why have a server?...advice needed

[Guest Greg Peterson]

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]]

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]]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]]

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]]

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]

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]]

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