Serve me, server!

December 15, 2006 7:18 AM

I work for a small non profit who is looking to add a central file server to bring our non existent tech infrastructure out of the stone age. The boss is looking to drop $2,500 on a complete package from DELL, but Im thinking there must be a better and cheaper way to accomplish this.

We currently have 7 - 10 computers that all are minimally networked. Most are windows. Our requirements are:

Must have a central file server
Must have a regular backup option (that can be taken off site)
Boss really wants calendar sharing a la Exchange
Must have some possibility of Remote Access so we can work from the road or home.

We do not need. SMTP, POP3, HTTP, services. We already have that for free from a friend of the organization. I am reasonably competent at this kind of stuff, but I can not afford to spend a ton of staff time on setting it up.

The boss is considering spending $2500 on a set up from dell featuring windows small business server (with exchange) with dual 160gb mirroring drives, associated switches and the like, the backup solution will be an external hard drive. Supposedly it will come largely pre-configured and require minimal setup.

What says the hive-mind? Can we accomplish or exceed our requirements in a different of cheaper way? Perhaps building a linux box? Could I do this without spending a ton of time setting it up? Or should we go the way of the Dell?

posted by jlowen to technology (11 comments total)

When it comes to central file servers, where you will need parts / support /etc NOW, it's nice to have the service agreement, and get somebody out there this instant to fix your problem. Bad part? Replacement is quick and painless, not some RMA mess which you tend to get into when buying the cheapest parts from the web.
posted by defcom1 at 7:36 AM on December 15, 2006

Call CDW (or whoever) and ask about MS charity licensing.

If memory serves, Small Business Server does not have a charity license program, but the Win2K3 and Exchange charity licenses are insanely cheap. Like ten bucks per user or something.
posted by mrbugsentry at 7:39 AM on December 15, 2006

If you want to spend a minimal amount of staff time on it, you want it to be somebody else's problem to make it work when things go differently than planned. That means not building your own. My preference would be a nearby local shop, but that doesn't always exist.
posted by winston at 7:41 AM on December 15, 2006

Check Tech Soup before you buy anything. They are awesome & often have all kinds of nifty stuff cheap for nonprofits.
posted by mygothlaundry at 7:45 AM on December 15, 2006

I think mrbugsentry is right about SBS, plus that's really a lot of server for what you're going to use; 2K3 would be fine. If you guys aren't going to use Exchange mail, find another calendar application, as well. That's overkill.

The Dell setup will do you fine, but I worry that it's not going to be very expandable. You might opt for a small Dell server attached to an external RAID array for a file server. I don't remember anything about pricing on the smaller arrays, but I love our Promise array. Just avoid a black-box NAS like iomega or Snap; the headaches haven't been worth it for me.

$2500 is extremely reasonable for the solution you need. I know you're a nonprofit and so that's probably a fair chunk of budget, but it's not outrageous in the grand scheme of things. I just think you should spend your dollars on storage more than licenses that you don't really need.
posted by Lyn Never at 8:00 AM on December 15, 2006

I think you'd be best just getting the Dell and SBS. additionally, I'd get the bigger support contract - there's a Gold-level thing that you can get that gives you 4 hour onsite service. I speak from experience on this - I set up a Dell PowerEdge SC at a client's office to bring them from paper-based operation to machines with networked QuickBooks and Exchange, etc. and, to this day, SBS is the only MS product I'm really impressed with. it comes with everything ready to go, so you don't have to get your head wrapped around Active Directory (which you'll want - as you may have figured out by now, doing the peer-to-peer file sharing that comes with Windows can be a pain), and Exchange is already ready to go too. basically, you tell it a few simple things (what IP address it should be, what its name should be, etc.) and it sets itself up. SBS also includes some simpler management consoles so it's a bit easier to manage if you haven't got the expertise or time to deal with a full-blown Windows Server 2003-based network. at the client's office, I have Exchange set up to pull mail on a schedule from the ISP's POP3 server, and to send mail through their SMTP server. the only real fiddly bit I had to change was that I had to have the ISP turn DHCP off on their router - DNS is very important to AD and Exchange and having the Windows server deal with DNS and DHCP internally is just easier. SBS comes with some additional nicities too; there's a pre-built copy of Sharepoint Portal Server on there, which makes a nice Web-based intranet thing that anyone can work with (access is controlled through AD), and it's got a bit easier console for managing backups too.

