tmcd35

@sonofsanta, That relys on having a failover cluster which, in 2008R2, means a SAN. Support for Cluster Shared Volumes was (officially) added with 2012. The 2012 live migration doesn't require any shared storage at all, the VHD's are copied between servers local storage.

@SHimmer45, added to 2012 IRC. You're looking for "Move" in the context menu's.

This is school IT, there's no such thing. We prefer to refer to them as "creative infrastructure builds"

I ask for triple the amount I'm allocated each year if that counts? - (side note, I actually have a meeting with the SLT after half term to talk about restructuring ICT (read - double the budget); they are currently discussing staff cuts...)

Not meaning any offense; While the advise boils down to the same - "two well spec'd servers with local storage" - the delivery, IMHO, is a little over complicated given the audience. In an ideal world I'd follow @seawolf's advise to the letter, in reality budgets and timescales tend to call for some more practical decision making.

Crude - Just sat watching Task Manager for a few minutes. Soon get an idea of a servers load capacity. If software (SQL) is hogging all available RAM regardless, go back to the manufacturers recommended spec's, then take an educated guess as to whether or not you think the work load in your environment would need a little more. IMHO, always run SQL server in a VM, and always run it on it's own. That way you can control and restrict it's memory creep and stop it from effecting any other roles.

It is %username% as in - \\vs1\13$\%username%

Great fan of Wisesoft for this sort of job - (WiseSoft - Resources for IT Professionals). I've done it before with a combination of 'Robocopy', 'Bulk User AD' and 'NTFS Fix'

This I agree with 100%... ...This I don't (100%)... Most of this is way, way over spec'd. Remember it's a 100 seat environment. You need to do a proper cost/benefit analysis. Start buy describing the servers you need, add a bit (30% sounds good, I'd agree with that) for future expansion, then double itif running two server (add a third for three servers, etc) so if 1 server goes down the remander can take up the strain. I've never needed more than 3Gb in a DC and this is a 450 seat environement - DC2 currently sitting at 1.5Gb. DC3 using a bit more at 2.7Gb out of 12Gb (physical server, old VM host). 6Gb would be over kill, and 1 core is more than fine. I have VM's running on 1 core and 1Gb and others up at 4 core and 12Gb Ram. It's about matching the work load requirements. The best place to start is to look at the spec's and performance data from your existing machines. Like wise, while it might be good to have 2xNIC's for each network. Your infrastructure needs to support it. More NIC's = more CPU/RAM requirements for the host OS to support them. Do your switches support 802.11ad? (that said 2012 now includes some very cool NIC bonding features). While I agree with the sentiment, the size of the environment says different. Personally I'd stick with local storage in each host server, but I think a couple of grand could buy a suitable NAS that support iSCSI with good enough speed/reliability for that environment. SAN's are rediculously expensive and I very much doubt is something you should be looking at. All servers support 10GbE - it's called PCIe. Seriously, don't buy this now unless you need it. Buy it when you need it, when prices come down. Pretty much this! I turn all my servers off once every term and backup to a 8Tb QNAP NAS. My entire virtual environment (nearly 30 servers + user data) fits inside less than 4Tb. Taken off site. If the school burned down we can get everything back very quickly and easily. I suppose the point I'm trying to make is there is a danger of over spec'ing and spending too much (or getting a project mothballed on cost), as much as there's a danger in under spec'ing. Other thing to bear in mind - Hyper-V pretty much requires atleast 1 physical domain controller (I'm aware 2012 R2 has "measures" to get around this particular chicken and egg, but...)

For fans of Little Big Planet - Jim Noir is well worth a listen - A number of very good senseless tune

Hands down - Papercut NG. Not sure if it does rollers and transfers, atleast not by default. No doubt some enterprising coder has written scripts for various makes/models.

Is there a patch panel already in place they could have used, or would they have needed to quote for a new patch panel? Any company who did that here would get called back and never used again!

It's exactly the same as spec'ing physical servers to do the same tasks. What does the OS you are using recommend? What does the developer of the software you are using recommend? If you are virtualising existing servers then yes look at current performance measures for those machines. Also, if using Hyper-V, don't forget to spec an additional core and 2Gb for the host OS. (I'm not sure what VMWare asks for the host, probably 1core and around 512mb).

I've said it before, console and PC gaming are different beasts aimed at different audiences who want entirely different things from their gaming experience. As a console gamer, and no we're not all teens using mum and dad's 100" TV's, I find PC gaming too full of issues such as drivers and whether my graphics cards good enough. I know thing have improved greatly, especially with steam, but I really can't be asked. The idea console gaming is dying is laughable. The two big players have just enjoyed the biggest console launches in history! Console sales have been declining over the past couple of years not be because people have lost interest, but because everyone had a PS3 or 360 and that generation had gone on a little too long. It's been time for new hardware for a while. Personally I'd say valve are heading in the wrong direction if they want SteamOS to compete effectively in the living room space. I don't mind PC's offering backend services for the living room, like media streaming, but I'd sooner something with a little more finesse like a Roku box or a console or AppleTV on the front-end.

Search these very forums - plenty of (heated) discussions on this very topic, some quiet recently.

