Windows Forum

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Windows 2000 versus SBS2000

0 helpful
5 replies

by adam a.

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Yep, I know that SBS2000 is actually Windows 2000 with BackOffice mates.

What I need is confirmation that I'm not going crazy... that there is NO difference between the Windows 2000 you purchase by itself and the Windows 2000 that comes with SBS2000.

When you install Win2k from the SBS2000 cdrom does it do ANYthing differently to when you set up Win2k by itself?

Personally, I don't think it does. I've set up both and cannot see anything really different... yet I work very closely withsome people who say they are different (without giving me reasons why).

Hey, it may sound like a silly question... but everywhere I look confirms my own view... that there is nothing different. But if there is I NEED to know so I don't shoot my foot off in a meeting somewhere.

5 replies

by jlanum

I'm relatively new with SBS and W2K Server. With that said, the most obvious difference are the limitations that are added once the remainder of the SBS install takes place.

SBS doesn't trust anyone. Therefore, you must pre-design the network, especially if you are planning to add SBS to an existing domain or create multiple domains within and organization and utilize the Active Directory, etc.

Comparision of features, etc. Someone else will have to speak to that issue. We have a NT Server shop bringing in an SBS server to the existing domain.

by rightondudenospam!

I've have noticed the same thing. First you install 2000 then throw on the SBS cd's.

Well to make sure you could try accessing the internet through a proxy server on another box, or try to install it as a member server and then try to install Exchange standalone version on it.

We know for sure the SBS server must be a PDC and only one for the domain right?

Try installing it as a member...it shouldn't be possible...

This discussion is closed to new replies.