Is SBS 2003 Right for You?

Weigh the pros and cons for your environment

If you're a Windows server administrator, you've probably heard of Microsoft Small Business Server (SBS), but you might be unclear about what it is. Touted by Microsoft as a complete business server solution in a box, SBS offers a Windows Server 2003-­based server that provides messaging and collaboration, secure Internet access and data storage, fax capability, and the means to run line of business (LOB) applications.

In "SBS 2003 Overview," Michael Otey discusses installing and managing SBS 2003, but perhaps you're still unsure whether the product is right for you. Perhaps you find yourself squarely in the product's demographic—a small company seeking a low-maintenance, all-in-one server solution for your file-and-print and networking needs—but you're still contemplating whether to consider SBS 2003 or just go with Windows 2003. To answer that question, let's take a look at how SBS 2003's design is both similar to and different from that of Windows 2003, and how you might upgrade to SBS 2003 from an existing Windows server environment.

What SBS 2003 Is and Isn't
In many ways, SBS 2003 is a Windows 2003 server domain in a box. One server supplies domain controller (DC), intranet, file and print server, and email functionality. (For a list of features in both the standard and premium editions of SBS 2003, see Table 1.) Not only does one server take on all these duties, but SBS is deployed most often in a single-server network. Although you can feasibly add an additional Windows 2003 or Windows 2000 server, most SBS adopters follow the single-server model.

Microsoft has designed SBS primarily for organizations that want to get away from peer-to-peer (P2P) networks or that want to expand their simple file-sharing systems. Many small offices use their desktop OSs' networking capabilities to share files and resources. At some levels, this model works—I used it back in the Windows for Workgroups (WFW) days. However, the model has some big pitfalls. If a user turns off his or her computer at night or reboots it, any network resources (e.g., files, printer) attached to that computer are unavailable until the computer is back on. And response time suffers if the owner of a machine performs any taxing tasks on the computer. Additionally, in a P2P model, files often reside on individual workstations, not on a file server, which makes complete backups cumbersome and, therefore, unlikely.

To work around some of the problems of a peer network, you can dedicate a machine running a peer OS to file and print sharing (as I did), but even today's peer OSs lack tools for serious email, fax, and document management. SBS 2003 offers all that functionality in one server. SBS 2003 isn't a watered-down version of Windows 2003 and doesn't contain watered-down versions of the server software it runs. One major difference between SBS 2003 and Windows 2003 is that all the tools are in one box instead of distributed among several servers.

Another major difference between SBS 2003 and Windows 2003 is the extra guidance that SBS 2003 provides. Contrary to the tone of some of SBS 2003's text screens and planning materials, SBS 2003 isn't intended for the network novice. However, although Windows NT novices won't be comfortable with SBS 2003 installation and maintenance, Microsoft has taken some of its documented best practices for smaller networks and built them into SBS 2003. SBS 2003 designs your Active Directory (AD) implementation for you and automatically adds client computers to the domain when you add them to the list of computers that the SBS server will manage. You can configure client computers running Win2K Professional or later from the SBS server. And SBS 2003 has a helpful tool that lets you manage many tasks from one console. SBS 2003 offers many wizards to help you configure the server.

SBS 2003 also assumes that all Web sites are guilty until proven innocent. When you connect to the Internet through an SBS server, you'll find that all but a few sites (predefined by Microsoft) are blocked. You can easily bypass this blocking, but it's the default configuration.

When you first install Windows 2003, a Configure Your Server dialog box appears, but that dialog box is used only for configuring the server role, not for fully setting up the server. Windows 2003 assumes you have some knowledge about how to get started after you install the OS. In contrast, SBS 2003 provides more guidance. When you reboot after installing SBS 2003, you'll see a To Do List that reminds you of everything you need to do to get the server completely set up. These tasks include securing the server, scheduling backups (this task uses a backup wizard that prevents you from backing up to the system drive), and setting up email. This lack of assumption is consistent in most parts of SBS 2003 and its related tools.

Planning for SBS 2003
If you're considering SBS 2003 for your environment, you need to consider how SBS 2003 will fit into a domain. You also need to think about the hardware you'll need to support it.

You can make SBS 2003 part of a typical domain—but only to a point. The SBS server wants to be the DC: When you're installing SBS 2003, it doesn't ask which domain you want to join, as you might expect. That question isn't even on SBS's map. Other member servers can join the SBS domain, but the SBS server won't join an existing domain or permit a second DC in the same domain for longer than is necessary to get the domain running. Trusts don't work as you might expect, either. The SBS domain can be in a same-level trust relationship with another domain, but you can't always connect to shared resources in the other domain; if you can connect to them, they don't show up in SBS 2003's management tool. (An example is network printers in another domain.) This single-domain design has some implications for migration, as you'll see, and also implies that SBS 2003 won't work well for small offices that are connected to a larger domain. In such a case, you'd be better off with Windows 2003 or Win2K and its server functionality.

One potential pitfall of using SBS 2003 arises in small businesses that can't devote much money to IT. As a money-saving venture, unwary IT folks might attempt to short SBS on hardware—a bad idea. You're already saving money by putting all server functionality into one server, and that server has a lot of responsibility: It's a Web server, a mail server, a domain server, a print server, and possibly more. Because most SBS installations have only one server, this server is probably the single point of failure on the network. Make sure that you give SBS the hardware it needs, and protect your installation by using the To Do List's Configure Backup tool.

If you're migrating from a peer network, you'll almost certainly need to invest in server hardware. Microsoft recommends that an SBS 2003 server have at least a 550MHz processor, 384MB of RAM, and 4GB of disk space, just for the OS. (If you plan to install Microsoft SQL Server support and Service Pack 3a—SP3a—for SQL Server, add an additional 420MB.) Also, the more demands you make on the server, the more memory and processor speed you'll need. I'd recommend starting with 512MB of RAM and a 1GHz processor.

Finally, do your homework before you try to set up SBS 2003. The CD-ROM installation kit includes several tutorials that can help you get started. Microsoft has also set up some common rules in SBS 2003 to help you monitor and secure your server. (For example, SBS proactively monitors disk space.) However, SBS 2003 can't—and doesn't—assume a complete lack of knowledge on the part of the administrator. Although SBS 2003 offers much guidance, compensating for an administrator who's never touched NT is impossible.

And although SBS 2003 is designed to be simpler to manage than Windows 2003 and Win2K, SBS 2003's built-in components can be opaque. If you set up monitoring and it doesn't work, the software won't tell you why it doesn't work or how to fix it. SBS 2003 isn't appropriate for novices, so if you lack experience with NT but are thinking about implementing SBS 2003, you'll need someone with networking experience to set it up.

Moving to SBS 2003
Upgrading an existing server to SBS 2003 is relatively simple. Most often, this upgrade will involve updating an existing Win2K Server or SBS installation. When you begin the upgrade, Setup migrates your settings for you. The computer you start from must be a server—you can't upgrade a workstation to SBS 2003—but it doesn't need to be a DC.

Some people are migrating to Windows 2003 or SBS 2003 directly from NT 4.0. In fact, one of Microsoft's primary targets for SBS 2003 is the group of administrators who are using NT 4.0 servers. However, NT 4.0 servers are unlikely to have the hardware necessary to support a straight upgrade. By modern standards, NT 4.0 isn't terrifically demanding of hardware. I still have an NT 4.0 file server and DC that's chugging along with 48MB of RAM and a 100MHz processor. Without a replacement of the motherboard to permit a memory addition, this server simply couldn't handle SBS 2003. If I wanted to upgrade an NT 4.0 DC to SBS 2003, I'd need new hardware. However, if I introduced new hardware, I'd need a way to move all the data from the NT 4.0 DC to the new SBS DC.

Unfortunately, I was unable to test this scenario because the migration tool wasn't finalized at the time of writing. But Microsoft tells me that the ideal situation for someone migrating from, for example, NT 4.0 and Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5 is to order the SBS 2003 server from an OEM so that SBS 2003 is preinstalled. Then, the SBS administrator can run through a few wizards to transfer user account information—with all rights and permissions, Exchange mail and contacts, and Internet and network settings—from the NT 4.0 DC into the SBS 2003 AD environment. The wizards would also migrate any files on the old server to the new one. If the NT 4.0 computer is a DC, the two DCs would be able to run in parallel for a few days so that the administrator has sufficient time to accomplish the migration. This migration tool will soon be available as a free download from the Microsoft Web site at http://www.microsoft.com/sbserver.

SBS 2003 vs. Windows 2003
For several reasons, you might be better off with the regular version of Windows 2003 than with SBS 2003. SBS 2003 isn't intended for a complex network architecture. An SBS server can't join a non-SBS domain, and an SBS domain must be a root-level domain. An SBS domain can be in a trusted relationship with another root-level domain, but it's not truly designed for this use.

SBS 2003 is similar to Windows 2003 but not entirely. Because SBS 2003 is intended for smaller networks, and because the SBS server is meant to be the DC, SBS 2003 doesn't have some functionality (e.g., Terminal Services) that's useful in larger networks. (However, you can use Remote Desktop—which is enabled by default—to remotely administer an SBS 2003 server from another computer. You can also make an SBS 2003 DC a Terminal Services license server.)

A final caution about SBS 2003: It's not quite as simple as it seems. Setup should cause no difficulties for experienced NT administrators, but a novice would do better to buy a preinstalled SBS 2003 server. The danger of a reduced-administration server OS is that administrators can mistake it for a zero-administration OS. The fact that SBS 2003 is designed to automatically follow some Microsoft best practices doesn't mean that it automatically follows all of them. Even if you walk through all the configuration wizards, you'll still need to install security patches and service packs and follow safe-computing guidelines. The audience for which SBS 2003 is designed—the shop looking for an extremely low-maintenance server—might balk at SBS 2003's required maintenance.

Is It a Good Fit?
SBS 2003 is best suited for administrators who need an all-in-one server OS to supply all their communication needs (e.g., printing, document management, email), with perhaps one helper server to supply features that SBS 2003 can't provide. SBS 2003 isn't a good choice for those who need more than one domain or who immediately anticipate the need to join a new domain. And although SBS 2003 is designed to simplify the life of the systems administrator, I don't recommend that inexperienced administrators try to set it up without help.

The ease with which you migrate to SBS 2003 from your existing network will depend on your network's current organization. If you're moving to SBS 2003 from a P2P network, you'll need to copy the data files to the new server, create user logon and email accounts, and install the printers—in other words, you'll need to set up the server from scratch and make sure it's done properly. If you're coming to SBS 2003 from a previous version of Windows, you can either upgrade existing user accounts or move them from the existing server to the new SBS 2003 server—when the migration tool is ready.

