Very Computer

by F » Wed, 04 Sep 1996 04:00:00

I need some (lots) of advice about setting up a small LAN.
I am being contracted to design/install/setup/configure an
office LAN (small law firm), which, when I'm done, will
consist of around 10 workstations and a server. In addition
to file/print sharing services, other features required are
internet connectivity, e-mail and remote file/resource access.

Currently, their office consists of non-networked DOS/Windows
workstations, and the bulk of their work is done with WP5.1
for DOS, and some other law-specific applications, such as MANAC.
There are 3 486SX machines, 4 386DX machines, and 3 LaserJet III
printers. I am planning to decommision the 386s, upgrade the
486s, build 3 or 4 new Pentium workstations, and upgrade the
whole client side to Win95. I figure that I can ease them away
from WP5.1 and into MS Office 95.

The server that I am planning to build will look something like:

CPU: P150 (or higher?)
RAM: 64MB DRAM/512KB SRAM
HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)
FDD: 1.44 MB
CDR: 6x CDROM
NIC: 3Com 3C509B-TP
TAPE: don't know yet (tape or zip drive?)
ISDN: don't know yet (suggestions?)
MODEM: USR 28,8/33,6
MAINBOARD: Acer/Tyan/Asus (any suggestions?)
CASE/POWER: don't know yet (suggestions?)

As for other network hardware, what else am I going to
need aside from the hub, nics, and cabling? What brand
names should I be looking for? (3Com and ?)

How do I connect two or more printers to the server?
I assume that there exists some kind of multi-port parallel
interface that supports LPT1/2/3. Any ideas? I suppose
that I could just set up the other two printers as shared
devices on the client workstations, right?

They may also wish to host their own web-site, and I assume
that could be taken care of with an ISDN connection to a
local ISP, but my knowledge of ISDN is limited, so any advice
on this is greatly appreciated.

As for the NOS, my personal bias is OS/2 Warp Server, but I
have to consider my client's best interests, so the other
choice is WinNT Server (Netware is out of the question).
I want to be able to set things up with a minimum fuss, and
later train a couple of them to do general maintenance, like
file management and backups. Essentially, the NOS must be/have:

- easy to install, configure, maintain and upgrade
- rock solid reliable and secure
- remote file access (very important)
- moderately fast file system
- internet ready with e-mail capabilities
- seamless integration with Windows95 clients
- file/program/print/modem sharing

Without starting a war, which NOS is best suited for their
environment (small law firm), Warp Server or WinNT.
I've considered a simple Win95 peer-peer network, but it's not
my first choice...arguments for/against a peer network? I'm
listening.

Obviously, I haven't setup a LAN before, but I'm eager to get
going on it, so I would be greatful for ANY advice or comments.
btw, this is a serious request for comments, and not flame bait,
so please don't start a war.

-- !
fm __o
_`\<,_
(*)/ (*)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\ /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\ /
~~~~\ /~~~~~
\ /~~~

by **Mik** » Wed, 04 Sep 1996 04:00:00

Quote:>I need some (lots) of advice about setting up a small LAN.
>I am being contracted to design/install/setup/configure an
>office LAN (small law firm), which, when I'm done, will
>consist of around 10 workstations and a server. In addition
>to file/print sharing services, other features required are
>internet connectivity, e-mail and remote file/resource access.

>Currently, their office consists of non-networked DOS/Windows
>workstations, and the bulk of their work is done with WP5.1
>for DOS, and some other law-specific applications, such as MANAC.
>There are 3 486SX machines, 4 386DX machines, and 3 LaserJet III
>printers. I am planning to decommision the 386s, upgrade the
>486s, build 3 or 4 new Pentium workstations, and upgrade the
>whole client side to Win95. I figure that I can ease them away
>from WP5.1 and into MS Office 95.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Moving away from a DOS-based word processor
is one of the biggest reluctancies that I've found dealing with various corporations.
This really isn't a problem, though, as I assume that WP5.1 will run under Win95.

Quote:>The server that I am planning to build will look something like:

>CPU: P150 (or higher?)
>RAM: 64MB DRAM/512KB SRAM

Good, but leave plenty of room to upgrade.

Quote:>HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)

Some of the newest EIDE drives are significantly faster than SCSI drives of
similar capacity. Seriously consider and look into the Western Digital
WDCAC31600 drive (1.6 gig). It's one of the absolute fastest, and most reliable
drives I've ever used.

Quote:>FDD: 1.44 MB
>CDR: 6x CDROM
>NIC: 3Com 3C509B-TP
>TAPE: don't know yet (tape or zip drive?)

S*the ZIP drive, they're crap. Look into one of the Travan tape drives, or
if backup needs are large (full backup of every machine every day?) look into
getting a SCSI DAT tape drive.

Quote:>ISDN: don't know yet (suggestions?)
>MODEM: USR 28,8/33,6
>MAINBOARD: Acer/Tyan/Asus (any suggestions?)
>CASE/POWER: don't know yet (suggestions?)

