Setting up WORKGROUP

[Guest]

Hello,

A client is to obatin 15 new PCs, all XP Pro, to be setup as a workgroup.

They couldn't afford a proper server.

I believe each member of staff is to have their own XP Pro PC, and none of
these PCs is to be setup as an XP 'server'.

Apparently, everyone needs access to each others shared data.

I would appreciate any advice or guidance with regards simplifying this task
and setting it up. In addition to the best procedure for backing up.

Many kind regards for any advice.

Jeff

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

Hello,

A client is to obatin 15 new PCs, all XP Pro, to be setup as a
workgroup.

They couldn't afford a proper server.

Did they look into leasing? SBS is quite affordable - don't skimp on
hardware, but a lease might make it affordable for them. A domain model is
so much better overall.

I believe each member of staff is to have their own XP Pro PC, and
none of these PCs is to be setup as an XP 'server'.

Well, XP has a 10-connection limit, so you couldn't reasonably use one of
the workstations as an ersatz server and expect it to work well.

Apparently, everyone needs access to each others shared data.

I would appreciate any advice or guidance with regards simplifying
this task and setting it up. In addition to the best procedure for
backing up.

Many kind regards for any advice.

Jeff

I suggest you convince them that this proposed configuration will be an
absolute nightmare. If they care about their data, it shouldn't be scattered
around on 15 different workstations - it should be on one box you can easily
manage/back up.

They need *something* to use as a server, even if it's just a NAS box, or
Linux, or whatever.

It's quite difficult enough to support a 15-PC workgroup with no centralized
security -
(outside of a small handful of PCs, to be run by fairly savvy users, I don't
like to set up workgroups) - keep them as standardized and clean as you can,
and nothing gets kept locally. You won't be able to use group policy, but
you can at least point My Documents at \\server\share\<username> .

 

[Bob Willard]

Hello,

A client is to obatin 15 new PCs, all XP Pro, to be setup as a workgroup.

They couldn't afford a proper server.

I believe each member of staff is to have their own XP Pro PC, and none of
these PCs is to be setup as an XP 'server'.

Apparently, everyone needs access to each others shared data.

I would appreciate any advice or guidance with regards simplifying this task
and setting it up. In addition to the best procedure for backing up.

Many kind regards for any advice.

Jeff

You are lucky, since you have a client who is penny wise and pound foolish.
The client will be a steady stream of income to you, to fix stuff that has
been broken by design. This client needs a server, and they need to set up
each workstation to keep the useful data on that server, and they need a
backup app and some procedures to regularly do backup and to test backup.

 

[Guest]

Thanks for your prompt replies.

I totally agree with you both.

I suggested a server etc, be it SBS or XP. They are adamant they can't
afford anymore than the 15 PCs!!! I will suggest a NAS box as a further
recommendation, as I can see as you both suggest, this could be an ongoing
nightmare, as I have experienced with other workgroups.

Am I correct to assume that if they ridiculously decline the NAS box, I am
going to have to setup each PC with the 15 user accounts in order to share
files, or simply just have one account called 'user' for example on each PC
for simplicity?

I don't wish to get into the realms of different permissions on different
PCs for different users, I believe they don't want this anyway.

Regards,
Jeff

 

[Bob Willard]

Thanks for your prompt replies.

I totally agree with you both.

I suggested a server etc, be it SBS or XP. They are adamant they can't
afford anymore than the 15 PCs!!! I will suggest a NAS box as a further
recommendation, as I can see as you both suggest, this could be an ongoing
nightmare, as I have experienced with other workgroups.

Am I correct to assume that if they ridiculously decline the NAS box, I am
going to have to setup each PC with the 15 user accounts in order to share
files, or simply just have one account called 'user' for example on each PC
for simplicity?

I don't wish to get into the realms of different permissions on different
PCs for different users, I believe they don't want this anyway.

Regards,
Jeff

:

To get the $s to buy an entry-level server, you might suggest that the client
re-think the kind of PCs needed. If the users are only doing email/browsing
plus a little M$Office work, then any modern PC is overkill; for a new XP PC,
the slowest desktop with 512MB is OK; or, they might consider second-hand PCs.
And, if money matters, I'd vote against Vista: it needs more RAM, it wants
better CPUs and better VGAs, and it crashes more often.

