garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) (05/04/88)
We have a couple macintosh installations here and we'd like to know
which is the best Network to set up.
Right now we're running MacServe. We're running it close to capacity
and are having some problems.
We have a dedicated SE serving around 30 macs or so with 3 imagewriters and
an NTX laserwriter. Aside from being slow, our 'Laserwriter' drivers
are getting clobbered, and sometimes while someone is MacWrite-ing
something, the screen will freeze. Only recourse is to reset the machine.
Could these things be caused by running MacServe to it's limits, or
does this sound like something unrelated to MacServe? Has anyone
had this happen to them before?
We are thinking of moving to AppleShare. We are waiting for the
new version due out next month. Does anyone have any comments on
AppleShare? Especially the new version that is coming out.
BEST FEATURES? / WORST FEATURES?
How about some others, like TOPS?
Is it smart to go with AppleShare for the future standards?
Any and all comments welcome......
Thanks!
-Jay Garvin,
Computer Specialist, uhcc
"Oh my god, it actually let me choose RESUME!"
=============================================================================
| Jeffrey Jay Garvin _ Electronic Mail: |
| Computer Specialist __| | _ BITNET: |
| University of Hawaii |__ |_| |__ garvin@uhccux.BITNET |
| Computing Center ____| ____| InterNet: |
| 2565 The Mall |__ _ |__ garvin@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu |
| Keller Hall Rm 201 |_| | __| UUCP: |
| Honolulu, HI 96822 |_| {ihnp4,uunet,dcdwest,ucbvax} |
| USA Phone: (808) 948-7351 !ucsd!nosc!uhccux!garvin |
=============================================================================avalon@ssyx (Scott A. McIntyre) (05/04/88)
+-In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP>, garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) wrote:-
[Text deleted]
I work in a Mac Lab here at UCSC, and we are running Farallon Phone Net on
a mere 8 macintoshes and 1 LW and 1 IWII. So far, the biggest problem we
have come into is the file server (tops I think) is connected to a Sun in
the basement of our building, and it tends to slow down after a while.
Actually, I have a few questions for you all: A while back someone asked
about security measures for a LW, and several alternatives were offered in
the way of having people pay for copies. Can someone summarize and send
it to me? Or, just answer this. When someone comes into the lab, we request
they sign in, and give us their ID card. This has proved to be a hassle,
especially when they don't give it to us and sneak in when we aren't looking,
forget that they didn't give it to is, and want us to buy them a new one
when we don't have it in our drawer. Anyway, we kidna want to get away from
this system. What alternatives are there? We charge .25 a page for the LW
and the IWII is free.
Another question: Yesterday, the lab was really packed, and everyone
wanted to print and get to class in a hurry, well, it came time for one person
to print and the chooser said that the Imagewriter was not available....My
jaw dropped....Upon closer examination, somehow the Imagewriter driver had
been reduced from 31k to .5k WHY? I personally installed all of the disks
with the full 31k IW driver, and they worked fine till yesterday, when poof!
Thanks!
Scott
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
avalon@ssyx.ucsc.edu ARPA/Internet \
or > Me!
avalon@ucsck.BITNET Bitnet /
"If I die, does my Mother get a refund?"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) (05/05/88)
In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP> garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) writes: >We have a dedicated SE serving around 30 macs or so with 3 imagewriters and >an NTX laserwriter. Aside from being slow, our 'Laserwriter' drivers >are getting clobbered, and sometimes while someone is MacWrite-ing >something, the screen will freeze. Only recourse is to reset the machine. >Could these things be caused by running MacServe to it's limits, or >does this sound like something unrelated to MacServe? Has anyone >had this happen to them before? In the networks that I have set up I have noticed a significant performance hit in a network with over twenty nodes. Apple says no more than 32, but my rule of thumb is no more than 18. If there are more than 18 nodes you should get a bridge and break the network into two zones. Remember you have to count all Appletalk devices on the network, Appletalk ImageWriter, All the turned on Macintosh's, and all the turned on LaserWriters. And any other Appletalk Device that's turned on. Also make sure that **EVERY** single Macintosh on the network is using the same version of the LaserWriter print driver. If someone uses a different LaserWriter driver than everyone else, even for just one print job, it can cause serious problems for everyone else. The only solution after that happens is to turn off the LaserWriter, and have everyone go back to chooser again. >We are thinking of moving to AppleShare. We are waiting for the >new version due out next month. Does anyone have any comments on >AppleShare? Especially the new version that is coming out. >BEST FEATURES? / WORST FEATURES? >How about some others, like TOPS? AppleShare is just about the best file server software out there in my opinion. If you have more than 10 people using the file server it's also cheper than TOPS. Tops is good, but each workstation in the network can be setup as a server for every other workstation. This is the best part of Tops, it's distributed. Appleshare is centralized. The debate regarding Centralized and distributed systems has been going on for about 20-30 years now, and I'm not about to make the definative statment regarding which is best. You have to analyse your particular situation, and then decide for yourself. Tops takes more memory from each workstation, and if a workstation has allowed others to access it then the user will notice SIGNIFICANT periods of dead time when others are requesting information from that particular workstation. Although it's not required, most people end up dedicating a machine as a server anyways, because no one wants to use a machine that is fast one second, and slow the next. Also since people can use a Machine that is also serving the network, if that machine crashes because they choose to run some "bad" software, then it destroy's everyone else on the network. If you have central file server, and that's all it does, then it's easier to maintain network stability. TOPS is excellent is some situation. Those situation are when you have more than one type of computer on the network, Macs ---> MS-Dos --> Sun workstations. And TOPS is cheaper if you have fewer than 10 workstations on the network. But if you have more than 10 workstotions, and they are all Mac's, then I'd recommend Appleshare. It's cheaper for one. And in my opinion offers more features. It has good security measures. It is directly supported thru the finder. You can use TOP's volumes from the finder, but they have their own security method that the finder knows nothing about. Security is implemented in a DA that either allows you to "mount" a volume, or not "mount" a volume. Once the volume is mounted that's it. You now have access to the whole thing. TOP's does allow you to just offer "Folders" over the network, but when someone else mount's that folder on their workstation it creates a desktop file in the folder, that's fine for the workstation, but what that does to the original Harddisk that it came from I don't know. >Is it smart to go with AppleShare for the future standards? If anyone has the clout to set a standard, I'd rather bet on Apple than some other company that's doing the same thing. Most file server software has been modified for Apple's new standards. Notice Apple didn't modify their software to meet someone else's standard. Also a lot of multiuser software has been modified to work with Appleshare, and Appleshare offers some features that make it easier for a programmer to implement multi-user software, most other network software doesn't yet offer these "internal" features. And now that Appleshare is around, they will most likely duplicate the Appleshare model, rather than triing to go it alone with their own way of doing things. David M. O'Rourke +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | dorourke@polyslo | Disclaimer: All opinions in this message are mine, but | | | if you like them they can be yours too. | | | Besides I'm just a student so what do I | | | know! | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | When you have to place a disclaimer in your mail you know it's a sign | | that there are TOO many Lawyer's. | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
rmh@Apple.COM (Rick Holzgrafe) (05/06/88)
In article <2229@polyslo.UUCP> dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David O'Rourke) writes: >In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP> garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) writes: >>We are thinking of moving to AppleShare. [...] > >>How about some others, like TOPS? > > TOPS is excellent is some situation. Those situation are when you have >more than one type of computer on the network, Macs ---> MS-Dos --> Sun >workstations. And TOPS is cheaper if you have fewer than 10 workstations >on the network. > But if you have more than 10 workstotions, and they are all Mac's, then >I'd recommend Appleshare. [...] > >David M. O'Rourke I hope no-one minds a partisan pointing out that current versions of AppleShare do support MS-DOS and Pro-DOS (Apple II) workstations as well as Macs. I don't work on AppleShare, so please don't send questions to me... you'll find me to be pretty ignorant about the details. :-) ========================================================================== Rick Holzgrafe | {sun,voder,nsc,mtxinu,dual}!apple!rmh Communications Software Engineer | AppleLink HOLZGRAFE1 rmh@apple.com Apple Computer, Inc. | "All opinions expressed are mine, and 20525 Mariani Ave. MS: 27-Y | do not necessarily represent those of Cupertino, CA 95014 | my employer, Apple Computer Inc."
paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) (05/06/88)
We use MacJANET here in our student lab. I think it is the best available
for a student environment, much better than TOPS, MacServe, or Appleshare.
It isn't perfect, but it does what it does very well. We have 21 stations,
4 IW II's, and a LaserWriter Plus. All networking is with PhoneNET.
MacJANET is available through Apple Canada or from Watcom Products in
Ontario (519) 886-3700.
--
Paul H. Steele USENET: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Paul
Acadia University BITNET: Paul@Acadia
Wolfville, NS Internet: Paul%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
CANADA B0P 1X0 (902) 542-2201x587mithomas@bsu-cs.UUCP (Michael Thomas Niehaus) (05/06/88)
In article <9329@apple.Apple.Com>, rmh@Apple.COM (Rick Holzgrafe) writes: > In article <2229@polyslo.UUCP> dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David O'Rourke) writes: > >In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP> garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) writes: > >>We are thinking of moving to AppleShare. [...] > I hope no-one minds a partisan pointing out that current versions of > AppleShare do support MS-DOS and Pro-DOS (Apple II) workstations as > well as Macs. > > ========================================================================== > Rick Holzgrafe | {sun,voder,nsc,mtxinu,dual}!apple!rmh The newest verion of AppleShare does support MS-DOS and ProDOS, althought you have to buy some additional software for the client side. This is not a problem, though, since such software is relatively inexpensive. Michael Niehaus UUCP: ..!{uunet,pur-ee,iuvax}!bsu-cs!mithomas
dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) (05/06/88)
In article <9329@apple.Apple.Com> rmh@apple.UUCP (Rick Holzgrafe) writes: >I hope no-one minds a partisan pointing out that current versions of >AppleShare do support MS-DOS and Pro-DOS (Apple II) workstations as >well as Macs. Thanks!! I forgot that apple implemented that also. But they still don't have Unix along with AppleShare. Oh well time will fix that I hope. Thankyou again for pointing out my oversight! David M. O'Rourke +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | dorourke@polyslo | Disclaimer: All opinions in this message are mine, but | | | if you like them they can be yours too. | | | Besides I'm just a student so what do I | | | know! | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | When you have to place a disclaimer in your mail you know it's a sign | | that there are TOO many Lawyer's. | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) (05/06/88)
In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted
to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be
10 different copies of the software on the file server. This was totally
unacceptable so we went with MacJANET, which did not have this restriction.
Does the current Appleshare allow a single copy of a program to be used
simulataneously by any number of users?
--
Paul H. Steele USENET: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Paul
Acadia University BITNET: Paul@Acadia
Wolfville, NS Internet: Paul%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
CANADA B0P 1X0 (902) 542-2201x587news@nud.UUCP (Usenet News Administrator) (05/06/88)
In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP> you write: > >We have a couple macintosh installations here and we'd like to know >which is the best Network to set up. > >Right now we're running MacServe. We're running it close to capacity >and are having some problems. > >We have a dedicated SE serving around 30 macs or so with 3 imagewriters and >an NTX laserwriter. Aside from being slow, our 'Laserwriter' drivers >are getting clobbered, and sometimes while someone is MacWrite-ing >something, the screen will freeze. Only recourse is to reset the machine. > We have 28 Macs, 4 Laserwriter Pluses 10 IBM PC's and 3 Sun 3/260 servers with 18 clients on or TOPs net. It is divided into 2 Zones with 2 Kinetics Fastpath gateways and is both stable and reliable. Our Macs are Mac Pluses and Mac SEs >Could these things be caused by running MacServe to it's limits, or >does this sound like something unrelated to MacServe? Has anyone >had this happen to them before? > Another group here runs MacServe and has experienced the simptoms with many fewer devices then you have. >We are thinking of moving to AppleShare. We are waiting for the >new version due out next month. Does anyone have any comments on >AppleShare? Especially the new version that is coming out. >BEST FEATURES? / WORST FEATURES? > >How about some others, like TOPS? > As I said we are using Tops for Mac 2.08, Tops for Sun 1.0 and Tops for IBM PC 2.0. We run it with InBox. My Mac is running diskless, ie my system resides on one of the Sun servers. Tops for Sun make the Suns into a Mac Fileserver but importantly (at least to us) it allows the Suns to access all the Laserwriters on AppleTalk, which the PCs and Macs also access. We are using IDEs Software Through Pictures developement Tool. It wants to print through its own menu so haveing this driver from Tops really helps. Kspool couldn't do this and neither could AppleShare. We really like Tops. the only complaint is that if customer support cannot answer your question right away and promise a call back, they don't. > > Alan Heflich USENET {backbone}!nud!sleazy!Heflich Internet Heflich @ Dockmaster.arpa My employer has not part in this reply and probably wishes me to express that
stew@endor.harvard.edu (Stew Rubenstein) (05/08/88)
In article <9329@apple.Apple.Com> rmh@apple.UUCP (Rick Holzgrafe) writes: >I hope no-one minds a partisan pointing out that current versions of >AppleShare do support MS-DOS and Pro-DOS (Apple II) workstations as >well as Macs. The current version of AppleShare does NOT support Pro-DOS workstations. This software has not been released yet, although it was discussed at the Spring Developer's conference. Stew Rubenstein Cambridge Scientific Computing, Inc. UUCPnet: seismo!harvard!rubenstein CompuServe: 76525,421 Internet: rubenstein@harvard.harvard.edu MCIMail: CSC
korn@eris (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (05/08/88)
In <1072@aucs.UUCP>, paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) said: >In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted >to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be >10 different copies of the software on the file server. This was totally >unacceptable so we went with MacJANET, which did not have this restriction. >Does the current Appleshare allow a single copy of a program to be used >simulataneously by any number of users? It is indeed possible to run multiple copies of the same program under AppleShare. However, not just *any* program. There is a bit called the 'shared' bit (though early versions of ResEdit got this bit confused with the 'cached' bit) which you set in a program. This says "I am designed to be launched multiple times". If you use ResEdit on MicroSoft Word sometime, you'll notice that the 'shared' bit (or 'cached' bit, if you are using an older version of ResEdit) is set. And indeed, MS-Word can be launched multiple times. To be a multi-launch program really all that needs to happen is that you don't write to yourself; alter yourself in any way (such as saving the window positions of your windows to be MultiFinder friendly in the resource fork of yourself -- if you want to do this, use a configuration file that you save somewhere [like the System Folder maybe]). I haven't used MacJANET, but I would be curious as to what happens when two people try to run a program which modifies itself (like perhaps my Graphic Load Average program, which writes to itself 'cause I took the cheap way out for the sake of compactness & speed). I would expect one to crash... (but after seeing what Radius is doing with making all menus tear-off [even ones that aren't], I'll believe most any mac wizardry...). Peter -- Peter "Arrgh" Korn korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU {decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn
wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu (Pierce T. Wetter) (05/09/88)
In article <1072@aucs.UUCP> paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) writes: >In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted >to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be >10 different copies of the software on the file server. This was totally >unacceptable so we went with MacJANET, which did not have this restriction. >Does the current Appleshare allow a single copy of a program to be used >simulataneously by any number of users? There is an info bit called 'shared' which means appleshare doesn't have to open more then one copy, it can open the application read only. If you set this in any version of appleshare, you can get away with one copy. PIerce Wetter ---------------------------------------------------------------- wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu Race For Space Grand Prize Winner. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Useless Advice #986: Never sit on a Tack.
dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) (05/09/88)
In article <1072@aucs.UUCP> paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) writes: >In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted >to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be >10 different copies of the software on the file server. This was totally >unacceptable so we went with MacJANET, which did not have this restriction. >Does the current Appleshare allow a single copy of a program to be used >simulataneously by any number of users? It depends on the software. But most programs work fine over the network with more than one user. Notiable exceptions are MacWrite 4.5 & 4.6, MS Word 1.05, and Excel 1.04 {Haven't tried 1.06 yet} David M. O'Rourke +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | dorourke@polyslo | Disclaimer: All opinions in this message are mine, but | | | if you like them they can be yours too. | | | Besides I'm just a student so what do I | | | know! | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | When you have to place a disclaimer in your mail you know it's a sign | | that there are TOO many Lawyer's. | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) (05/09/88)
>My Mac is running diskless, ie my system resides on one of the Sun servers. >Tops for Sun make the Suns into a Mac Fileserver but importantly (at least to >us) it allows the Suns to access all the Laserwriters on AppleTalk, which >the PCs and Macs also access. We are using IDEs Software Through Pictures >> >Alan Heflich >USENET {backbone}!nud!sleazy!Heflich >Internet Heflich @ Dockmaster.arpa > I am curious about the diskless Mac workstation. Does TOPS allow a Mac to boot without any inserted disks? I was under the impression that that was not possible with a networked device, that there had to be some sort of local hard disk to boot from before a mac can access the Appletalk network. Even if this is possible, it seems to me that it would only be suitable if the workstations had a direct ethernet link to the file server. I can't imagine how slow a Mac would be if it tried to access a system folder over 232K bps Appletalk. -- Paul H. Steele USENET: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Paul Acadia University BITNET: Paul@Acadia Wolfville, NS Internet: Paul%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU CANADA B0P 1X0 (902) 542-2201x587
denbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) (05/09/88)
From article <1072@aucs.UUCP>, by paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele): > In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted > to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be > 10 different copies of the software on the file server. It depends on the program. One of the finder flags can be toggled to allow multi-launching. By default, it is not set. This is because some programs are not well behaved under appleshare and write spool files to the application directory with non-unique names. MacWrite 5.0 and Word 3.01 are both shipped with the multi-launch flag set and work well under appleshare. The thing I would like is a mechanism allowing me to say how many copies of an application may be running at a time. This way, I can have the server make sure that no more than the licensed number of copies are being run. The problem that drives me batty under appleshare is that there is no such thing as a superuser. If I need to play with files that are in multiple user's areas, I have to either keep logging in, or shut the server down. Also, you have to shut the server down to add users or change passwords. -- William C. DenBesten | denbeste@bgsu.edu Dept of Computer Science | CSNET denbeste%andy.bgsu.edu@relay.cs.net Bowling Green State University | UUCP ...!cbosgd!osu-cis!bgsuvax!denbeste Bowling Green, OH 43403-0214 |
han@Apple.COM (Byron Han) (05/09/88)
In article <1072@aucs.UUCP> paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) writes: >In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted >to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be >10 different copies of the software on the file server. This was totally >unacceptable so we went with MacJANET, which did not have this restriction. >Does the current Appleshare allow a single copy of a program to be used >simulataneously by any number of users? >-- I believe part of the problem lies in the fact that many applications are not licensed to be placed on file servers and multi-launched. Therefore, if 10 people want to run their Mac??? software package, they should actually have 10 copies of Mac??? on their file server. Most applications that are well behaved (e.g. follow TechNotes 115/116) by not writing to themselves, numbering temporary files can be made sharable by setting a bit using ResEdit. Unfortunately, many applications are NOT well behaved, e.g. they hard code their temp file names, store configuration information in their resource/data fork, do not check for result codes from File Manager and Resource Manager calls, etc etc etc. Writing an AppleShare compatible application requires some thought. It is not as easy as writing a MultiFinder compatible application because you need to check all File and Resource Manager calls. -- Byron Han, Communications Tool "OS/2 - Half of an operating system." Apple Computer, Inc. MS 27Y ------------------------------------- ATTnet:408-973-6450 applelink:HAN1 domain:han@apple.COM MacNET:HAN GENIE:BYRONHAN COMPUSERVE:72167,1664 UUCP:{sun,voder,nsc,decwrl}!apple!han
