Guest Greg Peterson Posted March 28, 2008 Posted March 28, 2008 Greetings. I will be starting a small (20-30 person) business soon, and will likely be a key decision maker for the IT equipment. In the future company, I am wondering why we need to have a server, when a relatively cheap NAS will likely do the trick for all of our filesharing needs (mostly sharing engineering drawings and other large files). For e-mail, we'll probably go with Gmail and eliminate the need for any mail server (if people want to set up POP3 accounts on their PCs, that's their choice). Our website will receive minimal traffic, so it will be hosted elsewhere. If we use something like Peachtree accounting (which is for 5 or so users), then must an application like that be run on a server? Or could it also run on a NAS? We'd also like to cut the cord to the phone company, and integrate Skype with our PBX system. Would that require a server, or could we get by with a product like this? http://www.zipcom.com.tw/products/Product-SkyPBX-SVR.htm I guess what I'm asking is: Which applications typically used by a small business require a server, and could a NAS suffice? Thanks, Greg
Guest leew [MVP] Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed Greg Peterson wrote: > Greetings. I will be starting a small (20-30 person) business soon, and > will likely be a key decision maker for the IT equipment. > > In the future company, I am wondering why we need to have a server, when a > relatively cheap NAS will likely do the trick for all of our filesharing > needs (mostly sharing engineering drawings and other large files). For > e-mail, we'll probably go with Gmail and eliminate the need for any mail > server (if people want to set up POP3 accounts on their PCs, that's their > choice). Our website will receive minimal traffic, so it will be hosted > elsewhere. > > If we use something like Peachtree accounting (which is for 5 or so users), > then must an application like that be run on a server? Or could it also run > on a NAS? > > We'd also like to cut the cord to the phone company, and integrate Skype > with our PBX system. Would that require a server, or could we get by with a > product like this? > http://www.zipcom.com.tw/products/Product-SkyPBX-SVR.htm > > I guess what I'm asking is: Which applications typically used by a small > business require a server, and could a NAS suffice? > > Thanks, > Greg > > I recommend servers in ALMOST all instances, even for businesses 1/4 your size. In particular, Microsoft has an excellent product available, Microsoft Small Business Server 2003 (SBS 2003). What this offers you that you rarely get with a "cheap" NAS device: 1. Single Logon. In a domain environment, you can setup your computers so that each user has a logon that can be used on ANY computer. When they change their password, the change is effective on ALL computers that are a member of the domain. In a Workgroup, you must setup a user account on EACH computer the user will log on to - or use a common logon which means you have no way of tracking who does what. 2. Centralized Management - you can control system settings on ALL systems from one system. For example, SBS will allow you to redirect everyone's My Documents and Desktop folders to a folder on the server. This is called folder redirection. 3. I've used Gmail for an organization I'm in. I love google... but I HATE gmail. I've gotten so many important messages flagged as SPAM it's not funny. Maybe it was a config error on our administrators part, but I also don't like that I can't create (easily, if at all) sub folders. I would strongly advise against using the gmail facility at this time (I'm sure I'm in the minority). 4. Centralized backup. With Folder redirection, mentioned in #2, you can backup virtually all user data without concern by backing up JUST the server. (Your network, ideally, will be setup so that your users can use ANY workstation (or almost any workstation) and if one fails, it really won't matter; they can sit at another employee's desk and pick up right where they left off). 5. Exchange Server, included with SBS, will provide shared and group calendars, e-mail, tasks, and contacts. 6. One of the best features of SBS (and Windows Server 2003 and later) is Volume Shadow Copy, not typically offered by any CHEAP NAS. This feature takes automatic, periodic backups that users can easily restore themselves by right clicking on a folder and reviewing the history of the backups. EXPENSIVE NAS units typically offer this "snapshot" feature, but they typically cost AT LEAST $5,000 - usually more like $10K plus. 7. Remote access options with SBS include Remote Web Workplace, Sharepoint, and VPN. I have a few pages you might want to review to get a better understanding of the SBS product and backup in general. You should also might want to review the link on Volume Shadow Copy. http://www.visualwin.com/VSS/ http://www.lwcomputing.com/tips/static/sbs.asp http://www.lwcomputing.com/tips/static/backup.asp
