nmX.Memnoch

It's not external at all. You purchase a motherboard with onboard/integrated graphics. Then you upgrade the system with a standard addin PCIe X16 card...no external device and no external PSU. When you're playing games or doing something graphic intensive the system uses the addin PCIe card. When you're doing general stuff like web browsing, email, word processing, etc the PCIe card is turned off and the system uses the onboard/integrated graphics. It's a neat idea but at the same time I wonder why they don't just fix their chips so that the 3D processing units are powered off when you're not using them. I don't see the reason for switching back and forth between two cards other than to be a marketing gimmick. Instead of requiring yet another video device in the PC, make the existing (or new) devices more power efficient...kinda like how Intel turns off part of the Core 2's cache when it's not being used. TESLA is geared more towards graphics artists and rendering farms.

The builtin defrag engine isn't nearly as good as the full product. I believe it's based on Diskeeper 7.x (possibly 6.x or even as old as 5.x). Even 10.x isn't nearly as good as 2007 (11.x). They got a lot right with the latest version. They generally release a new version every year...incidentally right after I renew my maintenance agreement. That's coming up so Diskeeper 2008 (name is my assumption) should be out in a few months. For those thinking about purchasing Diskeeper...make sure you get the maintenance agreement! You buy them in 1 year blocks and during the period of the maintenance agreement you get maintenance, support and all upgrades free of charge. You'll pay about half the cost to renew the maintenance agreement every year than if you purchased each upgrade outright. I believe purchasing in volume comes includes the maintenance agreement for the first year.

Woops...my bad. Too much going on... I'll try to get it to you today. I still haven't forgotten...I've just been busy!! If I don't get to it tomorrow I'll definitely get to it this weekend. I'll probably just attach it to this thread...

Sweet!

The link N1K provided is the supposed fix for the 10 half-open connections limit that was added in SP2, not a fix for the 10 connection limit. The legal answer is no. For true server duties you should use the server version of the OS (i.e. Server 2003 R2, Standard Edition). If printing is your only requirement, a cheaper option would be to purchase a dedicated print server device and configure the clients for direct-IP printing. If you already have a server then I would suggest purchasing a dedicated print server device for each printer (or if they have the capability of adding a network card, that's your best option). Then configure those printers on the server using IP printing and share them from there. It won't add that much load to your server...particularly since you're only talking about six printers.

I just double checked it on my last Windows 2000 Server box at work. The setting is in the same location mentioned above.

There's been a lot of buy outs in the hard drive market in the last few years... First Maxtor bought Quantum, then Hitachi bought IBM's drive division. Next it was Seagate buying Maxtor. Now WD is buying up some of the parts suppliers. There's probably a few more in there... On the desktop side there are only three major players (IMO) and they are WD, Seagate and Hitachi. I still consider Samsung an "up and coming" in the HDD market. It's pretty much the same three major players on the laptop side as well, with Toshiba thrown in for good measure. The server side is a completely different story. Fujitsu and Seagate have that pretty well covered. Hitachi is a player, but not as much as even Fujitsu. I wish WD would get back into SCSI (and now SAS) drives. I guess it could be argued that their SATA 3Gb/s drives could be used on SAS controllers, but I'd much prefer to have actual SAS drives. I used WD for years until those damnable 250GB SATA drivers that scream like a banshee! They finally moved to the newer, quieter motors though and now have some of the faster drives on the market again so I may move back to them in the near future. For now my machine has 2x250GB 7200.10 SATA's and 2x400GB 7200.10 SATA's and my server has 2x80GB 7200.8 PATA's (RAID1) and 4x400GB 7200.10 SATA's (RAID5). My other machines have a mixture of Seagate and WD drives.