Beware of USR sportster modems. Bypass the issue altogether by getting the
USR v.everything modem.

Quote:>As for other network hardware, what else am I going to
>need aside from the hub, nics, and cabling? What brand
>names should I be looking for? (3Com and ?)

>How do I connect two or more printers to the server?
>I assume that there exists some kind of multi-port parallel
>interface that supports LPT1/2/3. Any ideas? I suppose
>that I could just set up the other two printers as shared
>devices on the client workstations, right?

Good idea :)

Quote:>They may also wish to host their own web-site, and I assume
>that could be taken care of with an ISDN connection to a
>local ISP, but my knowledge of ISDN is limited, so any advice
>on this is greatly appreciated.

>As for the NOS, my personal bias is OS/2 Warp Server, but I
>have to consider my client's best interests, so the other
>choice is WinNT Server (Netware is out of the question).
>I want to be able to set things up with a minimum fuss, and
>later train a couple of them to do general maintenance, like
>file management and backups. Essentially, the NOS must be/have:

>- easy to install, configure, maintain and upgrade
>- rock solid reliable and secure
>- remote file access (very important)
>- moderately fast file system
>- internet ready with e-mail capabilities
>- seamless integration with Windows95 clients
>- file/program/print/modem sharing

Having worked with both NTAS (4.0) and Warp Server, I'd recommend Warp Server.

File sharing is considerably faster than NT4.0, and it's ready to handle the internet
additions *today*. It make an overall excellent server.

- Turbo

by **FredMill** » Wed, 04 Sep 1996 04:00:00

Quote:>I need some (lots) of advice about setting up a small LAN.
>I am being contracted to design/install/setup/configure an
>office LAN (small law firm), which, when I'm done, will
>consist of around 10 workstations and a server. In addition
>to file/print sharing services, other features required are
>internet connectivity, e-mail and remote file/resource access.

>Currently, their office consists of non-networked DOS/Windows
>workstations, and the bulk of their work is done with WP5.1
>for DOS, and some other law-specific applications, such as MANAC.
>There are 3 486SX machines, 4 386DX machines, and 3 LaserJet III
>printers. I am planning to decommision the 386s, upgrade the
>486s, build 3 or 4 new Pentium workstations, and upgrade the
>whole client side to Win95. I figure that I can ease them away
>from WP5.1 and into MS Office 95.

>The server that I am planning to build will look something like:

>CPU: P150 (or higher?)
>RAM: 64MB DRAM/512KB SRAM
>HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)
>FDD: 1.44 MB
>CDR: 6x CDROM
>NIC: 3Com 3C509B-TP
>TAPE: don't know yet (tape or zip drive?)
>ISDN: don't know yet (suggestions?)
>MODEM: USR 28,8/33,6
>MAINBOARD: Acer/Tyan/Asus (any suggestions?)
>CASE/POWER: don't know yet (suggestions?)

The Tyan is the *best* choice for the MOB, Q-Logic for a SCSI
controller, and #9 for video....probably a Motion Video 771 PCI with
2MB would do nicely. If you're only going to get a single processor
MOB, get a Tyan Pro board...200Mhz. More money, but *much* quicker
than P-5. I'd use Everfit for a case (full-tower), with a 300W. I'd
also use NT Server, since you're going to move users to Office. We
still build a few systems that are destined for OS/2, but most are for
NT and Win-95.

Hope this helps,

Fred

- Show quoted text -

Quote:>As for other network hardware, what else am I going to
>need aside from the hub, nics, and cabling? What brand
>names should I be looking for? (3Com and ?)

>How do I connect two or more printers to the server?
>I assume that there exists some kind of multi-port parallel
>interface that supports LPT1/2/3. Any ideas? I suppose
>that I could just set up the other two printers as shared
>devices on the client workstations, right?

>They may also wish to host their own web-site, and I assume
>that could be taken care of with an ISDN connection to a
>local ISP, but my knowledge of ISDN is limited, so any advice
>on this is greatly appreciated.

>As for the NOS, my personal bias is OS/2 Warp Server, but I
>have to consider my client's best interests, so the other
>choice is WinNT Server (Netware is out of the question).
>I want to be able to set things up with a minimum fuss, and
>later train a couple of them to do general maintenance, like
>file management and backups. Essentially, the NOS must be/have:

>- easy to install, configure, maintain and upgrade
>- rock solid reliable and secure
>- remote file access (very important)
>- moderately fast file system
>- internet ready with e-mail capabilities
>- seamless integration with Windows95 clients
>- file/program/print/modem sharing

>Without starting a war, which NOS is best suited for their
>environment (small law firm), Warp Server or WinNT.
>I've considered a simple Win95 peer-peer network, but it's not
>my first choice...arguments for/against a peer network? I'm
>listening.

>Obviously, I haven't setup a LAN before, but I'm eager to get
>going on it, so I would be greatful for ANY advice or comments.
>btw, this is a serious request for comments, and not flame bait,
>so please don't start a war.

>-- !
>fm __o
> _`\<,_
> (*)/ (*)
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\ /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> \ /
> ~~~~\ /~~~~~
> \ /~~~

by **Jon Martin Solaa** » Wed, 04 Sep 1996 04:00:00

> >HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)

> Some of the newest EIDE drives are significantly faster than SCSI drives of
> similar capacity. Seriously consider and look into the Western Digital
> WDCAC31600 drive (1.6 gig). It's one of the absolute fastest, and most reliable
> drives I've ever used.

by **Al Rudderh** » Wed, 04 Sep 1996 04:00:00

Quote:>The Tyan is the *best* choice for the MOB, Q-Logic for a SCSI
>controller, and #9 for video....probably a Motion Video 771 PCI with
>2MB would do nicely. If you're only going to get a single processor
>MOB, get a Tyan Pro board...200Mhz. More money, but *much* quicker
>than P-5. I'd use Everfit for a case (full-tower), with a 300W. I'd
>also use NT Server, since you're going to move users to Office. We
>still build a few systems that are destined for OS/2, but most are for
>NT and Win-95.

Why bother putting an expensive video card into a server? If the machine
is really going to be used only as a server then who gives a hoot about
video acceleration features? I say spend the extra $ on more RAM.

by **Lulu of the Lotus-Eate** » Thu, 05 Sep 1996 04:00:00

*}I am planning to decommision the 386s, upgrade the
*}486s, build 3 or 4 new Pentium workstations, and upgrade the
*}whole client side to Win95. I figure that I can ease them away
*}from WP5.1 and into MS Office 95.

Certainly, upgrading 386's to Pentiums is a good move. But
*downgrading* WP5.1 to Office95 seems like an absolutely terrible idea,
especially for a law office. WP5.1 is simply so much more stable, and
easier to work with, and satisfies the special document needs for legal
documents so much better, that the loss of productivity from moving to
Office95 would be HUGE.

On the client OS, I would also ask, why Win95? Warp has the same
hardware requirements, while being far easier to learn, and much more
stable in use. Merlin, from preliminaries, seems to suffer from a
little bit of memory bloat, even without the VoiceType and such, but
Warp3 is much easier than Win95. Of course, memory is cheap enough that
going to 24meg with Merlin might not be bad, even on the 486's (w/o VT,
of course).

Yours, Lulu...

_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: Postmodern Enterprises _/_/_/

_/_/ The opinions expressed here must be those of my employer... _/_/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Surely you don't think that *I* believe them! _/_/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

by **godzillai** » Thu, 05 Sep 1996 04:00:00

-
--The Tyan is the *best* choice for the MOB, Q-Logic for a SCSI
--controller, and #9 for video....probably a Motion Video 771 PCI with
--2MB would do nicely. If you're only going to get a single processor
--MOB, get a Tyan Pro board...200Mhz. More money, but *much* quicker
--than P-5. I'd use Everfit for a case (full-tower), with a 300W. I'd
--also use NT Server, since you're going to move users to Office. We
--still build a few systems that are destined for OS/2, but most are for
--NT and Win-95.
-
-Why bother putting an expensive video card into a server? If the machine
-is really going to be used only as a server then who gives a hoot about
-video acceleration features? I say spend the extra $ on more RAM.

Listen real carefully. TCP/IP AKA Internet is the way networks are heading,
not NETBEUI/NETBIOS. Even Microsux is beating this drum.
Because Microsux is beating this drum I am thunder struck at how primitive
an implementation of TCP/IP, NT Server, NT Client & Winbloze95 has. IT IS A JOKE!!
Primitive is being generous. OS/2 TCP/IP is a complete implementation of honest to
god UNIX TCP/IP. Not some limp* half assed joke!
So if you want a real TCP/IP and all the t*s in a commercial shrink wrap
OS, OS/2 is the ONLY way to go.

by **Jon Ste** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

In article <50h0jk$...@itw.com>, @ImageBiz.com says...

>In <50gqal$...@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, f...@unixg.ubc.ca (FM) writes:
>>I need some (lots) of advice about setting up a small LAN.
>>I am being contracted to design/install/setup/configure an
>>office LAN (small law firm), which, when I'm done, will
>>consist of around 10 workstations and a server. In addition
>>to file/print sharing services, other features required are
>>internet connectivity, e-mail and remote file/resource access.

>>Currently, their office consists of non-networked DOS/Windows
>>workstations, and the bulk of their work is done with WP5.1
>>for DOS, and some other law-specific applications, such as MANAC.
>>There are 3 486SX machines, 4 386DX machines, and 3 LaserJet III
>>printers. I am planning to decommision the 386s, upgrade the
>>486s, build 3 or 4 new Pentium workstations, and upgrade the
>>whole client side to Win95. I figure that I can ease them away
>>from WP5.1 and into MS Office 95.

>I wouldn't be so sure of that. Moving away from a DOS-based word processor
>is one of the biggest reluctancies that I've found dealing with various
corporations.
