Networks

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Time to Replace Hardware Windows 2003

0 helpful
7 replies

by tbirdright

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

I have four servers that are running windows 2003 server, in various roles. The servers are HP proliant DL360G3 AND DL380G4 servers that were good quality when purchased (dual/quad core Xeon 3.06Ghz, 533 bus, 3G RAM, RAID), but there is not currently enough disk storage.
My outside IT tech is recommending new hardware because of age, although there are no serious events that have occurred, except one hard drive failure.
What's the problem with keeping "old" hardware that is not experiencing problems?

7 replies

by av .

If those servers are running your critical applications and they're five years old, its time to retire them to running less critical applications.

Sure, if they're in good shape you could always just add disk space, but thats a short-term fix. The best thing would be to redeploy those servers to less critical applications.

The problem with old hardware is that its hard to find parts. If the hardware manufacturer no longer offers replacement parts, you're left with third-party parts and they don't always work. I might do it with a workstation, but never with a server.

AV

by charliespencer

And if you can find parts, they're going to be expensive.

It's also expensive to find service. You can't get an affordable third-party service contract.

You may not need to replace these servers on a one-for-one basis. Depending on what they do, you may be able to consolidate some of them to a single, more powerful, new box, or convert some of them to virtual servers.

by hal 9000

Basic Business Practices I suppose. Ideally you should be replacing things before they fail as Down Time costs you lots of money.

Also at the 5 year period in deployment you are at the end of the Tax Cycle where that hardware starts to cost you more money that you can depreciate on your Tax's so it's a Double Whammy where if it breaks you are in for a lot of Down Time and there is no Tax Benefit in continuing to use these devices that will have been replaced with new faster equipment that will allow your users to do more in less time.

So while they may be working perfectly now newer equipment is faster allowing more to be achieved in the same time allowing the company to potentially make more money or keep existing customers happier. And the Tax Breaks will be expiring very soon so the costs of using this equipment is about to go through the roof.

From a Purely Economic Side it's cheaper to replace every 4 to 5 years and retain stable platforms than to have things break which prevent work being carried out and require Overtime to be worked to catch up once the broken bit has been fixed/Replaced.

Just remember that if one of those Xeon CPU's was to fail now you would have to hunt around the Second Hand Places to find a replacement. Is up to 2 weeks downtime worth this?

The above is just a generalization as I don't know your company but they are very pertinent to every business no matter what it is that they do.

Col

by tbirdright

The tax remark is a good point as accelerated depreciation methods and even sec. 179 can ease the pain at tax time.

I'm really trying to get to the end of the year when (hopefully) this economy turns around and funds are available for something besides essentials like ...payroll.

HP support is available for these servers with next day parts.

by hal 9000

That shouldn't be an Issue but it may come back to haunt you latter when the Accountants start to ask Difficult Questions like [b]Why do you want a New one Now?[/b] I've seen examples where Hardware has been stretched out where they use it for so long that they no longer have any money available to replace it when it becomes necessary and even worse they waste so much money keeping the old stuff going. ;)

Col

This discussion is closed to new replies.