[There's a reason that Yoda is the unofficial mascot of SBS. Size indeed matters not.] Checking out the solutions - THE OFFICIAL BLOG OF THE SBS DIVA
Fri, Nov 18 2011 23:25 bradley

Checking out the solutions

We're going to play a game.  See if there is any combination of answers you can give on the server selecter side whether this web site that will come up with either SBS Essentials or SBS Standard as a recommended solution.

http://www.serverbenefits.com/

Go ahead and try.  Report back what you get.

So far I keep getting Windows Server foundation, 2k8 r2 standard or enterprise, and System center essentials.  Nothing in the SBS family.  I can get SBS in the server experience side, but not on the server selector side.

So ... can you?

Filed under:

# re: Checking out the solutions

Saturday, November 19, 2011 6:21 AM by Fred Gregory

I managed to get SBS Essentials to come up. I chose 16-25 PCs, Cloud-based email, and for the 3 business priorities, I chose "remote access", "easier data recovery" and "single console management". However, if I dropped the PC count to 1-15, I got an extra question - "Do your workers need access to applications and full desktop functionality from an offsite location?" Answer "Yes" to that question and give the same answers as above and it recommends R2 foundation. Answer "No" and it recommends SBS Essentials. Apparently whoever built this Server Selector doesn't know SBS Essentials has Remote Web Access. They also don't seem to realize that R2 Foundation DOESN'T have single console managment, remote access and easier data recovery.

# re: Checking out the solutions

Saturday, November 19, 2011 7:43 AM by Jerry Cope

Got it first time!

26-75 PCs

On-site mail server

No to offsite access to applications and full desktop

Single console management, Enhanced security, Reliable IT

Answer = SBS 2011 Standard

# re: Checking out the solutions

Saturday, November 19, 2011 8:52 AM by Paul Husted

Susan,

Yes, it can be done.

Answers as follows:

1 - PC count under 75 (either 16-25 or 26-75 seems to work)

2 - Email as "on-site mail server"

3 - Access from off-site location - answer No.

4 - 3 business priorities: single console management, easier data recovery and reliable IT environment.

This results in SBS 2011.

Changing the answer on #3 (off-site access) from No to Yes seems to flip the result to Windows 2008 Standard.

And, no, that doesn't make sense to me either.

# re: Checking out the solutions

Saturday, November 19, 2011 11:16 AM by Neil Myers

OK. So 2 go's at it.

My workers needed "full desktop functionality from an offsite location". 'Remote Web Access: Computers' was looking like a winner, until I came across www.serverbenefits.com. Looks like we need to dump our SBS 2011 and put Windows 2008 R2 Standard and System Center Essentials 2010 in instead :-/

Anyway, back to the answers. Almost the same as above:

- 26-75 PC's.

- On-site mail server.

- No to offsite access to desktop.

- No existing servers.

- No virtualization.

- Single console management / Easier data recovery / Remote access (but, obviously, not if you want to access your office PC's desktop remotely)

= SBS 2011 Standard

# Not coming up with the right answer

Monday, November 21, 2011 2:13 PM by Joe Raby

Me -> a system builder

Foundation isn't available to me, so I can't build custom-built solutions based on it.

Microsoft recommends that businesses of <15 PC's should get Foundation.  So that means as a small business that builds custom solutions to other small businesses, I don't have an answer, according to Microsoft.

For those customers, I have to sell them the higher-priced SBSe.  So far, price hasn't been a big barrier, especially when I show them RWA.  Frankly, I'd rather see Foundation include the simpler management console anyway.

# re: Checking out the solutions

Thursday, December 08, 2011 8:23 PM by Paul Schnackenburg

Hi,

I sent your findings to Jeff Alexander, MS IT Pro evangelist here in Australia, he's got in contact with the right people and Rosemary Stark here at MS in Australia is following it up and they're talking about splitting some questions to make a clearer path. I'll keep you posted here how it goes.

Paul Schnackenburg