XP Pro or SBS 2003 as Server OS

[Guest]

I am setting up an all new server and network for a medical office that will
have up too 10 (not more) computers connected, including wireless network to
a couple of tablets, and some form of secure remote access. I get to choose
the server OS. My main criteria is that it has to be simple to setup and
maintain. (And of course I do not want to part with more of our hard earned
money than necessary.) There will not be an IT person on site. Do I choose
XP Pro or SBS 2003, and of course why?

 

[Shenan Stanley]

I am setting up an all new server and network for a medical office
that will have up too 10 (not more) computers connected, including
wireless network to a couple of tablets, and some form of secure
remote access. I get to choose the server OS. My main criteria is
that it has to be simple to setup and maintain. (And of course I do
not want to part with more of our hard earned money than necessary.)
There will not be an IT person on site. Do I choose XP Pro or SBS
2003, and of course why?

As Windows XP is *not* a server class OS, I would go with Windows 2003
Server. Yeah - you will only have 10 computers, but how many users and how
sure are you there will never be more than 10 computers?

Having a server gives you more options on controlling the computer remotely
than if you did not have the server. You could even have a makeshift
(albeit far below par) domain to distribute policies, etc. With no IT
person on site, this should factor in greatly to your decision. You need
the ability to manage from anywhere and control the workstations as much as
possible - XP as a 'server' would not give you this.

 

[Guest]

Thank you, even if it is not what I wanted to hear. Did you deliberately
jump over Small business Server 2003 to Server 2003? Does SBS 2003 have
limitations that make it so I need to go up to the full Server 2003?

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Do I choose XP Pro or SBS 2003, and of course why?

Shenan Stanley replied:

As Windows XP is *not* a server class OS, I would go with Windows
2003 Server. Yeah - you will only have 10 computers, but how many
users and how sure are you there will never be more than 10
computers?

Having a server gives you more options on controlling the computer
remotely than if you did not have the server. You could even have a
makeshift (albeit far below par) domain to distribute policies, etc.
With no IT person on site, this should factor in greatly to your
decision. You need the ability to manage from anywhere and control
the workstations as much as possible - XP as a 'server' would not
give you this.

Thank you, even if it is not what I wanted to hear. Did you
deliberately jump over Small business Server 2003 to Server 2003?
Does SBS 2003 have limitations that make it so I need to go up to the
full Server 2003?

No No.. I deliberately left out a version of Server 2003. (Standard, Small
Business, Enterprise, Web ore Data Center..) In your case, Windows SBS 2003
is likely the BEST choice, as it is made to do what you will be doing - more
than one function in one given server.

You could get SBS and install SUS and get the patch management going for
your PCs/Laptops.
You do have a Domain in place - albeit one that could go very bad very
quickly if the server died.
You are limited in number of devices/users - but in your case (as listed) -
you should be fine.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/sbs/default.mspx