[H] Win2K Server OS
Am I correct that MS WinUpdates may have pulled Win2000 Server OS from their support syllabus? Did updates on 07/23/10. W2k Server got bupkis! All the XP clients got updates.. No biggie! I expected this :) Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS
Yes. Extended-phase support for Windows 2000 (all patch levels) and Windows XP (SP2) ended on 7/13. XP with SP3 is still supported. No further patches, security or otherwise, will be created for these operating system versions unless you have a contract with Microsoft or pay to have the patch created. It truly is time to move on... -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:10 PM To: Hardware Group Subject: [H] Win2K Server OS Am I correct that MS WinUpdates may have pulled Win2000 Server OS from their support syllabus? Did updates on 07/23/10. W2k Server got bupkis! All the XP clients got updates.. No biggie! I expected this :) Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 01:26:12PM -0500, Greg Sevart wrote: Yes. Extended-phase support for Windows 2000 (all patch levels) and Windows XP (SP2) ended on 7/13. XP with SP3 is still supported. No further patches, security or otherwise, will be created for these operating system versions unless you have a contract with Microsoft or pay to have the patch created. It truly is time to move on... Agreed... Duncan you crack me up :) -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS
Damn!! I missed my last update by only 10 days! Sux 2B me!! ... :) OK. I'll look for another way.now :) I'll shed a tear. Win2K was very good to me. It was completely bullet-proof in my operations. Yes, I most likely used it in a complete dweeb mode and never demanded much of it. My Bad! Hey! Bryan!! Stop laughing LOL!! Best, Duncan On 07/29/2010 14:26, Greg Sevart wrote: Yes. Extended-phase support for Windows 2000 (all patch levels) and Windows XP (SP2) ended on 7/13. XP with SP3 is still supported. No further patches, security or otherwise, will be created for these operating system versions unless you have a contract with Microsoft or pay to have the patch created. It truly is time to move on... -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 1:10 PM To: Hardware Group Subject: [H] Win2K Server OS Am I correct that MS WinUpdates may have pulled Win2000 Server OS from their support syllabus? Did updates on 07/23/10. W2k Server got bupkis! All the XP clients got updates.. No biggie! I expected this :) Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS?
At 08:23 7/7/2008, DHSinclair wrote: On my lan there are only 2 people that use the server and/or any of my clients. Me and the Administrative account. I can not imagine 5 or more seats, unless I created accounts for my Brother, Sister, 2 Nephews and my Brother-in-Law. So, the 5-connections of the per server default seems to cover my normal operation with some overhead. Or, am I way off base still? Am I correct that each of my client machines have there own CALs anyway as installed with networking installed/enabled? Now I understand why servers may be best left to IT pros. This is tough tinker business :) Best, Duncan Why don't you use Samba. It's free. http://www.us-webmasters.com/FreeBSD/Install/Samba/ Start Here to Find It Fast! - http://www.US-Webmasters.com/best-start-page/ $8.77 Domain Names - http://domains.us-webmasters.com/
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS?
Thank you Ben, This is a very tough topic for me. I get the per seat (aka per person) choice. Since I do not have 1 server, my book steers me away from this. Plus, if I select the per server option, I get one future no-cost (reload) option to change if necessary. On my lan there are only 2 people that use the server and/or any of my clients. Me and the Administrative account. I can not imagine 5 or more seats, unless I created accounts for my Brother, Sister, 2 Nephews and my Brother-in-Law. So, the 5-connections of the per server default seems to cover my normal operation with some overhead. Or, am I way off base still? Am I correct that each of my client machines have there own CALs anyway as installed with networking installed/enabled? Now I understand why servers may be best left to IT pros. This is tough tinker business :) Best, Duncan At 19:58 07/06/2008 -0400, you wrote: The number that you enter is for the number of CAL's (Client Access Licenses) you own. A Windows license comes with 5 CAL's. I always did per seat licensing, so that you'd only have to worry about a CAL for each computer accessing the server. DHSinclair wrote: I am rebuilding my win2KServer OS. I just rcvd the magic 25-digit key. I entered it and now I am at a screen asking about Licensing Modes. IIRC, the original server install was for 5 Clients and 25 concurrent connection. Should I change the [ 5 ] to [25]?? The window is default with ATM: o Per Server. Number of concurrent connections [ 5 ] Each connection must have its own Client Access License (?CAL?) Per Seat. Each computer must have its own Client Access License (?CAL?) To avoid violation of the License Agreement, use Licensing (which is located in Administrative Tools) to record the number of Client Access Licenses purchased. Thanks much. Yes, I am digging in my W2K Server book also... Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS?
