Install win xp over a network
in [Hardware]
|
Prev: VGA clock setting?
Next: SATA II Harddisks ?
From: Conor on 2 Jul 2005 13:49 In article <da5i0p$jod$1(a)bagan.srce.hr>, Bandul says... > I've got 10 problems. > I bought 10 computers recent. Comp dont have a cd/dvd-rom. I must install > win xp pro on every one. > Can i do that over a network.( got switch) or someting else. > Thanks. > Buy a USB CDROM drive. -- Conor -You wanted an argument? Oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room K5, just along the corridor. Stupid git. (Monty Python)
From: Keith Willcocks on 2 Jul 2005 15:17 "Conor" <conor.turton(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:MPG.1d30e3e43942626a98a1db(a)news.individual.net... > In article <da5i0p$jod$1(a)bagan.srce.hr>, Bandul says... >> I've got 10 problems. >> I bought 10 computers recent. Comp dont have a cd/dvd-rom. I must install >> win xp pro on every one. >> Can i do that over a network.( got switch) or someting else. >> Thanks. >> > Buy a USB CDROM drive. > Or even an ordinary internal one and fit it in each machine for the duration of the XP installation. It is only a 5 minute job. -- Keith Willcocks (If you can't laugh at life, it ain't worth living!)
From: BOOGIEMAN on 2 Jul 2005 18:55 On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 18:49:00 +0100, Conor wrote: > Buy a USB CDROM drive. I'm not sure if the DOS will recognise it. Maybe he'll not be able to install windows with it
From: kony on 2 Jul 2005 19:42 On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 23:55:34 +0100, BOOGIEMAN <BOOGIEMANPN(a)YAHOO.COM> wrote: >On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 18:49:00 +0100, Conor wrote: > >> Buy a USB CDROM drive. > >I'm not sure if the DOS will recognise it. >Maybe he'll not be able to install windows with it If the system will recognize USB drives, he might as well just copy the CD's contents to a thumbdrive and use that instead.
From: kony on 3 Jul 2005 00:43
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 23:05:09 -0500, David Maynard <nospam(a)private.net> wrote: >> No, the problem is XP's networking. If anything, antiquated >> protocols have been around so long there is simply no excuse >> for problems from the OS. >> >> MS does not "tell us" what to migrate away from. When they >> give me a free PC then they can dictate what it uses, not >> when it's listed as a "supported" feature. > >That sounds so terribly 'consumer noble' but the fact of the matter is >there's no good reason to support an antiquated protocol. > Define support. There is no good reason NOT to support it to the extent that it works. There is no good reason not to support ANY protocol, even one completely home-grown, to the extend that it installs in same manner and is supported though whatever features it, itself, supports in a standardized manner. Perhaps it's only antiquated in your and MS's minds. Certainly not so to anyone who uses it. That doesn't even begin to mean someone else shouldn't use something that suits their needs more than your own personal alternative would. The fact of the matter is that the main benefit of TCP/IP is that it's routable.. Once you remove that need, you're left with a slower protocol. |