>This really isn't a problem, though, as I assume that WP5.1 will run under
Win95.

Yes- but you really want to try and move the users away from DOS Applications
as quickley as possible. If you are looking at MSoft Office - then sell them
the idea that they can use WordPerfect Keys in MSWord - and have the extra
functionality of a good WYSIWYG Word Processor. After only a matter of days,
users will be using MS Word like pro's !

>>The server that I am planning to build will look something like:

>>CPU: P150 (or higher?)
>>RAM: 64MB DRAM/512KB SRAM
>>HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)

>Some of the newest EIDE drives are significantly faster than SCSI drives of
>similar capacity. Seriously consider and look into the Western Digital
>WDCAC31600 drive (1.6 gig). It's one of the absolute fastest, and most
reliable
>drives I've ever used.

STOP !

EIDE is fine for workstations. They are very quick, yes - but no where near
as quick as WIDE FAST SCSI2. However, they are certainly cheaper.

So why opt for SCSI ? The easiest way to explain is EXPANSION and RAID
contingency (whether RAID 2,3 or 5). Have you ever tried adding a second EIDE
drive to a PC ? Takes a little bit of time - right, try adding a third ! I
promise, you'll be at it for hours !

Look into SCSI - and if data is going to be stored onto the Server (ie as a
File Server) - then look into Mirroring, Duplexing or RAID 5.

What are the benefits of either ?

Mirroring is literally copying everything from one drive to another. Anything
written on Drive A is also written on Drive B - because this is usually
Hardware Controlled, then if the Drive A fails, Drive B automatically takes
over - ie contingent against drive failure.

Duplexing is the same as Mirroring, but uses 2 Drive Controllers. This means
that if the DRIVE controller fails - you are still contingent. The extra
benefit is read-ahead-writes with duplexing - ie 2 controllers mean that you
run much faster

RAID 5 is the fastest option and requires less drives than the above when
utilising LARGE volumes. RAID 5 uses a minimum of 3 drives to "SPAN" the data
across. The Volume Size would be a maximum size of 2 of the drives put
together - however if ANY of the drives fails, then the data is still across
the others. Full contigency - and with technology like Compaq's - you can
have hot-pluggable drives - ie pull the drive out while the server is still
running. This is expensive for small volumes - but for VERY large data
volumes, very cheap compared to Duplexing. RAID 10 is a cross between RAID 5
and Duplexing - Unbelievably expensive, but you have 2 SMART SCSI Controllers
doing the job and a minimum of 6 drives - only used in special cases !

>>FDD: 1.44 MB
>>CDR: 6x CDROM
>>NIC: 3Com 3C509B-TP
>>TAPE: don't know yet (tape or zip drive?)

>Scrap the ZIP drive, they're crap. Look into one of the Travan tape drives,
or
>if backup needs are large (full backup of every machine every day?) look into
>getting a SCSI DAT tape drive.

Thats the other reason for going SCSI as much as possible - single controller
controls ALL of the devices ! DAT Drives are cheaper and cheaper these days.

NIC not really important how fast since only 10 users on this network -
however, make sure a "popular" brand of 32bit NIC is used (EISA or even PCI) -
so reliability is secured.

>>ISDN: don't know yet (suggestions?)
>>MODEM: USR 28,8/33,6
>>MAINBOARD: Acer/Tyan/Asus (any suggestions?)
>>CASE/POWER: don't know yet (suggestions?)

>Beware of USR sportster modems. Bypass the issue altogether by getting the
>USR v.everything modem.

We use USR Sportster modems on all our Mail MTA's and on our NT Servers for
RAS. Good, cheap, reliable modems.

However - if you are looking at ISDN as well - perhaps you should be
investigating an ISDN/MODEM router.

>>As for other network hardware, what else am I going to
>>need aside from the hub, nics, and cabling? What brand
>>names should I be looking for? (3Com and ?)

Hubs - well, you need at least 16 ports - SMC do a good 16port 10BaseT hub for
only 250. SMC Cards go for about 40 (remember - these are UK prices -
probably less in US !). Cabling is pretty easy - just talk to a local
Building Manager or the guys who installed the Telephone System. You might
want to "neaten" things up by connecting the hub to a cable unit and have
floor ports cabled up to the unit - easy to add further connections and
smartens up your server room ! For 10 users - keep to Ethernet. Keep it to
10Mps Cards as well since you won't utilise 100Mps

>>How do I connect two or more printers to the server?
>>I assume that there exists some kind of multi-port parallel
>>interface that supports LPT1/2/3. Any ideas? I suppose
>>that I could just set up the other two printers as shared
>>devices on the client workstations, right?

Either/Or !!! Setting printers up on the server - no problems - setting
printers up as Client Shares - problem if that client is switched off -
printer connected using a NetPort - very good solution but you need to pay for
that netport ! Cost is approx 200 - Intel do a good NetPort that means you
literally plug the printer into the network.