Also, if some of the 15 folks do CPU-intensive work while the rest are light
internet/office folks, consider getting strong PCs for the neediest and weak
(cheap) PCs for the rest. {Many companies get strong PCs for execs and for
their secretaries, while getting cheaper PCs for the folks who do real work.}

I don't think you need to create 15 users on each PC, unless each user actually
uses each PC. I'd suggest one user account per PC, with unique usernames and
unique PCnames to keep track of which shared file belongs to which user --
Joe on JOEsPC, Alice on ALICEsPC, etc.

Note that they will sometimes hit the XP PRO limit of 10 concurrent inbound
accesses; esp. in cases where everybody at the site needs to get at the same
file. There is no real workaround, other than to buy a server OS or a NAS.

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

Thanks for your prompt replies.

I totally agree with you both.

I suggested a server etc, be it SBS or XP. They are adamant they can't
afford anymore than the 15 PCs!!!

Um ...do you really *want* to work with this client?

I will suggest a NAS box as a

further recommendation, as I can see as you both suggest, this could
be an ongoing nightmare, as I have experienced with other workgroups.

Yep. So why deliberately step into it?

Am I correct to assume that if they ridiculously decline the NAS box,
I am going to have to setup each PC with the 15 user accounts in
order to share files, or simply just have one account called 'user'
for example on each PC for simplicity?

Well, either you use simple file sharing (which has no security) or you set
up everyone with the same username/password (which has no security) or you
set up everyone's computer with all 15 matching usernames & passwords (which
is an admin nightmare).

I don't wish to get into the realms of different permissions on
different PCs for different users, I believe they don't want this
anyway.

That's also foolish of them. Do they really want the admin assistant reading
all the boss' confidential data?

Ultimately, they really would benefit from centralized file storage,and it
seems to me this is a great time for them to put it in place & do it right.
I'd explain that to them, and I'd probably take a pass the work if they
didn't want to see reason. Yes, they could be a steady source of income for
you, but if they're balking at hardware costs they'll probably be balking at
your bills as well.

Some topics to consider discussing with them:

Centralized storage (as per above)
Centralized security
Backups (can't reasonably back up 15 different workstations)
Email - if you're not using Exchange, but are using Outlook or OE, all that
data is getting stored on the local workstation & has to be backed up from
there - even if you have a NAS.
Centralized antivirus (from a single console)
Network security (decent firewall, not just a cheapo NAT device)


Yadda yadda yadda. You probably know all this already, but thought I'd
mention it.

 

[Guest]

You could take a look at http://mylogon.net if you want to keep it to a
straightforward workgroup arrangement, but with a server-logon.

You will still need a bona-fide server though, as fifteen clients are too
many connections for a desktop share (10 max)

Linux could be an option if finances are tight, I would suggest Debian or
Ubuntu. Disadvantage is that Linux servers call for a lot more in-depth
knowledge of the OS than do Windows servers.

 

[Guest]

Thanks for your replies guys.

Yes, this client is a nightmare. I've since found out that they cannot
afford a NAS storage device so it looks like its a case of any data being
stored on local PCs!!!

In addition, this client believe it or not has all static public ip
addresses for each machine!!!

I believe each client wishes to access each others PC, but there is not alot
of data on each PC to be stored. Main reason being to access the Internet and
pop3 email accounts. I do not believe as far as I am updated, that any
particular PC or account has to have any special security or permissions on
them.

From this scenario I gather that one simple account i.e. 'user' would
prevail on each PC, rather than each PC having different account logon names.

In respect of anything else i.e. backups - that is there problem, as long as
I notify them of the issues.

Would you agree, as I don't wish to make it anymore complicated than it
could be?

Thanks,
Jeff

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

Thanks for your replies guys.

Yes, this client is a nightmare. I've since found out that they cannot
afford a NAS storage device so it looks like its a case of any data
being stored on local PCs!!!
Sigh.

In addition, this client believe it or not has all static public ip
addresses for each machine!!!

That's insane. No firewall?

I believe each client wishes to access each others PC,

They won't all be able to do this reliably.

but there is
not alot of data on each PC to be stored. Main reason being to access
the Internet and pop3 email accounts. I do not believe as far as I am
updated, that any particular PC or account has to have any special
security or permissions on them.

From this scenario I gather that one simple account i.e. 'user' would
prevail on each PC, rather than each PC having different account
logon names.

In respect of anything else i.e. backups - that is there problem, as
long as I notify them of the issues.

Yep. Put it all in writing. Everything.

Would you agree, as I don't wish to make it anymore complicated than
it could be?

Frankly, I'd run away from this project. It sounds like the sort that'll
come back to bite you in the ___ later. No good deed goes unpunished, and
all that.