General discussion


Project Server & Small Business Server 2003

By curtis ·
We are looking at upgrading from Microsoft Small Business Server 2000 to MS Small Business Server 2003 and also implimenting MS Project Server,

The problem we have is that for some of the advanced web features of project server seem to require Server 2003: Enterprise Edition,

Small Business Server is built on Windows Server 2003, which edition of Server is it built on? Standard or Enterprise?

Does anybody know a way around this? or will we have to bite the bullet and purchase Server 2003 Enterprise Ed?

Any help would be great...

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

What role under Enterprise

by dafe2 In reply to Project Server & Small Bu ...

Check Project Server docs for the following setups and your feature set: (We've successfully done option 2)

Option 1: Sharepoint Services running under Standard server could enable the advanced services you desire

Option 2: Sharepoint Server running under Standard server

I'm not familiar ennough with SBS server, but I seem to recall reading a whitepaper suggested it was Standard Server with less services & reduced Server Roles (Not sure on that!)

Collapse -

SBS 2003 Enterprise

by BFilmFan In reply to Project Server & Small Bu ...

Check to see if the SBS 2003 Enterprise will support the features you are seeking. You will still be limited to the no more than 75 CAL's, but it may have the features you are seeking.

Collapse -

I want to make the Move to SBS

by Robotech In reply to SBS 2003 Enterprise

Right now we're running Windows 2000 Server (Standard) on an HP 800 Netserver. 800Mhz processor, 768MB RAM and two SCSI 10,000 RPM drives (36GB) running software RAID 1 via Windows 2000 RAID configuration. We also have a DAT 12/24 tape drive.
We have an application software used by 7 people, and we will add an 8th soon. Plus I have folder redirection set up so that if someone's PC dies they can walk over to someone else's PC, login and continue working until their PC is replaced. The system works fine, except for the occasional slow down when several people hit the server at once.
I want to propose to my CFO/VP a change to SBS, which would give us better processing power and the ability to have our own Exchange Server/Email address, rather than relying on our sister company.
I was thinking of the following hardware (and I need you guys' feedback on this.

Dual Pentium or AMD processors running at 3.0 Ghz.
Dual SATA drives at 80GB each (hot swappable).
DLT Tape drive 80/160GB (SCSI)
Hardware RAID 1
Dual Power Supplies (hot swappable).
Floppy and CD-ROM.

Apart from transferring all our current operations to this new server. I would add Exchange to handle our e-mail. I would probably also want to include SPAM blocking software (one that checks if the source address is legit before forwarding to recipient), and also Internet access control, this can be done via ISA right?
Is my hardware sufficient for current and planned roles? We have almost 20 users, with no plans to exceed 25 within the next 5 years.
Would I be better off building this on my own, or should I order from DELL, IBM etc?


Collapse -

There are only three rules:

by dafe2 In reply to I want to make the Move t ...

In Business IT there only three rules:

Rule 1

Neber build a PC or a Server, buy it from a reputable Manufacturer such as HP, IBM or DELL

Rule 2

Same as rule 1

Rule 3

Same as rule 1 Except leave the FRANKENPUTERS at home they have no place whatsoever in business. Allways remember - A server is NOT a PC in a tower case. It's an Engineered Architecture.

In regards to your specs:

Provided your hardware meets Microsoft minimum requirements it's fine...where it gets tricky, in simple terms is at the "forest level" so to speak. But I would offer a couple ideas on the Server:

First, CPU:

You don't need to worry so much about CPU anymore (You'd be hard pressed to buy a slow one!) Buy intel only. AMD is for those gearheads in basements that pronounce MainBoard "MOBO".
Also, based on what you've described I don't see the value in going dual CPU. On a true server the MainBoards are designed and built for maximum IO. 75 users on an HP DL360 XEON server just barely keep it awake. (Busy WEB Server Role)

Second, RAM:

This is where your really going get performance . Throw as much RAM in your Server as you can. The supposed rule of thumb is 100Meg per user. Personally I order 2G,and if budget permits spend the rest of funding on more.

Third, Disk:

The biggest bottle neck: Disk, I'd suggets you go with a Raid5 Array, populated it with 5 20G disks.

My best advice:

Allways buy a "real" "server" and allways buy it from someone like IBM, DELL or HP. If your boss doesn't agree with you, and you feel your good at what you do, update your CV & start shopping for a new job. I can guarantee you when not if the boss looses accounting data on a RANKENPUTER he'll fire you anyway. This is one reason to go brand name and REAL SERVER not PC IN A BIG CASE, there are a thousand others.

Collapse -


by Robotech In reply to There are only three rule ...

So what you're saying is that my SBS running as an:
1. Exchange Server.
2. File Server (AD with My Documents etc. redirected to a share on the server).
3. Application Server.
4. ISA server.
5. Backup Exec for SBS.
6. Symantec Antivirus for SBS (Do they actually make this?).
7. SPAM filter software.

All of this will work fine on a single processor server (3.0Ghz Intel with 2GB RAM)?

Also, can an Exchange or SBS server host two seperate domain names?
For example, can half of my staff have an e-mail address of: <user> and the other half <user>, all running on the same mail server?

