No More SBS

[Cronox]

Last night Microsoft announced that SBS 2011 will be the final product in the SBS line and that they will stop selling it at the next of next year. We currently have around 25 clients happily running this product and have been a bit hesitant to move to cloud based solutions which Microsoft seem to be pushing as replacements. The Server 2012 Essentials MS is offering as a new SBS solution seems quite limited with only 25 user licenses or 50 devices, this will not be enough for a number of our clients plus exchange will no longer be built in. Over the next few months we will be testing out both office 365 and Google apps as well testing out some different configurations on on-premises servers to see what’s going to suit different customers best.

I’m wondering if anybody else here works in this area and if so what are your thoughts on the move?

A few articles covering this:
http://blogs.technet.com/b/sbs/archi...ssentials.aspx
http://www.sbsfaq.com/?p=3617

[joyufat]

Why are you hesitant to move to cloud-based? Services like Google Apps are perfect for small businesses as you get a really good service without having to internally maintain it yourself.

You can get hosted Exchange as well (e.g. if you need it in Australia)

[chip]

Originally Posted by joyufat

Why are you hesitant to move to cloud-based? Services like Google Apps are perfect for small businesses as you get a really good service without having to internally maintain it yourself.

You can get hosted Exchange as well (e.g. if you need it in Australia)

I suspect there are many small businesses who baulk at the cost of a proper internet connection, especially those outside of metro areas.

[Cronox]

The main reason we haven’t moved to cloud solutions previously is that pricing just doesn’t work out very well for our customers. Virtually all of our customers run server/database based line of business applications, as well as typically having 100GB+ of work related documents, photos, CAD files ect. As a result they need an on-premises file server. With an SBS license only costing around $1500 it made sense to put in on the server rather than say just vanilla windows server as your only paying $600ish extra but getting exchange, cheaper CALs, must quicker configuration and easier to use management interfaces. Assuming you have something like 20 users on a system that $600 is not going to go very far when you are paying $5 per month, per user.

Additionally the few customers we do have using Google Apps have not been very happy with the service. I haven’t dealt with them directly so I can’t comment in detail with the problems they have been having but they mostly seemed to revolve around the web interface being slow and not very easy to use and the outlook integration not being great. I understand that these kind of issues can be caused by any number of reasons including what the user is used but it defiantly wasn’t an encouraging experience.

[ewok85]

Originally Posted by chip

I suspect there are many small businesses who baulk at the cost of a proper internet connection, especially those outside of metro areas.

You don't need anything special - I have a few sites around Asia with a dozen users, using MS RemoteApp (hosted in Tokyo) and Google Apps, using normal ADSL.

Originally Posted by Cronox

Additionally the few customers we do have using Google Apps have not been very happy with the service. I haven’t dealt with them directly so I can’t comment in detail with the problems they have been having but they mostly seemed to revolve around the web interface being slow and not very easy to use and the outlook integration not being great.

Been using Google Apps for Business for nearly two years now, and I just aren't seeing those issues.

With Chrome the web interfaces are not all that slow or heavy, the Outlook integration is fairly good and gets better all the time.

I've already moved about 30% of our users to working completely through the web interface, saving significant money on Office licensing costs. That alone is 3~4 years of Google Apps subscription, per user, right there.

SBS has always been a product that should have been killed off. I'm hoping they include more CALs with the Standard Windows server, and then people can just use Windows Server for AD and file/print serving (IIS, whatnot), then MS has their cloud offering for email.

Managing a server properly is very expensive, and managing SBS more so with Exchange.

[Cronox]

Originally Posted by ewok85

Managing a server properly is very expensive, and managing SBS more so with Exchange.

In general we haven’t found SBS to be more expensive to maintain than our non-SBS sites, particularly for SBS 2003 (2008/2011 seems a bit more bloated and we have noticed some more issues). Obviously the hardware and set-up costs differ but once it's up and running we haven't found SBS to require much additional maintenance.

The office savings are a very good point, although it does mean convincing people to move to the web interface.

Looking back over my posts I think I have come off a bit negative, I'm actually quite excited to get some more hands on time with the cloud options, especially google apps.

[tin]

Originally Posted by chip

I suspect there are many small businesses who baulk at the cost of a proper internet connection, especially those outside of metro areas.