Discuss this Article 55

Karen (not verified)
on Dec 11, 2003
Can you tell me the hardware guidelines for SBS 2003?
Martin (not verified)
on May 5, 2004
I am changing my server. I have still a Novell server, and I bought a new server with SBS 2003. The problem is that I never used windows server's and I don't know if I can do a migration from the Novell to the SBS2003. Can you tell me if it is possible and perhaps tell me how to do it?
Cortney (not verified)
on Apr 28, 2004
I demoted the computer that I have SBS 2003 installed on and it doesn't like that. I reboots itself every so often saying it must be a Doamin controller. Is there anyway around this? I just want it to be on a workgroup.
jairaj (not verified)
on Feb 11, 2004
Hi, This article is great,but i need some information on migrating from SBS 2003 to windows 2003.The following is the senario. I have a client running sbs 2003 on a box,and he wants to upgrade this sbs 2003 server to windows 2003 server which is on other box. He just wants to move ISA,SQL and Exchange of sbs 2003 to the windows 2003 machine. I would be happy if you can include some article on this. Regards,
Aravind Shrihari (not verified)
on Apr 27, 2004
I have installed SBS 2003 and I am using it for mail and website. I have 2 XP pro clients. I have a problem with the firewall as the port queries seem to be passed through to the client machines. Can any one who has a good knowledge of builtin firewall please contact me on ashrihari at hotmail dot com as I need help urgently. This month already I have used 10GB of bandwidth. I can not see spams or any thing. FTP is disabled.
Adam (not verified)
on Jan 7, 2004
Can you tell me if SBS 2003 is capable of running property management software?
Eddie Albert (not verified)
on Jun 28, 2004
I originally installed SBS 4.5/Back Office Server for a Property Management company. I was mostly satisfied with that offering, when SBS 2000 came out we upgraded and now that SBS 2003 is out we will upgrade again. I am a network engineer and SBS does require you to read the manuals and become aware with the uniqueness of an all-in-one server OS. Would I recommend SBS, yes. Would I recommend someone who has never worked with NT set it up alone, no. Hire a consultant that has taken and passed the SBS 2003 course to assist you with your install. Hint #1 - HIGHLY RECOMMEND as stated in the article BUY FROM AN OEM dealer and when in doubt get MORE than you think you need in the way of memory. Hint #2 - Fast HDs = Faster Apps, virtual memory etc. A huge 200+GB drive running at 7200rpm is about 60% slower than a 15k RPM SCSI drive or 40% slower than a new 36 or 74GB 10k RPM SATA drive. Best of luck! /ELA
John Harrold (not verified)
on Jun 24, 2004
Robert, did you ensure your local administrator account on both SBS2003 and the old NT are the same? Your internet connection was disabled and your DNS lookups were pointing to the opposite server? I am about to install SBS 2003 and I see all your responses. I am wondering what these people have for expertise, is it really this difficult or are these people non-IT savvy?
LK Eng (not verified)
on Apr 22, 2004
Excellent article for those who need to be armed with knowledge of what to expect when making a decision. Article also confirmed some of my suspicions and revealed other factors not even thought. Keep up the great style of writing.
Frank Williams (not verified)
on Mar 7, 2004
This article is very good, just what I needed for starters. Thank You
Kalpesh (not verified)
on Apr 28, 2004
I had installed sbs2003 premium edition but having problem that my website can't open some subsites like my company website from my xp professional clint computer,why?could advise me please
CS Burge (not verified)
on May 5, 2004
You will also need a third party program for updates(unless you have enough time to check every program included w/ SBS). Shavlik.com has HfNetCheck Pro that will scan for almost all MS software on your SBS server and tell you what needs patches and or SP's, Even MS Office. Definately not a Low maintenance Server OS, but is easily administered other than updates.
jarek (not verified)
on Apr 15, 2004
Asim, XP Home Edition can not join a domain. Unfortunately you need to upgrade to Professional Edition or downgrade to W2K Professional.
Anonymous User (not verified)
on Mar 6, 2005
Limitation of SBS 2003 to one domain controller was not disclosed on the OEM pack and 5 CAL pack led us to believe a network of 3 all running SBS was possible. Microsoft confirmed 5 PCs could run SBS and now we have to buy additional software for two workstations. What a waste of money and time this system is for us.
Alex Bath (not verified)
on Feb 26, 2004
An excellent article, thank you. Its so hard to get round the marketing-oil that the MS website is so drenched in to get at the truth. At last a decent product for the small business who want to start throwing their weight around a bit.
Herr Garman (not verified)
on Apr 25, 2004
At this moment we are fighting 11 hours non stop with SBS2003 installation. First we had to reinstall the server twice! Right now, Windows XP clients can not access shares. this is a horrible and awkward system. Prepare to dedicate atleast 10-15 hours to the installation only. Configuration is even worse, and do not even dream to use any form of backup server running any version of windows. Looks like we are staying over night here...
Ed Obeso (not verified)
on Jan 13, 2004
Your words came at the right time, We are perfect for SBS 2003. But we need to put some steroids on our projected server. Thanks, and warm regards from Los Cabos, Baja, Mexico.
Christine Cramer (not verified)
on Nov 24, 2003
Nice to read an article about SBS where networking novices are warned about the "simplification" this OS by Microsoft. Microsoft would have us all believe that the small business owner can install and configure this themselves. They've also teamed up with OfficeDepot who is advertising a $500 server to run it on which has little memory and no built-in redundancy. Thanks to this author for stating you can't shortchange your SBS on hardware and pointing out the mission critical nature of the SBS server. Just a footnote, if you're going to use both SQL and Exchange in the premium edition, you'll want at least 1Gb of memory.
Robert Meltz (not verified)
on May 19, 2004
I am 7 hours into night 2 after an 8 hour night last night trying to migrate NT4 to SBS2003 premium. I have the new hardware. I have the OS installed. I followed every step of the migration documentation to a T until I tried to establish a trust relationship. I was informed that sbs2003 could not estabish a trust with an NT4 domain. skipping that step didn't work either. ADMT generated an error: "Access is denied. (Error code=5, domain=)". The Biggest reason we bought sbs2003 was because we could migrate our users, computers and data with a supplied, supported migration tool. Without the migration tool, we would not have gone with 2003 server of any flavor. There isn't anything in that box that I can't do with Linux. And I am not about to pay $99 to get Microsoft to answer an Email. No way. the software was expensive enough. What other company can get away with treating their customers so poorly?
