Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

January 9, 2008

Hey Gang,

It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I haven't been

keeping up with current hardware out there. So I'm looking for

recommendations

We currently have

Windows 2k (32bit) Server

2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

4gb Memory

SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

This system was originally designed to house about 10-15 concurrent users

and thier applications. The last 4.5 years have been pretty good to use,

especially considering it's holding a load of about 35 concurrent users and

all thier applications. With that unexpected growth in mind.. I'm thinking

Win2k3 server (64-bit)

8GB Memory

Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and should I consider

starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the most reliable?

Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be appreciated

Thanks

Andre

January 9, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only allow 64-bit

printer drivers, and add to the already existing problem with

finding TS compatible printer drivers.

That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008, which includes a new

feature called Easy Print, which should solve the printer driver

problem.

And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and load-balance

them than buying a single high performance server.

_________________________________________________________

Vera Noest

MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

"AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> Hey Gang,

>

> It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I

> haven't been keeping up with current hardware out there. So I'm

> looking for recommendations

>

> We currently have

>

> Windows 2k (32bit) Server

> 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

> 4gb Memory

> SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

> SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

>

> This system was originally designed to house about 10-15

> concurrent users and thier applications. The last 4.5 years have

> been pretty good to use, especially considering it's holding a

> load of about 35 concurrent users and all thier applications.

> With that unexpected growth in mind.. I'm thinking

>

> Win2k3 server (64-bit)

> 8GB Memory

> Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and should I

> consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

> Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the most

> reliable?

>

> Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be

> appreciated

>

> Thanks

>

> Andre

January 9, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

Don't I need twice as many server licenses then?

"Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote in message

news:Xns9A20DEB7E523Dveranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

> I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only allow 64-bit

> printer drivers, and add to the already existing problem with

> finding TS compatible printer drivers.

> That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008, which includes a new

> feature called Easy Print, which should solve the printer driver

> problem.

>

> And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and load-balance

> them than buying a single high performance server.

> _________________________________________________________

> Vera Noest

> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>

> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>

> > Hey Gang,

> >

> > It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I

> > haven't been keeping up with current hardware out there. So I'm

> > looking for recommendations

> >

> > We currently have

> >

> > Windows 2k (32bit) Server

> > 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

> > 4gb Memory

> > SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

> > SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

> >

> > This system was originally designed to house about 10-15

> > concurrent users and thier applications. The last 4.5 years have

> > been pretty good to use, especially considering it's holding a

> > load of about 35 concurrent users and all thier applications.

> > With that unexpected growth in mind.. I'm thinking

> >

> > Win2k3 server (64-bit)

> > 8GB Memory

> > Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and should I

> > consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

> > Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the most

> > reliable?

> >

> > Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be

> > appreciated

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > Andre

January 10, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

You need to buy Windows 2003 twice, yes. Clients can use the same

server CAL and TS CAL to access both servers.

But often 2 moderately powerfull servers are cheaper than one high

performance server.

_________________________________________________________

Vera Noest

MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

"AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> Don't I need twice as many server licenses then?

>

> "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote

> in message

> news:Xns9A20DEB7E523Dveranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

>> I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only allow

>> 64-bit printer drivers, and add to the already existing problem

>> with finding TS compatible printer drivers.

>> That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008, which includes a

>> new feature called Easy Print, which should solve the printer

>> driver problem.

>>

>> And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and

>> load-balance them than buying a single high performance server.

>> _________________________________________________________

>> Vera Noest

>> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

>> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

>> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>>

>> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

>> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>>

>> > Hey Gang,

>> >

>> > It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I

>> > haven't been keeping up with current hardware out there. So

>> > I'm looking for recommendations

>> >

>> > We currently have

>> >

>> > Windows 2k (32bit) Server

>> > 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

>> > 4gb Memory

>> > SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

>> > SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

>> >

>> > This system was originally designed to house about 10-15

>> > concurrent users and thier applications. The last 4.5 years

>> > have been pretty good to use, especially considering it's

>> > holding a load of about 35 concurrent users and all thier

>> > applications. With that unexpected growth in mind.. I'm

>> > thinking

>> >

>> > Win2k3 server (64-bit)

>> > 8GB Memory

>> > Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and should

>> > I consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

>> > Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the

>> > most reliable?

