localshop
Fri May 09 07:36:00 PDT 2008
ok i understand now. I will go ahead and see if the server can cope with WSS
and all its other duties. Thanks
"Costas" wrote:
> That depends on what you are trying to accomplish.
>
> If you are happy with your current network configuration, then installing
> WSS 3.0 on the current installation is a way to go, but you will still be
> running your domain controller as an application server, which is what you
> will doing when you install WSS 3.0 on it.
>
> If you are thinking of taking advantage of the SBS features, in addition of
> using WSS 3.0, then installing SBS 2003 and making your current server a
> member of the SBS domain, is a better solution.
>
> What I'm trying to say, is having WSS 3.0 on a domain controller, with 50
> users, might be "too much" for the server. That's something you will have
> to test and see how it performs
>
> --
> Costas
>
>
> "localshop" <localshop@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:CD050BDA-E944-46AB-9754-30B4E6717B0C@microsoft.com...
> > Thanks for the information. Do you think it might just be easier to intall
> > WSS 3.0 component on the current W2K3 server and forget about having a
> > separate sbs?
> >
> > "Costas" wrote:
> >
> >> Since your current network is based on a Windows Server 2003 domain, the
> >> first thing you'll have to do is join SBS to the existing domain, and
> >> make
> >> it the PDC holding all the FSMO roles. Instructions on how to do that
> >> are
> >> in the following document:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/884453
> >>
> >> After that make your current domain controller, a member server of the
> >> new,
> >> SBS 2003, domain. SBS will do just fine with 50 users but I wouldn't
> >> recommend to install WSS 3.0 on it. You can install it on the W2K3
> >> server
> >> instead. The WSS 3.0 component doesn't come bundled with W2K3 but you can
> >> download it for free from Microsoft's web site. Here is the link:
> >>
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=EF93E453-75F1-45DF-8C6F-4565E8549C2A&displaylang=en
> >>
> >> In my opinion, having WSS 3.0 on a member server is a much better setup
> >> because you can surpass some limitations that exist between WSS 3.0 and
> >> Exchange running on SBS. It also takes off from the load on the SBS
> >> server.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Costas
> >>
> >>
> >> "localshop" <localshop@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:CF6C2ACD-EA53-4191-8F4C-ACCBC624A93C@microsoft.com...
> >> > Hi, I want to create an intranet for an existing smallish network and I
> >> > understand SBS comes with WSS which is a good tool for making an
> >> > intranet/document store. I have purchased a blank server with no OS.
> >> >
> >> > 1. How would SBS 2003 standard edition be with 50 per machine licenses?
> >> >
> >> > 2. I already have a server running Microsoft Server 2003 which runs the
> >> > network at present such as active directory. If I install SBS 2003 on a
> >> > new
> >> > server and add it to the existing domain will WSS able to get access to
> >> > the
> >> > existing active directory?
> >> >
> >> > 3. Does WSS come bundled with Microsoft Server 2003? Or is the easiest
> >> > way
> >> > to run WSS via a new install of SBS 2003 standard on a new server in
> >> > the
> >> > domain?
> >> >
> >> > 4. Is there any way to get my hands on a trial? I live in the UK for
> >> > info.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >>
>