Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3 Network
Setup a G5 running Panther with all the latest updates to find that when I mounted the NT server volumes (some specifically setup for Mac), all files without a dot prefix eg .jpg .doc, came up as Unix exe (Executable) file with an ugly little black icon. This was tragic for the customer's Quark files, as they had no prefix on them. However, if I saved a new Quark 4 or 6 file to the server, it was OK. The older G4 in the studio could still see the old files, but with anything newly saved from the G5, it could not load it.

Searched high and low on the net, spoke to a University administration technicians, spoke to some local Apple technicians, but could not find anything substancial. I did, however, come across some well set out internal support documentation, with screen shots (helpful) from Cambridge University. This lead me to the Directory Access application in the Utilities folder, where a number of network services are ticked by default, including SMB. By simply un-ticking SMB service and connecting via afp://server-Address, all files without a prefix on the windows servers magically returned to their previous state.

These types of major but simple changes, like the missing Key Caps program should be put in "Whats new?" in the Apple Help. This was an OS 9 to OS X migration client; there are still thousands out there, that may have chosen to stay on OS 9...
    •    
  • Currently 1.00 / 5
  You rated: 1 / 5 (4 votes cast)
 
[11,809 views]  

Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3 | 16 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: gcgiv on Jun 03, '04 12:11:34PM

Your solution only works if the Windows server is running Macintosh services (thus the ability to connect with afp), otherwise an afp connection would be refused. Most windows environments do not have that service running by defualt so by Apple enabling SMB it allows for "out of the box" connection to windows servers.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: DavidRavenMoon on Jun 03, '04 01:12:57PM

If the server is for a Mac based shop, then of course it will have Macintosh services installed.

At work here, we have a W2K server box. We connect using AFP due to the fact that Mac files (such as fonts) will get damaged on the native Windows file system. Also, OS X doesn't seem to like to see Mac files on Windows formatted disks, and it shows the resource forks as separate files, just as it does on a PC, with no way to join them back up. We have to use a Mac running OS 9 for the times we get DOS formatted Zip disks with Mac files.

The one big problem with using AFP, is that MS has not updated Services for Macintosh to work with long file names... so certain files cannot be directly copied to the server, without renaming them first.

I tell all the users here to make sure they add .qxp or .qxd to their Quark documents for just this reason. It was a real oversite of Quark to not have the program save files with the extension.

Personally I'd rather use an OS X Server box. ;)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: LittleSaint on Jun 03, '04 05:09:48PM

I would have to disagree with that first statement. We are a Macintosh heavy organization and we are eliminating SFM. It doesn't scale well and at high file loads, spikes the utlization on the server. SMB access is a godsend for any enterprise class organization with Macs. Plus you can join them to an Active Directory tree for single sign-on authentication.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: ericdano on Jun 05, '04 01:18:20PM

Yeah, who wouldn't use OS X server, but without any RAID 5 solutions that are cheap, Windows or Linux is a way better solution. A 700Gig RAID 5 server can be set up for about $1K.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: kevco on Jun 03, '04 04:26:04PM

A "prefix" would come at the beginning of a filename. The characters at the end of a filename would more appropriately be called a "suffix" although the most common term in the Windows world is "extenstion"



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: LittleSaint on Jun 03, '04 05:13:08PM

Apparently you never checked the Apple Discussion board where this topic has been discussed ad nauseum.

http://discussions.info.apple.com/webx?128@25.DmwIaWhQocG.431296@.689391fc




[ Reply to This | # ]
Please spellcheck your hints
Authored by: gatorparrots on Jun 03, '04 10:55:32PM
substantial

[ Reply to This | # ]
Directory Access application has nothing to do with it
Authored by: ducasi on Jun 04, '04 03:24:59AM

By un-ticking SMB in the Directory Access application, all you've done is turn off the ability to browse windows networks. It makes no difference to how you access a windows server.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Directory Access application has nothing to do with it
Authored by: Tijer on Jun 04, '04 05:54:52AM

Who made this go through to the front page? With the help of simple logics this could have been avoided.

You can change the icon manually (thus you will change the icon for all unix-execs in ie. /usr/bin) or you can just avoid caring so much about how the icons are on your external network-drive.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Directory Access application has nothing to do with it
Authored by: LittleSaint on Jun 04, '04 09:19:39AM

It's not just the icons. Applications do not recognize files that do not have type/creator codes or file extensions.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: stingerman on Jun 04, '04 09:40:17AM

Yep, basically this is what it comes down to:

-If your OS 9 users are using AFP to connect to Windows server then:
For OS X users to work with the OS 9 files correctly, they need to connect to the same Windows server using AFP.

-If you copy anything from OS 9 to Windows, then the only way for OS X to understand the meta data is to connect to Windows via AFP.
-If you copy anything from OS X to Windows, then your OS 9 users need to connect to windows through AFP to see the Meta data.
-Physically copying from OS X to Windows to OS 9 will lose the resource and Finder meta data, and vice versa. You need to not use WIndows as a go between.

The real solution is to use a OS X server for your Mac and Windows clients or to only connect to Windows shares using AFP. The new OS X Server (Panther) probably is the best solution as it provides a robust Open Directory with AFP, SMB along with being able to be a controller (Primary, WINS, etc) and participate in a active directory with replication. Since the Disks are formated as HFS+, you'll have no problems all around. You'll also benefit from faster File and Print sharing than even Windows servers provides its own Windows clients. (and you have the justification to buy a Xserve G5 and Xraid that you've been looking for. In fact, with unlimited clients on OS X server, it is a far cheaper though more robust solution to Windows.)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: osxpounder on Jun 04, '04 11:26:34AM

Like a lot of us, I connect to Windows machines and use a Mac primarily. So far, I've had few problems moving the following types of files to and from a Windows machine, then using the files later:

Photoshop, Flash and Word documents
image files of various types, incl. JPG, TGA, GIF, TIF
PDF
WAV, MP3, and AIFF
TXT
QuickTime MOV
MPG and DV video files

If I don't use Classic apps or OS9, should I expect, or look out for, problems with files that have been on a Windows volume? I use QuickTime a lot, as well as image and audio files, but so far haven't had any problems with the resource-thingies. I enjoy the ease with which I can copy files to and from my Win2k boxes; I didn't realize there were dangers afoot.

---
--
osxpounder



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: LittleSaint on Jun 04, '04 11:46:03AM

Or you can just make sure you use file extensions and you'll have no problems no matter how you connect. I think people need to realize that as Apple becomes more commited to enterprise environments, there is a good chance metadata will become extinct much like AppleTalk. So, get used to using file extensions now.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: montalvd on Jun 06, '04 12:06:44PM

> I think people need to realize that as Apple becomes more
> commited to enterprise environments, there is a good chance
> metadata will become extinct much like AppleTalk. So, get
> used to using file extensions now.

with all due respect, that's absurd. afp services are part of windows 2003. macintosh users in design/production groups can NOT "simply use file extensions". the solution is to ensure afp (which NO i.t. department would have a problem with...remember, afp is NOT appletalk).

users need to be trained to recognize the difference between an afp and an smb connection dialog box. then if a user is prompted to log in via smb, he/she should raise a flag...because afp connectivity isn't working properly (whether it's a client or server issue).

the solution is to simply ensure afp services is up and that users connect via afp. "working around" the problem by using file extensions does NOT solve the problem.

don't think for a minute that afp is a problem for any competent i.t. person...on the other hand, appletalk is and always was a p.i.t.a that most i.t. departments do NOT want running on their network.

don montalvo, nyc

---
don montalvo, nyc



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: montalvd on Jun 06, '04 12:10:50PM

> I think people need to realize that as Apple becomes more
> commited to enterprise environments, there is a good chance
> metadata will become extinct much like AppleTalk. So, get
> used to using file extensions now.

with all due respect, that's absurd. afp services are part of windows 2003. macintosh users in design/production groups can NOT "simply use file extensions". the solution is to ensure afp (which NO i.t. department would have a problem with...remember, afp is NOT appletalk) services are running.

users need to be trained to recognize the difference between an afp and an smb connection dialog box. then if a user is prompted to log in via smb, he/she should raise a flag...because afp connectivity isn't working properly (whether it's a client or server issue).

the solution is to simply ensure afp services is up and that users connect via afp. "working around" the problem by using file extensions does NOT solve the problem.

don't think for a minute that afp is a problem for any competent i.t. person...on the other hand, appletalk is and always was a p.i.t.a that most i.t. departments do NOT want running on their network.

don montalvo, nyc

---
don montalvo, nyc



[ Reply to This | # ]
Mounting Windows Server 2003 & NT with 10.3
Authored by: henryhbk on Jun 05, '04 07:30:14AM
There are multiple applications you can run on the OS9 side, which put appropriate extensions on the files, before copying the files. Heck I wrote one for a client in 1996, and it took me a couple of days.

With a much friendler programming environment, do it in realbasic (or python, applescript...) and do it yourself. It simply walks the tree, gets the OS9 filetype data and looks up a table of file extensions (many exists like this here). Then you need a table of apple filetypes (such as here). Now you can move these files back to the SMB drive, as it will now be a properly extensioned file.

---
Henry Feldman, MD
Medical Informatics
NYU School of Medicine

[ Reply to This | # ]