This must be available in Windows 2003 Server, it doesn't appear in Windows 2000 Server. If it's not in gpedit.msc on 2000 Server there's another way to do it. I know this because we just did it at one of my side jobs... Start > Programs > Admin Tools > Terminal Services Configuration (or) Start > Run > tscc.msc <enter> Terminal Services Configuration > Connections > double click on RDP-Tcp > Logon Settings tab > uncheck Always prompt for password It may be in a slightly different location...the instructions above are from my Server 2003 box at home. At any rate, the setting is definitely in the Terminal Services Configuation settings on 2000 Server.

Well...creating a new array would be a new drive to the OS. So you wouldn't be creating an extended partition. And yes, the new drives will run at 15K RPM regardless of the existing drives. That's a spindle speed and cannot be changed. Before you create the array you need to find out what they anticipate their storage needs would be. The reason I say that is it'll be a deciding factor in what type of array you would create. RAID10 will give you the best performance (and potentially redundancy), but you lose half the drive space. For instance, four 73GB drives in RAID10 would be ~146GB. But in RAID5 that would be ~219GB. If space isn't a concern I would opt for RAID10...but that's just me.

I'm in agreement here as well. Personally I would opt for just adding the drives as another array instead of partitioning. If the controller is multichannel put them on another channel for another performance boost. However, putting them on another channel may not be an option if the server has a backplane (unless it's a split backplane). Generally when I do new servers I create a RAID1 array for the OS and another array (RAID5 or RAID10 depending on drives and controller capabilities) for data/storage. I tend split the drive I/O up as much as possible. It also adds another layer to the drive redundancy.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechn...1.mspx?mfr=true Put a batch file in your StartUp that always sets it back to 0x2.

If the machine you're remoting into is set to always ask for a password you will be prompted twice--once by the client and once by the machine you're remoting into. To fix this you need to run gpedit.msc on the target computer and set the following policy: Local Computer Policy > Computer Configuration > Administrative Templates > Windows Components > Terminal Services > Encryption and Security > Always prompt client for password upon connection : Disabled If this is a domain policy then you may be out of luck. If you control the domain policies then you can just create a new policy that would enforce that setting on your workstations and servers.

Did you ever tried it on that voltage? Never fried any CPU here, not even a Celly 600@2.2volts for months... Do your research again . I never said it wouldn't work on a higher voltage. I said it required a VRM update, to the VRM 8.5 specification to be exact. The core voltage wasn't the only change. Also, I'm very familiar with running CPUs at higher than their rated speeds and voltage. I had a Celeron 600@1008MHz for the longest time...at stock voltage. My good old AX6BC was a champ at running CPUs without overvolting them (especially since it didn't have any voltage adjustments). However, that CPU only lasted about a year before starting to have problems. I fail to see how you had a Celeron 600 @ 2.2v (stock is 1.5v) run for months without some massive cooling on it (I had an Alpha setup with a 7000RPM fan). I'm not saying that's impossible, but it certainly would've been the exception rather than the norm. Another thing to note is that the Celeron 600 CPUs are Coppermine based (180nm), not Tualatin (130nm).

The same information still applies. It's the same reason you couldn't run Prescott P4's on pre-existing motherboards, even though the supporting chipset was still the same. The VRM's had to be updated to correctly support the new voltage requirements. It happens when they address design limitations on new steppings/cores of a given CPU family. AMD has done it before as well...they just usually opt for changing the entire socket when it happens. Voltage wasn´t the problem there, it was the pin lay-out that wasn´t 100% (g37 and g35 needed to be bridged) compatible altrough it was Socket370. Sure you normaly needed to lower the voltage but without doing it you could OC a bit more . Those babys ran faster then the first PIV . Voltage was most definitely the 'problem'. Do some research on the different VRM specifications between the Coppermine and Tualatin PIII's. The voltage change was the reason for the pin layout change. It was changed so that you couldn't physically install the CPU on a motherboard that didn't support it, thus potentially resulting in a brand-new fried CPU.

