shared folders vs mapped drives

Hi all, what are the pros and cons of simply using shared folders, versus
mapped drives for users in an SBS 2K3 network? TIA!

Paul
Wed Nov 10 14:40:52 CST 2004

Some programs require mapped drives and do not support UNC paths.

Other than that, it is normally more efficient to map common drives, as
opposed to having people fossicking around in the shares.

Paul Mac
"Dodge" <Dodge@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D7C3CD5-0B49-4B39-B013-DEA69ABFC173@microsoft.com...
> Hi all, what are the pros and cons of simply using shared folders, versus
> mapped drives for users in an SBS 2K3 network? TIA!

Javier
Wed Nov 10 14:49:41 CST 2004

Mapped drives are mostly for legacy apps that cannot use UNC paths. In some
cases is nice to have mapped drives for simplicity... I mostly use them for
program-specific data (not for "linking" to a shared folder).

--
Javier [SBS MVP]
www.msmvps.com/javier
<< SBS ROCKS!!! >>

"Dodge" <Dodge@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3D7C3CD5-0B49-4B39-B013-DEA69ABFC173@microsoft.com...
> Hi all, what are the pros and cons of simply using shared folders, versus
> mapped drives for users in an SBS 2K3 network? TIA!

Lanwench
Sat Nov 13 10:47:07 CST 2004

Dodge wrote:
> Hi all, what are the pros and cons of simply using shared folders,
> versus mapped drives for users in an SBS 2K3 network? TIA!

I like mapped drives - it's easy to move data elsewhere on the server (or to
another server) & just change the login script so it's invisible to users.
Also, end users generally find it easier to deal with "the S drive" rather
than \\server\shared.