Guest Anthony [MVP] Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed What differences are you assuming there are between a cheap server and a cheap NAS? Anthony, http://www.airdesk.co.uk "Greg Peterson" <gper a with a circle excite dot com> wrote in message news:iuGdnaTD_LTc4XDanZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@comcast.com... > Greetings. I will be starting a small (20-30 person) business soon, and > will likely be a key decision maker for the IT equipment. > > In the future company, I am wondering why we need to have a server, when a > relatively cheap NAS will likely do the trick for all of our filesharing > needs (mostly sharing engineering drawings and other large files). For > e-mail, we'll probably go with Gmail and eliminate the need for any mail > server (if people want to set up POP3 accounts on their PCs, that's their > choice). Our website will receive minimal traffic, so it will be hosted > elsewhere. > > If we use something like Peachtree accounting (which is for 5 or so > users), then must an application like that be run on a server? Or could > it also run on a NAS? > > We'd also like to cut the cord to the phone company, and integrate Skype > with our PBX system. Would that require a server, or could we get by with > a product like this? > http://www.zipcom.com.tw/products/Product-SkyPBX-SVR.htm > > I guess what I'm asking is: Which applications typically used by a small > business require a server, and could a NAS suffice? > > Thanks, > Greg >
Guest Synapse Syndrome Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed "Anthony [MVP]" <anthony@no-reply.com> wrote in message news:eXNEPgZkIHA.5396@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > What differences are you assuming there are between a cheap server and a > cheap NAS? Price is the obvious one, and then ease of maintaining it would be another consideration, I would have thought. ss.
Guest Anteaus Posted March 29, 2008 Posted March 29, 2008 RE: why have a server?...advice needed In the main I'm glad to see you've got the right idea, in that data should be stored centrally, and not on disparate hard-disks scattered around the site. A NAS or a server will provide this. Where the NAS is a bit limited is in the area of backup. Servers would normally backup to tape, and would perform this operation out of hours so as not to cause slowdown, and so as to do the backup when most files are closed. Other arrangements are possible, but the main point is that you need a ROTATIONAL backup of your data. A single disk cannot provide this. Possibly a workstation with a tape drive could do so. The idea of using external email accounts is reasonable so long as you won't need to send large attachments between local users. (Which you shouldn't anyway, if users understand how to use the NAS or fileserver) Though in that case an onsite mailserver (Exchange, MDaemon, Exim etc.) is best. Most accounting software requires a simple file-share. This could be a server or a NAS. A few packages require a database-process running on the server, and in this case only the specified type of server will do. These are less common though. A common misconception is that a server must be specialist hardware, and cost several $k. Not so. High-end desktop hardware would be perfectly adequate for a 20-30 user site, using W2003 Server or Linux as the OS. In fact, there is not much price difference between a decent NAS and a decent 'power' PC plus a couple of additional 500GB SATA disks, and the server is of course more versatile. The one case where I would recommend "server-grade" hardware is if you intend to use SBS. This puts so many services onto one computer, that anything less than real-muscle hardware will run like treacle. OS-wise, SBS offers a lot of features for its price. If you don't need all these features, the standard server-product is much leaner and faster though, and allows you much more flexibility in how you set it up. As the lwcomputing page mentions, with SBS it's easy to get yourself into trouble if you indulge in any kind of customisation. Linux is cheapest but probably best set-up by an engineer who understands it, as it's far more complex to config. Security-wise, without a server hosting a Domain, users will have to log-on locally, and this means that security will most likely be poor. There is however a third-party add-on which will allow users to log-on centrally to a NAS or other non-domain server. http://mylogon.net Hope this helps. My preference would be to build a server using the standard W2003 package as OS. -"Greg Peterson" wrote: > Greetings. I will be starting a small (20-30 person) business soon, and > will likely be a key decision maker for the IT equipment. > > In the future company, I am wondering why we need to have a server, when a > relatively cheap NAS will likely do the trick for all of our filesharing > needs
