🚀 go-pugleaf

NOTE: Some of your confusion is the result of terminology that is used
incorrectly, I will append a list of terms and *my* definitions.  These 
should not be taken as Gospel, but they should be reasonably accurate.  
[N.B. Please feel free to correct any and all mistakes that I have made]

In comp.sys.mac you write:

>Within the last month, my life has become completely changed from a 
>normal day to day life to week long bouts of kaos.  I have just taken 
>the job as lab manager/system tech in the department of journalism of 
>my school.  This means that I have to maintain and sustain well over 60
>various Macintosh computers and an assorted array of software and other
>devices as well.  I went into the job with a small knowledge of the 
>Macs, but I know other systems backwards and forwards ... but sometimes 
>it doesn't seem to help.
>
>Presently I am in charge of 3 labs and several departmental computers.  
>Each individual lab is connected together with bus connectors serving
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                      AppleTalk (PhoneNet?) network connectors?
          "SCSI" and "NuBus" are buses, AppleTalk is a Network.

>one to three printers depending on the lab.  The most extensive
>"network" we have is Public Folder, which if you have ever used it, is
>both useful and also a joke.

   Just some terminology, AppleTalk is the "network", Public Folder is 
   what you are using for "file sharing".  Just because you are using
   AppleTalk for "device sharing" doesn't mean it isn't a network.

   Public Folder is not a *commercial grade* file server -- after all it 
   is free!  But it fills its function very simply and elegantly.

>I read the letters concerning Lab Management and had some questions 
>about a few things.  First, the plans are that everything in the 
>department will be networked.

   You already *are* networked.

>I am not sure how I feel about this, nor do I know the exact details of 
>the plans.  Our main problem is that all the Macs have HDs of different
>sizes.  What I would like to do is to have everything hooked up to a 
>server but I have some problems with that.

   Macs that use a single application on one server makes it easy for 
   the administrator, not the users.  IMHO, Macs with less than 40MB are 
   not good for business applications and at work I suggest 80MB as the
   minimum. 

   Check out external or removable disk drives in the 40 or 80MB range.

>1.  With 60+ computers, it is bound to be slow.

   This really depends on just how you plan to do all this.  If you have
   only one copy of each application on one "file server", then it 
   *will* be impossibly slow!  But if each Mac has its own applications 
   and the file servers serve common "templates" or common files that 
   all the users will be expected to read from and write to, then it 
   will not be slow!  This is also dependant in the way the network is 
   set up and the way the information flows in the organization. 

   This is especially useful for data base operations, where it is only 
   the updated data that is sent back and forth to certain file servers 
   that everyone has access to.

>We are thinking about upgrading to system 7 soon, so using that plus 
>the network, we are going to have to come in an hour early just to get 
>an application going.

   System 7 has *absolutely nothing* to do with the network.  System 7 
   does have a background file server built into it though.

>2.  This is a Graphics/journalism class.  We are licensed for all our
>software including PageMaker, Illustrator, Persuasion, FreeHand,
>QuarkExpress as well as the big graphics and word processing software.  
>To network something like PageMaker, we would have to have 60 copies of
>it on the network if sixty people were to use it at once.  PageMaker
>alone takes up a heck of a lot of space.  Thoughts are going through my
>mind about sixty people using one server over basically one wire to all
>run the same system draining application.

>Having a server, however, would help us in security and file 
>maintenance.  Security reasons, basically for theft and file abuse
>(deleting/modifying, etc.) and maintenance, it would be easier to 
>install and maintain the files at one computer rather than running 
>around doing it on 60 different ones.

   Personal computers have advantages and disadvantages.  The users have 
   the freedom to customize their environment and their applications, 
   but with this freedom comes the responsibility of maintaining their 
   own system to some degree.

>But, alas, a server and a network may be a few months down the road and
>I would appreciate any suggestions for the present situation ... if 
>there are any.

   Same note about the network, but there is a shareware AppleShare
   compliant background file server out there.  Check sumex.  With your
   current setup, you can try out a file server on a mac that is not 
   heavily used to see how this will affect other users.

>Reading the letters, I came across someone mentioning FILEGUARD and 
>someone else mentioning DIGICARD.  Could anyone enlighten me on ether 
>or both of these in respects to my problems at hand?

   I think that FileGuard is an application used for password protecting
   either an entire volume (hard disk) or a specific folder.  This would
   keep the users from deleting, modifying, and stealing the apps.

   I haven't heard of "DIGICARD" before. 

IN CONCLUSION:

If your department is going to be spending a significant amount of money
implementing this "network", I would suggest that you find a qualified 
person or company that can help set this all up.  Things like network 
topology, number of routers or gateways, types of networks (more than 
one?), number, size and type of file servers, a mail server, and a 
scheme for backup of these computers (maybe just leave each user in 
charge of their own data).  Without the right type of help, a lot of 
money can be wasted!  Sometimes the most expensive solution is not the 
best!  And many of these things can't be answered without a thorough 
knowledge of your organization and the information flow in the group.


MY DEFINITIONS:

  Bus:  An electrical connection *usually* used to connect multiple
        devices to a single computer.  (e.g. NuBus, SCSI bus [Small
        Computer System Interface]).

  File server:  This is a machine that has the ability to allow one or
        more people to both read and write files.  A file server can be
        a machine that is dedicated to serving files and can not be used
        by a user (e.g. AppleShare), or a background file server that
        can be used by a person at the same time as it is serving files
        (e.g. Sitka [formerly TOPS], several shareware file servers, and
        Personal AppleShare that is a part of System 7.  According to my
        definition here, Public Folder does not qualify.

        NOTE:  Just because a File Server is dedicated, doesn't mean
        that it can't do other things (be the mail server, print server,
        FAX modem server, etc.), it just can't be used by a living
        breathing user!

  File sharing:  This is a method of sharing files.  Public Folder can
        share files, it is a one way transfer.  Oscar and Flash are
        another method of file sharing.  Oscar (and Flash I think) work
        in the other direction, it allows the sender to transfer a file
        to another machine on the network.  The problem is that other
        users can overload your machine with possibly unneeded files.

  Large paper weight:  A paper weight that can take up 30 to 100 percent
        of your desk.  For example, one company rep sold us some of
        these.  The server that they sold us didn't have enough disk
        space to allow the satellite stations they sold us to boot.  In
        this case, we had almost $100,000 in LPWs!

        We have some satellite network stations that can perform an LPW
        transformation every so often (to the dismay of those unlucky
        enough to be using them at the time.

  Network:  A network is a method of connecting individual computers.
        The computers can be "diskless", that is, they don't have a
        local hard disk even to hold their own operating system.  Even
        over Ethernet, this can seriously overload the network.  If
        these "satellite" network stations can't reach the server, or
        the network gets to busy that they can't be in constant contact
        with the server, they become what is popularity known as "a
        large paper weight".

  Satellite network station:  A network node that doesn't have a disk
        (or doesn't use it to boot from), and has to rely on another
        computer to serve it the operating system required to boot it,
        not only files and applications.


-- Pat ----------------------------------> hoepfner@heasfs.gsfc.nasa.gov 

P.S. Please, these are my definitions, ideas, etc.  Don't give any 
credit to my employer!