Mike said:
Kevin,
Full documentation on how to do customized installs using the appropriate
answer files and tools is available on the Windows XP CD ROM in the
Deploy.cab file as well as numerous articles on TechNet (available online
at -
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/default.mspx one link that may be of
value is
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/deploy/default.mspx
Don't forget to see and read all the additional resources listed at the
bottom section of that page.
See also
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/desktop/default.asp
Again massive amounts of information on deployment planning and
implementation of Windows XP in your environment
If you're still unable to produce a fully customized build for your
environment then you may wish to take expert advice and consultancy from one
of our certified partners.
In the UK these can be located via -
http://www.microsoft.com/uk/experts/default.mspx Thanks for the links.
As regards a couple of your other comments
- you can still do the desktop swap out without third party products and
with dissimilar hardware (again all just base functionality in Windows XP
and the Windows Server System)
Not doctrine - actually real world usage and deployment experience for
clients.
But you've got to admit that it did sound like and advertisment.
Finally, Windows XP is a complete desktop platform and irrespective of us
shipping it to install by default a more feature rich experience or not, you
would still be required to use the tools, technology and information
(mentioned above) to produce a "standard" build that meets your
requirements. So the starting point is irrelevant as you never perform an
install and then try and configure - you build your install to closely match
your requirements and then if needs be, configure it and implement
additional levels of security through technologies such as Group Policy via
Active Directory etc.
It really does sound like a lot of work, just to get a desktop to run
office apps though!
When this thread started, it was a plea, albeit not by myself, but one
which I can empathise with for a 'feature-less' platform to run office apps.
This is probably not the group to debate this but, I wonder how long IT
managers are going to put up with having to constantly upgrade client
PCs to keep up with bloatware. I think they stick with Microsoft
primarily because of compatibility issues and fear of using unknown
software. OpenOffice is good and runs on lots of platforms. Like I
said earlier in the thread, I use it on an ancient FreeBSD box with a 1
gig hard disk. But I'm sure that Microsoft will keep 'changing the
goalposts' so that no rival office package can offer true compatibility.
I don't have a real problem with that unless Microsoft actually
listen to people like myself and Spazzy who started the thread. Give us
what we want, not what Microsoft and their marketing people think we
need. Microsoft already sell XP Home, XP Pro, Media Center. Why not
a XP Barebones. I have already put in a suggestion on the MS website,
but I'm sure that it will fall on deaf ears, because MS always seem to
decide what we need. Like the integration of Internet Explorer into
Windows. A simple analogy of this is would be to buy a house at
£100,000 but the builders installed a £40,000 shower. But I don't want
a £40,000 shower. I can get one of those for £100 at the local DIY
shop. I ask the builder, can I remove the £40,000 shower and buy the
house for £60,000? He says "No, it's a load bearing shower. We now
must have internet explorer installed. It's not my browser of choice
but it's got to be there. Hence, Windows is now so full of stuff that
you can't remove without breaking something else that we probably have
to have it. Sorry this is turning into a rant. . .Blah . . . .blah . .
.. . .blah . . . .