Where does Exchange stand now that SBS is no more

Well.... SBS is no more. So much for cost-effective Exchange Server. So if a small business (15-25 users) wants in-house Exchange what are their options? Server 2012 Essentials or Server 2012 Standard and Exchane Server 2013?

   Microsoft has always said not to put Exchange Server on a DC yet that is what they did in SBS. That is a little hipocritical but where do they stand today with SBS being gone?

   Exchange Server has to be the most expensive package ever :) Is that the only way to do it now?
LVL 15
LockDown32OwnerAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
Nick RhodeConnect With a Mentor IT DirectorCommented:
Server 2012 Standard and Exchange Server 2013.  You will also have to purchase Exchange CALs along with the exchange license.  SBS2011 I thought was still available will the end of the year (I think).  If you purchased a volume license of Server 2012 and Exchange 2013 you can scale backwards to server 2008 and exchange 2010 (volume always lets you scale back 1 revision).

One SBS is eliminated yes this will be the only method. I think it was part of microsofts little push to get people to use Office 365 (Cloud) for exchange purposes.
0
 
LockDown32OwnerAuthor Commented:
Yes. That is what I meant by the mose expensive software ever. It stick in my head that Exchange Server is $700 for the server license and $60 for a CAL. That isn't really too bad when you consider Office 365 for Small Businesses is $185 per year, per user, every year, until you die :)

   The real question is do you need a seperate Exchange Server? As mentioned above Microsoft never advised putting Exchange Server on a DC. Have they changed their stance?
0
 
Nick RhodeIT DirectorCommented:
No they have not.  They always recommend exchange to run on a separate server.  Exchange can be a pig when it comes to resources, lack of resources on a DC can cause even more problems.  So much like SQL being a pig too, its recommended to install those specific services on a separate server.  The thing that is nice about Server 2012 though is if its on the same host you can install it on 2 VMs.  That's always a plus
0
 
LockDown32OwnerAuthor Commented:
That is part of the on-going VM war. You don't save on licensing, you pay more for hardware because it needs to be a little beefier and if you lose the server you lose the VMs too. Either way Exchange gets even more expensive when you need to run it on a "seperate" server. Sounds like Microsoft isn't doing much for the Small Business :) Oh well. Some things never change. Thanks for the input.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.