I also agree with Trevor. At face value the article (which I enjoyed
by the way) has a point. I run across many Small 5 or 8 person
shops with p2p networks and they are able to work fine. They
only share a Quickbooks file and back it up daily to CD. It works
and they are happy with the system and its limits.

But, the question should not only be 'do they "need" a server'. In
looking at clients we must take into account the expandability
and growth potential of the company and system. While they
may not need it, an argument could be made that almost any
small business could see better office and LAN performance with
a server like SBS than in a p2p. Centralized user and permission
management. Support by contracted companies becomes VPN to
the server and Remote assistance or Remote Desktop the
workstations. Group Policy control comes into play for a better
working experience, control, and data protection with redirected
folders.. Most small companies can benefit from Public folders
such as a company wide contact list or calendar, internal email,
even (I am chocking as I write it but it is true) Sharepoint
Services. Email clients are easier to manage with the POP 3
downloader etc. Yeah, Dual Core Xeon may be over kill but after
talking with a client that says they have a 5 year plane to triple
growth and add 2 remote offices you may need to use a bit of
temporary overkill. ROI comes in many forms, communication
with employees and clients, faster response from data and
workstation hardware, better disaster plan for data. An SBS
server with an internal 40 or 72 DAT drive, maybe like the HP
internal USB DAT 72 can be as simple as the office manager
changing tapes each AM and taking the last one home.

Does every small 5 - 10 user shop need a server...no, and I
recognize that many will be fine that way forever. But should
most of them have one for the added productivity and
management benefits? I thinks yes.

razz