• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Win98 Peer-to-peer network size

S

Sejuras

Junior Member
Got a small office with about 15 PCs (most run win98, some run 98SE). All are using TCP/IP to connect to single "file server" which is a PII-400 running Win98. Network is built on 24-port Netgear 10Mb mini-hub - not a switch, only a concentrator. Does anyone have any experience as to at what point is it a general rule of thumb (or just plain good ol' idea) to replace the file server with a REAL server running NT4.0 or Win2K? I don't think there are any latency issues yet, but for budgeting purposes, we are looking to double the amount of PCs in the office this next year!

Any thoughts would be appreciated!!!
 
Do it now, get the bugs out before you go on an expansion push 🙂

Actually, hire a network consultant and fix the network first...a hub just doesn't do it for more than a handful of computers unless your traffic is *really* low. Your best bet is probably a small switch with room for expansion...

~Ladi
 
I agree with hiring someone who knows what they are doing. But I don't think you need to worry about switches right now. I have set up several engineering firm offices with many more than 30 client machines using plain old hubs, and haven't had any problems.

See the other responses in the Networking forum.
 
don't hire anyone! think it through, it would be a good project to do some (a lot ) of research.
win2000 is very easy to setup as a "file Server" and would be a great idea if you are going to get more computers hooked up to it. I don't think a "file server" for you would need that much bandw. (that is what I get from you) (i am just assuming that they need to transfer some documents now and then etc.). With win2000, the server will run faster (doesn't have memory leaks like win98, 95 ,me), run longer (will not crash as much), and will allow for more options such as firewall (yes, I know ME is suppposed to do this very well, but think about it... it isn't secure and will slow down).
but, when possible try to upgrade to 100mbps

anyways,
that is my 2 cents
 
Sejuras, you should not use Win9x as a file server for any size network. Period. Operating systems in the Win95/98/ME family are far too unstable to be used as a server. The FAT32 file system used by these OSs is too prone to file system corruption to hold any important data. Win9x has almost no security. Also, keep in mind that any file server MUST be running on a UPS. Do you have one for that machine?

You need to be running either NT 4.0 Server or Win2K Server right NOW.
 
Naturally there is a UPS on it, the reason for 98 pretty much comes down to $$. The owners of the business hate spending money on computers / software but now it's "time to come to jesus" and hopefully I can pursuade them to see the long-term benfit of using a real server "OS". With the business growning as quickly as it is, I have to pursuade them to not have the "server" act as a user's desktop as well. We went through that once, and they freed it up, then the next month stuck a new hire on it! YIKES!!!!!

Is NT 4.0 server still available for purchase? I know msoft is pushing 2K server very heavily !
 
Professional will limit you to a maximum of 10 simultaneously connected users. Server is definitely a better option for your setup.
 
I'd go with Win2k in a small office enviroment. If it's a really tight budget you can get by with Win2k Professional, but the Server version gives you the opportunity to control security through a domain.

The reasons I'd go with Win2k is it runs an NFTS file system, it is very reliable (my server has not experienced a crash since it was installed), it has all the ease of use benefits of a Win9x system. Also, Win2k supports built-in routing so you can share an internet connection on that PC with the entire network easily and without any add-on software.

So I'd say Win2k Server if you can afford it. Win2k Professional if you can't.

As far as your hubs go, it really depends on how you are using your network. Switching might be necessary, but I've used hub exclusive networks with as many as 200 workstations.
I'd really need more specifics about your needs to advise on that point
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top