Duncan: I wouldn't worry about it too much either way. For a small home server with less than 5 clients you'll be fine either way you do it. The number of accounts you have doesn't affect the number of CAL's you'll need. I only like per-seat because you only need one CAL per PC, versus one per physical human accessing the box. At the end of the day, it should not matter. Also, the CAL that comes with the client machine is I believe a Terminal Services CAL, not a Windows Server CAL. If it's Windows Server and not Windows Small Business Server you won't be shut down even if you exceed the number of CALs that you own. I don't even think you can buy Win2k CAL's anymore, anyway. -ben DHSinclair wrote: Thank you Ben, This is a very tough topic for me. I get the per seat (aka per person) choice. Since I do not have 1 server, my book steers me away from this. Plus, if I select the per server option, I get one future no-cost (reload) option to change if necessary. On my lan there are only 2 people that use the server and/or any of my clients. Me and the Administrative account. I can not imagine 5 or more seats, unless I created accounts for my Brother, Sister, 2 Nephews and my Brother-in-Law. So, the 5-connections of the per server default seems to cover my normal operation with some overhead. Or, am I way off base still? Am I correct that each of my client machines have there own CALs anyway as installed with networking installed/enabled? Now I understand why servers may be best left to IT pros. This is tough tinker business :) Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS?
Thank you Ben, I accept your take on this. I can report that my server is back alive and now has its' mouse and kbd active again (main project!)!!! :) There will be NO more file culling on this machine! EVER! Thank you John, Fred, and Chris. Am back alive, but with a machine that did not pick up its NIC or video card. I have these drives so that will be fixed soon. 1st we do the NIC so I can get access to my lan clients and my driver archive on another client(s). The reload also trashed (I suspect) most of the previously loaded app sw links. ESET is now inop. I suspect most everything else is also. And, I had to re-tell the machine about me. Somehow all the folklore about reloading the os over itself did not work this time. No matter! I believe I can now recover most without too many future questions. The Collective WINS Again!!! I just checked the server's /Docs Settings/ directory. It is very funny/odd to me. Can I ask for viewpoints? The directory reads like this: /Administrator/ 03-18-2004 0520hrs /Administrator.SRV/ 07-07-2008 2243hrs /All Users/ 03-18-2004 0538hrs /All Users.WINNT/ 07-07-2008 2243hrs /Default User/ 03-18-2004 0505hrs /Default User.WINNT/ 07-07-2008 2243hrs /Duncan H. Sinclair/ 01-09-2007 1631hrs Yes, during the install process I did change the 'suggested name' of the machine from DUNCAN-68D8D106 to srv (even though the install promoted srv to SRV). [I could grow to hate M$, but for now I am stuck with it :) ] Will the new reload of the OS use the OLDER directories if I was to remove the new directories created today? Really confusing...I read it as 2 concurrent installs ? Best, Duncan At 09:34 07/07/2008 -0400, you wrote: Duncan: I wouldn't worry about it too much either way. For a small home server with less than 5 clients you'll be fine either way you do it. The number of accounts you have doesn't affect the number of CAL's you'll need. I only like per-seat because you only need one CAL per PC, versus one per physical human accessing the box. At the end of the day, it should not matter. Also, the CAL that comes with the client machine is I believe a Terminal Services CAL, not a Windows Server CAL. If it's Windows Server and not Windows Small Business Server you won't be shut down even if you exceed the number of CALs that you own. I don't even think you can buy Win2k CAL's anymore, anyway. -ben DHSinclair wrote: Thank you Ben, This is a very tough topic for me. I get the per seat (aka per person) choice. Since I do not have 1 server, my book steers me away from this. Plus, if I select the per server option, I get one future no-cost (reload) option to change if necessary. On my lan there are only 2 people that use the server and/or any of my clients. Me and the Administrative account. I can not imagine 5 or more seats, unless I created accounts for my Brother, Sister, 2 Nephews and my Brother-in-Law. So, the 5-connections of the per server default seems to cover my normal operation with some overhead. Or, am I way off base still? Am I correct that each of my client machines have there own CALs anyway as installed with networking installed/enabled? Now I understand why servers may be best left to IT pros. This is tough tinker business :) Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Win2K Server OS?
The number that you enter is for the number of CAL's (Client Access Licenses) you own. A Windows license comes with 5 CAL's. I always did per seat licensing, so that you'd only have to worry about a CAL for each computer accessing the server. DHSinclair wrote: I am rebuilding my win2KServer OS. I just rcvd the magic 25-digit key. I entered it and now I am at a screen asking about Licensing Modes. IIRC, the original server install was for 5 Clients and 25 concurrent connection. Should I change the [ 5 ] to [25]?? The window is default with ATM: o Per Server. Number of concurrent connections [ 5 ] Each connection must have its own Client Access License (?CAL?) Per Seat. Each computer must have its own Client Access License (?CAL?) To avoid violation of the License Agreement, use Licensing (which is located in Administrative Tools) to record the number of Client Access Licenses purchased. Thanks much. Yes, I am digging in my W2K Server book also... Best, Duncan
[H] Win2K Server OS?
I am rebuilding my win2KServer OS. I just rcvd the magic 25-digit key. I entered it and now I am at a screen asking about Licensing Modes. IIRC, the original server install was for 5 Clients and 25 concurrent connection. Should I change the [ 5 ] to [25]?? The window is default with ATM: o Per Server. Number of concurrent connections [ 5 ] Each connection must have its own Client Access License (?CAL?) Per Seat. Each computer must have its own Client Access License (?CAL?) To avoid violation of the License Agreement, use Licensing (which is located in Administrative Tools) to record the number of Client Access Licenses purchased. Thanks much. Yes, I am digging in my W2K Server book also... Best, Duncan
