Re: Remote Web Workplace, coming to Windows Server?

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry


"Douglas McIver" <douglas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ufdDC9KkFHA.3148@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> But Terminal Services won't allow each user to log into their existing PC,
> with their own applications already loaded. Example...
>
> We have six accounting people, four graphics people, ten sales people, and
> so on and they all have their own applications that they need. Obviously
> we aren't going to install all of these applications on a TS box, so it
> works perfectly having them access a website and then hit their assigned
> PCs.
>

No arguments from me against RWW - I'm very fond of it. In your situation,
though, I'd put the graphics folks on their own TS box & the others on a
shared one, depending on the app load, and build very robust boxes. Also
consider what sort of simultaneous logins you'd likely have, etc.

Or, open up RD individually to each machine (change the listening ports if
you like) and let them just use the RD client to access them from the
Internet.

> -Douglas
> "Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
> <lanwench@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
> message news:%23iecAM$jFHA.1948@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "Douglas" <dmciver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:e4nJiqyjFHA.3784@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>I have a few clients with SBS 2003 boxes and one of my favorite things is
>>>Remote Web Workplace. Do you think there is a chance that MS will create
>>>the application so that it can be installed on a standard windows
>>>network, not just an SBS network?
>>
>> I have no idea what plans might be afoot in the MS dev teams, but I find
>> it doubtful - although I know a lot of people would like this. You could
>> email mswish@xxxxxxxxxxxxx .
>>>
>>> I have found a way to make it work, install SBS 2003, grow the network
>>> to 75 users or so, use the transition pack to bring it to a standard
>>> server suite, and magically SBS 2003 will continue to work. I just wish
>>> I could offer it to everyone who uses MS Windows Server and XP at the
>>> desktop, it is a killer app!
>>
>> If you have more than 75 users, I'd say you really ought to invest in a
>> proper Terminal Server or two anyway. RWW is the 'poor man's solution' -
>> and although it's very nice, TS would probably be a heck of a lot more
>> efficient for your company.
>>>
>>> -Douglas
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: Terminal Services
    ... I understand that you want to have staff log ... we cannot make SBS to work as terminal server. ... why you cannot find Terminal Services in Add/Remove Windows Components. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Please help me as I am clueless at this point!
    ... Terminal Services is disabled in Application mode in SBS. ... member server running Terminal Services. ... "The list of users and computers cannot be found.Make sure the client ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: help sbs2003 add additional SQL server
    ... Like Susan I'm running everything including the kitchen sink on my SBS ... Understand why we have multi-tiered applications today, ... Server Publish only ... Know that if you've enable caching ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Trouble with sbs2k in Terminal Server app mode.
    ... Sell the SBS 2K software and put the money towards a Terminal ... Server to run in the SBS 2K3 Domain ... Set up the SBS 2K as a separate Domain doing Terminal Services ... >> Did you buy the SBS2003 Version Upgrade, or did you buy a full, fresh ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)
  • Re: Remote Web Workplace, coming to Windows Server?
    ... But Terminal Services won't allow each user to log into their existing PC, ... so on and they all have their own applications that they need. ... >>not just an SBS network? ... >> offer it to everyone who uses MS Windows Server and XP at the desktop, ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.general)