RE: Re: [OT] - Office IT support

["Paul Gordon" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'd have to say a jolly big "here here" to everything that
Ian just said. I=
am also, and have long been a big fan of SBS. The new version should be du=
e out "real soon now" - traditionally the SBS release has
followed around a=
bout 6 months following the main new server version release... Windows
Serv=
er 2008 was released in February....

It's fantastic value for money, it ticks every single one of your boxes,
it=
's easy to install, well supported by both Microsoft and the various
hardwa=
re vendors who supply off-the-shelf complete pre-built solutions including
=
a server, SBS preinstalled, configuration services, Network setup etc. etc.

I'd also suggest sacking your current solution provider, as they clearly
ar=
en't putting your requirements above their own... - anyone who wants to
cha=
rge a small business =A314K for a 1TB store plus a GB switch are a bunch
of=
shysters in my opinion.. Tell you what; I'll sell you one for =A31K...

Paul G.



-----Original Message-----
From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of I=
an Lowe
Sent: 09 August 2008 09:46
To: UKHA Group
Subject: [ukha_d] Re: [OT] - Office IT support

I don't work in support any more, but I did run a support company for
a few years. Your mileage my vary, but here are my suggestions.

>My office is expanding, currently at around 30 and need to be around
45 by the end of the year.

You are prime candidates for Windows Small Business Server. It
supports up to 75 users, at which point you can 'scale out' onto full
blown server, exchange etc.=20

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/essential/sbs/editions.mspx

>Currently we run a linux system with outlook (but no exchange) with a
1TB NAS server with 12 x 300GB SAS drives which we are now at 94%
capacity.

That's completely `fur coat no knickers' to be honest. Outlook without
exchange is pointless, and SAS storage when you are at the 30 user
level smacks of `shiny toy syndrome' from the supplier. And who lets a
company they are supporting reach 1Tb of space and still be on 100Mb?


>We need a stop gap solution for the next 3 months, but then when we
move I want to reuse the new stuff, but put it into a new more
efficient system.

Tbh, that's probably a false economy. Wait three months and do it
right, or take the hit now. If you are out of contract now, I'd wing
it - it's not long.

Both HP and Dell sell SBS at OEM pricing with new servers - it's a
*very* cheap way to get it.

> In addition we have a problem with software and licensing. Not
everyone has the same version of software and this is causing problems
as people without adobe CS3 cannot open the files.

SBS has software distribution by group policy built in. it is
*seriously* good.

> We have a tape backup system, but it takes so long to back up we
effectively could lose 2 days worth of information should there be a
fire.

Given your data volume, I would advise you to look at D2D2T (disk to
disk to tape) - basically a lot of cheap space in your backup server
will get you past the backup speed issue and allow fast recovery, with
slower tape streaming from the backup server's own disks. Who cares if
the backup runs for 14 hours if it doesn't affect anyone, right?

> The IT solution company at the moment proposing we get another 1TB NAS
with a gigabit switch (though we are currently on 100mbit) - which
will cost us another =A314k roughly.

Are you *sure* that's not a SAN node? 14K for a NAS seems awfully
expensive...

> I don't understand the real advantage of the SAS drives.

Because there aren't any at your level. SAS allows dual connections so
they can be multi-homed on two controllers at once (a fault tolerance
feature on higher end kit) it's also blisteringly fast.

Even Storage Area Network kit supports SAS for high speed and SATA
shelves for less critical (in performance terms) data. SATA is plenty
quick enough for normal office use.


> 3. I will want to upgrade to Exchange server, and run windows server
(which would also allow for immediate file recovery). At the moment we
have no shared calendars due to linux - we must have this. I would
prefer to run a separate email server and storage server.

SBS has *very* good licence terms and gets you Sharepoint and Exchange
- the best combination you can get at the moment.

6. I will want full access to the network - email and files remotely.
At the moment we only have access to webmail

Small Business Server gives you this. Full Remote Desktop to all
workstations, remote email etc.=20

7. Everytime a computer is attached to our network it needs to be
automatically distributed with the relevant templates and settings
from the server.

That's what Group Policies are for - Small Business Server has a
`network wizard' that sets up the machine, adds it to the domain,
installs the required software (automatically) and what's more - your
settings roam from machine to machine with you.

I am a fan of Linux, but this is where Microsoft earns it's bread and
butter. Small Business Server will eat any alternative platform for
breakfast - SBS 2003 was damn near unbeatable, SBS 2008 is going to be
simply the best software for any business in the `up to 75 staff'
category to have.

if you are buyng before November, make sure you get SA (sofwtare
assurance) with SBS 2003 R2 - it will give you upgrade rights to SBS
2008 when it ships.

Hope that Helps.

Ian.



------------------------------------