Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Recalls Small Business Server
dasButcher writes to tell us VarBusiness is reporting that hot on the heels of many other delays, Microsoft has recalled their Small Business Server 2003 R2. The operating system started shipping to OEMs, distributors, and systems builders in July but was immediately recalled after a recent audit.
I've recently been butting heads with SBS. Put in a samba server and a terminal server for a client to expand their business and bring some sanity to their IT setup. Their existing database app is hosted on a machine running Windows 2000 SBS, and I'm not allowed to move it. The server can't join their new domain - it's not even allowed to be part of a domain trust. The whole situation is hideous. I want to meet the person who recommended it and smack them round the face with the installation media.
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
You're definitely right about the "all eggs in one basket" risk, but what are the alternatives? A lot of the places that run SBS have no full time IT staff. With SBS they get an out-of-the box file server, domain controller, exchange server. There's a risk it may blow up and they'll lose those things, but for most of these places the alternative is not to have them in the first place.
It's too expensive to buy multiple boxes and too complicated (for these places where the controller/accountant does double-duty as IT guy). Don't even get me started on Linux. I'm sure it's great if you happen to have an open source guru around, but it's just not a viable option for setting up a back-end where no one has any serious tech experience. Then of course they could always just be a Mac shop - if they want to double or triple their IT infrastructure costs (ha!). Not to mention the prevalence of MS Access in small business areas.
I think you've got to hand it to MS. For about $400 you get all the software you need to run your business server, and it pretty much works out of the box. It's a whole lot better than not having anything, and as companies grow they will eventually build out the infrastructure and implement more redundancy. The "all eggs in one basket" isn't unique to just Windows SBS - it pretty much characterizes how small business works.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
umm...
5. Profit!
Not to defend MSFT, but...SQL Server 2005 was "significant".
Advice: on VPS providers
sounds like no end user organizations are using it yet' - dreamchaser
i ndows.server.active_directory/msg/f797472b226c029d ?dmode=source&hl=en
No it doesn't actually say *no* end users it says *most* and most does not equate to all. You should realize that most PR statements don't actually mean what the words mean.
"it basically said that in the part you left out:" - kjart
"None went to end users" - dreamchaser
The actual words are:
"Most of Microsoft's voluminous partner base did not have copies of SBS 2003 R2 in hand yet"
In other words some of Microsoft's voluminous partner base did have it. And seeing its a PR statement out of Redmond we can assume the reality is a lot more than a few got copies got out.
This fella seems to think he bought a new server that has the R2 edition on it.
http://snipurl.com/v9i1
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.w
No one has still replied to my request for an explanation of what non-final core components mean. Is this the same as bugs?
davecb5620@gmail.com
I'd like to add VS2003, .Net2.0, VS2005, Team System and xbox360 to that.
Rocket science is easy. Neurosurgery, now *that's* difficult.
How do you define a small business ?
I think you can consider a business with only one person a small business, but where do you draw the line ? 5 people ? 10 people ? 20 people ?
I ask, because I worked for a business of twenty people as the full-time IT staff, from 1997 to 1998.
We had a WANG VS system, running our own custom software, based upon the PACE RDBMS.
The support costs every year where about 25000EUR/year I think, but this computer system never failed.
Peripherals, like line printers and terminals needed some replacements and service every year, but that was included in the support costs.
The database consisted of about 350 tables for the operational work, 180 tables for financial reporting, and in addition to that the bookkeeping software.
I could spend about 95% of my time programming and enhancing the system.
Why do I tell all this ?
Because I think that a system like SBS, with all its different features, cannot be optimally used by a company which does not have a good IT staff.
What I mean is that from a certain size you should be able to also hire a good programmer, which is able to service the SBS and start making use of features of SBS specifically tailored to the business.
If you cannot afford such a person, then SBS is no use to a business (except maybe in a bragging 'me too' way), because only the easiest and simplest features will be used.
And this is how millions of small businesses around the world get their IT support - be it Windows or Linux based, as soon as the company using the system needs any infrastructure beyond "2 standalone desktop PCs" the setup & support is outsourced. Yet still CNET, /.'ers and recently digg'ers harp on about how "Linux must become as easy to configure and install as Windows!"
No it doesn't. For a lot of uses, it just needs to be easy enough, and customisable enough that a company with the right expertise can seriously consider offering services based on it.