WAL Win 11 Pro file limits
Why a Supplier Using Windows 11 as a File Server Might Recommend 4 Users Instead of 5
If a supplier is using Windows 11 as a file server and limits usage to 4 users, the reason is likely due to built-in Microsoft limitations and practical experience with performance and licensing. Here’s a breakdown.
Windows 11 File Sharing Limits
Microsoft imposes limits on how many users can access shared files on desktop editions of Windows.
| Windows 11 Home |
1–2 users |
Not designed for sharing |
| Windows 11 Pro |
3–5 users max (often 4 recommended) |
~20 inbound SMB sessions |
| Windows Server |
50+ users |
Scalable via licensing |
Why 4 Might Be the Suggested Limit
- While 5+ users may technically connect, performance degrades.
- Desktop editions are not optimised for concurrent file server operations.
2. File Locking and Conflict Risk
- Shared access to the same files can cause conflicts or corruption.
- Limiting to 4 users reduces concurrent access pressure.
3. Microsoft Licensing
- Windows 11 is licensed for individual use, not heavy multi-user file serving.
- Keeping users below 5 aligns better with Microsoft’s intent for “small workgroup use.”
4. Support Simplicity
- More users = more chances for access errors, lockouts, or system instability.
- 4-user setups are easier to support and more predictable.
If You Need 5+ Users Accessing Shared Files Reliably
To support more users with high availability:
- Use Windows Server (2022/2025)
- Designed for file sharing
- Supports dozens or hundreds of concurrent users
- Includes robust sharing, locking, and access control tools
- Use a NAS (e.g. Synology, QNAP)
- Purpose-built for file sharing
- Affordable and scalable
- Supports Windows/Mac/Linux clients
Summary Table
| Microsoft’s OS Design |
Desktop Windows is not meant for multiple concurrent file users |
| Session Limits |
Windows 11 Pro has a ~20 session cap, but fewer reliable file sessions |
| File Conflict Risk |
More users increase file lock and corruption risk |
| Performance |
Degrades when multiple users access simultaneously |
| Licensing Caution |
Keeping below 5 users aligns with personal/workgroup EULA intent |
Recommendation
If your business requires 5 or more users accessing shared data reliably and simultaneously:
- Do not rely on Windows 11 as a file server
- Instead, use Windows Server or a dedicated NAS appliance for stability, scalability, and compliance
May 25, 2025
WAL Win 11 Seats x 5
Comparison: Windows 11 Per-Seat + File Server vs. Windows Server 2025 with RDS
System Comparison Table
| Licensing |
✅ Simple and legal with per-seat licences |
✅ Legal if RDS CALs are purchased for each user |
| Installation |
Installed locally on each user’s PC |
Installed once on server, accessed by all users |
| User Experience |
Software runs natively, fast |
Users work via RDP — minor lag possible |
| Simultaneous use |
Depends on app’s support for shared data |
Full, concurrent use — each user has isolated session |
| Remote access (e.g. Tailscale) |
Only file server is shared; app must be local |
Entire system accessible remotely with one login |
| IT Complexity |
Lower — simpler setup, less to maintain |
Higher — server must be maintained, secured, backed up |
| Security |
Medium — relies on each PC’s patch level |
Higher — single point to secure and audit |
| Hardware cost |
Multiple powerful PCs needed |
One powerful server can reduce endpoint hardware needs |
| Backup management |
Shared files must be backed up; users responsible for app |
Server backups protect all data and app state together |
| Multi-user file access |
Risk of conflict if app isn’t designed for concurrent access |
No risk — app runs separately per user session |
| Software updates |
Each PC must be updated separately |
Update once, everyone benefits |
| Support burden |
Distributed — users may break things individually |
Centralised — easier to support a single environment |
| Audit trail & access logs |
Hard to track across devices |
Central logging of sessions, activities, login times |
| Scaling |
Easy to add users, but app install needed each time |
Easy to scale if server is powerful enough |
| Single point of failure |
Less risk — failure of one PC affects only one user |
More risk — server failure affects all users |
Risk Assessment Summary
| Licensing risk |
✅ Low |
✅ Low if licensed properly |
| Data loss risk |
⚠️ Medium (local PCs may not be backed up) |
✅ Low (centralised backups possible) |
| User error risk |
⚠️ Higher (5 separate environments to maintain) |
✅ Lower (admin controls full system) |
| Security risk |
⚠️ Medium (5 devices to secure) |
✅ Lower (single hardened environment) |
| Update drift |
⚠️ Likely (PCs updated at different times) |
✅ Consistent |
| Remote access reliability |
⚠️ App must support remote file access |
✅ Full RDP access anywhere |
| Scaling/expansion risk |
✅ Easy (if app supports it) |
⚠️ Depends on server capacity |
Summary Recommendations
| You need 5 independent users, each on their own PC, and the app works well over a file server |
Stick with Windows 11 + per-seat licences |
| You want to centralise control, simplify support, improve audit/security, or support larger teams |
Move to Windows Server 2025 + RDS |
| You want seamless remote access for everyone |
Windows Server 2025 + Tailscale |
| Your app struggles with file conflicts or shared file access |
Windows Server 2025 (single install) |
May 25, 2025
WAL Win 11 v Server
Executive Summary: Remote Access and Multi-User Software Deployment
As our business grows and adopts more remote and collaborative work practices, we are evaluating two options for providing secure, shared access to our business software.