the biggest draw for me is that, since I'm under contract for them, I really don't have to do much management. Exchange doesn't talk to the Internet (just to the ISP's mail servers) so it's less of a pain to manage. the server pretty much keeps itself going - very rarely do I have to actually deal with it, and when I do it's usually because the power went out and they have to turn the server back on. so, I'd do SBS on a server with on-site support and a UPS. additionally, I'd also configure Exchange to talk to your ISP's mail servers and not act as a real one, and then put it behind a firewall (which you should have anyway). if you really want to save costs, you can build a Linux box with a bunch of (mirrored) storage and use Samba acting as a NT 4 domain, but, IMHO, SBS will be a lot easier to manage.
posted by mrg at 8:25 AM on December 15, 2006

Consider using Google Apps for your mail and calendar needs instead of Exchange.

Exchange is complicated and requires lots of maintenance.

gmail isn't quite as full featured, but it's much easier to deal with.
posted by Xazeru at 9:11 AM on December 15, 2006

mrg's suggestion is spot-on and is almost identical to the setup I created for a 7-9 workstation office about 5 years ago.
posted by NationalKato at 11:18 AM on December 15, 2006

You know what? I implement SBS 2k3 (25 of em in the last year or so), and your boss is, imho, on the right track.

The initial outlay is high - 2,500 is about right for a Dell setup.
They pay for themselves in about 6 months usually through:
- Dramatically shortened implement time. If you are going to implement Exchange/Server 2003 you're going to need help doing it. Active Directory/Exchange are not simple setups. SBS Server greatly reduces the amount of "outside help" you'll need.

- Shared contacts.
- Shared fax.
- Shared calendaring.
- Sharepoint services for document management.
- Automated backup.
- Redirected My Documents folders.
- Centralized management console.
- Solid monitoring and reporting.
- You can hang additional licenses on it easily, it doesn't crash, lots of wizards-based implementation tools.

The key to SBS is the "bound together" nature of the apps it serves. A lot of effort has gone into making what are usually complex, painful tasks on Windows 2003 Server/Exchange (i.e. routing and remote access) into scripted wizards that set it up for you.

AFAIK, there is no equivalent "console" in Windows 2003 or MS Exchange that matches the Server Management console in SBS 2k3.
I really recommend you do the SBS thing. It's so much easier and in dollars, easier often translates to cheaper, in the end.

Plus, on preview, everything mrg said, with the possible caveat that the SBS POP3 connectors can be a real pain to deal with, depending on the sophistication of your ISP's pop server setup.
posted by disclaimer at 12:14 PM on December 15, 2006

Ask him this - do you *really* need a shared calendaring solution or is someone just looking for an excuse to stick to Microsoft Outlook?

Check out OfficeCalendar as well.

Sadly, Novell dropped 'hula' which was their Exchange replacement.

If you're at all interested in using Linux (Dell will sell you a Red Hat box) you should look at Zimbra.

This is a road I've been down several times, and I consider most of the other open source 'exchange replacements' to be total failures. Not just because half of them are abandoned and unsupported, but because they lack pretty much all of the features that make people want to use Exchange in the first place.

Going with a Linux solution might free up enough $$ to allow you to throw the remote access/VPN solution at a firewall appliance. Perhaps a Juniper Netscreen box.
posted by drstein at 12:17 PM on December 15, 2006

you said the magic words..."my boss wants to". ergo, you should NOT push for some alternate solution, because then any hassles that inevitably arise will be blamed on you.

that dell will serve you well and should be fairly easy to configure for your needs. i don't know how many employees there are, but exchange sounds like overkill unless there are dozens. for calendaring you might try google's calendar; you can share calendars, create multiple ones, etc. you can also add accounts to gmail and make it look like sent messages are from a different address.

for remote access, set up a free logmein.com account that connects to your server (or some other machine), and then use microsoft's remote desktop to allow access to all the other machines on your network if necessary. you could just use remote desktop from home but i believe you have to have a VPN set up or something.
posted by jjsonp at 1:12 PM on December 15, 2006