>> >

>> > Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be

>> > appreciated

>> >

>> > Thanks

>> >

>> > Andre

January 18, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

I've put both those suggestions through to dell, just to see what thier

recommendations are, they're telling me that thier "tech" guys say that it

will be to expensive and not benefit me. And that cluster licenses are 60%

more expensive then regular licenses?

"Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote in message

news:Xns9A21D0464E91veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

> You need to buy Windows 2003 twice, yes. Clients can use the same

> server CAL and TS CAL to access both servers.

> But often 2 moderately powerfull servers are cheaper than one high

> performance server.

> _________________________________________________________

> Vera Noest

> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>

> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>

> > Don't I need twice as many server licenses then?

> >

> > "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote

> > in message

> > news:Xns9A20DEB7E523Dveranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

> >> I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only allow

> >> 64-bit printer drivers, and add to the already existing problem

> >> with finding TS compatible printer drivers.

> >> That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008, which includes a

> >> new feature called Easy Print, which should solve the printer

> >> driver problem.

> >>

> >> And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and

> >> load-balance them than buying a single high performance server.

> >> _________________________________________________________

> >> Vera Noest

> >> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> >> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

> >> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

> >>

> >> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

> >> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> >>

> >> > Hey Gang,

> >> >

> >> > It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I

> >> > haven't been keeping up with current hardware out there. So

> >> > I'm looking for recommendations

> >> >

> >> > We currently have

> >> >

> >> > Windows 2k (32bit) Server

> >> > 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

> >> > 4gb Memory

> >> > SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

> >> > SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

> >> >

> >> > This system was originally designed to house about 10-15

> >> > concurrent users and thier applications. The last 4.5 years

> >> > have been pretty good to use, especially considering it's

> >> > holding a load of about 35 concurrent users and all thier

> >> > applications. With that unexpected growth in mind.. I'm

> >> > thinking

> >> >

> >> > Win2k3 server (64-bit)

> >> > 8GB Memory

> >> > Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and should

> >> > I consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

> >> > Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the

> >> > most reliable?

> >> >

> >> > Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be

> >> > appreciated

> >> >

> >> > Thanks

> >> >

> >> > Andre

January 18, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

Who talks about clustering???

I can only assume that Dell suggested that you run Session

Directory, which would mean that you have to run Windows 2003

Enterprise Edition, which is much more expensive, yes.

But that's not what I proposed. You can have a load-balanced farm

with Windows 2003 Standard Edition.

But if you want to go for a single 64-bit server, it's up to you. I

just don't like putting all my eggs in one basket.

_________________________________________________________

Vera Noest

MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

"AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 18 jan 2008 in

microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> I've put both those suggestions through to dell, just to see

> what thier recommendations are, they're telling me that thier

> "tech" guys say that it will be to expensive and not benefit me.

> And that cluster licenses are 60% more expensive then regular

> licenses?

>

> "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote

> in message

> news:Xns9A21D0464E91veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

>> You need to buy Windows 2003 twice, yes. Clients can use the

>> same server CAL and TS CAL to access both servers.

>> But often 2 moderately powerfull servers are cheaper than one

>> high performance server.

>> _________________________________________________________

>> Vera Noest

>> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

>> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

>> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>>

>> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

>> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>>

>> > Don't I need twice as many server licenses then?

>> >

>> > "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>

>> > wrote in message

>> > news:Xns9A20DEB7E523Dveranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

>> >> I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only allow

>> >> 64-bit printer drivers, and add to the already existing

>> >> problem with finding TS compatible printer drivers.

>> >> That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008, which

>> >> includes a new feature called Easy Print, which should solve

>> >> the printer driver problem.

>> >>

>> >> And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and

>> >> load-balance them than buying a single high performance

>> >> server.

>> >> _________________________________________________________

>> >> Vera Noest

>> >> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

>> >> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

>> >> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>> >>

>> >> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

>> >> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>> >>

>> >> > Hey Gang,

>> >> >

>> >> > It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I

>> >> > haven't been keeping up with current hardware out there.

>> >> > So I'm looking for recommendations

>> >> >

>> >> > We currently have

>> >> >

>> >> > Windows 2k (32bit) Server

>> >> > 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

>> >> > 4gb Memory

>> >> > SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

>> >> > SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

>> >> >

>> >> > This system was originally designed to house about 10-15

>> >> > concurrent users and thier applications. The last 4.5

>> >> > years have been pretty good to use, especially considering

>> >> > it's holding a load of about 35 concurrent users and all

>> >> > thier applications. With that unexpected growth in mind..

