Windows Server 2008 needed or not?

[CougTek]

For a small office with only 3 computers, but plans to add a few others, would you setup a central server with Server 2008 or just keep separated Win 7 Pro installations on each computers and not bother with running a server? The users are standard office workers without technical knowledge. They need a simple backup solution.

The simple way, for them, would be, in my opinion, to run remote profiles from the server and do regular backups of the server where the profiles would be stored. But that's an expensive solution. Other than that, I could simply put a standard computer and do nightly backup from the other computers on it and then backup its hard drive on an external drive daily. Sounds simpler, but its probably harder to maintain if the number of computers increases too much.

One last thing, the data needs to be accessible from a remote connection (a laptop from a team leader on the field). What's your sharing application of choice?

 

[Handruin]

Would Windows Home Server be beneficial to you for the tasks and requirements you have? That would be a less expensive way to have a central file and backup location than paying for Server 2008. I believe it supports up to ten clients. There are more details in the FAQ here.

 

[Mercutio]

I'd consider Windows Server in that scenario. I'd also consider WHS (which does offer RDP and RDP Gateway stuff), something like a Synology NAS. I could probably roll my own setup using FreeNAS or something, were I so inclined.

But I'd probably start by quoting those three things and explaining that over time the NAS and the full blown server are probably the best things to consider. Server 2008 will add a bunch of expenses but obviously is the right choice for flexibility.

 

[CougTek]

Since I use Western Digital and Seagate hardrives in my computers, I thought I could use Acronis for backing up stuff to a non-Server 2008, plain Win 7 Pro box with shared folders. Then backing the shared folders to an external drive. Once the tasks would be configured, it would be very simple for the office users. But I'm still without a solution for the remote access to some folders needed by the laptop guy. I haven't done that very often and I'm struggling a bit.

FreeNAS or OpenFiller instead of Windows 7 and Acronis would be a better solution for the back-up box? Or should I just stop cracking my skull and go for Win Server 2008? Are there NAS with sharing option for remote connections? Might be less expensive than a dedicated computer.

I thought MS license for WHS forbids commercial use?

 

[CougTek]

I've used this once or twice some five years ago : http://www.no-ip.com/services/managed_dns/free_dynamic_dns.html

Could it be a good solution for the laptop outside of the office?

 

[BingBangBop]

Get a router with VPN capability for remote access.

 

[CougTek]

I think he only needs to access files and he'll use a wideband wireless connection (typically low bandwidth). VPN will be heavy and slow. An FTP server should be enough (and faster).

 

[ddrueding]

When I have a remote user who needs access to stuff, I keep the data and programs on a local machine and give him an RDP connection. Some programs (QuickBooks comes to mind) are too sloppy at handling their own data files. Sometimes this is a tower in a corner with no monitor on it, but it is usually a VM.

 

[BingBangBop]

Get a VPN router for external access.

 

[CougTek]

With a Server 2008 system, a CAD-oriented workstation, two standard office computers, all with monitors and input devices, a laptop capable of doing basic CAD, the UPS, MS Office licenses, backup external hard drive and surge protectors, I'm about to ask them ~7130$. That's without my time. Microsoft takes 1735$ of that amount, excluding the laptop Win7 Pro license. That's over 24% of the price and more than I'll make myself, my time included. Something's not right in this world.

And it seems expensive for just a five-computers-setup.

 

[ddrueding]

It is steep because of the growth potential. If it wasn't for their anticipated expansion, I would stick a pair of 3TB drives in the CAD workstation in RAID-1 and call it the server. That would save them considerable money.

It also doesn't seem like a whole lot for an office start up cost. I doubt they'll flinch too much.

 

[CougTek]

If it wasn't for their anticipated expansion, I would stick a pair of 3TB drives in the CAD workstation in RAID-1 and call it the server. That would save them considerable money.

And what would you use to share the folders by FTP? Filezilla Server?

