Windows 2003 Dedicated Server

Windows server 2003?
I installed windows server 2003 on a computer to be like a server for our LAN.,i setup the DNS,DHCP . i need to install MS-OFFICE and other programs on the server,so any body on the LAN can use them (client server ). what other setups i need to do. who to dedicate certain programs for certain users on the LAN. if there is a link or topics to read. thanks for your help every body.

First, you should really consider selling your license to someone else and replacing it with SBS. SBS is less expensive (though the Client Access Licenses are more expensive). In addition, SBS was designed to work with small businesses - it uses wizards that are much easier for the less technically savvy to use in configuring the server. Now it's not clear exactly what you are talking about - "i need to install MS-OFFICE and other programs on the server,so any body on the LAN can use them (client server)" - to me, this means you expect to install the programs (run setup) on the server and install them there. Then, you expect everyone on the network to be able to use them on their own computers. If that's what you mean, then you are seriously misunderstanding this. A single copy of office CANNOT be installed on the server and have more than one user at a time use it. There are license issues. Further, things just don't work that way with most software. You can use the server as a deployment point - deploying it using Active Directory (AD) and doing so would make it resilient, meaning if joe user deleted winword.exe, instead of getting an error the next time he used it, he would get a slight delay as the workstation went back to the server and downloaded the missing executable file. (Deploying it with AD is an automated way to install it to multiple workstations without having to go to each one). Now if you mean to use the the server as a Terminal Server or GRID system, that's another story, but you STILL require a license for EVERY user who is going to use the software (exact licensing may be different - for example, rather than a license for each user, you may just need a license for each workstation, or for the number of Terminal Server Client Access Licenses (TSCALs) you have. Whatever the case, this is not as simple as you appear to be thinking it is. I strongly recommend you contact an EXPERIENCED consultant who can make recommendations and perform the overall installation and high-level management. To put things another way... do you know much about cars? Most people I know only know enough to check tire pressure add and MAYBE change their oil. So how foolish do you think it would be, if you were a taxi company and decided to rebuild your own engines when everyone on staff, at best, only knew how to change their oil? They would EXTREMELY lucky to do it right and would take them a lot of time to figure out how to do it and do it repeatedly and reliably. They could do it, absolutely, but how many hours would the cars be unavailable to make money while the VERY amateur mechanics tried to repair things? Wouldn't it make sense to have a pro do the maintenance in a couple of hours, or at worst (in changing an engine) a day, so they could get back on the road ASAP to make money? Computers aren't cars and you're probably not a taxi business, but it's just as foolish to try to install your own network - the number of things you get wrong could waste SERIOUS time that you could be using elsewhere making money - more money than the cost of hiring a pro to do it for you.

Is there a MCSA guru out there? Can I install windows 2003 server on a laptop?
Is 1 gig of memory enough? Hello: Is 1 gig of memory enough? I order the MCSA books to study on my own for the test. I think I can dedicate up to 40 hours a week for study and practice. My lab will consist of a server (laptop) a printer, and 2 desktop. “Only if I can get all of them to work together” A few questions: 1.Is it a good idea to use my laptop as my server? 2.Is a gig of memory enough to run server 2003 smoothly? 3.Currently my laptop is running XP: can I run XP and server 2k3 safely on my laptop without having problems or having the computer run slowly? 4.What should I know before loading server 2k3 to my laptop, is it a good idea to have 2 OS running on my laptop? 5.Any suggestions? 6.Is 6 months enough time to be certified? 7.is 40 hours a week of study and practice anough?

Yes, you can install it on a laptop if you meet the hardware requirements. Personally, I would leave your laptop OS alone and virtualize Server 03. You can get VMWare Server for free from their site and install Server on your laptop that way without actually wiping out the current system you have. Here are the answers to your other questions: 1. If you have the right hardware it is fine if you will be using it just for studying/testing. If you need a full time DC then no, it's not a good idea since you will need to have it on all the time. 2. A gig is decent but I would use at least 2GB, but it all depends on what you will be using it for. 3. If it's XP it would be better to wipe it out or virtualize the server to run on top of XP. 4. You can run two OS on your laptop but I would not recommend it since one will be a server and one will be a client os. 6. Six months is more than enough time but it all depends on your study habits. 7. Yes, it's more than enough.

Will I have issued having Windows XP, Vista and 2003 Server on the same hard drive?
I had Windows XP Professional and I installed Vista on the same hard drive on a different partition. I noticed the boot up option to choose which operating system to load is different. I now need to install Server 2003 to practice. I need to know if I will have issues. Don't want to buy a second hard drive because I only want to dedicate 10 gb of space to 2003

You will have no issues

Am I able to set up a Microsoft DNS server without AD ? If yes, how ?
I have an organization with approximately 1000 users of whom 90% of them are remote users. These users will use VPN to access a web-based application in the organization's network. I want to set up a dedicated DNS server so that remote users accessing the network can be resolved by their hostnames. The thing is there are about 1000 remote users and 100 concurrent users at any time. Am I able to set up a DNS server (using Microsoft Windows Server 2003) without setting up an Active Directory ? Can DNS run without AD ?

