An SMB share in Windows works best for me, because it uses NTFS permissions and is cross platform. The server is going to be Windows (non-Server) and the clients will be Linux. The Windows Network Share option works perfectly for me, but is limited to 20 users.
All in all, is there any way to use SMB shares on a Windows desktop, without hitting the arbitary, 20 user limit?
Posted Sep 7, 2018, 3:23 AM UTC
Samba.
I use SMB in an all linux environment.
Okay, do people not read?
I'm asking for an SMB server that doesn't have user limit, on WINDOWS.
Neat, either go with windows server or get a linux vm and run samba.
Also get fucked for your tone, I'm suggesting something to help you out.
Fuck you too. Just read the few lines, FFS.
Also, thanks for the suggestion (not /s). Linux with Windows VM seems to be the way to go (or Windows with Hyper-V).
A Linux
Go on my son, get a linux.
It'd be rather bending the license, but if you're not afraid of command line, you can install Hyper-V Server (which is free) on the physical machine and your licensed client Windows OS as a Virtual Machine, but use the underlying host to serve the files. Quick googling revealed somebody else already thought of this: https://www.starwindsoftware.com/blog/free-smb3-file-server-on-hyper-v-2016
Might have to do that, however, would a Windows VM in Linux work - the VM will have the user access setup via NTFS permissions, and the host will just share on the network?
Hmm not sure why this is down voted. Seems a valid question.
You could do this but seems like a bunch of effort for little gain
People are suggesting what usually works (Samba on Linux), without reading my requirements.
I'm telling them to go fuck themselves.
It is what it is.
Well that's one plan
You mean running that Hyper-V Server I mention above under e.g. VMWare? I'd say it will work just as well as any Windows Server, and you can even uninstall the Hyper-V role, despite the name.
No, I mean run desktop Windows in a VM with the NTFS permissions, then share the folders with host OS (Linux) l, then share on network?
Am I making sense?
Well, I think I understand what you are asking ...but I don't it works that way. For NTFS permissions to be enforced the folder has to be shared by Windows ...or perhaps some newer version of Samba can do that too, but I don't have any experience with that, and you wouldn't actually need Windows if it could do that.
I wasn't aware of the 20 user limit, where is that coming from?
Microsoft being a dick. Windows 7 to 10 have a hard limit of 20 simultaneous connections (both, in software and in the EULA).
I see. Time to switch to server OS or Linux.
Yup. I think the problem has been identified, but the OP doesn't like the obvious solution.
I'm just asking about alternative solutions.
How is this Microsoft being a dick? An end user desktop operating system has no reason to have more than 20 simultaneous connections, if you need that use a server operating system.
Okay, that's your position.
I think there's no good reason for arbitrary limits on my paid OS.
I'm trying to understand the need for NTFS permissions.
Granular permissions are available easily.
What specifically?
Hello, definitely what you want is samba on Linux 🤣
I'd say first and foremost you need to sort your attitude out, before you sort this issue out..
All I want is people to read the few lines of text.
But I am not the only one not following Reddiquite (people have been downvoting my comments in other subreddits since the last hour).