Option 1: Windows 11 + Per-Seat Licences + File Server
- Each user runs the software locally on their own PC
- A shared file server holds the centralised data
- Licensing is per user (“per seat”), simple and cost-effective
- Works well if:
- The application supports multi-user access to shared data
- Each user has their own capable PC
- Low IT overhead, but harder to control updates, security, and data consistency
- Remote access is possible using Tailscale, but the app must run locally
Option 2: Windows Server 2025 + RDS (Remote Desktop Services)
- Software is installed once on the server, and all users access it via remote desktop
- Fully centralised environment: easy to manage, secure, and update
- Requires Windows Server licence + RDS CALs (one per user)
- Designed for true multi-user concurrent access, even from remote locations
- Best choice for:
- Tight version control
- Shared processing power
- Simplified support and backups
Comparison Summary
| Licensing |
Per-user, simple |
Requires server + RDS CALs |
| Simultaneous access |
Limited by app |
Fully supported |
| Security |
Decentralised |
Centralised and strong |
| Remote access |
Tailscale + local app |
Tailscale + full desktop |
| Cost |
Lower upfront |
Higher upfront, better scalability |
| Management |
User PCs must be maintained |
Single point of administration |
Recommendation
If each user has a strong PC and the application supports file-based multi-user access, continue with Windows 11 + file server.
If you need central control, simplified support, secure access from anywhere, or guaranteed multi-user concurrency, invest in Windows Server 2025 with RDS.
May 25, 2025
WAL Win 12 Pro file limits
Why a Supplier Using Windows 11 as a File Server Might Recommend 4 Users Instead of 5
If a supplier is using Windows 11 as a file server and limits usage to 4 users, the reason is likely due to built-in Microsoft limitations and practical experience with performance and licensing. Here’s a breakdown.
Windows 11 File Sharing Limits
Microsoft imposes limits on how many users can access shared files on desktop editions of Windows.
| Windows 11 Home |
1–2 users |
Not designed for sharing |
| Windows 11 Pro |
3–5 users max (often 4 recommended) |
~20 inbound SMB sessions |
| Windows Server |
50+ users |
Scalable via licensing |
Why 4 Might Be the Suggested Limit
- While 5+ users may technically connect, performance degrades.
- Desktop editions are not optimised for concurrent file server operations.
2. File Locking and Conflict Risk
- Shared access to the same files can cause conflicts or corruption.
- Limiting to 4 users reduces concurrent access pressure.
3. Microsoft Licensing
- Windows 11 is licensed for individual use, not heavy multi-user file serving.
- Keeping users below 5 aligns better with Microsoft’s intent for “small workgroup use.”
4. Support Simplicity
- More users = more chances for access errors, lockouts, or system instability.
- 4-user setups are easier to support and more predictable.