>>They may also wish to host their own web-site, and I assume
>>that could be taken care of with an ISDN connection to a
>>local ISP, but my knowledge of ISDN is limited, so any advice
>>on this is greatly appreciated.

ISDN is easy-peasy. No idea where you are (US or Europe) but over here, we
have 64K per channel and 2 channels. In the US that is 56K per channel.
Purchase a "Terminal Adaptor" (ISDN Modem) that "Ties" the 2 channels together
- doubling your i/o. You want access to all workstations and Mail etc etc ?
You gotta look at an ISDN Router. Spider do them - not cheap. 2000 a time.
Cheapest I know is the 3Com SONIX 500 - costs 900. Look hard into whether
you really need something like this - it might be cheaper to give everyone
modems and place your web page on a central server (like mine - check out
http://www.aloha.com/~iq for details !) - you'll CERTAINLY get better
throughput at a MUCH cheaper rate.

- Show quoted text -

>>As for the NOS, my personal bias is OS/2 Warp Server, but I
>>have to consider my client's best interests, so the other
>>choice is WinNT Server (Netware is out of the question).
>>I want to be able to set things up with a minimum fuss, and
>>later train a couple of them to do general maintenance, like
>>file management and backups. Essentially, the NOS must be/have:

>>- easy to install, configure, maintain and upgrade
>>- rock solid reliable and secure
>>- remote file access (very important)
>>- moderately fast file system
>>- internet ready with e-mail capabilities
>>- seamless integration with Windows95 clients
>>- file/program/print/modem sharing

>Having worked with both NTAS (4.0) and Warp Server, I'd recommend Warp
Server.

>File sharing is considerably faster than NT4.0, and it's ready to handle the
internet
>additions *today*. It make an overall excellent server.

You want lots of IP and Internet facilities - look at NT. Preferably 3.51.
You want easy to install, configure, remote file access and all of the above ?
NT. You want seamless integration with Win95 clients - definately NT !

I promise you, its cheaper, and much more convenient - its also easier to
expand and maintain and as for setting users up - simple. You want SQL or
Collabrashare later on ? NT.

Of course I would sit down and write a full Strategy document prior to
installation personally - but then, I've had the benefit of hindsight many a
time !

Hope all works out well

Jon Steel
IQ Web Design
http://www.aloha.com/~iq

i...@aloha.com

by **yo..** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

Quote:>OS/2 TCP/IP is a complete implementation of honest to
>god UNIX TCP/IP. Not some limp* half assed joke!
> So if you want a real TCP/IP and all the t*s in a commercial shrink wrap
>OS, OS/2 is the ONLY way to go.

Yeah, harass people into buying a dead OS. OS/2 is dead!

Zachmann (the president of Canopus Research) said it, Thompson didn't say
ANYTHING about OS/2 at a recent IBM conference in Toronto.

OS/2 may be good OS, but its like soy ice cream, it may be good for you, but it
tastes like shit!

yogik

see PCWEEK ONLINE Aug. 14, 96 for reference to above

by **Earl H. Kinmon** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

: >OS/2 TCP/IP is a complete implementation of honest to
: >god UNIX TCP/IP. Not some limp* half assed joke!
: >So if you want a real TCP/IP and all the t*s in a commercial shrink wrap
: >OS, OS/2 is the ONLY way to go.

I do not know what UNIX or UNIX-like system you are thinking of, but
neither IBM TCPIP 2.0 or the version bundled with Warp is a complete
implementation of UNIX TCP/IP. In particular, a number of the tcp/ip
commands in OS/2 do <not> properly (using UNIX as a reference) handle
redirection of stdin and stdout. On a unix or unix-like system you can
do

find . -type f -print | cpio -ocBv | rsh machine -l name "cpio -icBdvm"

to copy a directory tree. This does not work with OS/2 tcp/ip, even if
you have a UNIX-like cpio on the OS/2 box.

Many UNIX tcp/ip option flags have been changed in the OS/2 version.
Output format for command line programmes (netstat for example) is <not>
the same as in the UNIX world, for no obviously compelling reason.

Foreign language versions of OS/2 tcp/ip (I use the Japanese version),
give diagnostics in the vernacular, which breaks shell scripts from the
UNIX world where English is the norm for diagnostics, even if the
programme has been otherwise converted.

The OS/2 tcp/ip installation is spastic and inconsistent. In the
Japanese version that I use, many of the tcp/ip related screens are too
big for the physical screen at VGA resolution, apparently because they
were tested only at XVGA and above. This makes using OS/2 tcp/ip on a
portable with only VGA resolution, a real pain in the ass.

The terminology in tcp/ip is inconsistent. For example, in the Japanese
version (probably a literal translation of the English version),
torikesu (cancel) is used very inconsistently. Sometimes it is "abandon
the just made changes." At other points it is "abandon the current menu
but not the changes made through that menu."

