Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- From: "Cliff Galiher" <cgaliher@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:56:51 -0600
Well, this is getting dangerously close to fracturing into a conversation about ethics in our industry, and that is a subject I could go on about for a great deal of time. But suffice it to say, I don't agree with doing the task "the long way" just so I can charge more. I've also found that consultants that do so *really* leaves the door wide open for a better/more honest/more efficient consultant to take that business...which in the long run costs more than you made on the one job you overcharged on.
Admittedly though, I am also a cynic and realize that a sucker is born every minute, so you don't need to keep customers as long as you live in a market large enough that you can *always* get new ones...and ultimately such a loathsome character will make more money in their career than I will. But I can't stomach being such a bottom feeder.
Did I warn you that I have strong feelings about this subject?!? :)
At any rate, none of this is meant as a direct attack on the OP. I do not know his business practices, so I am not judging (yet.) But between his comment about charging his customer, and then your (AllenM) stating that monetarily that it may be in his best interest, I thought I'd share my opinion on such practices as a whole and, by no means, intend it to be interpreted as attacking anyone specifically whom I do not know.
So there you have it, the beginnings of my rant, that I shall chop off at the knees as it probably has no merit to continue in this thread.
-Cliff
"AllenM" <NoReply@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:#O9pBrTEKHA.1516@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I agree Cliff and having done a Swing migration myself I can attest to the simplicity and efficiency of the the process. But hey for charging over $100 an hour it is to his advantage to take as much time and make as much money as possible. Yes he may be over charging but in the end the client will be getting a "clean" and efficient install..
I think he prefers this way because the aren't many user accounts and mailboxes plus it would appear he is not worried about NTFS permissions.
Frankster,
Just one other suggestion seeing how amount of time and work is not an issue with you. I would remove the computers from AD first and join them to a workgroup. that way there is no domain information attached to the SIDs. For copying data over I would not use robocopy. I use this freware program called GoodSync and it is way faster than robocopy. Plus it has a one way copy over or a two-way sync copy.
Good luck and perhaps you can send over some of them mega bucks you will be making on this over my way :)
"Cliff Galiher" <cgaliher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:uSMp4iTEKHA.1252@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxAllen:
His original outline did not mention file permissions either way, nor did it mention that he was aware that he'd have to rejoin the computers to the domain. So...as outlined, his plan would not work. You add those stipulations and I do agree though (which he conceded in a later post.)
I don't think we are disagreeing here, but I did want to make sure that he (the OP) was aware of the drawbacks to his plan. If he was, for example, going to copy the data over with a program that keeps ACLs, such as robocopy, then the new accounts would obviously cause a mismatch...and that is a legitimate thing to point out and take into consideration...and his plan was not specific in this regard either way.
So I think it was fair to say that his plan would *not* work as outlined. That there would be extra steps (rejoining the computers to the domain, which requires touching each PC) and resetting permissions. Can you *make* the plan work? Yep. Does it work "out of the box?" Nope. So I stand by my answer. :)
Anyways, I think we are on the same page now. Just a difference of interpretation.
-Cliff
"AllenM" <NoReply@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:OMAiXeTEKHA.4376@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxThe plan will work. Pretty much he is starting from scratch and he doesn't seem to mind the extra work. Nobody claimed the work will take less time and that more of it or that the Swing migration is not a better method. He simply asked if it would work and not if it was his best option. Of course there is also the down time to consider. I would certainly also export the mailboxes to a pst for backup to exmerge.
"Cliff Galiher" <cgaliher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:%23sXYrOTEKHA.1248@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNo, this will not work. The problem with your plan is that, even if you create new user accounts and computer accounts with the *exact* same names in AD, internally Windows does not use "names" to match accounts. Each account gets a randomly generated SID during creation, so the "new" accounts won't match and thus all of your computers will have to be manually rejoined and all permissions on shares will have to be reset.
Personally I'd recommend a "swing" migration. This is a process/kit that has been developed by an MVP, refined, and has been used by many of the experts here many times over. It may not be the "official" MS migration process, but it is darn near bulletproof.
-Cliff
"Frankster" <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:pZednS6BbO-ZX-zXnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxMy question is: Does this sound sensible?
I am experienced with Windows Servers and Active Directory Domains, but not SBS.
I need to replace an aging low performance machine with a new machine on an SBS2003 installation.
After reading about "migration", (general nightmare, I think) I have decided to simply build a new box using the same SBS license/software. Then configure to match the old machine, exactly, then recreate all the shares, users, install all the printers, the Workspace Web, Exchange (with all new user accounts to match, of course.) Once I have it tested using a crossover cable for a client, just do the real cutover and decommission the old box. It seems that this would be the least risky instead of the "joining the domain with a 7 day limit" thingy, etc.
Other than simply copying the data over (from the shares, etc) I will have to get the current Exchange mail over too. For Exchange I plan on exporting each user to a PST file using that users logon (I'm told Outlook can do this?) and then simply use the exported PST to import their existing mail into the new installation of Exchange. Does anyone know if that'll work? Is another method better?
I realize that this may sound like overkill to some and that some may recommend "migration". But this sounds like the "safest" way to me, not disturbing the old box. So a "backout" plan would just be to reconnect the old box. Downtime (in terms of a day or two) is not a big probem. More than that would be.
There are only about 10 users and 10 remote connected computers. They use Workspace Web for remote sessions and Exchange email (Exchange is directly on the Internet, not POP, IMAP or anything.
Comments please?
Thanks all...
-Frank
- References:
- Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- From: Frankster
- Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- From: Cliff Galiher
- Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- From: AllenM
- Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- From: Cliff Galiher
- Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- From: AllenM
- Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- Prev by Date: Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- Next by Date: question about sbs backup recovery
- Previous by thread: Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- Next by thread: Re: Install new hardware for SBS 2003
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
