I am planning a project for a school classroom. Potentially, we would
like to put in Thin Clients and a Terminal Server.

I have been testing the Thin Client configuration with a Windows 2000
Terminal Server. The problem is I am not getting audio, and also the
screen is lowering resolution and color depth.

I would like to be able to have high resolution and color depth, and
also to play audio from the Thin Client from applications I run on the
Terminal Server.

I read somewhere that it is not able to be done with 2000 unless I get
Citrix Metaframe. Is this correct?

The reason I am avoiding Windows 2003 is that the network is currently
a Windows 2000 environment and we don't want to mix 2003 into it, as
we would like the Terminal Server to be a member of the existing
domain but I understand that 2003 MUST become the master controller in
any domain if it is the only 2003 server.

Please advise what my options are.

Thanks.


---Atreju---

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:15:36 GMT, Atreju <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

SNIP

I would like to add that in the Terminal Services Configuration, on
the RDP-TCP Properties window, under the Client Settings tab, there is
an option to disable certain things. One of those items says "Audio
Mapping" and it is checked and disabled.

It stands to reason that if it exists there in the first place, then
it could in theory be _not_ disabled.

Any thoughts?


---Atreju---

Hi,

SBS 2003 needs to be the first domain controller in the domain it creates -
you can have Standard or Enterprise Windows Server 2003 domain members in a
2000 domain with no problem

And no, there's no way to get high res in 2000 without Citrix

--
--Jonathan Maltz [Microsoft MVP - Windows Server - IIS, Virtual PC]
http://www.visualwin.com - A Windows Server 2003 visual, step-by-step
tutorial site :-)
http://vpc.visualwin.com - Does <insert OS name> work on VPC 2004? Find out
here
Only reply by newsgroup. I do not do technical support via email. Any
emails I have not authorized are deleted before I see them.


"Atreju" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I am planning a project for a school classroom. Potentially, we would
> like to put in Thin Clients and a Terminal Server.
>
> I have been testing the Thin Client configuration with a Windows 2000
> Terminal Server. The problem is I am not getting audio, and also the
> screen is lowering resolution and color depth.
>
> I would like to be able to have high resolution and color depth, and
> also to play audio from the Thin Client from applications I run on the
> Terminal Server.
>
> I read somewhere that it is not able to be done with 2000 unless I get
> Citrix Metaframe. Is this correct?
>
> The reason I am avoiding Windows 2003 is that the network is currently
> a Windows 2000 environment and we don't want to mix 2003 into it, as
> we would like the Terminal Server to be a member of the existing
> domain but I understand that 2003 MUST become the master controller in
> any domain if it is the only 2003 server.
>
> Please advise what my options are.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> ---Atreju---

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:21:25 -0400, "Jonathan Maltz [MS-MVP]"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>And no, there's no way to get high res in 2000 without Citrix

Darn!

What about audio?

When you say high res, what about color depth? It is reducing me to
256 colors. That seems kind of pathetic.

So would you recommend 2003 SBS?


---Atreju---

SNIP
> When you say high res, what about color depth? It is reducing me to
> 256 colors. That seems kind of pathetic.
>
> So would you recommend 2003 SBS?
SNIP

TS on Win2K Server is limited to 256 colours.

No 2003 SBS will not sit happily in an existing W2K domain as it will insist
on being a domain controller.

Sounds like you either need a W2K3 member server in your domain to run as
the TS or get Citrix.

But remeber - W2K clients don't have equivalence licensing on W2K3 TS.

Rock <--> Hard Place... you choose.

"Atreju" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:21:25 -0400, "Jonathan Maltz [MS-MVP]"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >And no, there's no way to get high res in 2000 without Citrix
>
> Darn!
>
> What about audio?
>
> When you say high res, what about color depth? It is reducing me to
> 256 colors. That seems kind of pathetic.
>
> So would you recommend 2003 SBS?
>
>
> ---Atreju---

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:46:47 +0100, "Graham Taylor"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>SNIP
>> When you say high res, what about color depth? It is reducing me to
>> 256 colors. That seems kind of pathetic.
>>
>> So would you recommend 2003 SBS?
>SNIP
>
>TS on Win2K Server is limited to 256 colours.
>
>No 2003 SBS will not sit happily in an existing W2K domain as it will insist
>on being a domain controller.
>
>Sounds like you either need a W2K3 member server in your domain to run as
>the TS or get Citrix.
>
>But remeber - W2K clients don't have equivalence licensing on W2K3 TS.
>
>Rock <--> Hard Place... you choose.