Guest Frankster Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed > Other things typically get backed up to an external hard drive that is > rotated off site once per week to someone's home. Now, this isn't IDEAL > for everyone. It fits my clients. Absolutely! I do exactly the same thing with most of my small business clients. Often the client had read somewhere about off-site backup over the Internet. But they don't realize that sending a backup file over the Internet at DSL upload speeds (reality of 500kbps at best in most cases) is very limiting. Even with a T-1 at 1.5mbps (theoretical) is very slow. Most seem to have at least 2 more more Gigabytes to backup daily. I also agree with the full backup daily for most small businesses so a roll-back to a specific date is possible. I also usually advise two external drives. One to be taken home and rotated weekly. -Frank
Guest JohnB Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed There's already been quite a few very good suggestions made so I won't add much other than to say; keep in mind that being frugal up front, in a case such as this, will most likely cost MORE money in the long term. If you could somehow magically try both solutions; a NAS box and an SBS server, for one year - and then make your decision based on those experiences, I don't think there's any doubt you'd choose the network domain solution over a NAS solution. The administrative, security and backup advantages are quite significant IMO. "Greg Peterson" <gper a with a circle excite dot com> wrote in message news:iuGdnaTD_LTc4XDanZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@comcast.com... > Greetings. I will be starting a small (20-30 person) business soon, and > will likely be a key decision maker for the IT equipment. > > In the future company, I am wondering why we need to have a server, when a > relatively cheap NAS will likely do the trick for all of our filesharing > needs (mostly sharing engineering drawings and other large files). For > e-mail, we'll probably go with Gmail and eliminate the need for any mail > server (if people want to set up POP3 accounts on their PCs, that's their > choice). Our website will receive minimal traffic, so it will be hosted > elsewhere. > > If we use something like Peachtree accounting (which is for 5 or so > users), then must an application like that be run on a server? Or could > it also run on a NAS? > > We'd also like to cut the cord to the phone company, and integrate Skype > with our PBX system. Would that require a server, or could we get by with > a product like this? > http://www.zipcom.com.tw/products/Product-SkyPBX-SVR.htm > > I guess what I'm asking is: Which applications typically used by a small > business require a server, and could a NAS suffice? > > Thanks, > Greg >
Guest Hurricane Andrew Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed Security, here is key. So is user management. So is Active Directory for controlling the environment, users, computers, etc. Centralizing software distribution. Controlling access to data (in today's world with the risk of exposing non-personal private info). Auditing. With the advantages of SBS, there is no reason why any business with 5, let alone 20-30 users, would want to even consider not running a server to manage their network. -- "Hurricane" Andrew Milford, DE "JohnB" <jbrigan@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:%23cWXIYgkIHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > There's already been quite a few very good suggestions made so I won't add > much other than to say; keep in mind that being frugal up front, in a > case such as this, will most likely cost MORE money in the long term. If > you could somehow magically try both solutions; a NAS box and an SBS > server, for one year - and then make your decision based on those > experiences, I don't think there's any doubt you'd choose the network > domain solution over a NAS solution. The administrative, security and > backup advantages are quite significant IMO. > > > > > "Greg Peterson" <gper a with a circle excite dot com> wrote in message > news:iuGdnaTD_LTc4XDanZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@comcast.com... >> Greetings. I will be starting a small (20-30 person) business soon, and >> will likely be a key decision maker for the IT equipment. >> >> In the future company, I am wondering why we need to have a server, when >> a relatively cheap NAS will likely do the trick for all of our >> filesharing needs (mostly sharing engineering drawings and other large >> files). For e-mail, we'll probably go with Gmail and eliminate the need >> for any mail server (if people want to set up POP3 accounts on their PCs, >> that's their choice). Our website will receive minimal traffic, so it >> will be hosted elsewhere. >> >> If we use something like Peachtree accounting (which is for 5 or so >> users), then must an application like that be run on a server? Or could >> it also run on a NAS? >> >> We'd also like to cut the cord to the phone company, and integrate Skype >> with our PBX system. Would that require a server, or could we get by with >> a product like this? >> http://www.zipcom.com.tw/products/Product-SkyPBX-SVR.htm >> >> I guess what I'm asking is: Which applications typically used by a small >> business require a server, and could a NAS suffice? >> >> Thanks, >> Greg >> > >