>> >> > I'm thinking

>> >> >

>> >> > Win2k3 server (64-bit)

>> >> > 8GB Memory

>> >> > Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and

>> >> > should I consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

>> >> > Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the

>> >> > most reliable?

>> >> >

>> >> > Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be

>> >> > appreciated

>> >> >

>> >> > Thanks

>> >> >

>> >> > Andre

January 21, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

Well, they implied I could only share licenses if I was clustered? I

haven't made any decisions yet.. I agree with the eggs in one basket bit,

but I'm still trying to learn more .. i've only ever had the one server so I

don't know what's involved with load balancing. Though, I do believe i'm

going to stall until 2008 release .. then there's the part about being iffy

on running on a brand new OS.. lol, I can't win here.

"Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote in message

news:Xns9A29F3A3D1716veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

> Who talks about clustering???

> I can only assume that Dell suggested that you run Session

> Directory, which would mean that you have to run Windows 2003

> Enterprise Edition, which is much more expensive, yes.

> But that's not what I proposed. You can have a load-balanced farm

> with Windows 2003 Standard Edition.

> But if you want to go for a single 64-bit server, it's up to you. I

> just don't like putting all my eggs in one basket.

>

> _________________________________________________________

> Vera Noest

> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>

> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 18 jan 2008 in

> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>

> > I've put both those suggestions through to dell, just to see

> > what thier recommendations are, they're telling me that thier

> > "tech" guys say that it will be to expensive and not benefit me.

> > And that cluster licenses are 60% more expensive then regular

> > licenses?

> >

> > "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote

> > in message

> > news:Xns9A21D0464E91veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

> >> You need to buy Windows 2003 twice, yes. Clients can use the

> >> same server CAL and TS CAL to access both servers.

> >> But often 2 moderately powerfull servers are cheaper than one

> >> high performance server.

> >> _________________________________________________________

> >> Vera Noest

> >> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> >> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

> >> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

> >>

> >> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

> >> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> >>

> >> > Don't I need twice as many server licenses then?

> >> >

> >> > "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>

> >> > wrote in message

> >> > news:Xns9A20DEB7E523Dveranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

> >> >> I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only allow

> >> >> 64-bit printer drivers, and add to the already existing

> >> >> problem with finding TS compatible printer drivers.

> >> >> That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008, which

> >> >> includes a new feature called Easy Print, which should solve

> >> >> the printer driver problem.

> >> >>

> >> >> And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and

> >> >> load-balance them than buying a single high performance

> >> >> server.

> >> >> _________________________________________________________

> >> >> Vera Noest

> >> >> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

> >> >> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

> >> >> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

> >> >>

> >> >> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

> >> >> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> >> >>

> >> >> > Hey Gang,

> >> >> >

> >> >> > It's about that time to upgrade our server, and honestly I

> >> >> > haven't been keeping up with current hardware out there.

> >> >> > So I'm looking for recommendations

> >> >> >

> >> >> > We currently have

> >> >> >

> >> >> > Windows 2k (32bit) Server

> >> >> > 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

> >> >> > 4gb Memory

> >> >> > SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

> >> >> > SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

> >> >> >

> >> >> > This system was originally designed to house about 10-15

> >> >> > concurrent users and thier applications. The last 4.5

> >> >> > years have been pretty good to use, especially considering

> >> >> > it's holding a load of about 35 concurrent users and all

> >> >> > thier applications. With that unexpected growth in mind..

> >> >> > I'm thinking

> >> >> >

> >> >> > Win2k3 server (64-bit)

> >> >> > 8GB Memory

> >> >> > Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and

> >> >> > should I consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

> >> >> > Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still the

> >> >> > most reliable?

> >> >> >

> >> >> > Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would be

> >> >> > appreciated

> >> >> >

> >> >> > Thanks

> >> >> >

> >> >> > Andre

January 21, 2008

Re: Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

You'll have to ask Dell what they had in mind, but there's no

"license sharing", with or without clustering.

_________________________________________________________

Vera Noest

MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

"AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 21 jan 2008 in

microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

> Well, they implied I could only share licenses if I was

> clustered? I haven't made any decisions yet.. I agree with the

> eggs in one basket bit, but I'm still trying to learn more ..

