Whirlpool

All,

I'm planning the conversion of my 5 PC Windows based peer-to-peer network to a thin client Client/Server. I'll be running Server 2003, Terminal Services, with Windows XP Pro on the clients.

I've not done this before and I do not have any exposure to home networks running like this. My main question for now is what would be optimum configurations for the clients.

I see constant references to "old" and "dated" computers being good in thin client roles but no examples. The family are typically running around the 1GHz CPU, 30Mb HDs with 512Mb PC-133. Although getting sluggish running Windows XP and apps, I'd expect a performance increase once the apps are moved to a server. But how much difference?

Another question. I understand that most of the traffic between the clients and server will be screen updates from the server and keyboard / mouse input from the client. I assume audio is also distributed by the server - like error beeps etc - and what about audio from games?

And what about app configurations. If the app is running on the server, then the server video card, audio and monitor would be seen by the app and configuration files created accordingly. What if there is a substantial difference between these peripherals compared with the client? How does that all work? The server is running an AMD64 with 2 Gb RAM and PCIE video.

Thanks for any responses.

Boeaz writes...

I assume audio is also distributed by the server - like error beeps etc

yes

and what about audio from games?

I wouldn't use TS for running games.

If the app is running on the server, then the server video card, audio and monitor would be seen by the app

Yes

What if there is a substantial difference between these peripherals compared with the client? How does that all work?

I wouldn't use TS for applications that require intensive video processing.

I agree with above... and also it might be overkill running XP Pro on the clients. If they are already slow, find the minumum OS that can run the terminal server client.

I think there is even a client for some linux distros

Is it worth it?

Terminal Services Licenses are darn expensive..

Boeaz writes...

The family are typically running around the 1GHz CPU, 30Mb HDs with 512Mb PC-133.

Run a linux thin client Operating System on them

thinstation.sourceforge....ndex.php/ThIndex

Or buy wyse terminals from ebay, they are darn good, and u can get old ones cheap, new ones even have usb for digi cams etc.. they are quiet, can be turned on off straight away, no boot time, small and will fit anywhere..

And what about app configurations. If the app is running on the server, then the server video card, audio and monitor would be seen by the app and configuration files created accordingly.

This is where thin clients become a pain in the ass, not everything is going to work on the client, 3d apps etc, .. they are great for word processing, browsing etc.. .

IMHO i would ditch this idea totally, expensive/technical for very little gain and some drawbacks.. How about just SBS server with Active directory running the network and no TS?

or better yet, how about clarkconnect as a server, ?? and forget the thin client thing.. save you some dollars..

Thin clients ive seen have only ever worked in offices, where certain apps are used daily.. any change needed planning and sometimes was not possible because of the firware of the thin clients etc..

Also are you sure your not getting confused with active directory?

edit: Also these are the thin clients i have at home, the same model ON EBAY. I payed 50 or 60 australian dollars for mine each, but have seen them cheaper in bulk buys.. You can also get later model ones with windows embedded firmware on them, though it aint xp..

Great feedback and information, thanks.

In terms of cost, it will be expensive but not as much as it may first appear. This is all dependent on a successful outcome for Microsoft's Action Pack. I'm with Defence in IT and I think well positioned to meet the requirements. I should have a better idea late next week.

Now, the thin client configuration is not a priority. I was going to try that approach simply to get the technical experience in doing it and to free up workstation resources. If that is going to be too hard, complex or expensive I'll deploy applications to the computers through Terminal Services. Either way, I'm gaining a lot of skills by working this through, analysing the results, and reconfiguring the network to improve performance.

A drawback will of course be the users (family!), who do not all necessarily share my interest in networking and just want to sit down and have things work.

I had already changed my thinking for my son's computer who will almost certainly need to log onto his computer to play NeverWinter Nights - it seems clear so far that games do not perform well across Terminal Services. I do intend to lock down his computer as much as I can to leave him as less as possible apart from the game. He will need to log off his computer and log onto the server to use other applications and services including Internet surfing.

There is still much to learn, such as stopping users from being able to download .exe files and installing them on computers, but it is a lot of fun.

Thanks again, and any more comments are certainly welcome.

Boeaz writes...

Thanks again, and any more comments are certainly welcome.

Hi mate, since you are looking at the action pack..

I honestly think it would be better in your situation to forget terminal services for the moment..

And setup SBS server 2003 (that comes in the action pack).

