how to set xp pro to better server data in workgroup

[marsha]

I just want this computer to hold data for the network of
5 computers. They will access the data from this computer.
Is there some way to set it up so that it works as a server
much better?? There won't be anyone using this computer
for any applications.

It is a network of 6 computers (including this one) in the
same workgroup.

Thanks

 

[Malke]

I just want this computer to hold data for the network of
5 computers. They will access the data from this computer.
Is there some way to set it up so that it works as a server
much better?? There won't be anyone using this computer
for any applications.

It is a network of 6 computers (including this one) in the
same workgroup.

Thanks

Please see the answer you got in microsoft.windowsxp.basics and keep to
that thread. Please do not multipost; it wastes everyone's time. Here
is a link explaining why crossposting judiciously is preferable:

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

Malke

 

[Guest]

Windows XP Professional is a workstation
operating system. In your case, you need
to consider installing Windows Server 2003
which is a server-based operating system.

 

[marsha]

Please see the answer you got in microsoft.windowsxp.basics and keep to
that thread. Please do not multipost; it wastes everyone's time. Here
is a link explaining why crossposting judiciously is preferable:

I needed an answer by the am when I have to have a plan. That is
why the request in both ng.

 

[marsha]

Windows XP Professional is a workstation
operating system. In your case, you need
to consider installing Windows Server 2003
which is a server-based operating system.

So I gather you are saying that there is no tuning that will
help?? I have been told that since it is a work group network
with only 6 stations, that server 2003 was a waste of money.
Naturally, cost is a consideration.

 

[Kerry Brown]

I just want this computer to hold data for the network of
5 computers. They will access the data from this computer.
Is there some way to set it up so that it works as a server
much better?? There won't be anyone using this computer
for any applications.

It is a network of 6 computers (including this one) in the
same workgroup.

Thanks

Right click on My Computer. Click on Properties. Click on the Advanced tab.
Click on the Settings button in the Performance box. Click on the Advanced
tab. In the Processor Scheduling box click on the radio button for
Background Services.

Instead of wasting a computer for this you should investigate network
storage devices. If all you want is to share some files it's a much cheaper
and easier solution. For less than the price of a computer you could get two
duplicate devices and use one to backup the other.

http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10594

http://www.iomega.com/direct/produc...SORTMENT<>ast_id=26890319&bmUID=1140500506872

Kerry

 

[NoStop]

So I gather you are saying that there is no tuning that will
help?? I have been told that since it is a work group network
with only 6 stations, that server 2003 was a waste of money.
Naturally, cost is a consideration.

Well then install a FREE and far better server package on that computer
using one of the Linux distros. Then you can setup samba on that server and
serve files to your hearts content to all the other 'puters in your
workgroup. Of course you could do much more with it, such as set it up to
also run a mail server, web server, ftp server, print server, etc. etc.

 

[Gordon]

So I gather you are saying that there is no tuning that will
help?? I have been told that since it is a work group network
with only 6 stations, that server 2003 was a waste of money.
Naturally, cost is a consideration.

the majority of carey's answers are in the form of "buy new software".
Ignore mostly.

 

[NoStop]

the majority of carey's answers are in the form of "buy new software".
Ignore mostly.

I have to agree that Carey is one of the most clueless posters around here.
But he is consistent with the Microsoft approach to computing. Can you
think of anyone who would have a somewhat acceptable computer experience
using only Microsoft's "operating system" out of the box and not have to go
and purchase all kinds of extra software? That's all part of Microsoft's
approach to computing. First you charge for a half-baked "operating system"
with an 80% profit margin. Then you load it with such totally undependable
and useless software applications like NTBackup, its "CD burning software",
an insecure internet browser, a so-called email client (OE) that is one of
the worst in the industry, a few extra apps like Notepad and Paint and
leave your users begging for more and spending more to get it. And one
shouldn't forget that part of this approach is to have an "operating
system" that is so insecure, additional money needs to be spent to try and
secure it.

Microsoft needs to follow Carey's lead and change it's motto to "buy from us
and then buy new software for a real computing eXPerience" (tm).