We had a customer not too long ago tell us they were paying something like $2000/month for a crappy 512/512 connection... At the time they signed up, this was the best Telstra could do for them apparently.
Needless to say, this was replaced by cheaper ADSL when new owners took over.

Originally Posted by ewok85

You don't need anything special - I have a few sites around Asia with a dozen users, using MS RemoteApp (hosted in Tokyo) and Google Apps, using normal ADSL

Define "normal" ADSL... It varies too much to say "normal". Some of our customers think 512k down is normal (where we get 20mbps on ADSL2 right near them). We actually have one customer still on 256/64 ADSL from Telstra and he insists he's getting a good deal


Edit: Personally I have trust issues with "the cloud"... But here's a thought. With power prices now looking like a 25-50% increase with the carbon tax, there could be a saving in power costs that offsets any internet cost increases.

[NSanity]

Here we go again...

GoogleApps is great for low amounts of users and where decent bandwidth is available. My business uses it.

Problem is, 10-15 user sites and adsl (sometimes < 3mbit) are not compatible with cloud computing. Telling customers that they need to drop 3-6k/month (up from < $100) on connectivity to be able to operate as a business because they don't get a good adsl sync speed due to their distance from the exchange and the regional pricing for shdsl/fibre/wireless is a good way for the customer to tell you to fuck off.

As a provider, I'm not worried. I don't need re-skilling in Exchange, AD, Iis, whatever - I have those skills, and it looks like I'll be using them more frequently. I can see that there would be many businesses that have just lost a large part of their revenue stream as a result though (or need to spend an ocean on re-training) though.

I assume this will come with a reduction in exchange costs (its been dropping for a while now anyway...) but there will still be a gap in licensing between 2x server8 w/ exchange (ad not on exchange remember guys) and the current sbs2011 standard rates.

[ewok85]

Originally Posted by tin

Define "normal" ADSL... It varies too much to say "normal". Some of our customers think 512k down is normal (where we get 20mbps on ADSL2 right near them). We actually have one customer still on 256/64 ADSL from Telstra and he insists he's getting a good deal

Well I think we have 2/2mbit in Malaysia (dynamic IP), and 10/1mbit (dynamic IP) residential in Thailand. Hong Kong and Singapore use residential fibre (2/2 in HK, 10/5 in Singapore) with dynamic IP. We made significant savings by moving to residential connections over dedicated business connections, or by going to dynamic IP and simply shopping around. In the case of our HK office we took the monthly cost down by 1/3 by switching ISP, with the same speed but using fibre instead of DSL.

Edit: Personally I have trust issues with "the cloud"... But here's a thought. With power prices now looking like a 25-50% increase with the carbon tax, there could be a saving in power costs that offsets any internet cost increases.

This is another thing. I actually have given in and allow all the IT equipment to be turned off outside of business hours in our Singapore and Thailand officers because they generate so much heat, and at the same time they've seen some power cost drops.

Power prices are ridiculous in Tokyo, and going up - I keep looking at getting a Xenserver/Vmware license that includes dynamic power savings smarts to try and get our costs down. Not having email and file storage tied to the office means I can shut down half of our infrastructure at night and weekends (leaving the PDC and SQL server running 24/7 still).

[taldoren]

Pretty much exactly the same as you Nsanity

Have a few clients that are only able to get <2mb dsl links. full cloud computing will just not work. Also have a few small business clients that while have slightly better dsl speed, also use large files in they day to day operation.

Bit of a shame really, when setup and maintained right SBS was a great solution for the small business market, with a central point of management

Originally Posted by ewok85

This is another thing. I actually have given in and allow all the IT equipment to be turned off outside of business hours in our Singapore and Thailand officers because they generate so much heat, and at the same time they've seen some power cost drops..

.

99% of all small business I support do not just work during office hours, not unusual to find the business owners logged in remotely till 9pm-11pm nightly with a good chuck of weekend work as well.

[darkanjel]

IMO, cheap Exchange is the best part of the SBS deal. Without the need for Exchange, you just need a local file server, i.e. NAS, Linux, Server standard, etc.

If you want cheap, move to another file storage/sharing system.

You can also get MS licensing on SPLA.

