Re: Networked Office
From: Edward Lee (elee_at_ulgm.org)
Date: 07/20/04
- Next message: John Bergman: "Cannot Login - Corrupt Login UI on Win2003"
- Previous message: Sarah Tanembaum: "Re: Networked Office"
- In reply to: Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]: "Re: Networked Office"
- Next in thread: Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]: "Re: Networked Office"
- Reply: Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]: "Re: Networked Office"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:21:00 -0500
PMFJI. I have some experience with creating an admin install of Office. I'm
looking for some info that would get me started using GPO to deploy an
upgrade to O2k3 and then deploy patches in the future.
Thanks,
-- Edward Lee Microsoft MVP - Sharepoint Portal Server "Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]" <cwshultz@mvps.org> wrote in message news:u%232WvTUbEHA.3996@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > Sarah, > > You think that this is very inefficient? Come on.... > > I have absolutely no understanding of your point of reference. What do you > want? We are not avoiding any issues. I see no issues whatsoever with > installing software via GPO at all. In fact, this ( deploying applications > via GPO ) is a God-send. Maybe you are atheist, I do not know ;-) > > And you have stated in other parts of this post that you are not worried > about the network being clogged as you have a Giga Ethernet network. This > was an argument that you used to support your proposed setup. Yet, in your > response to my suggestion about installing via GPO you state that you do not > want to clog up the network. So, which one is it? You say one thing in one > part of the post and then completely contradict it in another... > > It looks like you choose a bad solution when you did not yet know what the > options were. In English we say that you painted yourself into a corner. > > Cary > > > > PS. MVP stands for Microsoft Most Valuable Professional > > "Sarah Tanembaum" <sarahtanembaum@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:2lv06mFgjqd3U1@uni-berlin.de... > > I think this is very inefficient. Why can I install my apps on a disk in > my > > server and mount that disk on my workstation and execute the exe file from > > there. > > > > If I need to upgrade, all I have to do is upgrade the server and those > 10(or > > 100 workstation) will get updated instantly without clogging up the > network > > for transferring files between the server and those 10(or 100) client > > workstation. > > > > I think you all know what I'm talking about but most of your MVP[Microsoft > > ....] are avoding the issues. > > > > Please .... > > > > > > "Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]" <cwshultz@mvps.org> wrote in message > > news:eqKWWK8aEHA.1656@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > > Sarah, > > > > > > I might jump in here for a second. > > > > > > First of all, the idea of a Terminal Server is generally a really good > > idea. > > > I have been using Terminal Server for the last 15 months or so and it is > > > generally a great thing. As Kevin mentioned, you can no longer install > > > Terminal Server in Application Mode ( err, that is the WIN2000 > > > terminology.... ) on the SBS2003 Server itself. There are some very > good > > > reasons for this. You would need a second server that would be the > > Terminal > > > Server. On SBS2000 you can indeed do this - but again, not generally a > > good > > > idea to run Terminal Server in Application Mode on a Domain > Controller.... > > > > > > However, since you have powerful workstations, you have a really good > > point > > > / question as to why do you would want to turn them into thin clients. > I > > > would probably not want to do that! Du hast schon das Geld ausgegeben! > > > > > > Secondly, you can indeed make an Administrative Installation of Office > > 2003 > > > on your Server and install that application on each workstation from > that > > > Admin Installation. The advantages of doing this are 1) you have a > > common, > > > accessible installation point and 2) you do not have to worry about > losing > > > the Office 2003 CD! However, the disadvantage of doing this ( compared > to > > > my next suggestion ) is that when you want to update the clients ( sagen > > > wir, dass Microsoft Office 2003 SP1 liefiert ) you have the problem of > > > updating each client - this usually involves uninstalling Office 2003 > from > > > each client ( you could use the utility from the Office 2003 Resource > Kit > > to > > > do this! ) and then running the installation on each workstation. Sure, > > you > > > could probably do this via a logon script, but you still have the > > > administrative overhead ( you have to write the additional lines in the > > > logon script and make sure that it is run on each machine and then rem > out > > > the additional lines in the logon script ). So, with this solution you > > have > > > a really nicely located Administrative Installation Point that you can > > > nicely keep up to date but you have the problem on the workstations. > > > > > > So, I would suggest to you that you take a good long look at using Group > > > Policy to install Office 2003 to all of your computers ( or users ). > You > > > simply make that one Administrative Installation Point ( via setup.exe > > > /a ) - which you can still update when security patches are releases or > > when > > > a Service Pack is released - and you have the ability to very quickly > and > > > without much administrative overhead install this to your clients and - > > here > > > comes a really neat point - easily and quickly update the clients when > > those > > > security patches or Service Packs are released. Additionally, if you > make > > > use of the Office 2003 Resource Kit you can create .mst files ( aka > > > Transforms files ) that will allow you to customize the installation ( > say > > > that Heinz and Hans get Excel, Word and Outlook while Ulrike and Petra > get > > > PowerPoint, Word and Outlook ). Furthermore, you can set a lot of the > > > options via a GPO that will ensure that all of your users have the > > settings > > > that they need. You will not have to go to each computer and make sure > > that > > > all of those specific settings are properly configured. Do it via the > GPO > > > and there you have it! Also, you can control it so that your clients > can > > > not go to the officeupdate.microsoft.com and make untested updates to > the > > > Office 2003 installation. This is a really nice feature as well..... > > > > > > Sarah, Du kannst Dich gerne an mich wenden solltest Du Fragen ueber das > > > Group Policy Object haben.... > > > > > > HTH, > > > > > > Cary > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Sarah Tanembaum" <sarahtanembaum@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > news:2lqiquFflml0U1@uni-berlin.de... > > > > 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, is there > a > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
- Next message: John Bergman: "Cannot Login - Corrupt Login UI on Win2003"
- Previous message: Sarah Tanembaum: "Re: Networked Office"
- In reply to: Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]: "Re: Networked Office"
- Next in thread: Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]: "Re: Networked Office"
- Reply: Cary Shultz [A.D. MVP]: "Re: Networked Office"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
