I see as a problem is if it goes down! I guess there is a way
    | > to
    | > cluster a couple of servers up to deal with this?
    | >
    |
    | Gets a bit more complex then - i've never set it up, but certainly using
    | win2000 server you can set up something called DFS that should allow you to
    | replicate stuff across locations but that gets accessed by a common
    | name/path.
    | A lot of people would suggest using Linux for your server (mainly cuz it's
    | free) but I couldn't tell you how to sort this out and whether it can now do
    | policies for windows boxes etc.
    |
    |
    There is a hidden cost of ownership with linux. It's questioned, too, if using
    linux as a server acts as an easier mechanism to infect MS machines. Being that
    there is such a MS - V - Linux lobby.

    Ive played with linux and samba and always found it slow and pants to be
    perfectly honest. Ive never got it to work for printing with anything much over
    a dot martix either.

    Thanks for the various responses and sorry for hijacking the thread. Lots of
    reading to do to get up to speed.
     
    Pier Danone, Aug 3, 2006
    #33
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.