What do you think of servers made by Tigerdirect?
INTEL makes server boards, plus the relevant hardware (M$ approved hardware etc). What if I can save $2,000.00 on the price, wouldn't it make sense to build it myself? I'm playing Devil's advocate here, I already had my eyes on a DELL from day one.

Collapse -

hehehe.... here I thought I was "subtle"

by dafe2 In reply to Okaaay.

The answer to your 1st question:

Without breaking a sweat.........unless you'll be running SQL or some other "intense application".....also, any of the servers (Brand)I mention can be take from two to eight CPU's.
Upgrades are not an issue. CPU & Power modules are sold together. (It's common today to consolidate server roles....many companies today are finding under-utilized servers comming out of the woodwork!) Not so long ago, your requirement could have "demanded" at "least" three servers.

Given your serving about 75 nodes it's more than adequate even configured with the server roles you mention. (Try to see it as a "whole" unit)Properly configured and managed you'll do more with less (and) use the server effectively.

Your Business is (or should be)interested in the following in order of importance:

(Server) Performance

"Brand Name" offers


Consistant manufacturing techniques and quality control ensure against premature component failures. All major components are redundant and/or hot swappable...including PCI bus.
Mean Time Between Faillure on most (Major Brands)
is usually 30000 power on hours greater than comparable "Tier 3" servers ie. Tiger Direct


These servers have tools & WEB based interfaces
for management or Admin functions. Alerts, such as impending faillures of any sort can be routed to pagers, e-mail and blackberry etc...This advantage alone makes an Admins life easier.


When a component does fail, most vendors like DELL, HP or IBM will overnight anything......give them the serial number and it's there. No cost, no grief.


Tool free entry and hot swappable PCI buses. MTTR (Mean time to repair) is usually minutes, not hours. Redundant Power supplies & Disks of course are hot swappable as well.

I can't answer your Exch question.....there are a lot of clever admins out there that can probably answer that. "Symantec Corporate Edition" will run fine on SBS Server. See my note (Above) on my thoughts of "Tiger" Servers.

Of course, having said all this, it really comes down to "You know your network best". I'm just offering a different view on very little info here..

Is peace of mind & doing the right thing for your business worth 2K.. You bet.

Thanks for pursuing this.........& good to know there are others that care ennough about the IT assets placed in their care to bounce ideas arround and do "peer checks". Whoever you work for is fortunate to have you.

Hope these thoughts give you some ideas & good luck, actually, lemme know how you make out. DAFE2

Collapse -


by Robotech In reply to hehehe.... here I thought ...

I was actually in the middle of doing an evaluation on running the same application over a T1, so that we can accomodate a user at a remote office (who would also need it for Exchange and a Telnet based application). Today I connected two Cisco 2600 routers back to back (using T1 service modules) to simulate the T1 connection, and the application functioned at an acceptable level. The only problem is cost. I was thinking of a sort of 'connect on demand' service that would bring the link up only when there was traffic coming from the remote office, but I'm not sure if that's available for frame T1. I only know of it being available for DDR service in ISDN BRI.

Finding an answer to this question, as well as the question about hosting two seperate domain names, will determine when I actually present my 'server proposal' to the CFO and WHAT I actually propose.

The HP Netserver e800 has served us well, but it's been 5 years. I don't want my migration to a new server to be forced upon me (do I hear hardware failure?) It would also mean serious loss of productivity, given that the company relies heavily on this ONE SERVER for EVERYTHING.

By the way, I'm a consultant here in Palm Beach County South Florida, not a full time employee of this client. Nevertheless, I realize that if my client suffers, I suffer. So I always watch their backs, always looking for ways to save them money and help them avoid a headache.

Collapse -

No problem...

by dafe2 In reply to Thanks...

Looks like a (prime) oportunity to reinforce some of the advantages of reliable hardware & redundance built into their new DELL or HP server to me?

Redundant hardware will probably make this oportunity work, considering the one server environment. Do you see yourself re-deploying the HP as a Print Server or even install the DLT & Veritas on it......

I hope you can do something with ISDN.....T1 sounds like your putting out a match with a fire hose?

Florida huh?'s 70 or 80 degrees? Don't answer that.

I'm in East Coast Canada and I'm freezing my *** off today. It's -5c brrr.

Collapse -

T1 is just right...

by Robotech In reply to Thanks...

ISDN would not work. I had tried it over a 256k frame relay before and it ran miserably. With a full T1 we're just about getting acceptable performance.
Plus the T1 would allow the Telent based program, and also allow users to connect to the Exchange Server.

I'm happy with the test.

Collapse -

I have an answer for you.

by jevans In reply to Thanks...

Exchange will allow you to setup as many email domains as you want. I personally have about 20 email domains on just our SBS server. With SBS you aslo get licenses for Outlook 2003. When you couple Outlook 2003 with Windows XP you get quite a bit of flexibility, such as running Exchange over RPC Proxy. This allows your remote users to use full blown Outlook with Exchange over the plain old Internet.

This works over just a dial-up due to the enhancements to the caching architecture of Outlook.

We currently have 10 users on an HPLH6000 wich sports two 700Mhz PIII Xeons and only experience slow down during backups. We are hosting web forums and other taxing database apps with no problem. The big consideration is the amount of RAM. At any given time, we have beween 1GB and 1.5 GB RAM utilized.

Related Discussions

Related Forums