macman@ethz.UUCP (Danny Schwendener) (05/09/88)
>... What alternatives are there? We charge .25 a page for the LW >and the IWII is free. The IFI (inst of Computer Science) at the University of Zuerich has developed a printed circuit board whichdoes just that. it uses a coin device (the kind you find commonly on photocopy machines) attached to the LW. However, this method is only useable in situations with low to medium printer traffic (we have a room with 32 macs, two of which only are connected to the LW), for obvious reasons. -- Danny +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mail : Danny Schwendener, ETH Macintosh Support Center | | Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, CH-8092 Zuerich | | Bitnet : macman@czheth5a UUCP : {cernvax,mcvax}ethz!macman | | Ean : macman@ifi.ethz.ch Voice : yodel three times | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
csaron@garnet.berkeley.edu (Aron Roberts) (05/10/88)
>In article <1072@aucs.UUCP> paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) writes: >In my early investigation of Appleshare, I was told that if you wanted >to have 10 people running the same program, then there would have to be >10 different copies of the software on the file server. This was totally >unacceptable so we went with MacJANET, which did not have this restriction. >[...] In article <9416@apple.Apple.Com> han@apple.UUCP (Byron Han, fire fighter) writes: >I believe part of the problem lies in the fact that many applications are >not licensed to be placed on file servers and multi-launched. Therefore, if >10 people want to run their Mac??? software package, they should actually >have 10 copies of Mac??? on their file server. Actually, most licensing agreements we have seen recently permit a single copy of an application program to be placed on a file server and multilaunched, as long as the individual or organization operating the file server has purchased at least as many individual copies of the package as the maximum possible number of simultaneous users of that package. (This does not take into account the increasing number of site, server, or multiple user licenses which are becoming available.) Like Mr. Steele, we have been using Waterloo MacJANET in our academic microcomputer lab. I have extremely impressed with its performance in this setting. One particular attribute which has proven attractive is the ability to permit multilaunching of applications from *read-only* volumes, permitting a high degree of protection from alteration and piracy and simplifying routine server maintenance. Disclaimer: I speak only for myself and not for the University of California or any of its subsidiary departments or units. Aron Roberts Tolman Microcomputer Facility 1535 Tolman Hall, University of California Berkeley, CA 94720 (415) 642-2251 csaron@garnet.Berkeley.EDU CSARON@UCBCMSA.BITNET
dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David M. O'Rourke) (05/10/88)
In article <2106@bgsuvax.UUCP> denbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) writes: >The problem that drives me batty under appleshare is that there is no >such thing as a superuser. If I need to play with files that are in >multiple user's areas, I have to either keep logging in, or shut the >server down. Also, you have to shut the server down to add users or >change passwords. I think the new version of Appleshare now allows you make these type of changes from a Workstation. It also used to drive me crazy and was one of my initial critisisms of the system. But I think you can add/delete and modify users from a workstation now. Also I had a chance to talk to one of the people who developed Appleshare and asked him about the superuser concept. He said that since Appleshare is for a workgroup enviroment, that means that there shouldn't be a lot of need for the security of a larger system. I'm not justifing the decision, I'm simply relating what I was told. David M. O'Rourke +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | dorourke@polyslo | Disclaimer: All opinions in this message are mine, but | | | if you like them they can be yours too. | | | Besides I'm just a student so what do I | | | know! | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | When you have to place a disclaimer in your mail you know it's a sign | | that there are TOO many Lawyer's. | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) (05/10/88)
In article <3191@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> korn@eris.UUCP (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) writes: [stuff about multilaunch software under networks deleted] >I haven't used MacJANET, but I would be curious as to what happens when >two people try to run a program which modifies itself (like perhaps >my Graphic Load Average program, which writes to itself 'cause I took >the cheap way out for the sake of compactness & speed). I would expect >one to crash... (but after seeing what Radius is doing with making >all menus tear-off [even ones that aren't], I'll believe most any >mac wizardry...). > >Peter I don't claim to be an expert on networks, including MacJANET. I am basically going by what several people told me about multilaunch capabilities under networks. MacJANET certainly doesn't solve all network problems. For example, Switcher does not work with MacJANET network volumes since the software is read-only and Switcher doesn't like that. I'm sure there are other programs that don't work especially if they try to modify themselves. I have tried the following software under MacJANET (without any modifications) without problems: MacWrite MacPaint Word SuperPaint MacDraw Reflex Works Statview 512+ CricketGraph Pagemaker ReadySetGo RedRyder MacLinkPlus Hypercard doesn't work under MacJANET if loaded from a read-only volume, which is well know for Hypercard. We like MacJANET because it provides a pretty secure environment for our software. In the next version due shortly it will also limit the number of copies of a program in use, allowing us to buy fewer copies and restrict the usage. It will also have an encryption facility to make software pirary very difficult. MacJANET has its own types of problems, but we're happy with it. -- Paul H. Steele USENET: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Paul Acadia University BITNET: Paul@Acadia Wolfville, NS Internet: Paul%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU CANADA B0P 1X0 (902) 542-2201x587
dgold@Apple.COM (David Goldsmith) (05/10/88)
In article <2106@bgsuvax.UUCP> denbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) writes: >The problem that drives me batty under appleshare is that there is no >such thing as a superuser. If I need to play with files that are in >multiple user's areas, I have to either keep logging in, or shut the >server down. Also, you have to shut the server down to add users or >change passwords. AppleShare 2.0, due out this summer, allows users to change their own passwords and allows the AppleShare Admin program to run while AppleShare itself is operating. Thus you can add and change users and groups without taking the server down. It also has other improvements, but I'll have to refer you to the press releases since I can't remember them all.
