Looking into SBS 2003

[needinfo]

We are a small business with 6 computers networked to a server running NT 4.0. We also have an off-site location with 3-4 computers that are not currently networked at all. We need to access info between the two locations and also need to access e-mail off-site. Is the SBS 2003 the right option for us? We would like to share calendars and files between the 2 locations and I'm thinking that Sharepoint could manage this for us. I know that we need to be running XP Prof to be able to access desktops, but can pc's not running XP Prof still use Sharepoint? Is there anyway to upgrad our existing server or do we have to migrate to a new one? If anyone has some input on this, it would be very helpful.

Thanks!

[SMBNetEng]

You will find it easier to setup a completely new SBS2003 installation than attempting to "Migrate" anything. Your network is small with just a few PC's and users. You will likely have to reinstall any applications that you have previously installed on Server 4.0 anyway, so you might as well start with a clean slate. It would be less work and a cleaner installation in the long run. While you are at it, look at updating your server hardware.

I typically configure all new server systems (HP ML350 Servers) with 2GB of RAM for running the SBS2003 system. Couple that with RAID 5 and Dual Power supplies and you have a great platform to build your network on. You can get SBS2003 Preinstalled and save yourself about 4 hours of prep time.

In terms of the cost, SBS2003 costs less than a new version of Windows 2003 Server. SBS2003 comes with 5 CALS and you would need to add 5 more CALS to take care of your network.

In terms of Share Point, that is one way to do it, but you may find it easier to set up a VPN between the two sites using some routers like the Netgear FVS318 ($125 each) and allowing the remote branch to access all the files and Exchange. Their access is going to be slow when accessing files anyway using sharepoint so why not just give them full access via the network. The will see all the PC's at both locations and can map drives to network resources. It will just be slow for them.

For remote email (not at the main or branch location) you can use the Webmail access in SBS2003 (Exchange 2003), which has been vastly improved over Exchange 2000. I would recommend using Public Folders in Exchange to set up any company wide calendars. Remember that in Outlook 2003 and Exchange you can view other users' calendars if they grant you access to do so if you don't want a company calendar.
The only issue is that Windows 98 clients will not be able to install Outlook 2003 (which comes with SBS2003). They can use the webmail version.

Good luck.
SMB Network Consultant
MCSE

[kevind]

Hi, I have a similar scenario:
...a client who would like to connect branch offices via a direct 64kb link to a head office hosting sbs2003.
I think I already know what the answer is, but the client is adament that he wants this - my concern is the speed in connecting these remote branches to the head office on the same domain - even though the connection is a permanent digital 64kb.
Basically he has 15 users at head office already connected to SBS2003. He also has 2x remote offices each with 5-10 employees and these offices each have a direct diginet 64kb link to the head office. He wants the remote users to be able to login to the same domain (at headoffice) every morning across the 64kb link.
The applications they'll be using across this link are the internet and email only.
Their database is hosted on a terminal server at head office - but the remote users will access this via terminal server sessions.

Does anyone have some feedback on this scenario? or perhaps can give me a bit more ammunition against this idea?

Many thanks
Kevin