You've only just got this on PC!?! Wow, we had this on console back in the PS2 days! Maybe you do have hope for Red Dead Redemtion after all (sorry, couldn't resist)

For this sort of thing I find it best to ask system builders like Very PC, Novatech and Stone to quote on a spec. They tend to have more flexibility in getting the CPU/RAM/SSD requirements in the form factor your after.

Am I missing something? Read the linked site and it just talks about information being shared with institutions I already assumed it would be shared with - hospitals, clinics, etc. No mention of selling data to the highest bidder. Besides wouldn't the data protection act apply? Of course i don't want my personal data actioned off to $someinsurancescumbagdotcom but the scheme, as I just read it, I don't have a problem with. Besides - My medical notes would fit as MS Word document on a single sided 8" floppy. I'm sure if I ever needed an appointment with my GP I'd have arguements with the receptionist as to whether or not I'm registered at that clinic. Been to my current GP exactly twice. Once in 2001 to hand in the registration forms. Once in 2005 for some jabs for a holiday.

I think it was introduced with 2012. Not sure if SCVMM is needed as well, I don't think it is. We have a very high speed/high capacity SMB NAS set up for shared storage which was designed aroudn 2008R2. Had the feature been available then I think I would have used local storage on our network. On a side note, just looked at Dell's website - the VRTX doeslook like a very, very interesting all in one option! Maybe a little pricey, but could be worth it.

You how long it's going to take the tech savvy kids to work out they can send a virtual pupil to sit with the virtual teacher in the virtual school while they play hooky down at the arcades?

If you are going to do it, do it properly. The first thing you need to do is define how meny virtual servers you need. 1 or 2 AD/DNS? DHCP? Printers? MIS? File Storage? Personnally I'd say seperate them in to as meny individual roles as is practicle. No sense haveing the Webserver and WDS sitting on the same VM when they can have one each. Next up, work out how many CPU cores, Ram and disk space each of those individual VM's need. From this you can work out how meny CPU cores, Ram and hard disk your physical servers need. For a 100 computer school I think it'd be tough to justify more than 2, maybe 3 host servers. For two host servers make sure they are spec'd to run at 1/2 CPU/RAM/Disk capacity when every thing is on and working. For three host servers you work to 2/3 capcity (4=3/4 capacity, etc - assuming all servers have the same capacity). This means if one server fails the other can take up the slack. Finally, I think you might find SAN's an unnecerssary expense on a small network. You might get away with a top end NAS with iSCSI as shared storage. Personally, I'd go for local storage in this scenario. Hyper-V (and no doubt VMWare too - haven't used in a long while) allows you to replicate and synchronise across hosts without using any shared storage. I believe it can do auto failover without shared storage now, so if 1 server goes down the others automagically take up the load. For networking, without at a NAS, you want two networks 1 "management" interface for you to connect to the server on and 1 "switch" interface for the VM's to use. If possible go for 2 bonded NIC's on the switch interface. If you are using a NAS/SAN with iSCSI, then youd need a third network dedicated to that - again best as 2 bonded NIC's if possible. Also, you'll need Windows DataCenter. All license problems solved with one purchase - run as meny VM's of any version of Windows server as you need/like

Might be some answers here... Cloning a drive with a Bootcamp partition - Mac-Forums Discussions for Apple Products & Services Sounds like a comination of WinClone and Carbon Copy Creator should do what you are after.

The problem is the console is just not selling, even with crazy price cuts. You can't flog a dead horse forever, sooner or later you'v got to accept it's better off inside a McDonalds burger than racing at Ascot. Nintendo ace up their sleeve, and answer to that particular problem, is their backwards compatibility. The core hardware for Wii and Wii-U is fully backwards compatable with the GameCube. And they don't have any problems emulating older platforms. Next Christams might be too soon in R&D terms, but by the end of 2015 they really need to have come up with something new, in fact Christams 2015 could be too late, limping on for another 2 years...

To be fair, I had heard rumblings of a "fusion" device somwhere else and it kinda makes sense. Not sure if a whole new DS or a minor update, if anything, would be required. But bringing the two lines closer together, like Vita and PS4 - only better, makes perfect sense for Ninty. I just read down the Fusion DS specs and they're even more laughable. Reads like a b******d love child of a PS Vita with a SteamOS controller, ouch!

Fake, IMHO. I've heard other rumours of the Fusion idea, which may turn out to be real enough, but that spec has too meny "fantasy" elements to it to be real: IBM PPC750 Co-processor. Why? Not just for BC surely. That can be achieved through basic emulation on a Power8 chip - same core instruction set, mostly timing issues. Co-Axel input? Cable Card slot? in a console? For sale in more than one region? With cable company backing? I think not. "Holographic Versitle Disc" - maybe one day, but whats wrong with 300Gb BluRay? It's be cheaper for a start. Or typical Nintendo 8cm mini discs rather than regular 12cm discs. 4Gb unified ram plus another 2gb - for what? If the main storage pool contains both graphics and sytem ram, what needs to use a seperate 2gb reserve? 300gb flas storage? What time scales are being suggested that this size flash storage and holographic discs could possible come in at a competitevely affordable price? And given the "fusion" concept, a arm processor for DS compatibility would seem more likely No, I'm calling total BS on this one