> i've only ever had the one server so I don't know what's

> involved with load balancing. Though, I do believe i'm going to

> stall until 2008 release .. then there's the part about being

> iffy on running on a brand new OS.. lol, I can't win here.

>

> "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se> wrote

> in message

> news:Xns9A29F3A3D1716veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

>> Who talks about clustering???

>> I can only assume that Dell suggested that you run Session

>> Directory, which would mean that you have to run Windows 2003

>> Enterprise Edition, which is much more expensive, yes.

>> But that's not what I proposed. You can have a load-balanced

>> farm with Windows 2003 Standard Edition.

>> But if you want to go for a single 64-bit server, it's up to

>> you. I just don't like putting all my eggs in one basket.

>>

>> _________________________________________________________

>> Vera Noest

>> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

>> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

>> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>>

>> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 18 jan 2008 in

>> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>>

>> > I've put both those suggestions through to dell, just to see

>> > what thier recommendations are, they're telling me that thier

>> > "tech" guys say that it will be to expensive and not benefit

>> > me. And that cluster licenses are 60% more expensive then

>> > regular licenses?

>> >

>> > "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>

>> > wrote in message

>> > news:Xns9A21D0464E91veranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

>> >> You need to buy Windows 2003 twice, yes. Clients can use the

>> >> same server CAL and TS CAL to access both servers.

>> >> But often 2 moderately powerfull servers are cheaper than

>> >> one high performance server.

>> >> _________________________________________________________

>> >> Vera Noest

>> >> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

>> >> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

>> >> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>> >>

>> >> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

>> >> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>> >>

>> >> > Don't I need twice as many server licenses then?

>> >> >

>> >> > "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@remove-this.hem.utfors.se>

>> >> > wrote in message

>> >> > news:Xns9A20DEB7E523Dveranoesthemutforsse@207.46.248.16...

>> >> >> I would think twice about the 64-bit. This would only

>> >> >> allow 64-bit printer drivers, and add to the already

>> >> >> existing problem with finding TS compatible printer

>> >> >> drivers. That is, unless you can wait for Windows 2008,

>> >> >> which includes a new feature called Easy Print, which

>> >> >> should solve the printer driver problem.

>> >> >>

>> >> >> And I would rather buy to less powerfull servers and

>> >> >> load-balance them than buying a single high performance

>> >> >> server.

>> >> >> _________________________________________________________

>> >> >> Vera Noest

>> >> >> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server

>> >> >> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net

>> >> >> ___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___

>> >> >>

>> >> >> "AndreZ" <shmoes@hotmail.com> wrote on 09 jan 2008 in

>> >> >> microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:

>> >> >>

>> >> >> > Hey Gang,

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > It's about that time to upgrade our server, and

>> >> >> > honestly I haven't been keeping up with current

>> >> >> > hardware out there. So I'm looking for recommendations

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > We currently have

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > Windows 2k (32bit) Server

>> >> >> > 2ghz Dual Processors (single core)

>> >> >> > 4gb Memory

>> >> >> > SCSI Raid 1 (operating system)

>> >> >> > SCSI Raid 5 (Data files)

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > This system was originally designed to house about

>> >> >> > 10-15 concurrent users and thier applications. The last

>> >> >> > 4.5 years have been pretty good to use, especially

>> >> >> > considering it's holding a load of about 35 concurrent

>> >> >> > users and all thier applications. With that unexpected

>> >> >> > growth in mind.. I'm thinking

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > Win2k3 server (64-bit)

>> >> >> > 8GB Memory

>> >> >> > Dual Quad Core Processors (speed recommendations? and

>> >> >> > should I consider starting with 2 expandable to 4?)

>> >> >> > Hot swappable Hard Drive .. is SCSI obsolete or still

>> >> >> > the most reliable?

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > Any Tips and recommendations for your experiences would

>> >> >> > be appreciated

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > Thanks

>> >> >> >

>> >> >> > Andre

Sign In

Terminal Server Hardware Recommendations

Recommended Posts

Guest AndreZ

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest Vera Noest [MVP]

Guest AndreZ

Guest Vera Noest [MVP]

Guest AndreZ

Guest Vera Noest [MVP]

Guest AndreZ

Guest Vera Noest [MVP]

Similar Content

Terminal server error

Toms Hardware

How to troubleshoot Terminal Server issues?

ADK and Windows 2019 Server

Windows Server 2025

Browse

Activity

Site Info