Re: So why SBS?
- From: "Jonathan Davey" <me@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 14:36:55 -0000
Theres some interesting point being raised, even though I know so little!
Clearly its big old topic, but if I try to keep within the points made:
Mailenable is an example of a freeware or pay for extra's, mail server. It
is infinitly simpler to configure than Exchange once installed. The snap in
is intuative and logical. Exchange seems to mix its words and titles, the
global/generic use of POP and SMTP for just about every Exchange function is
dumb, MailEnable understands post office protocol and simple mail transfer
protocol (i didnt look it up) in a "meaningfull" way. Exchange just creates
a jumble of folders all sounding and looking the same.
Agreed, Exchange does provide remote-web-mail and public folders, the latter
of which I hear is to be retired in leu of SP; So that just leaves remote
webmail!? Which I WANT!
I also want Catchall, I asked in another thead about this and was told: a)
People who dont know your address, its their stupid fault. b) Recieve lots
of spam c) NDR is generated in any event.
A true story this week in fact, a UK construction company has just lost $10m
court case by default, because they failed to serve an "acknowledgment of
service" on the court. Why? Because the other firms solicetors sent their
grounds by email to the email address on the companys website. The court
held that it was reasonable for an email address displayed by a company to
be a valid means of comunication.
SPAM?? Exchange does a good job on spam, so does MailEnable and so does
WindowsXP. There might be less spam about if Win2k did not have open relay
by default, but thats another story ;)
NDRs well I am led to believe that most companies now block NDRs.
So for the risk of litigation or loosing a contract, the occasional spam
that gets through, I have to wonder whether theres an argument here at all.
Again in another thread the first thing I wanted to do with SBS was link
public folders to SP. Alas it cant be done. As was intimated earlier,
Outlook and SP integration is not comparible with Public Folders (view only
seems to be the order of the day).
Ive posted another thread about the SBS shares appearing on a rogue PC as
its a rather serious matter and I have no idea how or why its happening, ive
kept nearly all the install setting default.
Users.... AD, yes I agree enterprise wize theres a real advantage, but I
cant see it below 50 users. The standard profiles in Server are quite
effective assuming you add new users to the correct account in the first
place and your note running more than 1 file server.
The KILLER is backup and restore issues. Ive come to believe that to judge
an MS product, visit the sales webpage and simply invert everything it sais!
Honestly just read about SBS "security, ease of migration" profound
statements that are in a word LIES.
No Im not using Tape drives, why would I. My company is in construction,
that means vast amounts of drawings and photo's (I reach my 2gb Exch. limit
in 3 months!!) Simply a hard drive with a routine backup to another PC in
another building. All I have to do is rename the backup PC and wham
everyones got the files again. In fact best way is to add the file location
as a "homepage" to a folder in Outlook!! No Exchange Required. Makes you
wonder who's fooling who........
I think Leythos unwittingly sums it up for me in his last paragraph :)
"Leythos" <void@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4rdQf.11321$g91.1930@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <e79jOaCRGHA.2536@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, me@xxxxxxxxxxx
says...
Now that Ive implemented SBS, I cant actually see what benefits it brings
over and above SharePoint for SMB
1) Exchange is weird and unfamilar, theres plenty of significantly better
freeware options available!
I've been in the Linux world for a while, never found a "Free" product
with all the functions/features of Exchange or that provides as much as
exchange. I've seen many claim they replace exchange, but nothing has
the same level of features.
1b) Sharepoint provides "public" folders in much the same way as
Exchange,
but significantly simpler and usable.
Sharepoint is nice, and it has it's place, you need to learn the
difference between sp folders and exchange folders.
2) Domain, err still dont see the point. For example as a test Ive added
a
dummy PC to the network, it does not have any user/device authentication
within SBS but its network places are populated with server/shares!! AND
I
can add and delete any files from UserFolders. Get real!!
This is what makes a Admin's or Managers life simple. If you don't have
a group of users, or if you're not testing as a domain_user, then you
won't see the difference and why it's so dang nice to have a domain.
3) Backup, migrate, swing, nightmare with blob files. NO NO NO!
Simple file share, simple backup, 5mins fallover recovery.
I like simple, and moving a SBS2003 server to another box while
preserving all can be a problem, I've seen the same thing when moving a
Linux server to new hardware, it's not as simple as you might like. Oh,
and if it only takes you 5 minutes to restore from tape, then you're not
really doing anything with your server.
4) RAS, VPN.... Why bother?? Sharepoint provides depositry of files,
security job done!
Wrong, you don't understand VPN's if you think this to be true.
5) Sharepoint doesnt require you to employ a person simply to administer
CALs, (yes theres actually a user profile for CAL management!)
If you don't want security or central control, just get a cheap NAS unit
and share it with workstations across the network - even easier than
your solution.
I like SBS but have difficulty with the correlation between ease/cost of
deployment and benefits.
The thing I don't like about SBS2003 is that they went away from the
normal server management methods - when I first got a SBS box I didn't
use the wizards, never liked them, still don't like them, but I quickly
learned it was a mistake to use all those skills MS wanted
administrators to have. In my opinion they broke SBS by not making it
populate the wizards from the actual configuration for people that
didn't use the wizards.
The nice thing about SBS is that it's cheap initially, can get a shop up
and running in about 4 hours, has a lot of nice features, and even SQL
is cheap to add to it. Wizards make it easy for me to train the office
manager to check backup status, event logs, when to call me....
I actually moved from my Windows 2003 Standard server in my home to a
SBS2003 Premium server for my family, and I'm teaching my kids to manage
it.
--
spam999free@xxxxxxxxxx
remove 999 in order to email me
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: So why SBS?
- From: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
- Re: So why SBS?
- From: David Parkes
- Re: So why SBS?
- References:
- So why SBS?
- From: Jonathan Davey
- So why SBS?
- Prev by Date: After new install, what updates
- Next by Date: Any monitoring software will alert based on System Event errors?
- Previous by thread: Re: So why SBS?
- Next by thread: Re: So why SBS?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