Actually he's not an id*** at all. Often times when a die shrink is done the CPU requires less voltage...and often times pre-existing motherboards cannot support the lower voltage requirement. Sure, this isn't always the case but it's something you definitely should research before just purchasing a new CPU and plopping it on your motherboard. Take the Tualatin version of the PIII as an example. When it was released the i815 based boards that were already on the market wouldn't support them because of voltage differences. You had to either get a new motherboard or an adapter from a company such as PowerLeap.

Woops...my bad. Too much going on... I'll try to get it to you today.

I think you're confused as to what the "2" represents in Core 2 Duo. "2" in that case represents the second iteration of the Core family. "Duo" denotes the number of cores. That's why the quad core's are called Core 2 Quad. So, given Intel's past history in naming products it would stand to reason that the next iteration of the Core family would be Core 3 Duo and/or Core 3 Quad (who knows what the 8 core versions will be called). However, I don't see them going from Core 2 to Core 3 just for a die shrink and some new instructions. The underlying architecture will still be largely the same. Take for instance the Pentium 4. There are many, many different versions of the Pentium 4, each one building upon the previous.

Yeah, we've had to come up with some pretty creative stuff at work as well. We have a GPO that sets the security permissions to regedit.exe so that only Admins (and SYSTEM) have access. They did the same for net.exe. Using KiX (or a VBScript) worked like a charm. We've been using KiX as our logon script processor for YEARS though, so most of our stuff was already in place. I don't do roaming profiles so I can't help you there...sorry. BTW, it's probably going to be another couple of days before I can get you a copy of my script...but I haven't forgotten.

NewEgg generally quotes a flat-rate shipping amount. If you order more than one item you'll usually get a shipping discount. So my list, for instance, would probably be a little cheaper if all parts were ordered at the same time.

I didn't think it was possible to delete the BUILTIN\Administrator account...even if it was renamed?

I would probably make that like this just for the sake of sanity when trying to figure out what it's not working @ECHO OFF %0\..\kix32.exe %0\..\outlook.kix I just checked and the profile owner (i.e. the user) does have full access to write to the area you're trying to write to. The only way they wouldn't is if you already have a GPO that locks down that access for whatever reason.

This is a good read and will offer some more information about Diskeeper: http://www.sql-server-performance.com/sql_fragmentation.asp We were already doing the DBCC REINDEX on our SQL cluster but we recently implemented DK2007. After letting it do it's thing for a day or two we noticed an improvement in how well the system responded, and continues to respond.

You shouldn't have problems writing to anywhere under HKCU as a regular User, except for the Group Policy keys. This is regardless of the language you use. My primary logon script is over 1200 lines long, and there are two supplemental scripts that sometimes get called. The supplemental scripts are several hundred lines each. I do everything from checking the version of our antivirus program (emails me if it's the wrong version), checking virus definition dates (emails me if they're too old), setting Office user information (for the Track Changes and Author options) to simply mapping network drives and printers. And it all runs in the context of a regular user.

I find your choice of the P5B curious since the P5K is out now and will give further future upgrades...plus it runs about the same price. Here's my list Case ANTEC Sonata III Mini Case Retail (Includes 80PLUS certified EarthWatts 500W PSU) http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetai...ctCode=10005323 $129.95 CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E6420 Conroe 2.13GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor - Retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16819115016 $186.00 Motherboard ASUS P5K LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16813131180 $149.99 + $6.61 S&H Memory OCZ Gold 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - Retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16820227124 $103.99 - $35MIR = $68.99 Hard Drive(s) Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (Perpendicular Recording) ST3250620AS 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16822148144 $69.99 x 2 = $139.98 Optical Drive Sony NEC Optiarc Black 18X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 18X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 12X DVD-RAM 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 32X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM 2MB Cache E-IDE / ATAPI DVD Burner - OEM http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16827152076 $29.99 + $4.99 S&H Video Card XFX PVT80GGHE4 GeForce 8800GTS 320MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Video Card - Retail http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16814150172 $289.99 - $40MIR = $249.99 + $6.63 TOTAL = $973.12