news:1162139786.578430.107380@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have a setup that I would like to try, but I am having some trouble.
> I have two machines both running Windows XP. My main machine will be
> for performance with striped disks, high end vid cards, etc. My second
> machine is the fault tolerant server with RAID 5 array and all the
> backup. What I would like to do is have all my critical data files be
> stored on the "server" and just have all my program files on the main
> machine. For the most part this is no problem but my local user
> settings and information is pretty much forced, by my estimation, to be
> stored on the local machine. I have tried to change my profile pointer
> to the remote server but it just comes back and says the security
> permissions are not valid and it will not work.
>
> Has anyone else tried to do this utilizing just Windows XP or do I have
> to go the server route and have roaming profiles? I just have an extra
> license of XP laying around but do not have one for the Server 2000 or
> 2003.
>

news:1162139786.578430.107380@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have a setup that I would like to try, but I am having some trouble.
> I have two machines both running Windows XP. My main machine will be
> for performance with striped disks, high end vid cards, etc. My second
> machine is the fault tolerant server with RAID 5 array and all the
> backup. What I would like to do is have all my critical data files be
> stored on the "server" and just have all my program files on the main
> machine. For the most part this is no problem but my local user
> settings and information is pretty much forced, by my estimation, to be
> stored on the local machine. I have tried to change my profile pointer
> to the remote server but it just comes back and says the security
> permissions are not valid and it will not work.
>
> Has anyone else tried to do this utilizing just Windows XP or do I have
> to go the server route and have roaming profiles? I just have an extra
> license of XP laying around but do not have one for the Server 2000 or
> 2003.
>

"Ian" <I**@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:7DB3C47A-1C38-404C-BE41-5D1C1EA88234@microsoft.com...
>
> -Roaming profiles don't need to be on a server, they can be anywhere, even
> on the same computer. Neither do they require a domain.
>
> However, roaming profiles are not really intended to serve the purpose of
> backup; for one thing not all data is included. The 'Local Settings'
> folder,
> which often contains the user's email, is not included.
>
> I'd suggest that the best approach for fixed computers with a single user
> is
> NOT to store your data in the profile at all. Store it on network shares
> instead.  Or on a separate partition  (or SUBST if you prefer) on the same
> computer. It's relatively easy to reconfig most apps to look for data on
> another (mapped) driveletter.
>
> The other option is to store the data locally, but have a script copy it
> to
> the server at regular intervals. This is the arrangement we use for
> laptops.
> It's less of a hassle than roaming profiles, plus it's saved the data on
> more
> than one occasion when a HD has failed.
>
> The other key point to realise is that if your data is valuable to you
> then
> a single backup ain't enough. If a profile is copied at every logoff, then
> you only have until the next logoff to realise that a key file has been
> trashed. Once you've logged-off.. too late, both copies are now trashed!
> This
> is why any serious backup policy will provide for more than one copy of
> the
> data.
>
>