. . . continued from Hot News Start answering the question by posing a few others: Does the phrase "configuring the Windows 2003 operating system" give you vague chills? Does the phrase "it's time to configure Exchange Server 2003" make you squirm in your chair? Does the phrase "exploiting Windows SharePoint services" leaving you slack-jawed? What's a "Remote Web WorkPlace"? How about "implementing security via RRAS/NAT basic firewall and ISA Server 2000"? Do you fear "net congestion" and if you don't know what it is, does it make you tense? Do you have any idea what the term "Active Directory" means? Confusing? Unintelligible? It should be. Anything which uses jargon that is completely new to you requires a guidebook first and foremost, and if the guidebook opens up a whole new world of technology, it's also likely that somebody will have to find a way to magically add six more hours to every work day just to find the time needed to install and experiment with the subject at hand. Let's start with defining what a server is supposed to be. Above all else, a server is supposed to allow many users to access a network at one time without any decrease in performance. In typical home networks and many SOHO and VSB networks, a router and its built-in hub provide access to the Internet and e-mail while at the same time performing the necessary background magic which enables all the computers on the network to access the Internet at the same time. It's a peer-to-peer network and it's called that because all computers have the same degree of access to each other depending on file sharing settings on each computer. There's no master computer to which all the others have to report. Productivity slows to a crawl whenever more than one person tries to access the same file. Everyone stores e-mail on their own computer. Internet access has to be controlled from individual workstations or through the router. Everyone stores data and documents on their own computer. Backup practices are sketchy.

Do two or more people use the same database? Will business suffer if one of the computers in your current peer-to-peer setup crashes, making crucial files unavailable? Do you or your employees need access to e-mail and files on the road? If all of the answers are "Yes" then you may be able to make good use of a server.

A network with a server is a different thing altogether. A server program running on a computer dedicated to the task provides Internet access. A server allows many users access to files at the same time without any decrease in performance. E-mail is stored in one, easy-to-back-up location. Data and documents are stored in one, easy-to-back-up location. Network and Internet access for each and every user can be controlled from a single location.

Do two or more people use the same database? Will business suffer if one of the computers in your current peer-to-peer setup crashes, making crucial files unavailable? Do you or your employees need access to e-mail and files on the road? If all of the answers are "Yes" then you may be able to make good use of a server. There are only two little catches: a) it's expensive, and b) you absolutely have to find the time to learn about servers and networking.

Real advantages for VSB are limited. One- or two-person operations may never benefit from the presence of a server beyond the idea that well-designed servers invariable come with automated backup software. Of course you can automate backups on a peer-to-peer network too. It's not as elegant as a server installation, but it works just fine.

Security is a huge consideration these days. If your two or three SOHO or VSB computers are sitting behind a good router, security is good by default. It then becomes a matter of best practices where safe e-mail habits and diligent antivirus and antispyware software updates are concerned.

On the other hand, if you consolidate user data, documents, databases and e-mail on a server, you can perform full backups, guarantee access to data no matter who is off sick, implement full fledged security practices on a user-by-user or system-wide basis, and scan incoming mail for viruses before it ever gets to individual workstations.

Is that last bit a very strong case for purchasing and installing a server? Not by itself. Don't forget the money issue. You need a few things to build and use a server. Windows Small Business Server 2003 is the core item. A dedicated computer with a 2.8GHz processor, 1GB or more of RAM, an automated backup system, an uninterruptible power supply, the additional client licenses needed (each computer connected to the server needs its own client license), is the next item. You need the wiring and hub to hook it all up, some of which you may already have. Server-compatible backup software, a tape drive and server versions of some of your software round out the expenses. In a five computer network (plus server), say goodbye to something around $7,500. Lotsa money—and you still have the problem of maintaining the server, which of course costs money for a network service company to periodically make house calls.

"Ah-HAH", you say. "What about Linux? It's darn near free!"

Well that's true. It's darn near free. Except for the cost of installation (do not attempt this on your own unless you're prepared to spend the better part of a two week vacation buried inside Linux command lines). Even if you do get a Linux server up and running, there's the pesky problem of converting all your workstations to Linux, the need to find all of the Linux software needed to do your work, and so on. Mac OS X is easier than Linux and more likely, at this time, to meet your needs on the workstation side. The only problem is that unlike Linux, Mac OS runs only on Apple hardware. All this leaves most existing hobbyists, SOHOs and VSBs with one choice: Windows Small Business Server 2003.

No matter what you choose, you will have to learn about this stuff. It's a tall order. Here's an excerpt written by Paul Hudson in his PC Plus review of Windows Small Business Server 2003 (SBS):

"What’s quite clear is that SBS contains technologies from Windows Server 2003 and Exchange Server 2003, but adds a great deal more on top to streamline things as much as possible. A lot of the helpful wizards here aren't available in the main packages, and the various parts of the system are integrated so tightly that SBS becomes a full product by itself, as opposed to a suite. Particularly impressive was the Active Directory configuration. The SBS set-up tool located my router, detected that it supported UPnP, and offered to automatically configure the router as the primary DHCP provider for the new Active Directory forest." Okay. The Active Directory Forest? Do you have time in your SOHO or VSB efforts to sit down and try to understand the meaning and use of Active Directory Forest?

The language was designed by engineers and programmers, but never modified in a way that is accessible to non-engineers and non-programmers. When will all of those mavens realize that we are not engineers. We are craftspeople. We are designers. We are insurance brokers. We are plumbers. We are electricians. We are renovators. We are . . . you name it. But we are most emphatically not engineers and programmers. Provide language and definitions which are clearly accessible to us. SOHO and VSB networking and servers—in fact, anything beyond a peer-to-peer network operating behind a router providing access to the Internet—require some intensive study.

If you decide to go with Microsoft SBS, first seriously consider a book written by Harry Brelsford called Windows Small Business Server 2003 Best Practices. It's published by SMB Nation Press. It contains a great start to finish guide which is clear enough for novices. Buy the book, read it, and if you can figure everything out on paper, take the next step. Considering Linux server? If you're not an actual software development company with a resident IT tech to manage Linux, forget about it. If you already use Macs, you'd be foolish to consider anything other than an Apple server.

The measure of your need for a server is threefold: a) cost, b) your time available to dedicate to the task, and c) real technical needs. If you can't now say that a) you can definitely afford it, b) you have the time needed to learn this stuff, and c) that you have genuine data access, data loss and data security issues which will be fully alleviated by a proper server, forget about it. You don't need a server.

The alternative to a server is of course better organization of your time and your office. Better work habits often result in savings of both time and money, all of which represent the lifeblood of every SOHO and VSB. A decision not to spend time and money on a server may be the best choice of all.

Back to Hot News!