If You Need 5+ Users Accessing Shared Files Reliably
To support more users with high availability:
- Use Windows Server (2022/2025)
- Designed for file sharing
- Supports dozens or hundreds of concurrent users
- Includes robust sharing, locking, and access control tools
- Use a NAS (e.g. Synology, QNAP)
- Purpose-built for file sharing
- Affordable and scalable
- Supports Windows/Mac/Linux clients
Summary Table
| Microsoft’s OS Design |
Desktop Windows is not meant for multiple concurrent file users |
| Session Limits |
Windows 11 Pro has a ~20 session cap, but fewer reliable file sessions |
| File Conflict Risk |
More users increase file lock and corruption risk |
| Performance |
Degrades when multiple users access simultaneously |
| Licensing Caution |
Keeping below 5 users aligns with personal/workgroup EULA intent |
Recommendation
If your business requires 5 or more users accessing shared data reliably and simultaneously:
- Do not rely on Windows 11 as a file server
- Instead, use Windows Server or a dedicated NAS appliance for stability, scalability, and compliance
May 25, 2025
WAL U7 v U6
Wi-Fi 7 (U7 series) access points generally have a shorter effective mesh range compared to Wi-Fi 6 (U6 series) devices. This is primarily due to the characteristics of the 6 GHz frequency band utilised by Wi-Fi 7.
📶 U6 vs. U7 Mesh Range Comparison
| Wi-Fi Standard |
Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) |
Wi-Fi 7 (802.11be) |
| Primary Mesh Band |
5 GHz |
6 GHz (with 5 GHz fallback) |
| Max Outdoor Mesh Distance |
~60–120 meters (line-of-sight) |
~30–50 meters (line-of-sight) |
| Wall Penetration |
Moderate (better at 5 GHz) |
Poorer (6 GHz attenuates more through walls) |
| Ideal Use Case |
Long-range outdoor or mixed indoor/outdoor mesh |
High-speed indoor mesh with minimal obstructions |
🧠 Why U7 Mesh Range Is Shorter • Higher Frequency: The 6 GHz band used by Wi-Fi 7 offers higher data rates but has a shorter range and less ability to penetrate obstacles compared to the 5 GHz band. • Attenuation: Signals at 6 GHz are more susceptible to attenuation from walls and other obstructions, leading to reduced coverage in non-line-of-sight scenarios. • Regulatory Constraints: In some regions, the 6 GHz band may have stricter power limits, further impacting range.
✅ Recommendations • For Extended Range: If you require longer mesh links, especially in outdoor or large indoor environments with obstacles, U6 Mesh or U6 Long-Range (U6-LR) access points are more suitable - DOWN THE YARD? • For High-Speed, Short-Range: If your priority is achieving the highest possible speeds over shorter distances with minimal obstructions, U7 Pro or U7 Outdoor access points are ideal. THE HOUSE? THE OFFICE? • Hybrid Approach: Consider using a combination of U6 and U7 devices to balance range and performance, deploying U6 APs for broader coverage and U7 APs in areas where ultra-high-speed connectivity is essential. 
We could try: 1 U7 in the office - wired (as in may as well) 1 U7 in the house - wired (may as well) 1 wired U6 half way up the yard 1 wired U6 up top the yard though I suppose if wired the the yard could have U7s as well. Then it’s a case of how to get the benefits of U7 in all the wireless devices - or simply leave as is and wait for newer devices to catch up. And Avoid 2.4ghz - switch it off unless you find a specific device needs it.
May 25, 2025
WAL System access
New Remote Access System: Secure Connectivity Anywhere
We are introducing a new secure remote access system to reflect the modern, global nature of our operations. This system allows access to our internal server from almost any device, from anywhere in the world, with encryption and advanced security.
To access our systems, please follow these steps:
⸻
Install the Tailscale App • Download it from https://tailscale.com/download or app store: get auth code from us. • It provides secure, encrypted access to our network with no need to open firewall ports.
Install a Remote Desktop (RDP) App • Use the official Microsoft Remote Desktop app (available for Windows, macOS, iOS, Android). Get username and pw from us, and server address.
Connect to the Server • Use the server’s internal IP address (accessible once Tailscale is connected) • Log in using your assigned username and password
Benefits • Access from anywhere • End-to-end encrypted traffic • No need for VPN or firewall changes • Full compatibility with all major devices
For assistance, contact your IT support team i.e us.
You will need from us:
- Tailscale authentication code(one time)
- Server address. (One time)
- Login username. (One time if saved)
- Login password. (One time if saved) After that, connection s/be one click. Connections will timeout, but remain as they were until you next connect, like when you walk away and later return to an always on pc,
May 25, 2025