Question

Locked

Win 2003 server Vs. SBS2003

By acmahajan ·
we have a workforce of 25 users and at no period we are going to cross 50 users and we are planning to get new server ,now I would like to know if i go for SBS 2003 what are the major advantages and disadvantages w.r.t Windows 2003 server...such as features,CAL,Devices,Microsoft Hidden Strategy,
Loss in terms of future additions of clients. Performance between s/w applications in sbs2003 and software?s if we buy separately for Win2003 server.etc
Thanks in advance

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

7 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Collapse -

SBS and Windows 2003

by CG IT In reply to Win 2003 server Vs. SBS20 ...

SBS version's platform is Windows Server 2003.

The thing about SBS is that you get Exchange Server and Sharepoint Services with the standard edition and you get Exchange Server, Sharepoint Services, ISA Server and SQL Server with the premium edition. Note: Sharepoint services is an internal web site with both versions. Last is monitoring and reporting. Unlike Windows Server 2003, SBS has a monitoring and reporting service that provides daily, weekly and monthly status reports on just about anything you want to monitor. Built right in. With plain Windows Server 2003 you don't get this unless you go with 3rd party solutions.

The drawbacks with SBS is that you can not create trusts with other domains. SBS is single forest single domain. So if you have a need for multiple domains either in the contigious DNS namespace or outside of it, you need Windows Server 2003. Note: you can have memeber servers on the SBS network. you can have more than 1 DC on the network. you can even have remote offices with DCs on the network and delegate roles to those DCs, but you can't create trusts with other domains.

Performance is up to hardware you use. you could opt for a high end small business server like the dual processor HP 350 ML with SCSI drives or for terminal services add a terminal server.

SBS 2003 has a limit of 75 users or devices. That is the SBS server will only allow 75 connections of either one. and it's not cumulative meaning you can't have 75 devices AND 75 users. Not matter how you add it up, 75 if the limit.

Collapse -

5CAL

by acmahajan In reply to SBS and Windows 2003

Thanks CG IT,
the server that we are going for is

DELL SC1430 Server TOWER
Dual Core Xeon 3GHz
4MB L2 Cache
667MHz FSB
1 GB @533 MHz DDR-2
160GB 7200 RPM SATA-2
Gigabit Ethernet Card
Would this be a good configuration or would you suggest changes.

2)If I take a 5 CAL with(SBS) and i wish 25 clients to share the Network, share file, share printer, share internet, can i do it.
I know it would be wrong but with limited budget right now we can only buy 5CAL.
Comparing this if we buy Win2003 server, what difference it would make.
Thanks again

Collapse -

5 CALs?

by CG IT In reply to 5CAL

can't recommend on hardware because I don't know what the server will be used for.

I will say is get as much memory as you can afford, when you plan on storage always think it won't be enough, always assume that the server will go down. Think SCSI RAID 5 or think Mirrored SATA for O/S and additional disks for storage.

As far as CALs, again its up to you to decide which would be best based upon your network and user needs.

Device CALs only work with single servers meaning that a workstation connecting to the server uses up a CAL. User CALs work where the user will access multiple servers.

if you have 25 clients, you need at least 20 CALs [5 comes with the server where you choose per seat or per server] or you'll have to leave off 20 workstations or 20 uers.

That's true with Windows 2003 server as well. CALs are CALs regardless if it's SBS or just Windows Server.

Collapse -

5 CALs?

by CG IT In reply to 5CAL

can't recommend on hardware because I don't know what the server will be used for.

I will say is get as much memory as you can afford, when you plan on storage always think it won't be enough, always assume that the server will go down. Think SCSI RAID 5 or think Mirrored SATA for O/S and additional disks for storage.

As far as CALs, again its up to you to decide which would be best based upon your network and user needs.

Device CALs only work with single servers meaning that a workstation connecting to the server uses up a CAL. User CALs work where the user will access multiple servers.

if you have 25 clients, you need at least 20 CALs [5 comes with the server where you choose per seat or per server] or you'll have to leave off 20 workstations or 20 uers.

That's true with Windows 2003 server as well. CALs are CALs regardless if it's SBS or just Windows Server.

Collapse -

SBS 2003

by 3xp3rt In reply to Win 2003 server Vs. SBS20 ...

My advice is SBS 2003. It?s very easy to manage and administer your organization.
I administer SBS 2003 network with 44 workstations. Our server is dual Xeon 2.8 GHz with 2 GB RAM and 4 x 36GB SCSI Hard disks. 2 Hard disks are in Raid1 (mirroring), and have 2 partitions: 1. for system, 2. SQL server, the other two HDD are in raid 5 and have 2 partitions: 1. Exchange sever, 2. Data (users important data, because the entire sever have daily backup, maintaining the last 7 days). That?s mean we have a 5 calc license (the SBS 2003 come with this) and we buy additionally a 15 calc and a 25 calc license.

Collapse -

Are 2003 server CALS good for 2003 SBS

by puterfx In reply to Win 2003 server Vs. SBS20 ...

We have a 2003 server set up for about 50 seats, 60 users. I've ordered a 2nd server and am leaning on 2003 SBS as the o/s. I have 60 CALS total with the 2003 server. Can they be combined with the 2003 SBS? so I have a total of 65 CALS. The 2003 server will be basically just a data server.

Collapse -

Different CAL costs

by cc In reply to Win 2003 server Vs. SBS20 ...

Don't want to forget about the price difference between the 2003 Standard server CAL and the SBS 2003 R2 cal.

Server 2003 CAL for a set of five...
Approx $199.00

SBS 2003 CAL for a set of five...
Approx $500.00

You are going to pay more at the front end for Server 2003 but if you have more than 10-15 users (and are not needing extra features included with SBS) the extra cost on those CALs stacks up fast.

Back to Networks Forum
7 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Discussions

Related Forums