Which MS server 2003 would be best suited

[Wez]

Hey All,

Building a windows server for someone and they have the option of either Server SBS 2003 R2 or Server Standard Edition 2003 R2.

They are going to host there own website, dns, files and MS SQL.

I was opting for SBS but wondered what people thought on here.

The last windows servers I built were 2000 advanced server about two to three years ago.

:cool:

[DamanC]

Sbs 2003 R2 :)

[Wez]

Cool thanks.

[carl0s]

You need Premium if you want SQL Server included. Your app might be fine with MSDE though which is free but limited to 10 concurrent connections I think.

[Wez]

The SBS DVD i have is premium edition.

[Pete]

Why do they want to host their own website?
What connectivity do they have?
ADSL? If it's anything but for their own users, it'll usually ends in tears.
SBS is great value for money for small businesses (up to 75 seats)
Like Carl says, you may not need the full SQL Server - it's usually overkill for most.

[Wez]

Its more of an intranet than website :D

One of the new application they are going to use has MS SQL as the backend.

[Pete]

Should be fine then.

[Wez]

Not worked on MS server stuff for a long time, we use AIX, Solaris and Linux at my place.

[Wez]

When are MS going to sort there driver support out.

I can put a Linux distro in and it sees the raid disks and controller no worries, fecking windows needs a driver disk, on bloody floppy as well, utter crap.

[carl0s]

It is a PITA, particularly when floppies are now considered 'legacy' :)

However, it really comes down to the fact that a lot of the Linux driver support is written by or integrated by the kernel developers. As far as Windows goes, much of this stuff is third-party.