korn@eris (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (05/11/88)
In <1075@aucs.UUCP>, paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) said: >>My Mac is running diskless, ie my system resides on one of the Sun servers. >>... >I am curious about the diskless Mac workstation. Does TOPS allow a Mac to >boot without any inserted disks? I was under the impression that that was >not possible with a networked device, that there had to be some sort of >local hard disk to boot from before a mac can access the Appletalk network. >... It is certainly possible to *run* a Mac with out a local disk. It is impossible to *boot* a Mac without a local disk, or without custom hardware that has been added into a Mac to allow it to do so. You need to start out with a System file. You also need to have a System file that you are using all the time you are running MacOS. You can, if you want, switch System files in the middle, which is what was done with Tops in the doubly quoted comment above. The local disk that you boot from, however, needn't be a hard disk. A floppy works just fine. Peter -- Peter "Arrgh" Korn korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU {decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn
fiatlux@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (David Vangerov) (05/11/88)
In article <8805041543.AA16557@ssyx.ucsc.edu> avalon%ssyx.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU writes: >+-In article <1815@uhccux.UUCP>, garvin@uhccux.UUCP (Jay Garvin) wrote:- > >[Text deleted] > > I work in a Mac Lab here at UCSC, and we are running Farallon Phone Net on >a mere 8 macintoshes and 1 LW and 1 IWII. So far, the biggest problem we >have come into is the file server (tops I think) is connected to a Sun in >the basement of our building, and it tends to slow down after a while. The last time I looked, the Sun was running the AppleShare system for Unix from Columbia. Part of the reason that it gets real slow at times is because the network link between the lab and the Sun is rather slow (AppleTalk), also it's running off of the Sun, which is doing a million other things (like letting you read news off of ssyx :-). As far as I know, I don't think they have released TOPS for Unix based computers, though considering that TOPS is owned by Sun, I'm sure it'll be along real soon now... +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | David Vangerov | | Just your average Theater Arts major with a weird thing for computers | | fiatlux@ucscc.BITNET || fiatlux@ucscc.ucsc.EDU || ...!ucbvax!ucscc!fiatlux | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
korn@eris (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (05/12/88)
In <1076@aucs.UUCP>, paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) said: >In article <3191@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> korn@eris.UUCP (That's me) writes: > >>I haven't used MacJANET, but I would be curious as to what happens when >>... The day after posting this, I got a chance to play with MacJANET a little. Cleared things up a bit... >...[comments about MacJANET and software list of apps. that are known > to work]... >Hypercard doesn't work under MacJANET if loaded from a read-only volume, >which is well know for Hypercard. MacJANET works in generally the same fashion that the old Paradise hard drives used: You use a MacJANET utility to partion the hard drive on your server into a MacJANET section, and a 'normal' section. Within the MacJANET section you then allocate fixed size partitions. Users can mount these fixed size partitions (no idea what the limit on # of vols. is), and get at what's on them. In your typical student environment, most partitions will be locked, or read-only. As far as I could tell, MacJANET doesn't do any magic when it comes to apps. that want to modify themselves, or want to write to the directory they are in. They simply cannot. So if, for instance, Macfoo, a word procesing program of yester-year, decided it *needed* to create a temporary file in the same directory that it is running from or die, it will die. Very few programs do this anymore. Most, in fact, will create temporary scratch files wherever they can. If they can't do so in the directory they are launched from, they'll try the boot volume, or the blessed system folder (typically local, should always be writable). HyperCard, in fact, works quite well with MacJANET (and not just version 1.2, which has some neat nifty new features for dealing with read-only media). The trick is to put the Home stack on a writable volume, preferable your local floppy (if we are assuming a typical student environment). The HyperCard application itself can reside on a locked volume -- it doesn't modify itself. However, unless you are using version 1.2, all of the stacks that you access must be writable. An excellent way to test if a program that you want to run will work on a MacJANET locked volume is to go up to a 2 floppy system, put an unlocked boot disk into one drive, and a locked non-boot disk with the application you wish to test into the other drive. If you can run the application without problems in this configuration, you should have no problems running it from a locked server volume. >We like MacJANET because it provides a pretty secure environment for our >software. In the next version due shortly it will also limit the number >of copies of a program in use, allowing us to buy fewer copies and restrict >the usage. More magic I'll have to see before I believe... By the way, all of the above statements reguarding run-ability of applications applies equally well to AppleShare volumes. If you were to set up a system with an AppleShare server, you could easily make a folder 'read-only' (which, in AppleShare terminology is called 'no make changes privilege') to students, and all software that runs from locked local disks should work without problems from that AppleShare folder. If that software has the 'shared' (often known as the 'cached') bit set, it should multi-launch without problems from a 'read-only' folder. However, software which attempts to *first* write temporary files to the same folder that they're launched from will *not* multi-launch well from folders that are 'write-enabled' unless their temporary file names are unique. That is to say, if Macfoo is launched from two different workstations from a folder that is 'write-enabled', and it creates a temporary filename 'temp.file' from both workstations in that folder, we're going to get the workstation's work clobbered. Hope I haven't hopelessly confused people with a less than perfect explanation.... Peter -- Peter "Arrgh" Korn korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU {decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn
magorian@umd5.umd.edu (Dan Magorian) (05/12/88)
>In <1075@aucs.UUCP>, paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) said: >>>My Mac is running diskless, ie my system resides on one of the Sun servers. >>I am curious about the diskless Mac workstation. Does TOPS allow a Mac to >>boot without any inserted disks? I was under the impression that that was >>not possible with a networked device, that there had to be some sort of >>local hard disk to boot from before a mac can access the Appletalk network. > >It is certainly possible to *run* a Mac with out a local disk. It is >impossible to *boot* a Mac without a local disk, or w/out custom hardware that >has been added into a Mac to allow it to do so. You need to start out >with a System file. You also need to have a System file that you are >using all the time you are running MacOS. You can, if you want, switch >System files in the middle, which is what was done with Tops in the >doubly quoted comment above. >-- >Peter "Arrgh" Korn >korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU >{decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn - Do you or anyone have experience with boot proms on Apple Ethertalk cards? This is commonly done on PCs (eg, 3Com to boot from their XNS 3Share server, as well as Suns (seems to be no standard boot protocol in the IP world)). Probably the 3Com people who designed the Ethertalk card for Apple have done it, but the support for it in the MacOS seems to be a hot issue (read, sensitive until the recall issue is behind them). Anyone care to speak up? - Dan Magorian Comp Sci Ctr Univ of Maryland 301 454-6032 magorian@umd5.umd.edu magorian@umdd.bitnet Applelink A0190 - - - -
benjamin_kuo@pedro.UUCP (Benjamin Kuo) (05/13/88)
<1075@aucs.UUCP> I just wanted to add an interesting note, but when the modem or printer port on the mac is connected via a serial cable to a IBM (on or off) the Mac refuses to boot. I know that the power goes to the power supply (I have an independant fan in the 512K, and it runs) but there is no page beep or screen or disk action... Could that be part of the possibilities?