When you set it up, set up an active directory, and get your knowledge up in active directory, group policy's etc.. and lock it down that way.. you could have it very secure and configure it to the enth degree..

You can set policys for each family member etc.. it will also handle your email with exchange..

Then you could get a wyse terminal, and connect via rdp, im 99% sure that will work, so your son and other pc's can just log into the Active Directory normally.. Just use the wyse term for your daughter or wife, whoever needs the least amount of novelty (games music etc), the wyse term would just be logging into the server via rdp..

In the end SBS server will be a more complete solution for a home network, it can act as a fax/file/web/mail server.. and is very stable..

This will also give you more learning in the most popular way of networking, active directory..
This lets you have a play with terminal services/ thin clients and get a decent system/network at the end of it..

Also action packs server 2003 only comes with 2 licenses.. for any more you would have to purchase them.. and then purchase terminal services licenses as well..

Where if you use SBS server you get 5 licenses (perfect for u)..

good luck!!

Hi Uber,

I'm a little confused. Isn't one license sufficient to run one installation of Server 2003 on a network and if I have 5 CALs I can sustain 5 simultaneous user logons?

SBS appears to have one license and 5 CALS, as does Server 2003. There is also a 10 CAL TS pack. Perhaps MS have changed the Pack?

www.microsoft.com/austra...ackcontents.aspx

Hmm im not the BEST person for windows licensing, i was hoping someone would stand in and back me up..

But AFAIK, i Have action Pack, and it ony has 2 Cals/user accounts for win2k3 server.. Maybe thats when i use TS im not sure.. I cant actually remember..

But i know for sure that SBS comes with 5 CALs as i use this at home myself..

So if someone that actually knows the facts about the licensing side of it, that would be great, all i can remember is the last time we bought TS licenses, they were darn expensive.. (50 users)

Boeaz writes...

I'm a little confused. Isn't one license sufficient to run one installation of Server 2003 on a network and if I have 5 CALs I can sustain 5 simultaneous user logons?

As long as it isn't a SBS.

SBS you must either setup to be 5 users or 5 devices. Not 5 concurrent connections.

On standard/enterprise/i'msureothers ­ editions you can setup it up as concurrent connections. Oh and don't try turning off the license tracking :P well unless you don't mind the machine reboot alot.

Ok, so if I want 5 concurrent connections I'll need to install Server 2003 and not SBS.

I must say this is weird or I'm missing something. If I choose 5 users in Server 2003 so a maximum of 5 people can be logged on to the server at the same time, do I have unlimited devices, or none? I assume a device is a computer or a network printer?

Assuming its a standard printer it doesn't count ( if it is a multifunctional devices the can save scanned images onto a windows share it could be counted I'd suggest ).

Now a user is a user connected once if your logged on two machine using the server thats actually 2 users. Basically you can have 5 connections at any one time and you can turn of license monitoring service and it won't complain however if you ever get audit you have to show how you comply with concurrent connection limit.

Your other options which you can do on either the SBS or the other ones is do either Per User or Per Machine.

Basically you can have 5 users ( Your probably required to count a user multiple time if they have multiple concurrent logins ) OR 5 machines. SBS server will try to enforce I believe or else it will at least complain if your breach your licensing conditions. You transfer licenses as in if you are using the device system and you buy a new computer you could choose to no longer one of the PCs however you can't just swap the license every time you move between PCs and you have to prove how you audit and control the licenses if M$ ever knocks on your door.

If wanting games, don't use TS or thin clients. It just won't do the job, if at all. The video and audio requirements on a PC are too great to run over a network protocol like RDP, that's why Windows uses DirectX, to get the most speed possible directly to the hardware.

Check up on the RDP protocol and how it works. It does a good job, but not good enough for games.

Your system with the AMD64 with good PCIE graphics would be better suited to a gaming/desktop system. The graphics and cpu/mem would be wasted on a server role only - I wouldn't run any server functions off it either, it would slow down games.

Running WinXP on the clients doesn't make them thin clients either. If you want thin clients, then some of the previous linux suggestions would do the job.

What's the goal of converting the network to thin clients?

It's not clear why you'd want to use TS in this situation, as it won't improve games at all, and may or may not have an improvement in the office/browsing/email applications side of things.

That's not to say don't try things out...

[edit: oh sorry, missed one of your posts when speed reading - fair enough - use the action pack if you can get it and try stuff out, so much better to have actual experience with these things]