JDmailNY
join:2007-12-02
Pearl River, NY
| [2K3] Windows SBS 2003 VS Windows 2003 standard / w 2008
I want to use Microsoft Small Business – SBS / windows 2003 and I understand it comes with exchange and a lot of bells and whistles that I may not need. This will not be used as a main controller, just stand alone joined to the domain. This MS SBS package is cheaper than Purchasing a MS server lic, 5 cals windows 2003 standard / rights for 2008.
Note: The system with SBS will not act as a main controller.
Is it ok to use SBS instead of Windows 2003 / w 2008. We only need the 2003 option. |
|
craig70130
Premium
join:2004-04-27
New Orleans, LA | SBS has to be a domain controller. On top of that, it has to hold all of the FSMO roles. |
|
Leathal
Premium
join:2002-02-09
Toronto, ON
1 edit | reply to JDmailNY
craig is right about SBS, but you have to keep in mind that SBS is for small businesses that only need one server to do everything for them up to 75 users after which point they need to start running Windows 2003 Server and all the larger scale applications such as Exchange, SQL Server, etc.
SBS has only a 5 user grace, so if you buy a 5 cal of SBS you can stick on 10 users on it but the server complains its out of CALs, if you try adding more users after 10 the server rejects it until you add more cals.
There can only be one primary DC in a SBS network and it must be the SBS box. You can add other 2003 servers as a member of the domain but you can never make SBS a member of a server 2003 domain as it will reject it.
Its a completely different beast than server 2003.
Leathal
|
|
JDmailNY
join:2007-12-02
Pearl River, NY | Thanks Alot this helps big time. I am have mostly worked with 2003 and it can get confussing |
|
