What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharingone?

[Guest toni321@charter.net]

I know this might sound stupid but I am trying to understand the

concept of why on a server they have mapped network printers but also

they have the printers installed as shares. To me I would pick one or

the other. They do not have a print server running so what would be

the benefit? Can anyone shed some light on this for me ...

Thanks

[Guest Frankster]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

 

<toni321@charter.net> wrote in message

news:09d4fbe0-e355-43d0-888c-4e4b1ee37ab9@p39g2000prm.googlegroups.com...

>I know this might sound stupid but I am trying to understand the

> concept of why on a server they have mapped network printers but also

> they have the printers installed as shares. To me I would pick one or

> the other. They do not have a print server running so what would be

> the benefit? Can anyone shed some light on this for me ...

> Thanks

 

Ask the server admin. Or clarify your question here. You access the printer

you want by whatever means is available. If it is installed on your server,

fine. Otherwise you might mapped to another shared printer. Whatever. Don't

matter.

 

You are not clear if you are talking about using the server from the

keyboard to print, or simply using printers installed on the server to print

from your client machine.

 

-Frank

[Guest toni321@charter.net]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead ofsharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead ofsharing one?

 

On Jun 5, 6:07 am, "Frankster" <Fr...@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:

> <toni...@charter.net> wrote in message

>

> news:09d4fbe0-e355-43d0-888c-4e4b1ee37ab9@p39g2000prm.googlegroups.com...

>

> >I know this might sound stupid but I am trying to understand the

> > concept of why on a server they have mapped network printers but also

> > they have the printers installed as shares. To me I would pick one or

> > the other. They do not have a print server running so what would be

> > the benefit? Can anyone shed some light on this for me ...

> > Thanks

>

> Ask the server admin. Or clarify your question here. You access the printer

> you want by whatever means is available. If it is installed on your server,

> fine. Otherwise you might mapped to another shared printer. Whatever. Don't

> matter.

>

> You are not clear if you are talking about using the server from the

> keyboard to print, or simply using printers installed on the server to print

> from your client machine.

>

> -Frank

 

That was the reason I asked the question. There is no server admin and

I am working on this network with printers that are mapped and also

shared in the same environment. They have 9 clients connected to a

domain with the server functioning as a file server. There are three

network printers all have an IP address. The clients are 7 Vista

Business and 2 XP Pro. Each printer is installed on one of the clients

and shared. My question was asking the reason why to map the printer

rather then install it to each machine as a shared printer. Like I

said in the beginning it may be a stupid question but I am trying to

understand the concept, since I am always having to reinstall the

print driver in the Vista Machines. I thought it made a difference in

the way it was set up.

Thanks

Toni

[Guest Frankster]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

 

<toni321@charter.net> wrote in message

news:b89ce16f-c1a2-4069-bcb2-fa6255afba85@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

> On Jun 5, 6:07 am, "Frankster" <Fr...@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:

>> <toni...@charter.net> wrote in message

>>

>> news:09d4fbe0-e355-43d0-888c-4e4b1ee37ab9@p39g2000prm.googlegroups.com...

>>

>> >I know this might sound stupid but I am trying to understand the

>> > concept of why on a server they have mapped network printers but also

>> > they have the printers installed as shares. To me I would pick one or

>> > the other. They do not have a print server running so what would be

>> > the benefit? Can anyone shed some light on this for me ...

>> > Thanks

>>

>> Ask the server admin. Or clarify your question here. You access the

>> printer

>> you want by whatever means is available. If it is installed on your

>> server,

>> fine. Otherwise you might mapped to another shared printer. Whatever.

>> Don't

>> matter.

>>

>> You are not clear if you are talking about using the server from the

>> keyboard to print, or simply using printers installed on the server to

>> print

>> from your client machine.

>>

>> -Frank

>

> That was the reason I asked the question. There is no server admin and

> I am working on this network with printers that are mapped and also

> shared in the same environment. They have 9 clients connected to a

> domain with the server functioning as a file server. There are three

> network printers all have an IP address. The clients are 7 Vista

> Business and 2 XP Pro. Each printer is installed on one of the clients

> and shared. My question was asking the reason why to map the printer

> rather then install it to each machine as a shared printer. Like I

> said in the beginning it may be a stupid question but I am trying to

> understand the concept, since I am always having to reinstall the

> print driver in the Vista Machines. I thought it made a difference in

> the way it was set up.

> Thanks

> Toni

 

Okay, here are some thoughts - but you have to make up your own mind as to

which is best for you.

 

Ideally, you will install IP printers on each and every machine directly.

This would assume that you don't have 200 clients, if which case the

administration would be a lot easier on a shared bases. However, on a small

network, installing IP printers on each and every workstation is a good

idea. This allows the use of the printer without any other machine running.

Non-IP printers need to be shared from the workstation where they are

physically installed.

 

Any shared printer will have to have its host computer running all the time

for others to print to it.

 

Shared printers create the spool file (file made to be sent to the printer)

on the host machine. If someone is working on the machine physically

connected to the printer it will slow down when someone else prints to that

printer.

 

Lots of choices. The answers just depend on your network and your needs.

There is no overall good or bad way.

 

As for installing all printers on the Server and just sharing them all

out... some print drivers play havoc with servers because some print drivers

have bugs that interfere with other server operations. You're a test pilot

here. Also, the spooling will create a load on your server. This is why some

people dedicate a server to "print server only", if their network is big

enough to warrant it.

 

If you install a printer on a workstation, only 10 people can connect to it

to print due to a workstation's connection limitation. A server allows

unlimited connections.