Yes DNS can run without AD. (In fact it probably is running now or your server would not be able to resolve internet addresses) You will need to add the local ZONE files for it to resolve the local machines. There are alot of good books on the subject. You will need one to make this work.

Please Help Me Fix My Server!!!?
How can I get the most efficiency out of my Network Server We have a server with two large Databases on it. We have 16 workstations tapping into the server for both Database files and user documents and folders. There are two HD’s, 160gig mirrored, and 2 gigs of RAM (We run Windows Server 2003). I am thinking of reformatting the drives to partition them, dedicating two partitions for the databases (one each), another partition for the servers system files, and the final for the network users files (several gigs alone). Any ideas on if this is the right answer? Am I going in the right direction with my ideas for better speed and efficiency?

Nope. You're going in totally the wrong direction. Partitioning the hard drives as you suggest will give you a marginal boost in performance, at best. In all probability, you'll spend all that time and effort and find no noticeable difference. You need to run a performance test over a period of a few days or weeks to see where your choke point is. Which core resouce(s) is/are getting hammered the worst? The "usual suspects" are, in order: network bandwidth, disk access, RAM and processor. Until you know what's slowing you down, you won't know how to fix it. (Putting in a bigger engine won't make your car much faster if your brakes are locked up....) Once you have your performance figures, you'll have a MUCH better idea of where to go (that's what performance monitor is there for!) Having a Gig NIC connected to a Gig port in an intelligent switch can make an amazing amout of difference in client access speeds. (Your server has 10 times the bandwidth of your workstations, and the switch distributes the load. The performance boost can be dramatic.) I've seen a lot of onboard Gig NIC cards actually perform atrociously, even though Windows says they're "fine". Installing a Gig NIC card can cure a lot of ills. So can changing the NIC's speed from autosensing/automatic to manual. If it's RAM or processor, your only solution is to upgrade the hardware. If the problem really is disk access, partitioning is not the answer. You have several options. Since you're running a mirror, make sure your controller supports hardware RAID, and it's a true hardware RAID array. If not, get a controller that actually does its job. You can invest in higher performance drives, or even better, invest in a second pair. Put your OS and network users files one one pair, and your databases on the other. The problem might not be your server at all. We had a client with achingly slow network access speeds. We tore our hair out for weeks trying to solve the problem. Every test we ran showed the server was clean... purring like a kitten. Changing configurations, replacing hardware, etc. all did nothing. The culprit? Not enough RAM on the workstations. 256 will run XP; barely, but it won't drive network apps as well... No matter what your choke point is, partitioning your single pair of drives will not solve the problem. It won't even help.

RAID controller?
I've been looking for a RAID controller for weeks now and I can't seem to find what I need. Here are my bare essentials: 32-bit PCI interface, at least six internal drive connectors, RAID 5 support, Windows Server 2003 support. I don't care if it is SATA or IDE...it just needs ports for at least six drives. Also, it will be housed in a fileserver with a dedicated CPU, so it can be with or without an XOR chip; I really don't care. Any recommendations would be excellent--I'm just tired of looking and not finding anything suitable. In response to the answers so far- I can't use that 8 port SATA2 card because it is PCI-X. Like I said, I only have 32-bit PCI slots. The motherboard I'm using is not a server board, but just a small micro-atx board that I'll plug a bunch of drives into and run Server 2003 on it. I can't use two 4 port cards because all expansion slots are spoken for, except for the AGP. One PCI will have the RAID controller, the other two gigabit NICs, and the CNR slot an Intel 10/100 NIC. The idea is to host a 2TB RAID 5 array while also hosting dual internet lines via load balancing software. I hope that clears things up.

There's a Highpoint on this page, that has 8 SATA ports: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?Submit=ENE&SubCategory=410&N=2010150410 BTW, why not just use two 4 port cards? If you don't want to use two cards, this is the one that I'd use: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16816115022

PRINTING USER NAMES ON PRINTOUTS?
I run a windows 2003 network. I have a dedicated print server. How do i get my users name to print at the bottom (a footer) of each document that they print through the print server? I need to track the document owners as many people print without picking up their documents. I do have the option of printing serparator pages that have the user names on them but its additional waste of paper. Does anyone know of how to do this or some software that can be used?

check out in printing preferences

Please Help Me Fix My Server!!!?
How can I get the most efficiency out of my Network Server We have a server with two large Databases on it. We have 16 workstations tapping into the server for both Database files and user documents and folders. There are two HD’s, 160gig mirrored, and 2 gigs of RAM (We run Windows Server 2003). I am thinking of reformatting the drives to partition them, dedicating two partitions for the databases (one each), another partition for the servers system files, and the final for the network users files (several gigs alone). Any ideas on if this is the right answer? Am I going in the right direction with my ideas for better speed and efficiency?

How big are your database now? How much space are you planning on dedicating to the reformat? You have them mirrored now and that's great if anything goes wrong. Are you planning on doing the same thing after reformating? If not, what backup plans will you have in place when the server crashes?