Networked Office

[Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]]

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

 

[Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]]

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

 

[Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]]

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

 

[Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]]

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

 

[Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]]

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

 

[Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]]

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Technically it can be installed and run from the server,
and would save the problem of updating all 10 PCs.

How? Does MS supply a setup script for workstation to run office from
network-mounted-disk?

But as Chris mentioned, it would use huge amounts of the network.

This is not an issues for us. We have ample bandwidth to spare.

You can copy the CDs to the server and install to each
workstation from there.

This does not make any sense. Why can I just use them from network
disk(attached to each workstation), and execute the apps from there? This is
time consuming and it just plain old technology.

The only thing I can think of is if MS is collaborating with:
1. Disk vendors -- so we need to buy a lots of disk space
to store the same executable programs
2. Consultant -- more billable time(yeah.)

But seriously, why don't they(MS) make our lives(SysAdmin) a bit easier?

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Thanks Kevin. Unfortunately the terminal services are out of the question.
We have pretty powerful workstation and server, why would I use my
workstation
as a terminal(Isn't this goes again MS ideology)?

Secondly, why would I pay an additional license for each workstation
to access the terminal server. It is just not economical.

Or perhaps Microsoft is still ironing-out on how to implement this this type
of
technology(networked-multi-user-multi-task-apps)?

Thanks

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"

I'm trying to use my server as a file server, where I will store all the
Office executable. If MS so willing, then they can tell us what registry
setting on the local machine has to change so each of my workstation can run
office apps, e.g. MS Word, Excel, and other, right from their workstation?

Is it a technology issues that prevent this to happen? What's the big
problem since other OSes can handle multi-user apps?

Imagine if I can do that, everytime the workstation crashed and corrupted
the disk, all I have to do is install the os, mount the directory where
office reside, and voile ... it's back up again. Also, when the office need
upgrade, all I have to do is to upgrade the one on the server and again,
those 10(or for that matter 100K)workstation has their office upgraded!

Any ideas?




Office install
on just
like an

there

a

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Thanks Kevin. Unfortunately the terminal services are out of the question.
We have pretty powerful workstation and server, why would I use my
workstation
as a terminal(Isn't this goes again MS ideology)?

Secondly, why would I pay an additional license for each workstation
to access the terminal server. It is just not economical.

Or perhaps Microsoft is still ironing-out on how to implement this this type
of
technology(networked-multi-user-multi-task-apps)?

Thanks

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"

I'm trying to use my server as a file server, where I will store all the
Office executable. If MS so willing, then they can tell us what registry
setting on the local machine has to change so each of my workstation can run
office apps, e.g. MS Word, Excel, and other, right from their workstation?

Is it a technology issues that prevent this to happen? What's the big
problem since other OSes can handle multi-user apps?

Imagine if I can do that, everytime the workstation crashed and corrupted
the disk, all I have to do is install the os, mount the directory where
office reside, and voile ... it's back up again. Also, when the office need
upgrade, all I have to do is to upgrade the one on the server and again,
those 10(or for that matter 100K)workstation has their office upgraded!

Any ideas?




Office install
on just
like an

there

a

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Thanks Kevin. Unfortunately the terminal services are out of the question.
We have pretty powerful workstation and server, why would I use my
workstation
as a terminal(Isn't this goes again MS ideology)?

Secondly, why would I pay an additional license for each workstation
to access the terminal server. It is just not economical.

Or perhaps Microsoft is still ironing-out on how to implement this this type
of
technology(networked-multi-user-multi-task-apps)?

Thanks

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"

I'm trying to use my server as a file server, where I will store all the
Office executable. If MS so willing, then they can tell us what registry
setting on the local machine has to change so each of my workstation can run
office apps, e.g. MS Word, Excel, and other, right from their workstation?

Is it a technology issues that prevent this to happen? What's the big
problem since other OSes can handle multi-user apps?

Imagine if I can do that, everytime the workstation crashed and corrupted
the disk, all I have to do is install the os, mount the directory where
office reside, and voile ... it's back up again. Also, when the office need
upgrade, all I have to do is to upgrade the one on the server and again,
those 10(or for that matter 100K)workstation has their office upgraded!

Any ideas?




Office install
on just
like an

there

a

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Thanks Kevin. Unfortunately the terminal services are out of the question.
We have pretty powerful workstation and server, why would I use my
workstation
as a terminal(Isn't this goes again MS ideology)?

Secondly, why would I pay an additional license for each workstation
to access the terminal server. It is just not economical.

Or perhaps Microsoft is still ironing-out on how to implement this this type
of
technology(networked-multi-user-multi-task-apps)?

Thanks

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"

I'm trying to use my server as a file server, where I will store all the
Office executable. If MS so willing, then they can tell us what registry
setting on the local machine has to change so each of my workstation can run
office apps, e.g. MS Word, Excel, and other, right from their workstation?

Is it a technology issues that prevent this to happen? What's the big
problem since other OSes can handle multi-user apps?

Imagine if I can do that, everytime the workstation crashed and corrupted
the disk, all I have to do is install the os, mount the directory where
office reside, and voile ... it's back up again. Also, when the office need
upgrade, all I have to do is to upgrade the one on the server and again,
those 10(or for that matter 100K)workstation has their office upgraded!

Any ideas?




Office install
on just
like an

there

a

 

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Thanks Kevin. Unfortunately the terminal services are out of the question.
We have pretty powerful workstation and server, why would I use my
workstation
as a terminal(Isn't this goes again MS ideology)?

Secondly, why would I pay an additional license for each workstation
to access the terminal server. It is just not economical.

Or perhaps Microsoft is still ironing-out on how to implement this this type
of
technology(networked-multi-user-multi-task-apps)?

Thanks

Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"

I'm trying to use my server as a file server, where I will store all the
Office executable. If MS so willing, then they can tell us what registry
setting on the local machine has to change so each of my workstation can run
office apps, e.g. MS Word, Excel, and other, right from their workstation?

Is it a technology issues that prevent this to happen? What's the big
problem since other OSes can handle multi-user apps?

Imagine if I can do that, everytime the workstation crashed and corrupted
the disk, all I have to do is install the os, mount the directory where
office reside, and voile ... it's back up again. Also, when the office need
upgrade, all I have to do is to upgrade the one on the server and again,
those 10(or for that matter 100K)workstation has their office upgraded!

Any ideas?




Office install
on just
like an

there

a