 

[HeyBub]

Well then install a FREE and far better server package on that
computer using one of the Linux distros. Then you can setup samba on
that server and serve files to your hearts content to all the other
'puters in your workgroup. Of course you could do much more with it,
such as set it up to also run a mail server, web server, ftp server,
print server, etc. etc.

Brilliant! Install a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system designed by
a money-losing division of your local phone company that thrills those who
think the DOS command line is not sufficiently cryptic.

 

[Gordon]

Brilliant! Install a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system
designed by a money-losing division of your local phone company that
thrills those who think the DOS command line is not sufficiently
cryptic.

GUI is for telly-tubby computing.

Umm NO licencing problems, NO CALs to buy, comes WITH mail server, NNTP
server, Apache web server, NO problems with viruses or malware.

Can Windows Server match that? NO!

 

[Gordon]

Brilliant! Install a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system designed by
a money-losing division of your local phone company that thrills those who
think the DOS command line is not sufficiently cryptic.

So that's why a LARGE proportion of all the world's servers run Linux is
it?

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

So I gather you are saying that there is no tuning that will
help?? I have been told that since it is a work group network
with only 6 stations, that server 2003 was a waste of money.
Naturally, cost is a consideration.

Well, you ask " Is there some way to set it up so that it works as a server
much better?" but you don't explain in what way you consider what it's
currently doing insufficient. Please explain what it is you want it to do
that it's not doing and we can probably give you advice on whether what you
have can be made to do it, or you need a more appropriate operating system.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I needed an answer by the am when I have to have a plan. That is
why the request in both ng.

Marsha, asking in two newsgroups is OK. That wasn't Malke's point. Her point
wasn't that that you asked in two newsgroups, it was about *how* you asked
in both newsgroups. The point is that you did it separately (multiposting),
not both at once (crossposting), which is far preferable.

Please do not send the same message *separately* to more than one newsgroup
(called multiposting). Doing so just fragments the thread, so someone who
answers in one newsgroup doesn't get to see answers from others in another
newsgroup. And for those who read all the newsgroups the message is
multiposted to, they see the message multiple times instead of once (they
would see it only once if you correctly crossposted instead).

If you must send the same message to more than one newsgroup, please do so
by crossposting (but only to a *few* related newsgroups).

 

[NoStop]

Brilliant! Install a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system designed
by a money-losing division of your local phone company that thrills those
who think the DOS command line is not sufficiently cryptic.

That "knock-off" follows the UNIX tradition of providing a time-proven
industrial strength operating system of such superior technical excellence
compared to Windows, it makes XP look like a toy operating system. If you
knew anything about computers, you'd not come out with such idiotic
statements. If you look at what Microsoft is trying to do with Vista, you'd
see it is trying to employ just those things from UNIX that makes it so
superior and that Linux has already had for years.

Comparing Windows to Unix is like comparing an Etch-A-Sketch to Photoshop.
But I'm sure this is all far beyond your intelligence to grasp.

 

[marsha]

I found one very important change for anyone else who wants to use
an xp This is important to use it as a file server.
To add/edit the buffer in question

Select Hkey_Local_Machine > System > CurrentControlSet > Services >
LanManServier > Parameters

If SizReqBuf is not listed - Add it

Edit > New > DWordValue <okay> (name = SizReqBuf)

With SizReqBuf selected

Edit > Modify - Select Decimal and enter 65535 for the value.

or Hex ffff



Exit the registry and reboot the Data Server and all Workstations

 

[capitan]

That "knock-off" follows the UNIX tradition of providing a time-proven
industrial strength operating system of such superior technical excellence
compared to Windows, it makes XP look like a toy operating system. If you
knew anything about computers, you'd not come out with such idiotic
statements. If you look at what Microsoft is trying to do with Vista, you'd
see it is trying to employ just those things from UNIX that makes it so
superior and that Linux has already had for years.

Comparing Windows to Unix is like comparing an Etch-A-Sketch to Photoshop.
But I'm sure this is all far beyond your intelligence to grasp.

Vista is going to be adware crammed full of DRM that consumers will be
able to pay a few hundred dollars for if they care to.