SNIP

Ok, what about this: Can I setup a Win2kSBS just as a stand-alone
server, or does it HAVE to be in a domain at all?

If I could set it up as a stand-alone, then I would be able to live
with that.


---Atreju---

Yes, it MUST be a domain, it will reboot every hour after 7 days if it isn't

Why don't you put a Standard server up?

--
--Jonathan Maltz [Microsoft MVP - Windows Server - IIS, Virtual PC]
http://www.visualwin.com - A Windows Server 2003 visual, step-by-step
tutorial site :-)
http://vpc.visualwin.com - Does <insert OS name> work on VPC 2004? Find out
here
Only reply by newsgroup. I do not do technical support via email. Any
emails I have not authorized are deleted before I see them.


"Atreju" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:46:47 +0100, "Graham Taylor"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >SNIP
> >> When you say high res, what about color depth? It is reducing me to
> >> 256 colors. That seems kind of pathetic.
> >>
> >> So would you recommend 2003 SBS?
> >SNIP
> >
> >TS on Win2K Server is limited to 256 colours.
> >
> >No 2003 SBS will not sit happily in an existing W2K domain as it will
insist
> >on being a domain controller.
> >
> >Sounds like you either need a W2K3 member server in your domain to run as
> >the TS or get Citrix.
> >
> >But remeber - W2K clients don't have equivalence licensing on W2K3 TS.
> >
> >Rock <--> Hard Place... you choose.
>
> SNIP
>
> Ok, what about this: Can I setup a Win2kSBS just as a stand-alone
> server, or does it HAVE to be in a domain at all?
>
> If I could set it up as a stand-alone, then I would be able to live
> with that.
>
>
> ---Atreju---

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:28:03 -0400, "Jonathan Maltz [MS-MVP]"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Yes, it MUST be a domain, it will reboot every hour after 7 days if it isn't
>
>Why don't you put a Standard server up?

As in, not a domain controller?

Perhaps I could do that if possible. Can it be a member of a domain
that is managed by Windows 2000? I thought someone said that's not
possible.

Otherwise what I think I might just do is make it its own domain
separate from the rest of the network.


---Atreju---

Hi,
Windows Server 2003s (other than SBS editions) will act fine in a 2000
domain

--
--Jonathan Maltz [Microsoft MVP - Windows Server - IIS, Virtual PC]
http://www.visualwin.com - A Windows Server 2003 visual, step-by-step
tutorial site :-)
http://vpc.visualwin.com - Does <insert OS name> work on VPC 2004? Find out
here
Only reply by newsgroup. I do not do technical support via email. Any
emails I have not authorized are deleted before I see them.


"Atreju" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:28:03 -0400, "Jonathan Maltz [MS-MVP]"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Yes, it MUST be a domain, it will reboot every hour after 7 days if it
isn't
> >
> >Why don't you put a Standard server up?
>
> As in, not a domain controller?
>
> Perhaps I could do that if possible. Can it be a member of a domain
> that is managed by Windows 2000? I thought someone said that's not
> possible.
>
> Otherwise what I think I might just do is make it its own domain
> separate from the rest of the network.
>
>
> ---Atreju---

1. SBS 2003 can NOT run Terminal Server in Application Server Mode.
2. Windows Server 2003 Terminal Server or any other member server works
just fine in a 2000 AD Domain, NT4 Domain or stand alone.
3. It is highly recommended that terminal servers are member servers in
your AD domain, so they can be controlled by Group Policy. Do NOT make your
TS a domain controller.
4. 2000 has a max of 256 colors & NO AUDIO unless using Citrix MetaFrame
which adds up to 24 bit color & 3 different levels of audio (lo, medium &
high quality)
5. 2003 has a max of 24 bit color depth & basic audio only, not suitable
for streaming media.

If you need more than one terminal server, go with the Citrix Option, since
it adds robust load balancing, user experience & management features that do
NOT exist in 2000 or 2003.

Patrick Rouse
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
http://www.workthin.com

"Atreju" wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:28:03 -0400, "Jonathan Maltz [MS-MVP]"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Yes, it MUST be a domain, it will reboot every hour after 7 days if it isn't
> >
> >Why don't you put a Standard server up?
>
> As in, not a domain controller?
>
> Perhaps I could do that if possible. Can it be a member of a domain
> that is managed by Windows 2000? I thought someone said that's not
> possible.
>
> Otherwise what I think I might just do is make it its own domain
> separate from the rest of the network.
>
>
> ---Atreju---
>