Guest KiDFoX Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed I have 15 years experience with small business IT needs – company policy forbids me from discussing who I work for right now but it is a firm that deals exclusively with small business owners who typically have less than 100 employees. In general many of the things said here are good reasons to have a sever however I would suggest you find out form other local business owners if they know of a good reputable consultant. What I would look for is someone who will listen to your business needs, your plans, and learn about your business culture before recommending a solution. Microsoft Server 2003 SBS might be the right fit, but it might not. Just because you have a small business does not mean SBS is the right choice. The smallest client I have set up on 2003 Standard is 3 seats. If you only went by the terminology you would think 3 seat client should go with SBS. We implement many small businesses every year on Sever 2003 Standard for example. This is what a consultant can help you determine. Deciding that the advantages of a server suggest it makes sense for you is just the first step. finding the right product largely depends on your needs and cannot be pinned down to marketing terminology. Microsoft thrives on marketing but it is not what dives a good IT plan. Looking at Managed IT Services is another option that might be a good fit. Many can do your backups, maintain your infrastructure and provide you with email services for less than you might think. -- KiDFoX ------------------------------------------------------------------------ KiDFoX's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=18819 View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=940752 http://forums.techarena.in
Guest leew [MVP] Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed KiDFoX wrote: > I have 15 years experience with small business IT needs – company > policy forbids me from discussing who I work for right now but it is a > firm that deals exclusively with small business owners who typically > have less than 100 employees. > > In general many of the things said here are good reasons to have a > sever however I would suggest you find out form other local business > owners if they know of a good reputable consultant. > > What I would look for is someone who will listen to your business > needs, your plans, and learn about your business culture before > recommending a solution. Microsoft Server 2003 SBS might be the right > fit, but it might not. Just because you have a small business does not > mean SBS is the right choice. > > The smallest client I have set up on 2003 Standard is 3 seats. If you > only went by the terminology you would think 3 seat client should go > with SBS. > > We implement many small businesses every year on Sever 2003 Standard > for example. This is what a consultant can help you determine. > Deciding that the advantages of a server suggest it makes sense for you > is just the first step. finding the right product largely depends on > your needs and cannot be pinned down to marketing terminology. > Microsoft thrives on marketing but it is not what dives a good IT plan. > > Looking at Managed IT Services is another option that might be a good > fit. Many can do your backups, maintain your infrastructure and > provide you with email services for less than you might think. > > Generally very good advice. Especially considering there are many IT people who may be excellent in general but WILL screw up SBS installs because they are not familiar with it and instead try to manage it like a standard server. In my experience, there is very little reason NOT to use SBS in a small business. There are a few restrictions to it, but the only one that I can even think of as really having a significant impact on most small businesses is the lack of ability for trusts with other domains. And the vast majority of small businesses don't have this need. Considering the cost of SBS to even use as a plain server is CHEAPER than the cost of a standard server, especially in a 3 user environment, and the wizards make administration possible for everyday tasks by company staff as opposed to consultants only, I would find it unlikely that using Standard server is a good idea for the vast majority of businesses. Most often, those I see not wanting to use SBS are under misconceptions, such as "you can't have any other servers" which is false, or "SBS can be the only DC" which is false. Finally, with the ability to remove the SBS restrictions using the transition pack, if a company does eventually need a feature that is otherwise not available because you are using SBS, you can basically pay the difference between you SBS discounts and what you would have paid for standard versions of the same software and be fine. I'm not saying it can't happen... but - without naming names - can you site some examples of instances that did not involve the need for a trust where you or your employer felt it was better to use standard instead and why? I'm just curious... -Lee