leonardr@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu (05/13/88)
dorourke@polyslo.UUCP(David Orourke) writes in comp.sys.mac >In article <5270@cup.portal.com> Tim_M_Dierks@cup.portal.com writes: >>As we recently discovered to our glee, MacWrite 4.x works fine when shared. >>Just set the shared bit and you're off. The only restriction is that MacWrite >>has to be in a directory that noone using the program has write access to. >>As long as noone can write to that directory, it should work. As far as I >>can see, any software that will run in a write-protected environment can be >>shared by setting the shared bit. > > {Some Additional Information about his configuration ,etc. } > > The basic summary of this is that I don't think MacWrite handles it's >temp files correctly. Notice that more than one copy doesn't solve this >problem, since all of the copies try and create temp files in the system folder. >Is my memory correct? Or has Apple fixed this in version 4.5 or 4.6! As of Version 4.6 of MacWrite, it supports a NetWorked/Shared environment by numbering the files that it uses based on the number of currently open items. For example the first person to open MacWrite will be assigned Undo1, etc. It works and almost exactly like Apple said it should. +---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ + + Any thing I say may be taken as + + Leonard Rosenthol + fact, then again you might decide+ + President, LazerWare, inc. + that it really isn't, so you + + + never know, do you?? + + leonardr@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu + + + GEnie: MACgician + + + Delphi: MACgician + + + + + +---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
Heflich@sleazy.UUCP (Geg Spooks) (05/15/88)
In Article 17455 David Vangerov writes: >As far as I know, I don't think they have released TOPS for Unix >based computers, though considering that TOPS is owned by Sun, >I'm sure it'll be along real soon now... > We have been running TOPS for SUN (UNIX) since Dec. Release 1.0 was amazingly stable and full featured. It lets all of the Laserwriters on Local- Talk look like they are attached to each of our Sun FileServers. In addition It turns the Sun Servers into Mac fileservers. We trashed KSpool as soon as TOPS for Sun arrived > >+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >| David Vangerov | >+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Alan Heflich Motorola GEG (I suspect that my employer wishes me to publish a disclaimer) USENET: {backbone}!nud!sleazy!heflich INTERNET: Heflich@Dockmaster.arpa -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
newsuser@LTH.Se (Lund Institute of Technology news server) (05/15/88)
In article <2293@polyslo.UUCP> dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David O'Rourke) writes: >In article <1072@aucs.UUCP> paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) writes: >>Does the current Appleshare allow a single copy of a program to be used >>simulataneously by any number of users? > > It depends on the software. But most programs work fine over the network >with more than one user. Notiable exceptions are MacWrite 4.5 & 4.6, MS Word >1.05, and Excel 1.04 {Haven't tried 1.06 yet} Technical note: If the volume is locked, the application's shared bit is set and the application does not create any temporary files in the directory in which it resides, then I can not see any reasons for multi-launch not to work. Legal note: Technically possible does not mean legally ok. Check your license(s). >David M. O'Rourke -- Roland Mansson, Dept of Comp Sc, Lund University, Box 118, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden Phone +46-46109640 (work), +46-46111539 (home) USENET:roland@dna.lth.se BITNET:LTHLIB@SELDC52 AppleLink:IT0073
jeff@drexel.UUCP (Jeff White) (05/15/88)
> Do you or anyone have experience with boot proms on Apple Ethertalk cards? > This is commonly done on PCs (eg, 3Com to boot from their XNS 3Share server, > as well as Suns (seems to be no standard boot protocol in the IP world)). > Probably the 3Com people who designed the Ethertalk card for Apple have > done it, but the support for it in the MacOS seems to be a hot issue (read, > sensitive until the recall issue is behind them). Anyone care to speak up? > - > Dan Magorian > Comp Sci Ctr > Univ of Maryland > 301 454-6032 > magorian@umd5.umd.edu > magorian@umdd.bitnet > Applelink A0190 I doubt that the proms on Apple's (or anyone else's) ethernet board support diskless booting. I remember from discussions a couple of months ago on the net that people were complaining that it wouldn't be possible to run the Mac II as a diskless node under A/UX (a valid arguement, since A/UX does support NFS). Apparently, a lot of the university users (then beta test sites) were complaining to Apple about this, especially considering that Apple was requiring an 80 Mbyte drive per A/UX machine. I seem to remember Apple's position being that diskless stations wasn't an important, hence urgent feature for their machines to have. The redundant, auto recovery filesystem under A/UX would seem to make multiple diskless nodes difficult to implement (Apple is also probably pretty happy to be selling 80 Meg drives to each A/UX user). As far as diskless booting under the Finder (Mac OS) goes, I think that has even less chance of ever happening. The diskless boot protocol under NFS (ND) is standardized, so in theory it should be relatively trivial to implement. But if a diskless Mac wanted to remotely boot under the Finder, what type of server would it look for (3Com, Tops, MacServer, AppleShare, etc.)? I think the best you could hope for would be to create a floppy disk that when booted, would automatically mount the network disks (ie. Tops), make that virtual disk the startup disk, and then eject the floppy and remove it from the desktop. This would at least have the same final result as a diskless boot, if not as clean. Jeff White Drexel University - ECE Dept. rutges!bpa!drexel!jeff
wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu (Pierce T. Wetter) (05/16/88)
Anyone who wants to run a macintosh as a diskless node is a moron.
Why? Every mac shipped comes with at least one floppy drive. Why not use
it if its there?
Silly people.
Pierce Wetter
----------------------------------------------------------------
wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu Race For Space Grand Prize Winner.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Useless Advice #986: Never sit on a Tack.lippin@maypo.berkeley.edu (The Apathist) (05/16/88)
I suspect that the floppy drivers could be tweaked so that they would only eject the disk when a special piece of software asked them to. This would allow the effect of diskless booting, at the expense of a floppy drive (cheaper than an 80-meg hard drive, anyway). This will bring up the regular Mac OS, but not having used A/UX, I don't know if one could cram enough onto a floppy to bring it up remotely. --Tom Lippincott ..ucbvax!math!lippin lippin@math.berkeley.edu "Man, you ain't got class, you got linoleum." --Corky Siegel
paul@aucs.UUCP (Paul Steele) (05/18/88)
I just saw a demo of MacJANET 2.0 at the Apple Educational Symposium. This
new version has several improvements, such as multiple (named) file servers,
better print spooling and control of print jobs, program usage restriction,
program quotas, software encryption (which makes piracy VERY difficult), and
a much improved administration program. Waterloo has done a good job on
this new release. Now I just have to wait for our copy.
Incidently, Waterloo is setting up a new Macintosh lab consisting of
60 Mac II's networked using ethernet. I sure wish we had that kind of
money!
