Impressive, however I don't like the idea of a base OS and then customized based on the account. I still prefer terminal servers and just allowing apps based on active directory groups. However I guess if you require multiple OS's this is a cool way to do it, but then you arn't saving space on a base OS. Neat concept none the less.
@pomnikow I've been using terminal server since NT 4. No way does it compare to this. If someone owns their machine, it doesn't own all 40 users system files. Not to mention Cloning/rollout, video offloading, patching, point in time backups, vlans, sso... Terminal server is shit. I can't wait to migrate my users to this. Also, Terminal server is buggy and unsupported for a lot of proprietary vendor apps. Also, the licensing model on enterprise vs standard is ridiculous. 4gb ram for std
Impressive, however I don't like the idea of a base OS and then customized based on the account. I still prefer terminal servers and just allowing apps based on active directory groups. However I guess if you require multiple OS's this is a cool way to do it, but then you arn't saving space on a base OS. Neat concept none the less.
pomnikow 1 month ago
@pomnikow I've been using terminal server since NT 4. No way does it compare to this. If someone owns their machine, it doesn't own all 40 users system files. Not to mention Cloning/rollout, video offloading, patching, point in time backups, vlans, sso... Terminal server is shit. I can't wait to migrate my users to this. Also, Terminal server is buggy and unsupported for a lot of proprietary vendor apps. Also, the licensing model on enterprise vs standard is ridiculous. 4gb ram for std
BobDoleNSatanRmyniGz 1 month ago
@BobDoleNSatanRmyniGz also, i like to say also
BobDoleNSatanRmyniGz 1 month ago
Wow.
speedy0187 3 months ago