Thanks for the info... I tried to post the question below in a different
forum and never really got much discussion...
Are there many advantages to ghost over the slipstream\sif method? What are
other people using in small companies? (50-100 users) Is there anything
else out there for this? Any recommendations?
------------
What is the consensus on the best desktop imaging solution?
I have an environment with many different desktop\laptop models. It would be
nice to create an image for each different model and then when the time comes
to rebuild it I can do it with a few keystrokes.
I have been using a slipstream windows install with a .sif disk..which works
ok until a new model machine comes out and I have to create the XP install
disk again with new drivers. I have a feeling there may be a better solution.
What does everyone else use? Any recommendation or testimonials?
(This is an all Windows XP environment)
Thanks,
--------------
"gravyx[ at ]gmail.com" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On Jul 10, 7:04 am, SPiderman <SPider...[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have gotten away from the imaging and deployment process for a while. I
> > used to use GHOST. I would install XP and update it, put all the apps on it
> > (one issue was office, if something went wrong it would always want the
> > source location of the network folder from where it was installed???), then
> > sysprep the box, and ghost it to the server.
> >
> > What are all you guru's doing and anyone have a checklist they wouldn't mind
> > sharing or tips on adding software, etc.?
>
> Though not a guru, i have stuck with the tried and true symantic one.
> GHOST is so much easier for creating "template" PC's and putting
> whatever else you want on it. Though you have to make sure you don't
> span multiple HW configurations (found that out the hard way).
>
>
|