Need ideas deploying to 50 machines

[Doug]

We're on the verge of replacing 50 leased computers with new systems. The
new systems will probably have XP Professional and Office 2003 Professional
(OEM) pre-installed. But I also need to deploy about 20 additional
applications (including AutoCad) to each box.

Obviously I can create some kind of batch file that will run the setups.
Most of them have silent setups but a few don't so you have to
click-click-click your way through the setup.

Norton Ghost and the like seem like expensive alternatives. For 50 machines,
is it worth the per-client cost of Ghost?

We also have PatchLink, so one possibility I'm considering is to create some
PatchLink deployments for the additional software.

What other alternatives are there?

--Doug

 

[Shenan Stanley]

We're on the verge of replacing 50 leased computers with new
systems. The new systems will probably have XP Professional and
Office 2003 Professional (OEM) pre-installed. But I also need to
deploy about 20 additional applications (including AutoCad) to each
box.
Obviously I can create some kind of batch file that will run the
setups. Most of them have silent setups but a few don't so you have
to click-click-click your way through the setup.

Norton Ghost and the like seem like expensive alternatives. For 50
machines, is it worth the per-client cost of Ghost?

We also have PatchLink, so one possibility I'm considering is to
create some PatchLink deployments for the additional software.

What other alternatives are there?

Unattended installations - like:

http://unattended.sourceforge.net/
http://unattended.msfn.org/

 

[Doug]

Thanks, these look like a great place to start.

Would you "ditch" the pre-installed Windows XP & Office 2003 on the new
machines & reinstall everything? Or just set up some type of unattended
install to add the additional 20+ applications we need?

 

[Guest]

Drive Image is IMHO better than Ghost, though it may be hard to get hold of
now. v5 on will do. Check Ebay? <g> If following this route you also want
sysinternals' NewSID.

InstallRite ( http://www.epsilonsquared.com ) is also useful for packaging
apps, though one or two that modify the security hive can't be deployed this
way. Examples are Acrobat 6/7 and AVG. You can also roll printer-drivers
this way.

As for using or replacing the original install, the original probably has
drivers which saves you some work, but it may also have foistware. If so I'd
be loath to base 50 machines on an image that has had foistware cleaned-off
from it, just in case subtle problems are found later. You want a virgin
copy, on way or another.

 

[Robert Moir]

We're on the verge of replacing 50 leased computers with new systems.
The new systems will probably have XP Professional and Office 2003
Professional (OEM) pre-installed. But I also need to deploy about 20
additional applications (including AutoCad) to each box.

Obviously I can create some kind of batch file that will run the
setups. Most of them have silent setups but a few don't so you have to
click-click-click your way through the setup.

Norton Ghost and the like seem like expensive alternatives. For 50
machines, is it worth the per-client cost of Ghost?

We also have PatchLink, so one possibility I'm considering is to
create some PatchLink deployments for the additional software.

What other alternatives are there?

If these will be connected to a Windows server running active directory, and
all you're bothered about is deploying the apps, then why not read into
Active Directory package deployment via MSIs and let the network servers do
your thinking for you?

--

 

[Doug]

If these will be connected to a Windows server running active directory,
and
all you're bothered about is deploying the apps, then why not read into
Active Directory package deployment via MSIs and let the network servers
do your thinking for you?

That's why I'm considering doing it with PathLink. For one, I'm not all that
up-to-speed on Group Policy but my experience has been that it's difficult
to test, and all our users are in the same OU so I don't get any
granularity. Plus PatchLink is pretty good at keeping an inventory of who
has what.

 

[Robert Moir]

That's why I'm considering doing it with PathLink. For one, I'm not
all that up-to-speed on Group Policy but my experience has been that
it's difficult to test, and all our users are in the same OU so I
don't get any granularity. Plus PatchLink is pretty good at keeping
an inventory of who has what.

Well whatever works for you. Actually I find Group Policies to be very easy,
not to mention already paid for in the price of the server.

You can assign packages to a user or group of users, rather than just a
machine, using group policies and you can also use ACLs to control who has
the policy applied to them even within a single OU.

--

 

[Doug]

Thanks! You've convinced me to look at group policy more closely, it may do
what I want

--Doug