It also doesn't seem like a whole lot for an office start up cost. I doubt they'll flinch too much.

I hope so, because I need this badly.

 

[Chewy509]

Doesn't seem that expensive at all.

When I was working, we setup a 5 PC + 1 Server setup for a small retail shop. Price - AU$35,000. About $15K in hardware, and $20K in software (and most of that went to MS - especially since we needed Win2K3, SQL Server, MS Dynamics Store Operations, backup software, etc).

How much was the CAD software they are using? (Do you know what software it is)?

 

[Chewy509]

And what would you use to share the folders by FTP? Filezilla Server?

Could always use IIS that comes with Win7? (AFAIK Win7 IIS still has FTP server functionality available).

 

[ddrueding]

Keep it simple if possible. If FTP is enough, then use that.

 

[Santilli]

Is there something that 2003 won't do that 2008 does? When I was using 2008 I couldn't help but think that it was 2003 with a face lift...

 

[Chewy509]

Is there something that 2003 won't do that 2008 does? When I was using 2008 I couldn't help but think that it was 2003 with a face lift...

For SMB, about the only feaure would be "Direct Access".

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/R2-better-together.aspx#simplif

 

[Chewy509]

Keep it simple if possible. If FTP is enough, then use that.

I would use SFTP instead of plain FTP, just for the secure transmission aspects. A bit harder to setup, but once its working, it works the same as FTP.

 

[Handruin]

And what would you use to share the folders by FTP? Filezilla Server?


I hope so, because I need this badly.

Why complicate it with FTP? If you're running Win7 as the workstation and you decide to make one of them the backup location, just put everyone into a single homegroup and share that way using the built-in network file share.

 

[Mercutio]

The dead simple setup I'd use would be LogMeIn Hamachi for VPN access to the server and all the clients. That way the end user could easily and securely have both RDP and SMB access to whatever he needed.

I would probably try to avoid messing with a VPN router for the very simple reason that cheap routers are cheap. I've had issues with Netgear and Linksys and 3Com cheapies that need to be rebooted too often. dd-WRT seems to be more stable but still isn't perfect. Sonicwall has some nice options but those things are expensive.

Now, you CAN also configure the server itself to be a VPN end point if you'd like. It's perfectly possible. I've done it in the past, and it makes the most sense when you're going to use the server as a NAT box or something, but that's kind of a silly configuration since you're then making all internet access in the office contingent on that server running. I prefer to have my VPN access external to that. So I'd rather do the VPN router thing than rely on Microsoft's software.

File access: SMB over some kind of VPN is probably just fine. You can configure FTP or WebDAV using IIS if you're so inclined. I wouldn't bother unless they articulated a need.

Windows Server Backup is not completely horrible. I'd prefer to have Acronis Server, but for $800, that might be a little steep. I would suggest two or three external drives, preferably drive that can be accessed via USB3 or eSATA.

When you're selling this system, remember that you're selling a server. Business owners know that server = expensive. They also know that software licenses = expensive. They might not know anything else, but they do know that. $7000 is not horrible for what they'd be getting.

 

[blakerwry]

Is there something that 2003 won't do that 2008 does? When I was using 2008 I couldn't help but think that it was 2003 with a face lift...

One major difference that bit us a while back is that we bought a server with 24GB of memory. Turns out the software that was supposed to work with MS server2008 really wasn't tested with it and didn't actually work. Which meant we had to go back to server2003.

Server2003R2 Standard only supports 4Gb of RAM; 2008R2 Standard supports 32GB out of the box. The cost to upgrade to 2k3 Enterprise was an extra $1k or so over an equivalently featured w2k8 Standard license. Dunno if this makes much of a difference for you or not, given that in your setup 4GB of RAM sounds like plenty.

win2k8R2 is also 64bit only, which comes with all the nicety of requiring proper 64bit drivers, not running really old 16bit DOS apps, etc.

There are some AD updates as well, mainly for printer pushing and win7 preferences.