Running applications over the network


Recommended Posts

Posted this in Internet, Networking & Security before I realized there was a more specific fourm, sorry. Here it is:

My home network consists of a Linux box for a firewall/router and a Windows Server 2003 Standard box that runs ActiveDirectory and acts as a file server. I have about 10 client PCs on the network. 7 are Win XP Pro SP2, 2 are Win 2k Pro, and 1 is Linux. But this question only applies to the XP Pro boxes, really.

Here's the problem. Every 3 months I reformat all my Windoze machines, to keep them running smoothly. I'm really tired of re-installing MSFT Office, the Macromedia and Adobe suites, etc... every time I reformat. I figure, I already have a server, so why not take advantage of it? What I want to do is install all my applications onto the server and run them over the network. I know it can be done but I have no idea how. I'm pretty advanced with networking and security already, so I don't need a step-by-step guide, I just need someone to point me in the right direction. Anyone know?

Thanks a bunch.

Peace,

Pete Zaria.

Its called Terminal Services.

There are some pro's and some con's.

It is better to have a dedicated server running the applications rather than using your PDC.

The server would need to be high spec if you wanted more than a few users on at once (think dual cpu, fast hdd's, and preferably mirrored)

TS client licenses need to be purchased, they are not free (they are for the first 60 days, I think)

You will need to read the EULA for each piece of software to see if you are legally allowed to run it in this manner. Some don't allow it and others have special licensing for TS.

You need a fair bandwidth to run soothly (ask any IT guy who runs RDP on a busy server). 100Mbit will work, but a good gigabit on cat6 would be ideal.

The clients don't need to be anything special as they only send and receive kmv. Something like a P2 with 16Mb ram would work just fine. The server is doing all the work.

Less management after initial setup.

I would suggest imaging your installs rather as an option. Load up a pc, updates (and autopatcher) activate everything and then make the image. Later you can just pop the image onto the pc. If there are further updates, put the image on and then update and take a new image. If your pc's are very much same spec, then one image for all (hint: run sysprep before taking the image).

Thanks for the reply.

I'm already using terminal services. That's not what I want.

I want to be able to install the software on the server and then use the software from any other PC, over the network. Not screen emulation.

Terminal Services doens't work well for my purpose because lots of the work I do is graphics intensive, which doesn't work well over remote desktop/terminal services.

Processing power isn't really a problem. I have some high-spec machines I could use for this.

If I share the C:\Program Files\ folder of one of my PCs, I can run quite a few of the programs over the network, however some programs require registry keys and etc... to run (such as the Macromedia suite) so that doesn't work.

Any other ideas?

Peace,

Pete Zaria.

Edit: I've thought about the imaging idea before. The problem is, none of the PCs have the same hardware, so that'd mean making a seperate image for each machine, and then figuring out a place to store it. That's my backup plan, but I'm really hoping to be able to run my apps over the network. With ActiveDirectory all of my documents and settings are on my server anyway, so I don't have to back anything up when I reformat, it's just re-installing all my programs that bugs the living hell out of me.

2nd Edit:

I know this is possible. I did some contract work for a local accounting firm (spent 3 days running ethernet cable and setting up activedirectory users... lol) and they had this exact same thing set up. There was a dual 2 GHz server in a rack that hosted applications. You could access them from any PC on the network, and no, not through terminal services. When you launched Word from your desktop on a network machine, it opened the copy of Word on the server. This is exactly what I want. Anyone? Please? :cry:

Edited by Pete Zaria

Just came up with an idea, tell me if you can come up with any flaws in this plan.

Format the network PCs. Map drive letter "Z" to a shared folder on the network server. Then install the software to drive Z. Make a backup of the registry.

Then when I format, all I'd need to do is import the registry backup and I could still run the software from drive Z.

Anyone have a better idea, or see any problems with this one?

Peace,

Pete Zaria.

Yeh, I think that your idea will work. In your scenario, your server will be acting as a file server and not actually running the software. It will be providing the files for the client to run locally.

When you run word from a client, it will go to the server (drive Z) and open word.exe. In contrast with the accounting firm scenario, word.exe will not be running on the server but on the client.

Let us know how it all went for you.

  Pete Zaria said:
I'm already using terminal services. That's not what I want.

I want to be able to install the software on the server and then use the software from any other PC, over the network. Not screen emulation.

Terminal Services doens't work well for my purpose because lots of the work I do is graphics intensive, which doesn't work well over remote desktop/terminal services.

586466003[/snapback]

What do you think Terminal Services is? You must be thinking of the Admin part of TS.

  Quote
When a user runs an application on a Windows 2000-based terminal server, all of the application execution takes place on the server and only the keyboard, mouse and display information are transmitted over the network. Each user sees only their individual session, which is managed transparently by the server operating system and is independent of any other client session.

Source:Microsoft Web Site

Exactly. Terminal Services is like Remote Desktop or VNC. Screen emulation. I don't want the programs to be executed on the server, I only want them to be STORED on the server. Thus installing them to a network drive :) Do you think the idea I mentioned above will work?

Peace,

Pete Zaria.

  Billprozac said:
The only problem I see is that in addition to the program files, files are added to your application settings folder which is stored locally by default. YOu could use roaming profiles to store that in the server.

586470007[/snapback]

Alreaedy thought of this and took care of it. The only problem I've found so far is the registry backup/import process after a format. I don't want to back up all of the registry keys, only the ones that apply specifically to the server-installed software. So I'm working on that. Any ideas?

