F
Frank McCallister
Hi Sarah
You can run the executables from the server if you wish but a certain number
of DLLs will have to be on the WS. You don't want to do this though because
your Office programs will run as slow as mollasses because the executables
will have to be loaded across the 100 mb network lines instead of from a
much faster HD unless you are using Terminal services where only the video
is transmitted across the Network and even that is slower than running
local. The only time you would want to run from server is if you had
extremely small Hard Disks which make no sense with the price of HDs these
days.
Frank McCallister
COMPUMAC
You can run the executables from the server if you wish but a certain number
of DLLs will have to be on the WS. You don't want to do this though because
your Office programs will run as slow as mollasses because the executables
will have to be loaded across the 100 mb network lines instead of from a
much faster HD unless you are using Terminal services where only the video
is transmitted across the Network and even that is slower than running
local. The only time you would want to run from server is if you had
extremely small Hard Disks which make no sense with the price of HDs these
days.
Frank McCallister
COMPUMAC
Sarah Tanembaum said:Thanks Kevin. Unfortunately the terminal services are out of the question.
We have pretty powerful workstation and server, why would I use my
workstation
as a terminal(Isn't this goes again MS ideology)?
Secondly, why would I pay an additional license for each workstation
to access the terminal server. It is just not economical.
Or perhaps Microsoft is still ironing-out on how to implement this this
type
of
technology(networked-multi-user-multi-task-apps)?
Thanks
Kevin Weilbacher said:Sarah, what you have described is called 'Windows Terminal Server'. You are
right about the fact that by installing Office on one system, and letting
everyone access it reduces administrative issues. But, SBS2003 does not
allow you to configure Terminal Server on the SBS server itself. You can add
a separate system to act as a terminal server alongside your SBS server. The
temrinal server would house your Office apps, and your SBS server would
handle Exchange/email, Internet access, and file/print services.
--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long"
thereSarah Tanembaum said:I'm trying to use my server as a file server, where I will store all
the
Office executable. If MS so willing, then they can tell us what
registry
setting on the local machine has to change so each of my workstation
can run
office apps, e.g. MS Word, Excel, and other, right from their workstation?
Is it a technology issues that prevent this to happen? What's the big
problem since other OSes can handle multi-user apps?
Imagine if I can do that, everytime the workstation crashed and corrupted
the disk, all I have to do is install the os, mount the directory where
office reside, and voile ... it's back up again. Also, when the office need
upgrade, all I have to do is to upgrade the one on the server and
again,
those 10(or for that matter 100K)workstation has their office upgraded!
Any ideas?
I think you have the option upon installing if you want to install Office
to
a server, but I am thinking if you have 10 users it is going to slow down
your server badly. Is there a particular reason you dont want to install
on
the workstations? You can setup admin install of office to install just
like
Outlook installs on SBS client upon connection.
Is it possible to run office from a server?
We just purchased 10 brand new PC with Windows XP Pro
Pre-installed, an
a
server with ample of memory and disk space.
We also purchase a 15-user license of Microsoft Office 2003
Professional.
Instead of installing MS Office 2003 on all the workstation, isa
way
to run Office from a server?
I know of the terminal services/citrix way but that is out of the
question
as it will add cost per client.
Thanks