SBS 2003 or Windows Server 2003?
Posted on 2006-06-26
A small non-profit office needs a file/print/backup, an Exchange server and a Terminal Server. Should we buy one server or two?
I have a client that is planning on upgrading our peer-to-peer network by installing a server. They want to be able to have remote access to files and eventually a database. They have not chosen the database, so we aren't sure how it will be remotely accessed in the future. They would like to leave their remote access options open.
This is for a small office of 6-7 employees (3 travel frequently) and 1 employee in a remote office.
I was thinking of going with SBS 2003 because of the need/want for an Exchange server. The problem is that SBS 2003 does not have terminal services (application mode), only VPN.
Should we go with an SBS 2003 server box now and add a Windows Server 2003 terminal server box in the future if needed OR buy a Windows Server 2003 box with Exhange now and install TS on it in the future?
We are a non-profit so we can get all of the OSes and licenses donated for either product, so cost is not an issue. We can only place one Microsoft order from TechSoup every 2 years, so whatever we order now we have to get what we need for the next 2 years.
Yes, the domain controller will be on the same box as the Exchange server. This is not ideal, but for a small organization it is sometimes the only affordable route.
An after thought: I suppose that if we really needed to we could have 2 Windows Server 2003 boxes. One as the domain, backup, and TS and the other one only with Exchange.
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.