Re: Win4Lin server (Like M$-TSE but on Linux)

[Adam Tauno Williams <adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>http://www.nwc.com/1206/1206sp1.html
>>>An interesting article,  only problem is that the author doesn't
>>>realize he could stuff his X session inside a zlib-tight-TridiaVNC 
>>>connection and solve the bandwidth problem.
>>Tres cool. But I have another question related to this subject: how
>>does one go about installing MS Office 98 onto a Linux SMB server for 
>>multiple clients? (It currently resides on a Netware server, serving 
>>about 12  Win95/98 workstations.) By which I mean, is it any different 
>>than NT or Netware? Does the install croak up a wad of errors? Are there 
>>side issues I should be aware of? Finally, is it worthwhile to serve an 
>>Office suit like this on a file server?
>>One advantage, I would imagine, is that the read-only nature of the
>>app's executables is a natural defense against virii. Also, installing
>>Office remotely doesn't require new hard drives. 
>>One disadvantage is that such a small office does not really benefit
>>from this kind of space savings to the degree a business with 100+
>>workstations might.
>>Comments? TIA.

I've only run the Lotus Win32 office suite from a network install on a Samba
server,  I never tried with office after that experience.  It just doesn't gain
much.  Still has to copy dlls' et al to the client,  and so many things still
have to be r/w (for no apparent reason) that it doesn't help security either. 
I've had the problem of demanding r/w access to dlls, exes, etc... with quite a
few windows programs.  Even have one app that locks the EXE file in exclusive
mode so no one else can run it if it is in a network install.  Lovely.

>I tried it once from a NT server share.  Hoping to accomplish saving
>disk space on client machines and putting a limit on the number of 
>people who could access the share at a time as sort of a license server.  
>The latter failed miserably. Each client would access the servers share 
>evan if they were not using it, I presumed for the icon graphics.  The 
>former did not save much at all.  Can't give you any numbers to support 
>this but found little reason to do it.  The servers share only contained 
>the executables which were not that large anyways. Most of the files 
>(dlls and such) were put on the client machine anyways.   It

Yep.

>was more useful to install it from the share than have the apps run from
>the share.

I took the old CD-ROM drives out of dead/obselete machines and put them in a
box, creating a cheap-o-juke box, and just install packages from network mounted
CD's.  It is less hassle, and the Win32 apps seem more comfortable with a less
intelligent arrangement.

Systems and Network Administrator
Morrison Industries
1825 Monroe Ave NW.
Grand Rapids, MI. 49505