Re: Mac to PC file sharing issues on SBS2003
From: Eriq Neale (eon_at_eonconsulting.idonotwantspam.net)
Date: 12/24/04
- Next message: Eriq Neale: "Re: mac questions"
- Previous message: bob: "Re: QuickBooks 2002"
- In reply to: Chuck Maurice: "Re: Mac to PC file sharing issues on SBS2003"
- Next in thread: Jim Sykora: "RE: Mac to PC file sharing issues on SBS2003"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:56:46 GMT
On 2004-12-22 06:51:31 -0600, "Chuck Maurice" <chuckmaurice@htomail.com> said:
> Hi Jim,
>
> I had a look at your post, and actually I will probably be facing the
> same problem in a few weeks, as I intend to install a sbs 2003 server
> for a customer using OS X (30%) and OS 9 (5%) for desktop publishing,
> and Windows XP (65%) for administrative tasks.
> Actually I still hesitate between sbs 2003 or an OS X server.
> What is your experience with your customer?
> Did you have to add Extremez-ip to the sbs server (again some
> additional cost!).
> If not, did you choose smb or services for mac ?
> Are you using entourage 2004 on the mac? If so, can you use the shared
> calendars and contact lists among PC's and Mac's?
> Thanks in advance for sharing your experience!
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Thomas
Hey Thomas.
The choice between SBS 2003 or a Mac server is not an easy one. It all
boils down to what you're needing the server to do. Since the bulk of
your workstations are PCs, I'd initially look at the SBS solution. It
will be easier to manage the PC workstations from an SBS system than
from an OS X system. There are more features included with an SBS
solution than with an OS X server solution. While there are a number of
advantages for implementing an OS X server solution, the remainder of
this post will focus on the choice of an SBS server as the install
platform.
Your choice between SMB and SFM is relatively easy - will the OS X Macs
need to share data with the OS 9 Macs through the server? If so, go
SFM. Are there any files that will be larger than 2GB? If so, you'll
have to use SMB and upgrade the OS 9 Macs to OS X. In the ideal world,
I'd recommend ditching te OS 9 machines, replacing them with new Macs
running OS X, and go SMB all the way. You may not have that flexibility
with your client.
Entourage 2004 is a great tool, but one of its limitations is that it
cannot access shared calendars or contacts through the Exchange public
folders interface. You can still access those through the Outlook Web
Access interface, just not directly within Entourage.
And, of course, if you're putting the SBS solution into a new domain,
make sure you do NOT use the ".local" internal domain naming extension.
Use ".lan" ".mac" ".office" or something similar. Just not ".local" or
".com" for the internal name space.
Post back or drop me a line if you have additional Mac questions before
implementing a solution for your client.
HTH...
-Eriq
-- Eriq Neale - MCSE, MCSA Messaging, MCP Small/Medium Business, Mac Guru EON Consulting Need additional IT insight? E-mail "support at eonconsulting dot net"
- Next message: Eriq Neale: "Re: mac questions"
- Previous message: bob: "Re: QuickBooks 2002"
- In reply to: Chuck Maurice: "Re: Mac to PC file sharing issues on SBS2003"
- Next in thread: Jim Sykora: "RE: Mac to PC file sharing issues on SBS2003"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
