10-User Workaround

[Swampster]

Greetings one and all!

Does anyone have a workaround for the l0 concurrent user limitation in Windows (2000 Professional as well as XP Professional).

We have 10 systems (all running XP-Pro) and they all have to logon to a Windows 200 Pro system (via mapped drive) to access the company's main database program. The problem arises because the company had decided to expand by two more users, and I am hesitant to go to a Server type operating system.

Windows Server 2003 Standard or Small Business have been suggested, but I am concerned about the cost plus the fact that I know exactly NOTHING about installing or setting up this type of operating system.

Any and all suggestions are welcomed!

 

[spyordie007]

The only "workaround" is to run Windows Server and purchase enough CALs for your 12 concurent connections (unfortunetly). XP and 2K are set with this limitation for this very reason.

Another OS such as linux would also be options for you (if costs are a major concern). However if you are unsure of your abilities of managing a Windows server you will be way over your head trying to manage a Linux server.

 

[Fiveohhh]

Setting up 2k3 (just for the basics) is not that hard at all if you got it setup on win2k, should be able to do the same on win2k3 easily. One advantage the server OS has fixes your problem... more connections, and there are many more advantages, but if 2k was working fine for you 2k3 isn't going to not do something that 2k3 does. that beiong said I just so happen to have a copy of 2k3 for sale check my sig if your interested.

 

[SoulAssassin]

You're asking to violate the license for 2K Pro and basically break the law. Upgrade to 2K(3) Server and your problem will go away.

To setup a share is not really any different than doing it with 2K Pro.

 

[spyordie007]

oh, FYI if you do use server 2003 you can make use of volume shadow copy. it's a very nice feature that allows you to recover files if they get accidentally deleted or modified.

 

[owensdj]

Swampster, if you have a dozen client machines, you really need to be running Windows Server instead of Professional on the server machine. Windows Server is performance tuned to run server services, but Pro is not. You can also have a domain rather than a workgroup with a Windows Server. This will let you maintain a single user list rather than a user list on each machine.

If the cost is your concern, putting a Linux distribution on the server and running SAMBA on it for the Windows file sharing might be an option for you. Running Linux & SAMBA would save you more than $700 over a Windows Server 2003 with 15 client licenses. With the money you save, you could pay a good computer consultant to come setup Linux & SAMBA for you and still have hundreds left over to pay the consultant for any future work you might need.

 

[Swampster]

OK, everyone seems to be telling me the same thing . . . give up and go to a Server OS. That's what I was affraid I was going to hear <sigh>.

Considering that all I want to accomplish is to have more than 10 users concurrently connected to this system, which would be the best version. In other words, I don't need a domain, (as long as a workgroup works), nor do I have to be concerned with many of the other server functions offered in something like Enterprise.

Spyordie007 mentioned something about purchasing "CALs". I am not familiar with the term . . . would that stand for Computer Access License? If so, are you telling me I need to purchase WinXP-Pro for the workstations (already installed), a Server operating system of an appropriate version for the computer that acts as the host for the program AND purchase a license to connect all this together????

I know, I know, that may seem like a dumb statement, but remember, I am just now starting to explore the wonderful world of Server Operating Systems. I currently have a full version of Enterprise (w/25 user licenses . . . whatever that means), a demo version (180 days, I think) of Small Business Server 2003, and a 360 day demo version of Standard, so I have something I can install on a "test" system for learning purposes.

The full version will have to be returned shortly (unactivated), and the other two are expiring demo versions, but at least I have something to learn on and ask questions as I go prior to actually comitting to an upgrade of the Win2000Pro computer <G>.

 

[owensdj]

Swampster, CALs are Client Access Licenses. You'll need one for every client machine. Windows 2000 Pro and XP Pro are client operating systems. When you buy Windows Server it usually comes with a certain number of CALs already, such as 5 or 10. You can then buy more CALs to add onto this number. I believe the smallest number of CALs you can buy at one time is 5, so you'll have to go with 15 CALs to support 12 client machines. That'll give you some growing room.

As long as you're getting Windows Server, you might as well create a domain with your Windows Server machine. Keep in mind that Windows XP Home can not join a domain. You need Professional for that.

Windows 2000 Server, 2000 Small Business Server, Server 2003, and Small Business Server 2003 would all do the job for you. You won't see any benefit to an Advanced or Enterprise version, so don't buy those. Buying Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition 10 CAL and then buying a 5 CAL pack would probably be your best bet. You'll probably want to tell us about the hardware on your server machine to make sure it can run Server 2003.

Use the 360 day demo of Server 2003 to practice installing it. You'll need to make sure you configure the DNS server service on your Server 2003 machine because Active Directory domains depend on DNS.

 

[Fiveohhh]

Use the 360 day demo of Server 2003 to practice installing it. You'll need to make sure you configure the DNS server service on your Server 2003 machine because Active Directory domains depend on DNS.

FYI: you'll only need to install DNS if your using AD, if your going to use it as a file/print server, you don't need DNS installed on it.

 

[Swampster]

OWENSDJ,

As we speak, I have the Small Business Server 2003 Premium Edition (Evaluation Kit, from Microsoft) installing on my test system (1.4 AMD, 40GB HDD, 512MB of PC2700).

What would be the purpose and/or benefit of installing a domain? Remember, we are trying to stick with the KISS theory of operation (Keep It Super Simple).