--
Paul H. Steele USENET: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}!dalcs!aucs!Paul
Acadia University BITNET: Paul@Acadia
Wolfville, NS Internet: Paul%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
CANADA B0P 1X0 (902) 542-2201x587magorian@umd5.umd.edu (Dan Magorian) (05/19/88)
In article <6555@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Pierce T. Wetter) writes: > > Anyone who wants to run a macintosh as a diskless node is a moron. > > Why? Every mac shipped comes with at least one floppy drive. Why not use > it if its there? > > Silly people. > >Pierce Wetter > A moron is a person who offers nitwit advice on subjects upon which they are completely ignorant. Ever run a public workstation lab requiring maintenance and updating of hundreds of floppies across campus? Then consider the possibi lity of all of those machines reaching out on bootup to grap a boot image from a single copy on a server, and you'll understand the point. But you morons are in good company: the people at Apple (who definitely aren't morons) don't understand or care much about it either. - - - - - - - - - - - - -
wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu (Pierce T. Wetter) (05/19/88)
>> Anyone who wants to run a macintosh as a diskless node is a moron. >> >> Why? Every mac shipped comes with at least one floppy drive. Why not use >> it if its there? >> >> Silly people. >> >A moron is a person who offers nitwit advice on subjects upon which they are >completely ignorant. Ever run a public workstation lab requiring maintenance >and updating of hundreds of floppies across campus? Then consider the possibi Yes. That's one of my jobs as mac consultant at CalTech. Guess I'm not completely ignorant, but I knew that already. >lity of all of those machines reaching out on bootup to grap a boot image >from a single copy on a server, and you'll understand the point. But you >morons are in good company: the people at Apple (who definitely aren't >morons) don't understand or care much about it either. >- Except for the fact that no two people like their system setup exactly the same way. The Mac World isn't nearly as boring as unix, but even unix allows you to choose your shell, and run your own .login file. Are you going to allow these hypothetical people to run their own inits, desk accesories etc.? Regardless, you're missing the point. WHY DOES THE BOOTSTRAP HAVE TO BE IN ROM? You've got a floppy right there, boot off of it. If you're really concerned about updating automatically to new versions, it would be trivial to have the master take over the slave and update the slaves floppy automatically. The nice thing to do would be to ask the person before you go ahead and do it (You have an old version of the boot disk. Would you like it updated (Y/N)?) Besides, anything less then ethernet/ethertalk is too slow to do real work and if you're going to shell out the bucks for for an ethertalk card, why not shell out a bit more for a hard disk. I'm not surprised Apple doesn't consider putting diskless code in the Rom a high priority, neither do I. Pierce WEtter ---------------------------------------------------------------- wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu Race For Space Grand Prize Winner. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Useless Advice #986: Never sit on a Tack.
oberst@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Daniel J. Oberst) (05/19/88)
> As far as diskless booting under the Finder (Mac OS) goes, I think that >has even less chance of ever happening. The diskless boot protocol under >NFS (ND) is standardized, so in theory it should be relatively trivial to >implement. But if a diskless Mac wanted to remotely boot under the Finder, >what type of server would it look for (3Com, Tops, MacServer, AppleShare, etc.)?> If Apple did it, then AppleShare!! Even other vendors/purveyors are writing to the AFS protocols (e.g. CAP/AUFS, Novell, Cayman)> >I think the best you could hope for would be to create a floppy disk that when >booted, would automatically mount the network disks (ie. Tops), make that >virtual disk the startup disk, and then eject the floppy and remove it from >the desktop. This would at least have the same final result as a diskless >boot, if not as clean. > Jeff White How would it automatically mount the network disk? A user could "switch launch" the Finder from a mounted volume to change to it system, but I am not sure what you would gain. In any case wouldn't you need a separate "volume" for each station? And the user would need to "log in" to the correct volume for his/her station. One might be able to provide a larger/fuller system than a user could carry on a floppy, but it wouldn't obviate the need for somehow getting a floppy into the machine to start it. We've been looking at the problem of getting hard-diskless Macs on to servers and the logistics of providing the "boot up" they need to get on a server here at Princeton. For the present, it seems that somehow we need to get a floppy disk into those machines. Any ideas on how? 1) mass produce and distribute start-up disks? 2) strap/lock boot disks into the machines? 3) put them in vending machines on campus? 4) keep boxes of them available in the labs? The issues are less technical than operational. Anyone have ideas, suggestions, war stories? I'd be happy to summarize to the net. Dan Oberst Computing & Info Technolog Princeton University
jmsellens@watdragon.waterloo.edu (John M. Sellens) (05/20/88)
In article <6555@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Pierce T. Wetter) writes: > > Anyone who wants to run a macintosh as a diskless node is a moron. > > Why? Every mac shipped comes with at least one floppy drive. Why not use > it if its there? If you can boot diskless you avoid the problems of - corrupted boot disks - different versions of system software and printer drivers - requiring every user to have a diskette, or trying to keep the machine's disk from wandering away - trying to update who knows how many system disks when the software changes - you could possibly disable the floppy disk drive so that people are unable to steal software off the server - I'm sure that there's more good reasons It would be a big administrative convenience, especially if you're dealing with public and/or student labs.