Guest Anthony [MVP] Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed Cheap hardware is really about whether you want things like fast disks, faster processors, RAID, dual power supplies etc or can do without. You can buy a cheap server if that's what you want, with essentially the same hardware as a cheap NAS. They both have to have an operating system. The difference in cost between an OEM Windows Server license and an OEM OS (possibly also Windows) is going to be minimal. Of course you could go with a Linux OS and save a little, but then you either pay for a supported edition or you need to know quite a lot about it yourself. Anthony, http://www.airdesk.co.uk "Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMsyndrome.me.uk> wrote in message news:OYqx8TekIHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > "Anthony [MVP]" <anthony@no-reply.com> wrote in message > news:eXNEPgZkIHA.5396@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> What differences are you assuming there are between a cheap server and a >> cheap NAS? > > > Price is the obvious one, and then ease of maintaining it would be another > consideration, I would have thought. > > ss. >
Guest Kerry Brown Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed "leew [MVP]" <useContactPage@LWComputing.dot.com> wrote in message news:47ef613f$0$25059$607ed4bc@cv.net... > > I'm not saying it can't happen... but - without naming names - can you > site some examples of instances that did not involve the need for a trust > where you or your employer felt it was better to use standard instead and > why? I'm just curious... > Let me preface this by saying that SBS is a very good solution and what I normally recommend for small businesses. That said there some shops where it doesn't fit or isn't needed. I have one customer who runs a call center. They have two locations with around ten seats in total. They actually have six servers, none of which is SBS (3 SQL, 1 Terminal, 2 LOB apps). They don't need or want AD or Exchange. They do need 24/7 up time and no single point of failure. SBS is great but it doesn't fit every need :-) -- Kerry Brown MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/
Guest kj [SBS MVP] Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Re: why have a server?...advice needed Anthony [MVP] wrote: > Cheap hardware is really about whether you want things like fast > disks, faster processors, RAID, dual power supplies etc or can do > without. You can buy a cheap server if that's what you want, with > essentially the same hardware as a cheap NAS. > They both have to have an operating system. The difference in cost > between an OEM Windows Server license and an OEM OS (possibly also > Windows) is going to be minimal. Of course you could go with a Linux > OS and save a little, but then you either pay for a supported edition > or you need to know quite a lot about it yourself. > Anthony, > http://www.airdesk.co.uk Individuals can locate MS partners (Windows Server System, category Windows Small Business Server 2003) with the SBSC certfication in their area for starters. Still need to interview these providers *and* ask for references! https://solutionfinder.microsoft.com/ One note on the cheap hardware and OEM licesensing. OEM licenses can not be moved to more capable hardware later on. If you're going to start out on the cheap, then get retail licesnes or Volume licenses so you can move it to a beefy server later. Or, just start out right and size the server for your expected needs. With SBS, it doesn't pay to skimp on the server that runs all your infrastructure functions. ....and SBS is an ideal solution for 5-50 users with light technical administration abilities but with a business that has enterprise class technology needs. > > > > "Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMsyndrome.me.uk> wrote in message > news:OYqx8TekIHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> "Anthony [MVP]" <anthony@no-reply.com> wrote in message >> news:eXNEPgZkIHA.5396@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>> What differences are you assuming there are between a cheap server >>> and a cheap NAS? >> >> >> Price is the obvious one, and then ease of maintaining it would be >> another consideration, I would have thought. >> >> ss. -- /kj
Recommended Posts