 

Lots of choices... just depends.

 

-Frank

[Guest toni321@charter.net]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead ofsharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead ofsharing one?

 

On Jun 5, 6:07 pm, "Frankster" <Fr...@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:

> <toni...@charter.net> wrote in message

>

> news:b89ce16f-c1a2-4069-bcb2-fa6255afba85@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>

>

>

> > On Jun 5, 6:07 am, "Frankster" <Fr...@SPAM2TRASH.com> wrote:

> >> <toni...@charter.net> wrote in message

>

> >>news:09d4fbe0-e355-43d0-888c-4e4b1ee37ab9@p39g2000prm.googlegroups.com...

>

> >> >I know this might sound stupid but I am trying to understand the

> >> > concept of why on a server they have mapped network printers but also

> >> > they have the printers installed as shares. To me I would pick one or

> >> > the other. They do not have a print server running so what would be

> >> > the benefit? Can anyone shed some light on this for me ...

> >> > Thanks

>

> >> Ask the server admin. Or clarify your question here. You access the

> >> printer

> >> you want by whatever means is available. If it is installed on your

> >> server,

> >> fine. Otherwise you might mapped to another shared printer. Whatever.

> >> Don't

> >> matter.

>

> >> You are not clear if you are talking about using the server from the

> >> keyboard to print, or simply using printers installed on the server to

> >> print

> >> from your client machine.

>

> >> -Frank

>

> > That was the reason I asked the question. There is no server admin and

> > I am working on this network with printers that are mapped and also

> > shared in the same environment. They have 9 clients connected to a

> > domain with the server functioning as a file server. There are three

> > network printers all have an IP address. The clients are 7 Vista

> > Business and 2 XP Pro. Each printer is installed on one of the clients

> > and shared. My question was asking the reason why to map the printer

> > rather then install it to each machine as a shared printer. Like I

> > said in the beginning it may be a stupid question but I am trying to

> > understand the concept, since I am always having to reinstall the

> > print driver in the Vista Machines. I thought it made a difference in

> > the way it was set up.

> > Thanks

> > Toni

>

> Okay, here are some thoughts - but you have to make up your own mind as to

> which is best for you.

>

> Ideally, you will install IP printers on each and every machine directly.

> This would assume that you don't have 200 clients, if which case the

> administration would be a lot easier on a shared bases. However, on a small

> network, installing IP printers on each and every workstation is a good

> idea. This allows the use of the printer without any other machine running.

> Non-IP printers need to be shared from the workstation where they are

> physically installed.

>

> Any shared printer will have to have its host computer running all the time

> for others to print to it.

>

> Shared printers create the spool file (file made to be sent to the printer)

> on the host machine. If someone is working on the machine physically

> connected to the printer it will slow down when someone else prints to that

> printer.

>

> Lots of choices. The answers just depend on your network and your needs.

> There is no overall good or bad way.

>

> As for installing all printers on the Server and just sharing them all

> out... some print drivers play havoc with servers because some print drivers

> have bugs that interfere with other server operations. You're a test pilot

> here. Also, the spooling will create a load on your server. This is why some

> people dedicate a server to "print server only", if their network is big

> enough to warrant it.

>

> If you install a printer on a workstation, only 10 people can connect to it

> to print due to a workstation's connection limitation. A server allows

> unlimited connections.

>

> Lots of choices... just depends.

>

> -Frank

 

Now that makes sense to me. Thanks Frank for the examples.

Toni

[Guest Gurney]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:07:14 -0600, "Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com>

wrote:

>If you install a printer on a workstation, only 10 people can connect to it

>to print due to a workstation's connection limitation. A server allows

>unlimited connections.

 

Not entirely true - the Server OS does NOT allows "unlimited"

connections. It only allows as many connections as licenses

purchased.

[Guest Frankster]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

 

"Gurney" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message

news:d3lj44h8clibslnfacuktnr5esso8l84eo@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:07:14 -0600, "Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com>

> wrote:

>

>>If you install a printer on a workstation, only 10 people can connect to

>>it

>>to print due to a workstation's connection limitation. A server allows

>>unlimited connections.

>

> Not entirely true - the Server OS does NOT allows "unlimited"

> connections. It only allows as many connections as licenses

> purchased.

>

 

With Windows Server you can just "plug in" as many CALs as you like. There

is no technical enforcement. With workstation, NT through Vista, there is

technical enforcement of the 10 connection limit.

 

Not speaking of morality or legality here, just the technical facts.

 

-Frank

[Guest Gurney]

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

Re: What is the reason for mapping a network printer instead of sharing one?

 

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 20:02:44 -0600, "Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com>

wrote:

>

>"Gurney" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message

>news:d3lj44h8clibslnfacuktnr5esso8l84eo@4ax.com...

>> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:07:14 -0600, "Frankster" <Frank@SPAM2TRASH.com>

>> wrote:

>>

>>>If you install a printer on a workstation, only 10 people can connect to

>>>it

>>>to print due to a workstation's connection limitation. A server allows

>>>unlimited connections.

>>

>> Not entirely true - the Server OS does NOT allows "unlimited"

>> connections. It only allows as many connections as licenses

>> purchased.

>>

>

>With Windows Server you can just "plug in" as many CALs as you like. There

>is no technical enforcement. With workstation, NT through Vista, there is

>technical enforcement of the 10 connection limit.

>

>Not speaking of morality or legality here, just the technical facts.

>

>-Frank

True, but MS DOES do periodic unannounced audits to check licensing.

I've been through more than one. Not cheap when they catch you out of

compliance.