I do find it humorous that an organisation working on CAD files (presumably a consultancy of some sort) doesn't want to pay for software licensing.

I've also found that most of the resistance to cloud-hosted services I've encountered are pushback from the IT administrators/engineers or from senior management hoogey boogey US gubbmint out to steal my emails... and again IMO, that is usually self-preservation and irrational fear.

edit: also note that by the time SBS2012 is phased out, our NBN will likely be rolled out for those remote area users.

[NSanity]

Originally Posted by ewok85

Well I think we have 2/2mbit in Malaysia (dynamic IP), and 10/1mbit (dynamic IP) residential in Thailand.

Your upstream figures are what makes it work. If you want more than 512/512 or <8000/384 in a pairgained/rimmed area - you're shit out of luck, unless you pony up for Fibre/Carrier grade wireless - or deal with the uncertainty of 4G LTE.

Originally Posted by darkanjel

IMO, cheap Exchange is the best part of the SBS deal. Without the need for Exchange, you just need a local file server, i.e. NAS, Linux, Server standard, etc.

Looking at SBS Essentials - Exchange is like $400-500.

Originally Posted by darkanjel

If you want cheap, move to another file storage/sharing system.

NAS with samba permissions would suffice most people.

Originally Posted by darkanjel

I do find it humorous that an organisation working on CAD files (presumably a consultancy of some sort) doesn't want to pay for software licensing.

Yeah I agree on this. I have a client where they pay $45k per seat for their product of choice.

Yet they won't spend more than $1k on backup.

Originally Posted by darkanjel

I've also found that most of the resistance to cloud-hosted services I've encountered are pushback from the IT administrators/engineers or from senior management hoogey boogey US gubbmint out to steal my emails... and again IMO, that is usually self-preservation and irrational fear.

edit: also note that by the time SBS2012 is phased out, our NBN will likely be rolled out for those remote area users.

My areas aren't on the 3 year plan - we have ~35k people here, and most of the industrial parks can't get better than rimmed adsl1 (which kills SHDSL, leaving only fibre or carrier grade wireless).

SBS 2011 goes EOL in Dec 31, 2013. End of Support will be 5 years on that, 2018. Essentially I have a target date (Dec 31, 2013) to get all these customers upgraded by. If we're going to get the NBN, it will have landed by then - otherwise pray to fucking god that 4G LTE gets decently priced static IP's and better cell capacity. Or the cost for individual connections drops like a rock.

[darkanjel]

Originally Posted by NSanity

My areas aren't on the 3 year plan - we have ~35k people here, and most of the industrial parks can't get better than rimmed adsl1 (which kills SHDSL, leaving only fibre or carrier grade wireless).

SBS 2011 goes EOL in Dec 31, 2013. End of Support will be 5 years on that, 2018. Essentially I have a target date (Dec 31, 2013) to get all these customers upgraded by. If we're going to get the NBN, it will have landed by then - otherwise pray to fucking god that 4G LTE gets decently priced static IP's and better cell capacity. Or the cost for individual connections drops like a rock.

Unfortunately you just have to make do. Best practice now basically assumes you have access to high-speed internet. Business community cable? Set up a mini-ISP in the business park on a big cable link and re-sell it at affordable pricing?

Personally I believe the local short to mid-term future of cloud vs on-premise will be a hybrid mesh. On-premise server cache of cloud-stored data (in respect to larger files or low-bandwidth solutions)... basically a Riverbed on the cheap (yes, oxymoron).

[Skitza]

[QUOTE=Cronox;14533903]The main reason we haven’t moved to cloud solutions previously is that pricing just doesn’t work out very well for our customers. Virtually all of our customers run server/database based line of business applications, as well as typically having 100GB+ of work related documents, photos, CAD files ect. As a result they need an on-premises file server.[/]

These days I disagree. You don't need on site file servers at all. Cad included. Cloud setups can and will handle this with the same if not better performance than physical. Citrix or Ts will take care of this quite easily and terabyte+ file servers are also quite normal for a cloud config. I can't comment on the pricing but it's easily possible if you wanted to go down that path.

[rainwulf]

Skitza you are an idiot.

You are telling its faster to open a 1gig design file over an internet connection then it is from a local server?