Anonymous User (not verified)
on Dec 22, 2004
I have a LAN-to-LAN connection VPN. And i want i have two SBS 2003 that are stationed on each LAN. will be the same domain. One will be sub DC and connects to the main DC. In reality they are identical. Hope you understand. Is this possible with SBS 2003
Anonymous User (not verified)
on Feb 9, 2005
no, you will not be able to use two SBS on the same physical LAN & the same domain. Only one SBS. Use a Win2003 STD server for second. They will work beautifully together.
Simon Etcheverria (not verified)
on Apr 29, 2004
I bought a server with SBS 2003 pre-installed at a very good price. I had no particular need for the additional SBS elements thrown in on top of 2003, but very quickly discovered that without them MS have designed the system to shut itself down. Apparently not completely installing SBS is a breach of the EULA and gives them the right to autmatically shut down your server. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!BE WARNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Asim (not verified)
on Apr 1, 2004
I am new to Windows 2003 SBS, I dont know much about it. I know NT4 and Unix well. I am trying to set up a network with 2003 SBS server but I have got some computers with XP-Home on and they dont seem to talk to 2003 SBS server. When I go to client computer and do "//server/connectcomputer" it does not do that. Please advise the best line of action.
Brett (not verified)
on Dec 3, 2003
We currently have SBS 4.5 (with NT 4.0, exchange 5.5, SQL 7, etc). I have not been able to find much documentation on this type of upgrade. We are planning on getting a new server & upgrading in 2004. Any thoughts or good links?
Anonymous User (not verified)
on Dec 1, 2004
I have successfully installed SBS2003. I had to segregate th network (using the opt port of my sonic wall firewall) so that the server from ourr existing network was on a totally different physical network from the new SBS2003. No, it does NOT play well with others! Once I started over it went smooth. It just wants to be in total control. For a newbie, if it's an intitial setup and not a migration I think it would work pretty well. Comments on hardware - no doubt go all out with the most budget you can afford. I used a dual xeon 3GHz with 2 gigs of ram using 4 chips so that the memory can be interleaved as well. Two scsi channels, mirrored drives for the OS and raid 5 for the apps n data. no doubt, you want your SQL data on a different array than the OS or you're in for a disappointment no matter what processor nad memory you have. The other issue is that SBS REALLY wants to have two net cards, I had a bit of a time getting it to like my non UPNP sonicwall to play nice. Overall, it's a blast. Sharepoint alone impresses the heck outta office managers. Give it a go Tracy
bruno richoux (not verified)
on Dec 22, 2003
Regarding network security and filtering, as the standard version includes RRAS, why going for ISA if you only need basic firewalling capabilities?
Anonymous User (not verified)
on Mar 8, 2005
Hello. I have recently installed SBS 2003... My main reason was file sharing capabilities/email and basic central administration and trying to move away from p2p for future reasons. I am an NT novice, but have not worked with SBS before. I have a question.. All my users have their outlook set up at their personal PC (XP Pro) (That connects via POP3 to our ISP).. I would like to use the server capabilities. It would be using the server as the home of their mailboxes so I can administer/backup from there. What is the best way to go about this? They will need to retain all of the email they currently have. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, AJSkydiver
Colin (not verified)
on Dec 4, 2003
I have a client with SBS 4.5 and wants sbs 2003 will he need new CALS?
digant (not verified)
on May 14, 2004
My company is thinking of purchasing a Microsoft SBS (Small Business Server) but a hardware vendor who is friend of mine mentions that SBS does not permit communication to a remote server. Is this true?
Caliban Tiresias Darklock (not verified)
on Mar 2, 2004
Jairaj: You can't part-out the SBS install to other servers. You will need to buy new licenses for the server applications you want to migrate, along with new CALs as appropriate. If you don't already own copies of Exchange, SQL, and ISA server your best option is the SBS Server 2003 Transition Pack which runs between three and four thousand dollars; you will then need to upgrade your SBS CALs. This will also give you a full Server 2003 install on your SBS server, so you'll have fewer Active Directory issues than you'd get with a full removal of the SBS system. The alternative is to buy all the standalone servers separately, which is prohibitively expensive. As a Microsoft partner, I've been repeatedly shocked by various information I hear about SBS from Microsoft licensing; SBS is a very cost-effective solution for most small businesses in the short term, but the long term implications are significant. There seem to be an awful lot of upgrade, migration, and growth situations on SBS that essentially mean the business has to fork over thousands of dollars to go anywhere, and a couple of (admittedly pathological) instances have presented a mandatory cost in the high five figures. On the bright side, Microsoft *listens* to their partners, so these problems are almost certainly going to disappear over time. We've already seen a number of common problems go away between SBS 2000 and SBS 2003, and this trend is going to continue. Despite what some people may want you to think about Microsoft, they really *are* working their little blue badges off trying to make things better.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• The Microsoft
Technology Roadmap
• Office 365 Implementation
• Hyper-V Optimizing
• Windows 8 Deployment
and much more!

Come See Paul Thurrott & Rod Trent in Person!

Early Registration Now Open

Upcoming Training

Mastering SharePoint 2013: Succeeding, Not Just Surviving

Building on the success of the “Mastering SharePoint 2010” seminars, the presenters have updated the content to cover the latest and greatest SharePoint product: SharePoint 2013. While SharePoint 2013 is relatively new on the marketplace, the presenters have been working with SharePoint 2013 for well over a year, and have implemented it with a number of clients in production environments.

Register Now

Current Issue

May 2013 - The NameTranslate object is useful when you need to translate Active Directory object names between different formats, but it's awkward to use from PowerShell. Here's a PowerShell script that eliminates the awkwardness.

CURRENT ISSUE / ARCHIVE / SUBSCRIBE

Windows Forums

Get answers to questions, share tips, and engage with the Windows Community in our Forums.