Disease

See now this annoys me a lot, exactly how is Server 2003 Unreliable? I have been running 2003 since it came out and never once had a failure due to the OS on any of my 15 servers. If it was that unreliable as you claim then big business would all be using Linux for their networks which clearly they are not. I hate it when people claim that an OS is unreliable just because of a personal angst against the manufacturer. I personally hate Linux and would never use it in my network but I won't claim it is unreliable as that is just not true. Same as you claim. OP, were you present when the service pack was applying? (If not why the hell are you applying service packs to servers with no one present.) If you were present then thats your answer it failed to apply the service pack properly and so the OS would be screwed, Follow the KB article as suggested then go from there.

Use SQL Express and it will run on 2003, the problems are related to 2007 not 3.

I have Vista and never had a game fail to work, I am always amazed that people complain about Vista when I have not had 1 single problem with it. I play loads of games all the time and run a lot of applications and never suffered with vista at all, maybe it's down to setups

You obviously don't play many games now then :)

We tried to do that here, but instead they went with a 1980's style computer geek club to work on databases and such, only 1 person turned up for that though.

I would box up the camera and take it back to the shop and tell them that Media are to stupid to be dealing with such hi-tec equipment. lol Soz could not resist.

He would lose though as Parsnips are crap and thats a matter of fact.

Post them up protecting the names of the innocent, it would be interesting to see what all the fuss is about. 'XXXX The crappiest AV in the world is an opinion and I would personally see nothing wrong with an opinion expressed in that way. I may think that parsnips are the crappiest veg in the world, others disagree why should I need to justify my opinion?

Jake is right I think it is a shame that Edugeek has become a place where you can no longer express a true opinion for fear that we may upset some company or a sponsor of Edugeek. As Dos Box posts in the bold highlighted section above, it is all about the companies/sponsors opinion of Edugeek, not really a forum any longer where when someone asks for advice on a product or service where you can expect to get a true free thinking opinion anymore and that is just a damn shame. I don't blame Dosbox for it he is just protecting his investment, me personally I would have told them to stick it up their arse and prove that what my members are saying isnt true as for it to be libel the onus is on the person claiming libel to provide the proof. Still I understand why you have felt the need to water down the forums.

Censorship at it's best, welcome to the technical discussion forum where you can discuss anything as long as it does not upset anyone, seems to be becoming a trend in life now That said I can understand the concerns of the Edugeek staff I just get hacked off with censorship.

It's all irrelevant anyway, if parental concerns build up enough you will be made to remove wi-fi anyway regardless of any scientific study. Once parents start to create a fuss, which they will do, it will only be a matter of time. I am glad anyway as we don have and will not have any wireless here as its crap.

I am sure they said Thalidomide was safe and posed no threat to health as well. oh wait.....

Surely they fought for the right for people to vote for whoever they damn well want without people saying they are racist or what not because others don't agree with thier politics? My Grandad fought in WW2 and he would vote BNP if he could be bothered to vote (He is a Chelsea Pensioner by the way as well). Most people hate the way this country isbeing destroyed.

Better how?

What's Linux?

We have the same problems here example: Monday no one in the school can email the LEA NDR #5.7.1 smtp;550 5.7.1 This system is configured to reject mail from xx.xx.xx.xx (DNS reverse lookup failed) We run our own mail server and our domain hosting has its MX records pointing to our external IP, the LEA point the External IP through the network to our internal IP as we use their broadband. Now I come in on Tuesday and we can email fine to the LEA again. This happens all the time on and off we also get the same problem emailing Portsmouth Uni.

We are on the Swan NEtwork and our AV updates fine, we use NOD32

@ZeroHour - We hav been running Print Manager Plus now for nearly 2 years the maintenence is about £120 odd a year, not much really. Ours has never fallen over once and we could not live without it now. Just for balance

We use Print Manager Plus, we did use PCounter but found that PMP was much much better. We use the following. All print jobs over 5 pages are deleted by the system, they have to break the job up. Year 7 & 8 - 4 pages per day Year 9 - 8 pages per day Year 10 - 16 Pages per day Year 11 - 32 Pages per day Staff Unlimited Woks well for us and have decreased our toner cost dramatically

I used to use Novatech as they were just down the road, won't touch them with a barge pole now tbh, now use Dabs. I found Novatechs customer service to be crap.

Aye, I agree with Webman, sometimes it's easy to confuse RM doing a good job with something any competent manager could do.

ok, I see what you are saying, so it's dependant on how much you want to relinquish, if you relinquish all control you end up with the worst case scenario as stated, wonder how this will work with BSF then and BSF want schools to go over to fully managed solutions. (although I may be wrong on that s well )

I have R2 but not installed it yet, all my servers are Windows 2003 std. does it upgrade the forest when you add aR" server to the domain and how does that effect the non R2 servers, anyone know?

I understand as I say I am not trying to flame anyone just trying to understand, are there different levels of contract then, as posted above we have a full rm school in the city and they have a nightmare at times?