--

Earl H. Kinmonth, Kanji Users Service Operation (KUSO!), University of
Sheffield, Sheffield, England S10 2UJ

by **Mik** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

>> >HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)

>> Some of the newest EIDE drives are significantly faster than SCSI drives of
>> similar capacity. Seriously consider and look into the Western Digital
>> WDCAC31600 drive (1.6 gig). It's one of the absolute fastest, and most reliable
>> drives I've ever used.

>Even though the EIDE disk is fast, are you sure the EIDE subsystem will
>compare favourably to a SCSI subsystem in a multitasking multiuser
>environment? I doubt it.

Yes, actually, I am. At my office we're running an "old" 486 DX 50mhz machine
with an EISA EIDE controller, and a couple of WD 1.6 gig disks. The machine is
serving files, and is running NT4 beta 2. We have another machine, a Zeos Pantera
Pentium 90, with a PCI Adaptec SCSI Ulta Wide controller, and a Seagate Hawk 2XL
drive. Needless to say, the SCSI setup cost about 3x more, and performs slightly
*worse* in serving files than the EIDE setup. Benchmarks were conducted using
the RAIDMark drive benchmarking program, as well as compilation tests.

For 10 users, a fast EIDE subsystem is the way to go. Consider SCSI only if you
plan to buy a DAT tape drive also. If you're going to get 2 HDDs anyway, you might
want to look into an EIDE RAID level 0 controller, which interleave the 2 disk
drives, and provide outstanding performance.

SCSI is *extremely* overrated.

- Mike

by **Mik** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

In <50mdo0$...@infoserv.netkonect.net>, i...@aloha.com (Jon Steel) writes:

>In article <50h0jk$...@itw.com>, @ImageBiz.com says...

>>In <50gqal$...@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, f...@unixg.ubc.ca (FM) writes:
>>>I need some (lots) of advice about setting up a small LAN.
>>>I am being contracted to design/install/setup/configure an
>>>office LAN (small law firm), which, when I'm done, will
>>>consist of around 10 workstations and a server. In addition
>>>to file/print sharing services, other features required are
>>>internet connectivity, e-mail and remote file/resource access.

>>>Currently, their office consists of non-networked DOS/Windows
>>>workstations, and the bulk of their work is done with WP5.1
>>>for DOS, and some other law-specific applications, such as MANAC.
>>>There are 3 486SX machines, 4 386DX machines, and 3 LaserJet III
>>>printers. I am planning to decommision the 386s, upgrade the
>>>486s, build 3 or 4 new Pentium workstations, and upgrade the
>>>whole client side to Win95. I figure that I can ease them away
>>>from WP5.1 and into MS Office 95.

>>I wouldn't be so sure of that. Moving away from a DOS-based word processor
>>is one of the biggest reluctancies that I've found dealing with various
>corporations.
>>This really isn't a problem, though, as I assume that WP5.1 will run under
>Win95.

>Yes- but you really want to try and move the users away from DOS Applications
>as quickley as possible. If you are looking at MSoft Office - then sell them
>the idea that they can use WordPerfect Keys in MSWord - and have the extra
>functionality of a good WYSIWYG Word Processor. After only a matter of days,
>users will be using MS Word like pro's !

Here you have to understand the concept of "if it's not broken, don't fix it" :)
Also, the logical upgrade for WP5.1 would be WordPerfect for Win95, or
PerfectOffice, if that's avaiable for '95.

- Show quoted text -

>>>The server that I am planning to build will look something like:

>>>CPU: P150 (or higher?)
>>>RAM: 64MB DRAM/512KB SRAM
>>>HDD: 2 1.2 GB Hard Disks (SCSI or is EIDE ok?)

>>Some of the newest EIDE drives are significantly faster than SCSI drives of
>>similar capacity. Seriously consider and look into the Western Digital
>>WDCAC31600 drive (1.6 gig). It's one of the absolute fastest, and most
>reliable
>>drives I've ever used.

>STOP !

>EIDE is fine for workstations. They are very quick, yes - but no where near
>as quick as WIDE FAST SCSI2. However, they are certainly cheaper.

As you may read in my previous post, this is true only in theory. From the impementations
that I've dealt with, SCSI has *never* been significantly faster.

>So why opt for SCSI ? The easiest way to explain is EXPANSION and RAID
>contingency (whether RAID 2,3 or 5). Have you ever tried adding a second EIDE
>drive to a PC ? Takes a little bit of time - right, try adding a third ! I
>promise, you'll be at it for hours !

This was true only years ago. Adding up to 4 drives is as simple as plugging them
in with any modern motherboard. I have, however, spent endless hours working on
SCSI subsystems with incorrect termination, and wantnot.

- Show quoted text -

>Look into SCSI - and if data is going to be stored onto the Server (ie as a
>File Server) - then look into Mirroring, Duplexing or RAID 5.

>What are the benefits of either ?

>Mirroring is literally copying everything from one drive to another. Anything
>written on Drive A is also written on Drive B - because this is usually
>Hardware Controlled, then if the Drive A fails, Drive B automatically takes
>over - ie contingent against drive failure.

