16-User Network

[Jay Ashworth]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan Powers" <ryanx at indy.rr.com>


> > You will invest (read: waste) much more money optimizing the LAN to the
> > point where it runs well -- especially for large user counts and data file
> > sizes -- than you'll spend switching over to TS or Linux -- and from an
> > administrability *and training* standpoint, you're better on Linux, in my commercial,
> > professional opinion... unless your install is large enough to have
> > *more than one* on-site IT staffer.
> 
> I don't doubt that for a second Jay, and appreciate the explanation on data
> transfer. The entire index? Amazing. Everything that I write is Windows
> client to Linux server so this is something I haven't had to think about.

The issue isn't the client OS; it's *where the binaries execute*.

I will assume, though, that you mean "Linux Filepro on a Linux server, and
a terminal session", as I was suggesting.

> Linux would be ideal, but TS is most likely in the short term. I'm not
> sure how I got stuck with this. The MCSE must be on vacation.

Heh.

The problem is: Terminal Services is *expensive*: you have to pay for the
client OS (though you probably have already, *and* for a server-side OS
for each client (effectively; it's not quite as expensive per seat as a copy
of Windows for the client, I gather, but it ain't cheap.  And it requires
a 'business class' OS on the server; NT4, 2000Pro, 2003 or 2008.

Why I said it's likely less expensive to serve from Linux *even* if that
requires some reengineering.

Good luck with it.  :-)

Cheers,
-- jr 'you're going to need it' a
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274