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: Swampster
OWENSDJ,

As we speak, I have the Small Business Server 2003 Premium Edition (Evaluation Kit, from Microsoft) installing on my test system (1.4 AMD, 40GB HDD, 512MB of PC2700).

What would be the purpose and/or benefit of installing a domain? Remember, we are trying to stick with the KISS theory of operation (Keep It Super Simple).

An advantage would be security and administration. If all your doing is serving files off it, I think using a domain would go against your KISS. My parents company has 6 pcs, and I installed a domain on it, if you know your way around a server OS, than it may not be a bad idea, but for simplicity I'd stick with a workgroup.

 

[Budman]

Try & find a utility called "NTSWITCH" , this will allow you to change Win2k pro into Win2k server in 1 reboot.

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: Budman
Try & find a utility called "NTSWITCH" , this will allow you to change Win2k pro into Win2k server in 1 reboot.

I think hes looking for a legal way

 

[owensdj]

Fiveohhh, I don't agree with that. I think a domain is simplier than a workgroup. With a workgroup of Windows XP machines, you have to deal with adding a new user to every machine that user needs to access either locally or over the network(file and print shares). In a domain you just add them to the list of domain users and you're finished. They can go to any XP machine and log into it and access any file shares or shared printers.

If you're only dealing with 2-3 machines, stick with a workgroup, but at some point a domain makes things simplier.

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: owensdj
Fiveohhh, I don't agree with that. I think a domain is simplier than a workgroup. With a workgroup of Windows XP machines, you have to deal with adding a new user to every machine that user needs to access either locally or over the network(file and print shares). In a domain you just add them to the list of domain users and you're finished. They can go to any XP machine and log into it and access any file shares or shared printers.

If you're only dealing with 2-3 machines, stick with a workgroup, but at some point a domain makes things simplier.

I agree with ya there, but you gotta take the time to setup the domain and if you don't know how, will probably take awhile. Where if you have a your workgroup its fairly easy to be up and running in an hour from the time you put the os cd in(depending on how fast your pc it). If they are just sharing the files off the one pc, no reason to setup a user on every PC, just your server.

 

[Swampster]

Yes, this would definitely need to be a legal solution as we are a tightly regulated business.

To solve the question on Domain or just File Server . . . can I start with just the File Server functions and add the Domain Server later if the need (and knowledge level) justifies it?

 

[Swampster]

Forgot to ask . . . how does the operating system know how many Client Access Licenses I have purchased?

How do I activate them (i.e. assign license #1 to Suzy, #2 to John, etc.)?

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: Swampster
Yes, this would definitely need to be a legal solution as we are a tightly regulated business.

To solve the question on Domain or just File Server . . . can I start with just the File Server functions and add the Domain Server later if the need (and knowledge level) justifies it?

Yup you can setup a domain whenever.

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: Swampster
Forgot to ask . . . how does the operating system know how many Client Access Licenses I have purchased?

How do I activate them (i.e. assign license #1 to Suzy, #2 to John, etc.)?

You tell it when you install it(you can add them later too. Theres nothing verifying that you have them, you just tell it how many you have.

 

[Swampster]

OK, I bite . . . what is keeping me from purchasing SBS with 5 CALs and telling it I have 15??? That doesn't seem like the kind of "trust" we have come to expect from Microsoft lately/

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: Swampster
OK, I bite . . . what is keeping me from purchasing SBS with 5 CALs and telling it I have 15??? That doesn't seem like the kind of "trust" we have come to expect from Microsoft lately/

nothing... I'm assuming since most people that are buying sbs are a business and want to keep records straight. Thats just my thoughts though.

 

[Nothinman]

OK, I bite . . . what is keeping me from purchasing SBS with 5 CALs and telling it I have 15??? That doesn't seem like the kind of "trust" we have come to expect from Microsoft lately/

Nothing, but seeing as you're looking for a legal solution it would seem you can't do that.

I'll also chime in and vote for Linux. It's 100% free license-wise, there's no limits on number of CPUs or memory (within reason) or number of connections of any of the free serivces you can run on it. Samba can be setup as a domain controller or just as a fileserver with no CALs to worry about either way.

 

[OffTopic1]

1. Install a Linux server if the database run on Linux or if you are willing to migrate it to a free/opensource Linux database.

2. Bite the bullet & purchase 15 CAL with Windows server.

3. Intall the database on 2 different WindowsPro machines, and run replication ++ split the users (only if you are desperate).

 

[addragyn]

Why have you not tried one of the many point and click Linux solutions?

http://www.e-smith.org/

http://www.clarkconnect.org/

http://www.netmax.com/

I don't use Linux servers because they're cheaper. I use them because they work. Any of the above 3 will be easy as pie for you if you can read the docs and click a mouse.



It's easy.

1. Download the e-smith iso and burn it.

2. Read the docs and forum here to get you ducks in a row.

3. Install.

4. Be amazed how easy it all was. And think what an interesting concept Open source is. This was all coded for you, and anybody, to use because somebody out there loves this stuff and wants to share that.

5. ...

6. ...

7. Realize you've forgotten about the server you installed and haven't had to think 1 second about Service Packs and antivirus because the damn thing has just been solid.

 

[addragyn]

And developments Swampster?