>Duplexing is the same as Mirroring, but uses 2 Drive Controllers. This means
>that if the DRIVE controller fails - you are still contingent. The extra
>benefit is read-ahead-writes with duplexing - ie 2 controllers mean that you
>run much faster

>RAID 5 is the fastest option and requires less drives than the above when
>utilising LARGE volumes. RAID 5 uses a minimum of 3 drives to "SPAN" the data
>across. The Volume Size would be a maximum size of 2 of the drives put
>together - however if ANY of the drives fails, then the data is still across
>the others. Full contigency - and with technology like Compaq's - you can
>have hot-pluggable drives - ie pull the drive out while the server is still
>running. This is expensive for small volumes - but for VERY large data
>volumes, very cheap compared to Duplexing. RAID 10 is a cross between RAID 5
>and Duplexing - Unbelievably expensive, but you have 2 SMART SCSI Controllers
>doing the job and a minimum of 6 drives - only used in special cases !

I understand the RAID levels, but find that this is *massive* overkill for an office
of 10-20 people. The system you are designing would be justifiable only for a
minimum of 50 users =)

>>>FDD: 1.44 MB
>>>CDR: 6x CDROM
>>>NIC: 3Com 3C509B-TP
>>>TAPE: don't know yet (tape or zip drive?)

>>Scrap the ZIP drive, they're crap. Look into one of the Travan tape drives,
>or
>>if backup needs are large (full backup of every machine every day?) look into
>>getting a SCSI DAT tape drive.

>Thats the other reason for going SCSI as much as possible - single controller
>controls ALL of the devices ! DAT Drives are cheaper and cheaper these days.

The only possible reason for chosing SCSI over EIDE in this setup would be to have
a single card controlling everything, and getting SCSI HDD's and a SCSI DAT. But
from what I've read, ATAPI (EIDE) DATs are also available now.

>NIC not really important how fast since only 10 users on this network -
>however, make sure a "popular" brand of 32bit NIC is used (EISA or even PCI) -
>so reliability is secured.

>>>ISDN: don't know yet (suggestions?)
>>>MODEM: USR 28,8/33,6
>>>MAINBOARD: Acer/Tyan/Asus (any suggestions?)
>>>CASE/POWER: don't know yet (suggestions?)

>>Beware of USR sportster modems. Bypass the issue altogether by getting the
>>USR v.everything modem.

>We use USR Sportster modems on all our Mail MTA's and on our NT Servers for
>RAS. Good, cheap, reliable modems.

I agree, except for their "pausing" flaw. Just recently announced, there is a bug
in USR 33.6k sportsters made from 10/95 until a month or so ago that causes them
to pause for up to 30 seconds. It's not a major disaster, but is a consideration.
From what I understand, USR will replace these faulty modems with good ones, however.

- Show quoted text -

>However - if you are looking at ISDN as well - perhaps you should be
>investigating an ISDN/MODEM router.

>>>As for other network hardware, what else am I going to
>>>need aside from the hub, nics, and cabling? What brand
>>>names should I be looking for? (3Com and ?)

>Hubs - well, you need at least 16 ports - SMC do a good 16port 10BaseT hub for
>only #250. SMC Cards go for about #40 (remember - these are UK prices -
>probably less in US !). Cabling is pretty easy - just talk to a local
>Building Manager or the guys who installed the Telephone System. You might
>want to "neaten" things up by connecting the hub to a cable unit and have
>floor ports cabled up to the unit - easy to add further connections and
>smartens up your server room ! For 10 users - keep to Ethernet. Keep it to
>10Mps Cards as well since you won't utilise 100Mps

>>>How do I connect two or more printers to the server?
>>>I assume that there exists some kind of multi-port parallel
>>>interface that supports LPT1/2/3. Any ideas? I suppose
>>>that I could just set up the other two printers as shared
>>>devices on the client workstations, right?

>Either/Or !!! Setting printers up on the server - no problems - setting
>printers up as Client Shares - problem if that client is switched off -
>printer connected using a NetPort - very good solution but you need to pay for
>that netport ! Cost is approx #200 - Intel do a good NetPort that means you
>literally plug the printer into the network.

This is a solution that I also recommend.

- Show quoted text -

>>>They may also wish to host their own web-site, and I assume
>>>that could be taken care of with an ISDN connection to a
>>>local ISP, but my knowledge of ISDN is limited, so any advice
>>>on this is greatly appreciated.

>ISDN is easy-peasy. No idea where you are (US or Europe) but over here, we
>have 64K per channel and 2 channels. In the US that is 56K per channel.
>Purchase a "Terminal Adaptor" (ISDN Modem) that "Ties" the 2 channels together
>- doubling your i/o. You want access to all workstations and Mail etc etc ?
>You gotta look at an ISDN Router. Spider do them - not cheap. #2000 a time.