magorian@umd5.umd.edu (Dan Magorian) (05/20/88)
> Regardless, you're missing the point. WHY DOES THE BOOTSTRAP HAVE TO BE IN >ROM? You've got a floppy right there, boot off of it. If you're really concerned >about updating automatically to new versions, it would be trivial to have the >master take over the slave and update the slaves floppy automatically. The nice >thing to do would be to ask the person before you go ahead and do it (You have >an old version of the boot disk. Would you like it updated (Y/N)?) > Besides, anything less then ethernet/ethertalk is too slow to do real work >and if you're going to shell out the bucks for for an ethertalk card, why not >shell out a bit more for a hard disk. > > I'm not surprised Apple doesn't consider putting diskless code in the Rom >a high priority, neither do I. >Pierce WEtter > Sigh. How exactly does a "master floppy trivially take over the slave floppy and update it"? Sounds like technogobble to me. The point really is, mainten ance of boot floppies is a real pain, what with copying them, replacing ones students steal for personal use, updating, etc. If you haven't run into this problem, I seriously question what kind of lab you're supposedly running. Dec Vaxstations boot diskless from NFS servers, and if Apple's at all serious about connectivity, they will be considering it as well. Basically, floppy-based thinking (should be) on it's way out... - - - - - - - - - - -
magorian@umd5.umd.edu (Dan Magorian) (05/20/88)
>We've been looking at the problem of getting hard-diskless Macs on to >servers and the logistics of providing the "boot up" they need to get >on a server here at Princeton. For the present, it seems that somehow >we need to get a floppy disk into those machines. Any ideas on how? > 1) mass produce and distribute start-up disks? > 2) strap/lock boot disks into the machines? > 3) put them in vending machines on campus? > 4) keep boxes of them available in the labs? > The system we use for MacIIs in labs (2 meg mem, 2 floppies, ethertalk only, Applefileshare server) is: the boot floppy startup app is a ramdisk, which chops out 700k and then runs Sequencer, which runds some initializing startup apps then loads Hypercard off the server. This allows the boot floppies to be permanently write-protected with clippers. This was necessary because students stole them for personal use (but it's really ugly). Then the ramdisk is writeable, for people to add their favorite fonts, das, etc, and the Home needs to be writeable as well. On the next boot, the customized (often trashed-out) stuff is gone). It works really well, and runs faster as well (except booting, which takes over a minute). Local hard disks were considered and rejected for public labs - we have them with IBM Model 50s, and the management needed turns into a real pain: integrity checks on the local applications, auto downloading from a server if trashed, space checking, etc. Not the way to go if you have an option. We have workstation coordinator people who replace floppies and toner carts (yes, people even steal the "neutered" ones but far less often). We didn't seriously consider vending machines etc for floppies, but I would really like to go to a diskless system with a boot process on the AFS (or better yet, an NFS) server. By the way, we have single copies of all software (with site licenses, etc) and stacks in write-protected folders, and everything works well (using Hypercard's debug writeoff kludge till we get 1.2). Hypercard also works really well as a menu-based application launcher as well as flexible Hypertalk environment for power users (we looked at Powerstation, but it wasn't nearly flexible enough). Dan Magorian Comp Sci Ctr Univ of Maryland
mdr@reed.UUCP (Mike Rutenberg) (05/22/88)
Daniel J. Oberst writes: >We've been looking at the problem of getting hard-diskless Macs on to >servers and the logistics of providing the "boot up" they need to get >on a server here at Princeton. For the present, it seems that somehow >we need to get a floppy disk into those machines. Any ideas on how? > 1) mass produce and distribute start-up disks? > 2) strap/lock boot disks into the machines? > 3) put them in vending machines on campus? > 4) keep boxes of them available in the labs? You could create floppies with a complete system (set up to automatically open a server volume as "Guest"), and sell them for $2. You can also provide write protected floppies that people can copy if they already own diskettes. A floppy is really cheap to create (especially using some of the disk utility packages, with disk copy programs). I suspect it is worth giving each person their own. Mike
peter@aucs.UUCP (Peter Steele) (05/23/88)
I was at an Apple Symposium and asked the Appleshare dealer to compare
their product with MacJANET. Surprizingly, he admitted MacJANET was
a better network for a student/university environment. That's exactly
the same conclusion that we came to last summer and was the main
reason we picked MacJANET over Appleshare and TOPS. And with the new
features promised for MacJANET 2.0, it should become an even better
networking product for Macintoshes.
--
Peter Steele, Microcomputer Applications Analyst
Acadia University, Wolfville, NS, Canada B0P1X0 (902)542-2201x121
UUCP: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield}dalcs!aucs!Peter
BITNET: Peter@Acadia Internet: Peter%Acadia.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDUdenbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) (05/23/88)
Daniel J. Oberst writes: > > We've been looking at the problem of getting hard-diskless Macs on to > servers and the logistics of providing the "boot up" they need to get > on a server here at Princeton. For the present, it seems that somehow > we need to get a floppy disk into those machines. Any ideas on how? From article <9388@reed.UUCP>, by mdr@reed.UUCP (Mike Rutenberg): > > A floppy is really cheap to create (especially using some of the disk utility > packages, with disk copy programs). I suspect it is worth giving each person > their own. The problem with giving everyone their own disk is that once someone has a disk, they are not going to buy a new one, or bother to update it when you put a new version of the disk out, and you will have many old versions being run. I wouldn't strap them in. This would make it harder to restore bad disks and would make it a pain for people that want to use both drives to back up their diskettes. -- William C. DenBesten | denbeste@bgsu.edu Dept of Computer Science | CSNET denbeste%andy.bgsu.edu@relay.cs.net Bowling Green State University | UUCP ...!cbosgd!osu-cis!bgsuvax!denbeste Bowling Green, OH 43403-0214 |
adail@pnet06.cts.com (Alan Dail) (05/26/88)
I Completel~ry agree with Pierce Wetter. Why not put the boot code on
a floppy. The boot code hopefully will never need updating, but if
it ever did it is much easier to update a floppy than to update a ROM.
besides, I don't see having a computer as powerful as a Mac I{ runing
as a7wrdiskless workstation, even ethernet is going to be much slower
than using a built in rd disk. I would not?7use appleshare as a system disk
even if it were on ethernet and would let me because having slow disk access
[~destroyes the advantages of having { fast computer.
alan dail
UUCP: {crash uunet}!pnet06!adail
ARPA: crash!pnet06!adail@nosc.mil
INET: adail@pnet06.cts.comelwell@saqqara.cis.ohio-state.edu (Clayton Elwell) (05/27/88)
adail@pnet06.cts.com (Alan Dail) writes:
..., even ethernet is going to be much slower than using a built
in hard disk. I would not use appleshare as a system disk even if
it were on ethernet and would let me because having slow disk access
destroys the advantages of having a fast computer.
alan dail
UUCP: {crash uunet}!pnet06!adail
ARPA: crash!pnet06!adail@nosc.mil
INET: adail@pnet06.cts.com
Well, I've run AppleShare between two Mac IIs connected directly by
Ethernet, and after doing a series of timings, I found that the
difference in speed between AppleShare+EtherTalk and a local SCSI hard
disk is negligible.
I'd be happy to run a Mac diskless over Ethernet, just as I'm happy to
run my Sun 3/50 over Ethernet (and it swaps as well as doing file
access)...
Another thing to remember is that boot disks do not last forever. As
a rough guess, we have to replace about 10% of our boot disks every
quarter (i.e. about 30 out of about 300). Sometimes they just wear
out. Sometimes they get dropped & stepped on. Sometimes people
forget and take them home, or drop them behind tables, or whatever.
It's hard to lose a network, and they don't wear out so fast...
-=-
Clayton M. Elwell <elwell@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
-=-
"Gee, the Captain's vanished utterly so we'd better beam down the second-in-
command to exactly the same coordinates to see what happened to him!"