Peace,

Pete Zaria.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I run a very small Discord server that handles news and discussion on a few games - less than 25 members so far, but growing.  I would NEVER allow anyone to block or ignore myself or any of the other admins.   If myself or an admin gets blocked, we are unable to perform the duties that I asked them to on the server - one of which is to moderate chat and ensure things stay (mostly) family friendly.  Since it's my server, I am the Final Boss on the server and if someone doesn't like it, I will gladly show them the door.
    • It's been four years, and I still don't have a strong enough reason to upgrade to Windows 11 by Usama Jawad Windows 11 launched way back in October 2021, and I reviewed it at that time, assigning it a verdict of 6.5/10, noting that it's a decent operating system but it prioritizes aesthetics over actual functionality. I also expanded upon this viewpoint both prior to the general release of the OS and after the fact through my series of Closer Look articles. At that time, I couldn't fathom using Windows 11 as my daily driver, but now that it's been four years, have things changed? Is Windows 11 my daily driver? Yes and no I use both Windows 10 and Windows 11 daily, and the ratio of time I spend on both of them is fairly equal. I basically have two laptops, one for personal use and one for work. The personal laptop runs on Windows 10 whereas the work machine is powered by Windows 11. The reason behind this is that although Windows 10 is my preferred OS due to familiarity, my work laptop was facing some hardware issues that required replacement of the SSD. When my office's IT team replaced the SSD and asked me which OS I would like installed on it, I responded Windows 11 just for the heck of it; just to see if I could make it my daily driver. I've been using it for the past six or so months on that machine, but that isn't my only experience with Windows 11. Even on my personal machine, I have both operating systems dual-booted on separate partitions for the last four years. So yes, as things currently stand, I am using both Windows 10 and Windows 11 simultaneously. The former because I'm comfortable with it and the latter just because I felt like I could do with some change in my routine. Windows 11 still isn't really my OS of choice Let me get one thing straight, I have no strong complaints against Windows 11. I know that it's missing some functionality that some would consider essential, those things don't really bother me much. My use of Windows machines is fairly routine. I use them for writing articles, preparing presentations, building dashboards, coding, attending Teams calls, and similar activities. I don't play games on them, so gaming performance deltas - if any - don't bother me all that much. All that is to say, I still don't really have a strong reason to upgrade to Windows 11. Yes, the aesthetics are different, but all the other features that Microsoft has introduced in its latest and greatest version of Windows isn't something that affects my daily routine. Let's go through some of the recent changes that Microsoft has been working on with Windows 11: A redesigned Start menu: don't recall the last time I clicked on the Windows icon or key to open the Start menu. I do use Windows Search though AI features like Recall: Many are locked to Copilot+ PCs Improved context menus: I'm fine with the context menus in Windows 10 An improved and deeply integrated Microsoft Store: Eh, does anyone really use this storefront? Updates to Settings app: While I do like the improvements being made to this particular app, the Settings app isn't something I open daily There are lots of other changes too, but as you may have been able to surmise from the above, I am not inherently against any of the features present in Windows 11. I just feel that, for the vast majority of users - including myself -, there Windows 10 machine does get the work done. Yes, Windows 11 has new capabilities and perhaps even improves in many areas, it's just not enough to get people to ditch a perfectly running OS that they have familiarized themselves with. Windows 11 isn't a bad OS at all, it's just not as OS that everyone simply needs right now. None of this will likely matter at the end What would get me to upgrade to Windows 11 in a blink of an eye would be things that improve my daily workflow. If Teams really did get entrenched in Windows 11 in a meaningful way (I still remember that failed integration attempt), if AI really did enhance my productivity in a quantifiable manner through Windows 11-specific features, or if the OS had specialized software that simply couldn't be replicated in Windows 10, then we'd be talking. Of course, none of this may matter at the end. Windows 10 is reaching end of life (EoL) in less than four months from now, which means that customers who remain on this OS will be left high and dry when it comes to security updates. At that time, remainers such as myself will have to choose between sticking to an insecure version of Windows, migrating to Windows 11 - which may even require purchasing a new PC -, or even, God forbid, consider a Linux distro. There's also a very strong chance that Windows 10 ends up being the next Windows 7, which is something that I have hypothesized about before. In my opinion, Microsoft is still struggling to offer compelling reasons to ditch Windows 10 and upgrade to Windows 11, which is reflected in the fragmented state of Windows market share, where Windows 10 is still the most popular OS. Redmond is making various attempts to get people to seamlessly upgrade to Windows 11 in what may be last ditch efforts before the looming Windows 10 EoL date. But I believe what will really move the needle is the actual arrival of EoL or groundbreaking Windows 11 features that you simply can't get elsewhere. But I do believe that the latter will take some time, so until then, let's welcome the age of the new Windows 7. Have you upgraded to Windows 11 yet? If yes, what compelled you to upgrade? If no, what are the reasons behind choosing to be a remainer? Let us know in the comments section below!
    • Dude, the "DEI hires" are not the cool team. The "DEI hires" could have been a good thing for everybody, but ultimately turned into a politically motivated rule, and politics are not cool.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Apprentice
      Wireless wookie went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Week One Done
      bukro earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      Wulle earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Wulle earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Simmo3D earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      604
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      281
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      179
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      151
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      112
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!