>Cheapest I know is the 3Com SONIX 500 - costs #900. Look hard into whether
>you really need something like this - it might be cheaper to give everyone
>modems and place your web page on a central server (like mine - check out
>http://www.aloha.com/~iq for details !) - you'll CERTAINLY get better
>throughput at a MUCH cheaper rate.

>>>As for the NOS, my personal bias is OS/2 Warp Server, but I
>>>have to consider my client's best interests, so the other
>>>choice is WinNT Server (Netware is out of the question).
>>>I want to be able to set things up with a minimum fuss, and
>>>later train a couple of them to do general maintenance, like
>>>file management and backups. Essentially, the NOS must be/have:

>>>- easy to install, configure, maintain and upgrade
>>>- rock solid reliable and secure
>>>- remote file access (very important)
>>>- moderately fast file system
>>>- internet ready with e-mail capabilities
>>>- seamless integration with Windows95 clients
>>>- file/program/print/modem sharing

>>Having worked with both NTAS (4.0) and Warp Server, I'd recommend Warp
>Server.

>>File sharing is considerably faster than NT4.0, and it's ready to handle the
>internet
>>additions *today*. It make an overall excellent server.

>You want

...

read more »

by **Philipp Prau** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

>>I need some (lots) of advice about setting up a small LAN.
>>I am being contracted to design/install/setup/configure an
>>office LAN (small law firm), which, when I'm done, will
>>consist of around 10 workstations and a server. In addition
>>to file/print sharing services, other features required are
>>internet connectivity, e-mail and remote file/resource access.

[...]

Quote:>>As for the NOS, my personal bias is OS/2 Warp Server, but I
>>have to consider my client's best interests, so the other
>>choice is WinNT Server (Netware is out of the question).
>>I want to be able to set things up with a minimum fuss, and
>>later train a couple of them to do general maintenance, like
>>file management and backups. Essentially, the NOS must be/have:

>Having worked with both NTAS (4.0) and Warp Server, I'd recommend Warp Server.

>File sharing is considerably faster than NT4.0, and it's ready to handle the internet
>additions *today*. It make an overall excellent server.

Warp Server is able to share Modems (just like printers).
With NT, you have to buy SAPS Server for about $1000 extra!

So, if you want to start with a "small" Internet connection with
1 or 2 accounts, you can install the standard internet programs
on the clients, using one modem connected to the server.

Philipp

by **mbfa** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

-
--OS/2 TCP/IP is a complete implementation of honest to
--god UNIX TCP/IP. Not some limp* half assed joke!
-- So if you want a real TCP/IP and all the t*s in a commercial shrink wrap
--OS, OS/2 is the ONLY way to go.
-
-
-Yeah, harass people into buying a dead OS. OS/2 is dead!
-
-Zachmann (the president of Canopus Research) said it, Thompson didn't say
-ANYTHING about OS/2 at a recent IBM conference in Toronto.
-
-OS/2 may be good OS, but its like soy ice cream, it may be good for you, but it
-tastes like shit!
-
-
-yogik
-
-
-see PCWEEK ONLINE Aug. 14, 96 for reference to above
-
Well this doesn't change what I said. The Microsux TCP/IP implementations
are impotent & insipid, and you can't say otherwise.
Speaking of shit. You are using the old 50 billion flies can't all be wrong
reasoning that Winbloze is the only game in town. Well last I checked it is still
basically brown and stinks. Remember a stampeded doesn't mean they are
headed in the right direction.
Dead, alive, what does that mean, really? Amiga is dead, but I still see
all sorts of new things coming available. LINUX is dead, well it never noticed.
How about UNIX, is it dead? I have never looked to IBM for diverse support
beyond the OS release. The Internet & ISPs support OS/2 NOT IBM. If you need
URLs to see what I mean I can supply them. Check out these;

http://www.veryComputer.com/
http://www.veryComputer.com/
http://www.veryComputer.com/
http://www.veryComputer.com/
http://www.veryComputer.com/;use the spin arrow to OS2
ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/ps/products/os2
http://www.veryComputer.com/

Look's like it's still kicking to me. And what's this new release all the
reviewers are raving about? It, like Winbloze is winning awards, and it isn't
even out yet! Let me think now, what's it called... Warp 4 Merlin.

by **Erik Johnso** » Fri, 06 Sep 1996 04:00:00

Quote:> NT has the absolute *worst* suite of TCP/IP utilities. No traceroute, telnet servers,
> and a considerable number of other things that are *standard* with any good TCP/IP
> suite. If you're dealing with TCP/IP a lot, I would highly recommend Warp
> Server instead.

Ever type tracert at the NT command prompt? Looks like traceroute to
me.
I haven't had any complaints about NT's TCP/IP capabilities, though I
suppose
if I needed a telnet server I might. If one is going to do mail or web
serving,
there is a much wider variety of apps available for NT, many of which
are free.

-Erik Johnson

http://phidias.colorado.edu/vgallery.html

Very Computer

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?

Which NOS is best for me, OS/2 Warp Server or Windows NT?