David,
   We do all the partitioning & opsystem/software installation before 
pulling an image off the prime machine. That's why we need the imaging 
system to be low-level. Remember the old msdos 'diskcopy' command?  Its 
like we need a network hard-disk version of that.  Ghost has done this 
well enough until recently.

Most of the science/engineering software our professors specify have 
non-standard requirements which we want to avoid doing machine by 
machine.  Visiting the target machines for cloning is ok & is what we've 
been doing for a long time.  As I'm sure you're aware, public labs need 
to be visited often anyway.  That way, one finds out about a 
dysfunctional monitor or keyboard filled with coffee..

  VM would be ok, but correct me if I am wrong about this - doesn't 
virtualization assumes that there is more hardware capability than is 
being used?  Thing like FiniteElementAnalysis applications & CAD 
software really bring fast computers to a halt.  I tell my students not 
to browse the web too much or stream music when they are using 
Solidworks for this reason.  -V

On 10/18/10 10:52 AM, David Houston wrote:
> Victor,
>
> Am I understanding you that your interest is in a tool that can do the
> actual partitioning remotely?  I.e., never touch another console again,
> kind of thing?
>
> 	David Houston
> 	University of Vermont
> 	Phone: (802) 656 2013
> 	**
>          "You are nestled in our hearts forever"
>          **
>
>
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010, Victor Rossi intoned:
>
> VR:Greg&  David,
> VR:
> VR:  Thanks greatly for the insightful and informative take on cloning&
> VR:multicasting.  I honestly didn't know that WDS has a multicast mode.  Is this
> VR:how the computer depot preps new machines?  They always seem to arrive
> VR:UVMized.
> VR:
> VR:I haven't yet found anything in writing that says either Fog or WDS can
> VR:handle Win7/Ubunutu dual boot *client* machines.  The FOG site has a lot of
> VR:info about many opsystem options for the server side.
> VR:Has anyone had experience with WDS in dual boot systems?   Perhaps these
> VR:details are in your 2007 blog?
> VR:
> VR:The only real problem with spending $120 is that it is nice to test these
> VR:things out beforehand.  -V
> VR:**
> VR:On 10/18/10 9:48 AM, J. Greg Mackinnon wrote:
> VR:>    MCA does not cover Windows Server.  It covers Windows workstation
> VR:>  /upgrades/ (you must still purchase an OS with each new computer, but
> VR:>  you can upgrade to an volume license edition of Windows after that).
> VR:>
> VR:>  You can purchase a Windows Server (standard edition) license for about
> VR:>  $110 under MS Select Agreement though the Computer Depot. For most
> VR:>  people, that should not be cost prohibitive.
> VR:>
> VR:>  I expect you already know that in ETS we host two separate but
> VR:>  complimentary Windows deployment technologies... Windows Deployment
> VR:>  Services (Windows DS, or WDS), and "LiteTouch" (a component of the
> VR:>  Microsoft Deployment Toolkit). WDS is a systems for simple Windows
> VR:>  system image distribution. LiteTouch is a tool for running one-off
> VR:>  customized and automated deployments of Windows. Both are freely
> VR:>  available to the UVM community. I wrote about these services for the now
> VR:>  defunct "IT-News" letter in 2007. An old (but still accurate) blog entry
> VR:>  on the subject can be found here:
> VR:>  http://blog.uvm.edu/jgm/2007/08/09/changes-in-windows-deployment-technology/
> VR:>
> VR:>  If you really need frequent rapid multi-system cloning, then I could see
> VR:>  you wanting your own distribution server located on your local subnet.
> VR:>  But you still could use a WDS server in multicast mode to accomplich
> VR:>  this end. Total cost to you in software? About $110. Cheap!
> VR:>
> VR:>  I agree with David that Altiris likely would be too complicated and
> VR:>  cumbersome for small scale deployments. However, I cannot say that I
> VR:>  share is enthusiasm for open-source projects such as "Dolly" and "Fog".
> VR:>  I get the feeling that open source developers really have to struggle to
> VR:>  keep on top of new developments in the Windows OS world. Since Microsoft
> VR:>  provides reliable, affordable, and well documented tools for mass system
> VR:>  distribution, I see no reason to stray off the reservation... but that's
> VR:>  just my take on the situation.
> VR:>
> VR:>  --
> VR:>  J. Greg Mackinnon | ETS Systems Architecture and Administration | x68251
> VR:>
> VR:>  On 10/15/2010 3:01 PM, Victor Rossi wrote:
> VR:>  >  does our mca agreement does not include windows server editions?
> VR:>  >
> VR:>  >  i want to test altiris for imaging, but apparently it only works on
> VR:>  >  windows server
> VR:>
> VR: