Windows Server 2008 or 2003 & Hardware ?

starzsimon

starzsimon

starzsimon

Associate
Joined
23 Dec 2008
Posts
19
Hi Huys,

I have to manage 6 desktop machines and am thinking that it in the summer I may want to extend the current LAN so that it has a server-core. The function of the server would be to update machines and store profiles, passwords and files etc and then perform a daily backup.

I am just wondering the following:

If to use Windows Server 2003 R2 or Windows Server 2008 R2 ?

The clients will all have Windows 7 Professional, however they are currenty running Windows Vista Business. Now I need to know what confuguration will fit best.

Also I want to create a domain controller as this would allow the most centralised management. Will the clients be able to connect over WIFI? I don't know an awfull lot about DHCP etc so how would I configure the router etc and how would I manage the IP addresses?

I have looked into WHS and it's an option but it doesn't look very attractive as I see myself as more of a power user. I have created the contoso example of Windows Server 2003 successfully in the past but that was using LAN cable 1:1 and the Windows Server 2008 documentation isn't as descriptive about DHCP etc.

Next major question is can I use NET-OP hardware. I am planning on using a 2GB 1.6 GHZ kind of setup, nothing special and remember only about 3 machines will ever be active an once. I know Windows Server 2003 could eaily run on this spec.

So please let me know your opinions etc :D
 
I would say your best option is SBS2008, rather than 2008 R2. I doubt you would use most of the features in R2. SBS2008 has everything you will need for a small network and it is fairly straight-forward to set up.

SBS will act as a Domain Controller, Exchange and Fileserver among other things. Wifi or Ethernet cable will connect to the server just fine, assuming all are connected together via a hub or switch. SBS will usually configure your router for you if it is supported. Otherwise it should provide you with what you need to know to set it up. Basically it turns off the router's own DHCP and other services if you have told SBS it will be dealing with it.

Which IP addresses you use is entirely up to you. I am setting up my own SBS domain this week at home and I plan to have 192.168.0.1 to 0.20 as static addresses [for servers, printers and other devices, and 192.168.0.21+ for DHCP.

Windows Server/SBS 2008 will probably not be a very happy chappy on just 1.6GHz and 2GB RAM. I have run SBS with less in a VM before now, but it was never dealing with very much. A client has 8GB RAM and some old crappy dual-core Xeon and it runs dog slow sometimes with just a handful of clients. Microsoft recommends a minimum of 4GB RAM and a modern CPU.

For specific questions you should post in the Enterprise and Server subforum as this section is more for Windows on the desktop, rather than servers.
 
Hi, I only ave access to Enterprise, & Standard Servers although 2008 and 2003. Which would be more appropriate? I did some research and it did look like SBS would be the best option, however I am limited to what MSDNAA provides me with. Also if using 2003 I am assuming the hardware requirements would be slightly lower and that it is compatable with Windows 7 clients ?

Also my router is pretty standard BT WIFI & Internet with a few Ethernet ports, do I need to buy something more advanced ?
 
If you are limited in choice then go for 2008, especially considering most/all your client machines will be Windows 7 in the near future. The standard/enterprise editions are a little more involved setting up than SBS, but not that much more so.

Assuming you cannot change the hardware then 2003 is still viable. It is a very sturdy server OS [most of my clients are using 2003] and it is compatible with Windows 7 clients.

I couldn't really comment on your router. If the server can't reconfigure you just need to make sure any functions your server carries out [DHCP for instance] is turned off in the router.
 
Go with Standard 2008 R2. I wouldn't bother with 2003 R2 any more than I would bother with XP. If it's just performing basic network tasks for 6 machines it wouldn't even break a sweat even on a low spec machine (as long as it's not stupidly low).

The clients can easily connect over wifi but I would definitely wire the server.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom